• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

if true tRump is tOast

justabubba said:
somebody want to explain to him (again) why his statements are all wrong
Click to expand...

How is it false again ? The FBI DID mislead the FISA court

For one they stated in their FISA request that Steele wasn't told by Simpson who was funding his research.

Steele knew all along Clintons campaign and the DNC was funding his research...
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ne...r-steele-the-man-behind-the-trump-dossier/amp

The FBI lied to FISA when they repeatedly claimed Steele wasnt the source of the Yahoo article they used to corroborate the dossier.
 
ruskietards said:
Republicans dug the initial gold mine and the Clinton campaign took over and actually struck the gold that will likely bring down the tRump regime in the not too distant future.
Click to expand...

That is a LIE

The Washington Free Beacon stopped using Fusion GPS when Trump won the primary

Christopher Steele was hired AFTER the Hilllary Campaign and the DNC hired Fusion GPS

Clinton Campaign, DNC funded research that led to the Russian dossier

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wa...6fabf0-b8e4-11e7-a908-a3470754bbb9_story.html
 
Jesse Booth said:
Of course it could - it just seems far more likely to me that Trump is a sheltered trust fund baby with an aversion to bodily fluids than a fetishist who doesn't mind sleeping in a piss-soaked bed.
Click to expand...

I just go back to, Ive seen people over compensate in lying about something to cover up that they actually do it. In their mind they think that if they act as if they are offended by something no one will suspect that they are not offended and more. It can be an act or it could be legit. People that are in the public's eye a lot do a lot of acting and roll playing for their fans benefit. Trump is part of that Hollywood scene after all.
 
FreedomFromAll said:
I just go back to, Ive seen people over compensate in lying about something to cover up that they actually do it. In their mind they think that if they act as if they are offended by something no one will suspect that they are not offended and more. It can be an act or it could be legit. People that are in the public's eye a lot do a lot of acting and roll playing for their fans benefit. Trump is part of that Hollywood scene after all.
Click to expand...

This all feels like a gigantic stretch to me. The only evidence of the supposed pee tape is word of mouth collected in a unproven data dump. Meanwhile, we've had more people digging into Trump's private life in the last few years than I suspect any other politician before has had, and no other evidence has come up. We've even had a porn star come forward about an extramarital affair Trump had with her, and she described Trump's approach to sex as "unimaginative."

In the age of #MeToo, and with the collective ire of everyone in Hollywood and most of the media focused on Trump at once, it's simply inconceivable to me that he would be able to hide something like this for two years.
 
Jesse Booth said:
This all feels like a gigantic stretch to me. The only evidence of the supposed pee tape is word of mouth collected in a unproven data dump. Meanwhile, we've had more people digging into Trump's private life in the last few years than I suspect any other politician before has had, and no other evidence has come up. We've even had a porn star come forward about an extramarital affair Trump had with her, and she described Trump's approach to sex as "unimaginative."

In the age of #MeToo, and with the collective ire of everyone in Hollywood and most of the media focused on Trump at once, it's simply inconceivable to me that he would be able to hide something like this for two years.
Click to expand...

Perhaps that story just hasnt broke yet. Either way its either true or false or something in between.
 
FreedomFromAll said:
Perhaps that story just hasnt broke yet. Either way its either true or false or something in between.
Click to expand...

And there's about as much evidence for the piss tape's existence as there is for Obama's extramarital gay lover(s). It's just more likely that Trump's got a public phobia than it is that he has a perfectly hidden fetish.

 
Last edited:
hanger4 said:
Christopher Steele has yet to produce anything substantiated, why do think he suddenly has now ??
Click to expand...

Are you kidding? The dossier was created before Trump won the election, it reported: "the fact that Russia undertook a coordinated and massive effort to disrupt the 2016 election to help Donald Trump, as the U.S. intelligence community itself later concluded. Well before any public knowledge of these events, the Orbis (Steel's company ) report identified multiple elements of the Russian operation including a cyber campaign, leaked documents related to Hillary Clinton, and meetings with Paul Manafort and other Trump affiliates to reportedly discuss the receipt of stolen documents. Steele could not have known that the Russians stole information on Hillary Clinton, or that they were considering means to weaponize them in the U.S. election, all of which turned out to be stunningly accurate." (source of quote - Slate)
 
vesper said:
Well well fresh off the presses, a letter sent to Sessions and Rosenstein demanding a special counsel be appointed to investigate the actions of the agencies in regard to everything Russia during the Obama administration. From FISC to the Trump Dossier(s) by Steele

