We have the memo!

[Dacien]

And?

Your entire position here (and that of Nunes) still relies on the idea that using the Steele dossier, as part of the body of evidence in requesting a FISA warrant, was somehow unwarranted or unethical and thus should invalidate said warrant.

And none of you, not even Nunes, have made any single credible argument as to why that should be the case. Why does it matter if parts of the dossier were used, in your mind? Because I guarantee the reasoning you're using to back that does not hold up to scrutiny, at all.

There was a whole thread between me and Shadowmelded about the idea that the warrant wouldn't have been issued without the dossier, it's a detail we were debating, that's all.

Honestly though, this re-hashing of the same arguments isn't very engaging, we need more information, Endus.

[Edge-]

There was a whole thread between me and Shadowmelded about the idea that the warrant wouldn't have been issued without the dossier, it's a detail we were debating, that's all.

Honestly though, this re-hashing of the same arguments isn't very engaging, we need more information, Endus.

I don't think anyone is really disputing this fact though? It's also irrelevant, unless you're attempting to undermine the Dossier wholesale as a relevant piece of evidence and think that FISA judges are all morons.

[NYC17]

There was a whole thread between me and Shadowmelded about the idea that the warrant wouldn't have been issued without the dossier, it's a detail we were debating, that's all.

Honestly though, this re-hashing of the same arguments isn't very engaging, we need more information, Endus.

It's not engaging because you haven't been able to sell your argument as credible. It's difficult to have engaging discussions with someone who has outright admitted that their political bent is going to shape literally every argument they make regardless of the facts, and that being objective minded is off the table.

That's your position so it's not a surprise the term "engaging" can't be used to describe these discussions.

[Endus]

There was a whole thread between me and Shadowmelded about the idea that the warrant wouldn't have been issued without the dossier, it's a detail we were debating, that's all.

Honestly though, this re-hashing of the same arguments isn't very engaging, we need more information, Endus.

It isn't the same argument. It's a completely different argument. You're attacking a straw man, rather than what I was saying.

I'm saying even if the Page warrant relied heavily enough on the dossier's intelligence that it would not have been issued without said dossier, even if we grant that, so what?

It doesn't invalidate the dossier. Nothing has. Folks on your side keep acting like the dossier isn't evidence, which isn't justified by anything that's occurred.

It's not that "we need more information". It's that you folks keep making stuff up to fill that void of information, and have absolutely no justification for it.

We DO need more information. But the proper stance in that case is to say "this looks bad but it's not confirmed yet", not "here's a bunch of bullshit I made up that misrepresents what facts we DO know." You're doing the latter.

[Shadowmelded]

Looks like he's saying that only parts of the dossier were included, he doesn't seem to be challenging Gowdy's statement.

"We look at this as a complete whole, all the information is important" contradicts the idea that the dossier information was the sole reason it was approved. And again, to rehash a previous post of mine, let's just think about it for a second; the FISC application was 50 pages long, the Page parts of the Dossier 1-2 pages max, are the other 48 pages just blank? Even allowing for 8 pages of intro/wrap up, are 40 pages just self-referential?

[cubby]

I'd be a lot happier if nunes is also impeached for obstruction.

I bet you one of Mueller's interns is looking at it now.

[FlatBootyJudy]

Do you have any evidence to back up your claim?


As for the findings, we already have four indictments, and two guilty please. More to come...

- - - Updated - - -



Can you cite a source to back up the claim that they are basing it off of lies?

I have the lack of evidence to back up my claim. (: If there was dirt on Trump and with all the people digging they would have found some by now!

- - - Updated - - -

As Kiri said, presidents can't just be charged with a crime.

You constantly whine and cry about Democrats, how mean they are, and how this is all a conspiracy all the while boasting about how little you know of this subject. In the meantime...

Mueller keeps working.

You consistently whine and cry about Trump and yet he is still President. I am sorry if we disagree but you making silly assumptions does not make them true! (:

[Canpinter]

I have the lack of evidence to back up my claim. (: If there was dirt on Trump and with all the people digging they would have found some by now!

unless mueller is keeping it under wraps while he builds a case.

[wunksta]

If there was dirt on Trump and with all the people digging they would have found some by

My guess is that they are following every lead and compiling every possible piece of evidence to reveal at the same time.

To paraphrase Ralph Waldo Emerson, 'If you take a swing at the king, you best not miss'.

[cubby]

I have the lack of evidence to back up my claim. (: If there was dirt on Trump and with all the people digging they would have found some by now!

I guess Trump admitting to Obstruction of Justice isn't enough evidence for you? Or Donnie Dum-Dum Jr admitting to collusion? You are adorable though.

When the door slams shut on Cheeto and his criminal family, will that be enough evidence? Or will you be one of those Shrills shouting cover up.

[Machismo]

I have the lack of evidence to back up my claim. (: If there was dirt on Trump and with all the people digging they would have found some by now!

- - - Updated - - -



You consistently whine and cry about Trump and yet he is still President. I am sorry if we disagree but you making silly assumptions does not make them true! (:

So, you have no evidence to back up your claim, making it baseless. Good to know!

