Trump: The Good, The Bad and The Ugly

[rexlunae]

It is sloppy, and we are supposed to take Steele's word for it. I don't think so.

Two things:

1. He didn't write it for you. I don't think he much cared what you think of it. He wrote it for his clients.
2. What evidence do you have that it's full of misspellings. You wanna talk about being sloppy, how about your sloppy rationalizations?

I be as fictional as this. Pissing by someone on a bed which Barry and Michele made love, and then Trump making love on it with-- I think a Russian prostitute-- it's definitely fiction.

I see nothing that supports your casual insistence that it's "fictional". What, because you can't see Trump doing that?

Steele has been lying for money, because it was British intelligence which funded the dossier.

Evidence?

It isn't hard to defeat Rockefeller Republicans and RINOs in the primaries and caucuses these days. The RINOs were desperate.

What are you talking about?

Because he should apologize for using it in the first place. It is no surprise that he will be fired for not doing so.

Why? What specifically should he apologize for? You have been able to produce exactly zero justification for that.

 

[jgarden]

`

[h=1]House Intel Committee May File Report Alleging Corruption at FBI[/h]

Confronted by the Democratic victory in Alabama and the mounting opposition to Trump, the Republicans are beginning to realize that they may be facing a political "bloodbath" during the 2018 Midterms!

Given that outcome, it defies logic as to why Trump is more concerned about "corruption in the FBI" rather than using his time to generate public support for this tax legislation - an unpopular bill that will probably be the one and only major "accomplishment" that congressional Republicans will achieve prior to the 2018 Election!

Although "The Donald" is not on the ballot, make no mistake that this will be a referendum about the President, and if the Democrats regain control of the House and Senate, Trump's days in the White House are numbered!

 

[SabathMoon]

Two things:

1. He didn't write it for you. I don't think he much cared what you think of it. He wrote it for his clients.
2. What evidence do you have that it's full of misspellings. You wanna talk about being sloppy, how about your sloppy rationalizations?
I see nothing that supports your casual insistence that it's "fictional". What, because you can't see Trump doing that?

Considering the following points, it is difficult to draw any other conclusion than that the intelligence community deliberately used a document that is fraudulent on its face in a politically motivated disinformation campaign for the purpose of either keeping Trump out of the White House or at the very least deligitimizing his presidency from the start.

• Aleksej Gubarev, who is supposed to have been “recruited under duress” by the FSB as a “hacking expert” to run a botnet operation to hack the DNC and Clinton campaign, was never even contacted by intelligence agents.

• Trump associates Paul Manafort, Michael Cohen, and Carter Page, who were supposed to have handled all the heavy lifting in Trump’s dirty deal with Russian intelligence, deny having done so and the intelligence community has provided no proof that they did.

• Michael Cohen has proved — by his passport — that he was not even out of the country at the time the report claims he was meeting with Trump’s FSB handlers; in fact, Cohen has never been to Prague.

Is that not sloppy? Should Mueller be proud of the Steele Dossier? Why is Gubarev's name misspelled in the document consistently?

Try actually reading things which disagree with you for once.

 

[patrick jane]

`



Confronted by the Democratic victory in Alabama and the mounting opposition to Trump, the Republicans are beginning to realize that they may be facing a political "bloodbath" during the 2018 Midterms!

Given that outcome, it defies logic as to why Trump is more concerned about "corruption in the FBI" rather than using his time to generate public support for this tax legislation - an unpopular bill that will probably be the one and only major "accomplishment" that congressional Republicans will achieve prior to the 2018 Election!

Although "The Donald" is not on the ballot, make no mistake that this will be a referendum about the President, and if the Democrats regain control of the House and Senate, Trump's days in the White House are numbered!

Or, you could lose again real bad.

 

[rexlunae]

Is that not sloppy?

It's still not proven, but given that Trump routinely misspells his tweets, I guess you tell me.

Should Mueller be proud of the Steele Dossier?

He didn't write it. So, why would he be?

Why is Gubarev's name misspelled in the document consistently?

Because it's a Russian name, and the correct spelling isn't necessarily obvious. At a guess. Where are you getting that?

Incidentally, Steele himself only asserts that the dossier is 70-90% accurate. He doesn't say that it's infallible, only that it's got a lot of good information in it, the best he could collect.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5086683/Golden-showers-dossier-spy-insists-report-true.html

Try actually reading things which disagree with you for once.

Specifically?

 

[SabathMoon]

It's still not proven, but given that Trump routinely misspells his tweets, I guess you tell me.

How do we know what is a Trump and what is a tweet with just his name on it?

He didn't write it. So, why would he be?

One of his agents said it was worthy to start an investigation into, but it was a flat out lie. They knew much about Trump before the dossier.

Because it's a Russian name, and the correct spelling isn't necessarily obvious. At a guess. Where are you getting that?

Steele is British. It should have been easy to check his name. But Steele also slandered him, and Guberev considered suing him.

It is better for Mueller to admit it is only partially factual. Since it seems he isn't being fired, he may be doing that. I still want Trump to be vetted. He probably should be impeached, because Pence is the better president.

Incidentally, Steele himself only asserts that the dossier is 70-90% accurate. He doesn't say that it's infallible, only that it's got a lot of good information in it, the best he could collect.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...port-true.html

Steele has been good only with factual generalities, and fictions, so far.
Muchlike Trump?

 

[rexlunae]

How do we know what is a Trump and what is a tweet with just his name on it?