Dear Attorney General Sessions and Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein:
Matters have arisen – both recently and otherwise – which necessitate the appointment of a Special Counsel. We do not make this observation and attendant request lightly. We have tremendous respect for the women and men of federal law enforcement and federal prosecution. In the vast majority of fact patterns, the Department of Justice, the career prosecutors and law enforcement professionals who serve there, and the U.S. Attorneys’ Offices throughout the country are fully capable of investigating, evaluating, charging where appropriate, and prosecuting matters for which there is federal jurisdiction.
Nevertheless, there are instances in which an actual or potential conflict of interest exists or appears to exist, or there are matters in which the public good would be furthered, and an independent Special Counsel is warranted as the relevant Federal regulations provide.
We believe that, in the case of certain decisions made and not made by the Department of Justice and FBI in 2016 and 2017, both an actual conflict of interest exists and separately, but equally significantly, the public interest requires the appointment of a Special Counsel.
With respect to potential and actual conflicts of interest, decisions made and not made by both former and current Department of Justice and FBI officials have led to legitimate questions and concerns from the people whom we all serve. There is evidence of bias, trending toward animus, among those charged with investigating serious cases. There is evidence political opposition research was used in court filings. There is evidence this political opposition research was neither vetted before it was used nor fully revealed to the relevant tribunal. Questions have arisen with the FISA process and these questions and concerns threaten to impugn both public and congressional confidence in significant counterintelligence program processes and those charged with overseeing and implementing these counterintelligence processes.
Because the decisions of both former and current Department of Justice and FBI officials are at issue, we do not believe the Department of Justice is capable of investigating and evaluating these fact patterns in a fashion likely to garner public confidence. In addition, while we have confidence in the Inspector General for the Department of Justice, the DOJ IG does not have the authority to investigate other governmental entities or former employees of the Department, the Bureau, or other agencies.
Some have been reluctant to call for the appointment of a Special Counsel because such an appointment should be reserved for those unusual cases where existing investigative and prosecutorial entities cannot adequately discharge those duties. We believe this is just such a case.

[...]

Sincerely,
Bob Goodlatte
Chairman
House Judiciary Committee
Trey Gowdy
Chairman
House Oversight and Government Reform Committee
Click to expand...

They pay lip service to "respecting the men and women of law enforcement " ( the FBI ) but they sure don't act like it. While we are being attacked by a foreign power by cyber espionage, what are these guys focused on? Attacking those who are trying to protect us. This whole thing is a subterfuge to undermine the investigation because they don't like the fact that one of their own is being investigated. Whatever happened to the GOP of the watergate days? Those guys no longer exist.

"There is evidence political opposition research was used in court filings.".

One can only infer from this statement that Gowdy & Goodlatte believe there is something wrong with this, and there isn't. oppo research, though it's intent has a political end, it's value depends on facts, and if there are facts of illegality, those will be a great interest to law enforcement. It's reason for it's existence is really insignificant, all that matters are facts of possible illegality.

Gowdy is the guy who investigated Hillary 8 times, wasted millions of tax payer dollars, and for all that, what did he find
for which he could indict hillary?

Nothing.

Gowdy is the king of witch hunters, and there is no reason to believe he's improved his game on this call. But he did state that he believes in Mueller's integrity and wants him to complete his investigation, so i'll grant him that.
 
OscarLevant said:
Are you kidding? The dossier was created before Trump won the election, it reported: "the fact that Russia undertook a coordinated and massive effort to disrupt the 2016 election to help Donald Trump, as the U.S. intelligence community itself later concluded. Well before any public knowledge of these events, the Orbis (Steel's company ) report identified multiple elements of the Russian operation including a cyber campaign, leaked documents related to Hillary Clinton, and meetings with Paul Manafort and other Trump affiliates to reportedly discuss the receipt of stolen documents. Steele could not have known that the Russians stole information on Hillary Clinton, or that they were considering means to weaponize them in the U.S. election, all of which turned out to be stunningly accurate." (source of quote - Slate)
Click to expand...