Luckily, I have four indictments, guilty please, and evidence of lies throughout the administration to back up my claim.

[FlatBootyJudy]

So, you have no evidence to back up your claim, making it baseless. Good to know!

Luckily, I have four indictments, guilty please, and evidence of lies throughout the administration to back up my claim.

How do you provide evidence to prove a negative? This would be like me calling you a Russia spy, so prove to me you're not a spy!

[cubby]

So, you have no evidence to back up your claim, making it baseless. Good to know!

Luckily, I have four indictments, guilty please, and evidence of lies throughout the administration to back up my claim.

While not the most damning, I think the "best" piece of evidence is the Trump stooges claiming he never met with Trump. While multiple pictures exist of that very fact.

And on a side note, when you really think about that lie - how blatant and just stupid it is, you have to wonder what they are afraid of being found out, as @Breccia already mentioned.

- - - Updated - - -

How do you provide evidence to prove a negative? This would be like me calling you a Russia spy, so prove to me you're not a spy!

Donnie Dum-Dum Jr already admitted it. With email evidence in support. They colluded with the Russians during the 2016 election. Now it's just finding out how much, and what else.

Pay attention.

[Orange Joe]

I have the lack of evidence to back up my claim. (: If there was dirt on Trump and with all the people digging they would have found some by now!

How long did it take for them to find something on Nixon?

[Machismo]

How do you provide evidence to prove a negative? This would be like me calling you a Russia spy, so prove to me you're not a spy!

You made a claim... don't get pissy when people cal you out on it.

There is evidence of attempted collusion, Trump Jr. provided it. there are four indictments, two men pleading guilty. There's lots of members of Trump's team lying about meeting with Russians. Why did Trump and his team lie so often about meeting with Russians? Sad!!!

[FlatBootyJudy]

You made a claim... don't get pissy when people cal you out on it.

There is evidence of attempted collusion, Trump Jr. provided it. there are four indictments, two men pleading guilty. There's lots of members of Trump's team lying about meeting with Russians. Why did Trump and his team lie so often about meeting with Russians? Sad!!!

I am not pissy, I think that's a bit of self reflection on your part. I said there is no evidence of Russia colussion from Trump and I have angered the Democrats! The funny thing is there is plenty of evidence of Russia collusion from the DNC!

- - - Updated - - -

Donnie Dum-Dum Jr already admitted it. With email evidence in support. They colluded with the Russians during the 2016 election. Now it's just finding out how much, and what else.

Pay attention.

Meeting with a lawyer to find dirt on Clinton is not working with the Russian government.

Pay attention.

Trump Jr is not Trump Sr.

Pay attention.

[cubby]

Meeting with a RUSSIAN lawyer to find dirt on Clinton is not working with the Russian government.

Fixed that for you. Russian agents were in that room, and we know that from Donnie Dum-Dum's evidence.

Trump Jr is not Trump Sr.

No, he's far dumber - and we know he went to that meeting on the Father's orders. And told his father about it.

If you're going to play the willful ignorance game, you need to do more denial. Admitting what's already fact doesn't help the Trumpster cause at all, lol.

[Machismo]

I am not pissy, I think that's a bit of self reflection on your part. I said there is no evidence of Russia colussion from Trump and I have angered the Democrats! The funny thing is there is plenty of evidence of Russia collusion from the DNC!

- - - Updated - - -



Meeting with a lawyer to find dirt on Clinton is not working with the Russian government.

Pay attention.

Trump Jr is not Trump Sr.

Pay attention.

I don't give a damn if you go after the entire DNC, go get 'em, Tiger.

You made claims about Dem lies, and saying there was no evidence. Trump Jr's Twitter feed alone proves you wrong. It's sad that you are unable to actually back up your claims... so sad!!!

"And all the evidence mueller is basing his investigation on are from Democrat lies"

You did not back up that claim.

"It's been over a year and Democrats still can't prove anything with Trump, should we stop wasting tax payers money to fuel peoples political hate agenda? This memo proves they have an agenda!"

You did not back up that claim.

[NYC17]

I have the lack of evidence to back up my claim. (: If there was dirt on Trump and with all the people digging they would have found some by now!

- - - Updated - - -



You consistently whine and cry about Trump and yet he is still President. I am sorry if we disagree but you making silly assumptions does not make them true! (:

I present factual information. I don't sugar coat the facts nor do I have the desire to make you feel any way in particular about them. Your feelings are of as little interest to me as your opinion of facts. The facts are what they are. They stand despite your misunderstanding of them, or inability to comprehend them properly.

The fact you find them to negatively effect Trump is telling. I'm not sorry we disagree. I'm glad we do. If we agreed, if I held your delusional positions, I'd have to do some self reflection and evaluation of which you seem to be incapable.

Also, a basic understanding among reasonable people is that a lack of evidence is not in and of itself, evidence. People having to explain basic concepts to you seems to be a common theme.

[zmp]

So when is Trump getting impeached?