One of his agents said it was worthy to start an investigation into, but it was a flat out lie. They knew much about Trump before the dossier.


Steele is British. It should have been easy to check his name. But Steele also slandered him, and Guberev considered suing him.

It is better for Mueller to admit it is only partially factual. Since it seems he isn't being fired, he may be doing that. I still want Trump to be vetted. He probably should be impeached, because Pence is the better president.


Steele has been good only with factual generalities, and fictions, so far.
Muchlike Trump?

Listen, Mueller didn't write the dossier. He's not responsible for what's in it. What he is responsible for is finding evidence to corroborate any allegations that he might find in it that he wishes to use in any criminal case. And so far, we know exactly nothing about what he is actually using in that context. It could be nothing. It could be everything. The burden he's held to in a criminal case is very high, and he will have to meet it. But right now, his job is to lead the investigation, in as fair and impartial a manner as possible. And that doesn't involve making statements to satisfy you, or Congress.

 

[SabathMoon]

Listen, Mueller didn't write the dossier. He's not responsible for what's in it. What he is responsible for is finding evidence to corroborate any allegations that he might find in it that he wishes to use in any criminal case. And so far, we know exactly nothing about what he is actually using in that context. It could be nothing. It could be everything. The burden he's held to in a criminal case is very high, and he will have to meet it. But right now, his job is to lead the investigation, in as fair and impartial a manner as possible. And that doesn't involve making statements to satisfy you, or Congress.

I got real concerned when I heard he was using it. But you contradicted your statement. "He's not responsible for what's in it." Then you admitted he was using it at least generally.

 

[rexlunae]

I got real concerned when I heard he was using it. But you contradicted your statement. "He's not responsible for what's in it." Then you admitted he was using it at least generally.

Using it doesn't make him responsible for what's in it.

 

[patrick jane]

Using it doesn't make him responsible for what's in it.

I thought the Dossier was discredited long ago.

 

[SabathMoon]

Using it doesn't make him responsible for what's in it.

Yes, it does. He can't say it has much good information in it, because it doesn't.

 

[patrick jane]

Trump to the Swamp = It ain't no fun when the rabbit's got the gun.

 

[rexlunae]

Yes, it does. He can't say it has much good information in it, because it doesn't.

The people responsible for it are the person who wrote it, and the people who paid for it to be written, including Fusion GPS, the Clinton Campaign, and various Republican campaigns. Mueller isn't any of those people, nor is the FBI, or the Justice Department. Mueller has access to it and may use it to find leads, but what he brings to court is a totally different and much higher standard, which means that he's going to have to do the documentary work collecting evidence that Steele was never expected to do. You can whine all you like, but you can't make Mueller answer for someone else's work.

 

[kmoney]

Ugly: Trump's first year

 

[SabathMoon]

...but you can't make Mueller answer for someone else's work.

If he takes it too seriously, I could. This, he and associates seem to have been doing for months. Why lie about why Trump needs to ousted? Are they liberals that are overly afraid of certain conservative congressmen? The answer is likely yes, especially if you worked with the nonconservatives Reagan, H Bush or WTF Bush.

 

[patrick jane]

Ugly: Trump's first year

:yawn:

 

[patrick jane]

The people responsible for it are the person who wrote it, and the people who paid for it to be written, including Fusion GPS, the Clinton Campaign, and various Republican campaigns. Mueller isn't any of those people, nor is the FBI, or the Justice Department. Mueller has access to it and may use it to find leads, but what he brings to court is a totally different and much higher standard, which means that he's going to have to do the documentary work collecting evidence that Steele was never expected to do. You can whine all you like, but you can't make Mueller answer for someone else's work.

Link to the dossier - https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3259984-Trump-Intelligence-Allegations.html


[h=1]The Dossier is Explained[/h]
https://youtu.be/8Y0vBEjXQ7U

 

[patrick jane]

UglyYYYuge: Trump's first year

[h=1]President Trump's First Year in Office 3 minutes[/h]

 

[rexlunae]

Link to the dossier - https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3259984-Trump-Intelligence-Allegations.html


[h=1]The Dossier is Explained[/h]
https://youtu.be/8Y0vBEjXQ7U

I would like to know the name of the "presstitute" who claimed that everything in the dossier had been corroborated. I've never heard anyone claim that seriously. Why by coy about an accusation like that, if not to malign the entire industry unfairly?

The commentary....:rotfl: They keep saying they're going to stop talking about the document and actually discuss the contents, but they just keep talking tangentially-related conspiracy theories.

Is this where you've been getting your information? A lot of it sounds pretty familiar from talking to you.

 

[patrick jane]

I would like to know the name of the "presstitute" who claimed that everything in the dossier had been corroborated. I've never heard anyone claim that seriously. Why by coy about an accusation like that, if not to malign the entire industry unfairly?

The commentary....:rotfl: They keep saying they're going to stop talking about the document and actually discuss the contents, but they just keep talking tangentially-related conspiracy theories.

Is this where you've been getting your information? A lot of it sounds pretty familiar from talking to you.

I take the commentary with a grain of salt but it's better than CNN or MSNBC. From what I've read of the dossier it is full of lies and yet this was the basis for the entire witch hunt.

I see you have no comment on the Fake Dossier, only complaints about the commentary. Your alternative facts are so much better. Fact is, you complain about FOX's commentary and ANY commentary that doesn't end with Trump impeached.