No I'm not kidding;

*Journalists who are friendly with Fusion GPS and opponents of the Trump administration claim, without any evidence of any kind beyond anonymous sources’ vague say-so, that the dossier has parts that were “verified.” That could mean something as simple as the parts about Russia trying to find information about Trump, or about Trump affiliates having friendly business relations with Russians. We have no evidence to suggest that anything significant from the dossier has been verified. And we don’t know how much, if any, was actually deliberate disinformation from the Russian government sources.*

*Far from being “verified,” the dossier is better described as demonstrably false. That includes getting basic facts about Russia wrong, making claims — such as the claim that Trump lawyer Michael Cohen met with Federation Council foreign affairs head Konstantin Kosachev in Prague — that are verifiably wrong, making cartoonishly outlandish claims about finances, and various other problems.*

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/2...t_claims_about_the_steele_dossier_424764.html
 
OscarLevant said:
They pay lip service to "respecting the men and women of law enforcement " ( the FBI ) but they sure don't act like it. While we are being attacked by a foreign power by cyber espionage, what are these guys focused on? Attacking those who are trying to protect us. This whole thing is a subterfuge to undermine the investigation because they don't like the fact that one of their own is being investigated. Whatever happened to the GOP of the watergate days? Those guys no longer exist.

"There is evidence political opposition research was used in court filings.".

One can only infer from this statement that Gowdy & Goodlatte believe there is something wrong with this, and there isn't. oppo research, though it's intent has a political end, it's value depends on facts, and if there are facts of illegality, those will be a great interest to law enforcement. It's reason for it's existence is really insignificant, all that matters are facts of possible illegality.

Gowdy is the guy who investigated Hillary 8 times, wasted millions of tax payer dollars, and for all that, what did he find
for which he could indict hillary?

Nothing.

Gowdy is the king of witch hunters, and there is no reason to believe he's improved his game on this call. But he did state that he believes in Mueller's integrity and wants him to complete his investigation, so i'll grant him that.
Click to expand...

*While we are being attacked by a foreign power by cyber espionage, what are these guys focused on?*

Seeing as how these attacks were on Obama's watch maybe you should be him and his administration.

*oppo research, though it's intent has a political end, it's value depends on facts, and if there are facts of illegality,*

Absolutely it relies on facts, of which nothing major is verified and has been testified to numerous times.

*Gowdy is the guy who investigated Hillary 8 times,*

No he wasn't, Gowdy chaired the select committee on intelligence.

*wasted millions of tax payer dollars, and for all that*

That waste is solely on Hillary, she failed to produce relevant doc (failure to comply) til her private email server was discovered.

I suggest you find new sources for your information, what you've been using is obviously leading you astray.
 
hanger4 said:
*While we are being attacked by a foreign power by cyber espionage, what are these guys focused on?*

Seeing as how these attacks were on Obama's watch maybe you should be him and his administration.

*oppo research, though it's intent has a political end, it's value depends on facts, and if there are facts of illegality,*

Absolutely it relies on facts, of which nothing major is verified and has been testified to numerous times.

*Gowdy is the guy who investigated Hillary 8 times,*

No he wasn't, Gowdy chaired the select committee on intelligence.

*wasted millions of tax payer dollars, and for all that*

That waste is solely on Hillary, she failed to produce relevant doc (failure to comply) til her private email server was discovered.

I suggest you find new sources for your information, what you've been using is obviously leading you astray.
Click to expand...


Snarky comment aside....

They've been investigating the Clintons for 25 years, and todate, what have the found they can pin on her?

Nothing.

The dossier is merely provided as a source for leads, it is not being provided as evidence by Steel.
That being said, the Dossier has been confirmed on a number of points, it states the following confirmed items:

"the fact that Russia undertook a coordinated and massive effort to disrupt the 2016 election to help Donald Trump, as the U.S. intelligence community itself later concluded. Well before any public knowledge of these events, the Orbis (Steel's company ) report identified multiple elements of the Russian operation including a cyber campaign, leaked documents related to Hillary Clinton, and meetings with Paul Manafort and other Trump affiliates to reportedly discuss the receipt of stolen documents. Steele could not have known that the Russians stole information on Hillary Clinton, or that they were considering means to weaponize them in the U.S. election, all of which turned out to be stunningly accurate."
(source of quote - Slate)

Some of the leads given in the Dossier, together with additional confirmed evidence, has led to indictments of a number of Russians. As for Americans, Mueller hasn't finished his investigation, and to say "the dossier is fake" etc., is nonsense. The idea being given by right wingers
is somehow the FBI is relying on bogus information, i.e., the Dossier. They are crying "disgraceful" and "fake" and this is all complete nonsense. The sad truth is that they just don't like the FBI investigating the man they nominated. That's what is really going on here. Steel has worked with the FBI before, and his work is highly regarded as competent, overall.
 
Last edited:
hanger4 said:
No I'm not kidding;

*Journalists who are friendly with Fusion GPS and opponents of the Trump administration claim, without any evidence of any kind beyond anonymous sources’ vague say-so, that the dossier has parts that were “verified.” That could mean something as simple as the parts about Russia trying to find information about Trump, or about Trump affiliates having friendly business relations with Russians. We have no evidence to suggest that anything significant from the dossier has been verified. And we don’t know how much, if any, was actually deliberate disinformation from the Russian government sources.*

*Far from being “verified,” the dossier is better described as demonstrably false. That includes getting basic facts about Russia wrong, making claims — such as the claim that Trump lawyer Michael Cohen met with Federation Council foreign affairs head Konstantin Kosachev in Prague — that are verifiably wrong, making cartoonishly outlandish claims about finances, and various other problems.*

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/2...t_claims_about_the_steele_dossier_424764.html
Click to expand...

RCP didn't make all those statements, it only linked to a page on the FEDERALIST website, which is the source of that article a notoriously right wing site.

From the "Media Bias" website, which accurately gauges quality of content of various websites, they state:

These media sources (The Federalist website) are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information

For that reason I would never trust any reportage that resorts to weasel words, loaded phrases, and ommissions of context, because such reveals a mindset that is more interested in furthering an agenda than reaching the truth. Therefore...

I'd dispute many of their assertions, the most important one is that it glosses over the fact that the Mueller investigation is not finished yet, so making claims of veracity or lack thereof is simply premature.


I think you are missing the point. The Dossier is a lead source, some it if pans out some of it doesn't, it was never presented as evidence, it's a work product, nothing more, nothing less.

all that really matters is the Mueller investigation, and what he will come up with, and who his team is going to indict (and/or the grand juries will indict, as well ), and I will make a prediction:

In addition to the current indictments, I predict he will indict more Russians, Trump, Kushner, his sons, maybe Ivanka ( she might be an unwitting participant , not sure if that will protect her ), certain members of the RNC, and who knows who else, the indictment will go through the NY AG Eric Schneiderman under RICO statutes.

The Trump indictment will be challenged and taken to the Supreme Court. I predict the court will allow it under the very American principle that no man is above the law. I think even Gorsuch will go along with that one.

Then the GOP will have no choice but to impeach him, if he doesn't step down, and I think he will be forced to step down. I'm not certain about Pence, if he will be indicted as complicit aiding and abetting, etc.

But, if Pence is indicted, and the house goes to the dems and all of this happens after November 6th, yes, ohhhh yesss, it's entirely possible ( drum roll....)

PELOSI will become president !!!!! ( third in line for prez is the speaker of the house ).

Oohh, that would be the ultimate karma for repubs having put Trump into the presidency ( they could have kicked him out of the GOP long ago, before he was nominated, forcing him to have run as an independent, which he wouldn't have won ).


Anyway, whatever happens with the Mueller investigation, well, pass the popcorn, we're in for one helluva show.
 
Last edited:
OscarLevant said:
But, if Pence is indicted, and the house goes to the dems and all of this happens after November 6th, yes, ohhhh yesss, it's entirely possible ( drum roll....)

PELOSI will become president !!!!! ( third in line for prez is the speaker of the house ).

Oohh, that would be the ultimate karma for repubs having put Trump into the presidency ( they could have kicked him out of the GOP long ago, before he was nominated, forcing him to have run as an independent, which he wouldn't have won ).
Click to expand...

Pelosi as prez.
Pretty unlikely scenario.....but The Donald as prez was pretty unlikely, too.
Man, the gore from those GOP exploding heads would be worse than an episode of "The Walking Dead".
Who is gonna clean up that mess?:)
 
Aristaeus said:
Yes, I read the linked article;
Click to expand...
As my question did not address you; Good for you ? ?



Aristaeus said:
... especially the part which says the Kremlin intervened to block Trump's initial choice,
Click to expand...
I see. You do not know the difference between the words being reported.
Good to know.

The intervened part is a third person description of what people were saying.

The report stated that the memo said that the Kremlin asked.

These are different things.

Asking is not intervening.



Aristaeus said:
... which you conveniently forgot to highlight. Don't worry, I've bolded it and changed font colour so you can't 'miss' it again.
Click to expand...
Hilarious.
A forth parties interpretation of what third parties said is irrelevant to what is reported that the memo actually says, and does not need to be highlighted for intelligent folks to understand. Duh!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom