Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Monday, February 05, 2018

OTP 5 February 2018: Train crash with GOP lawmakers brings back memories of baseball shooting for Jeff Flake

Sen. Jeff Flake rushed to the aid of injured passengers from a garbage truck Wednesday after it collided with an Amtrak train carrying Republican lawmakers to a GOP congressional retreat in West Virginia.

For Flake, R-Ariz., the accident scene near Crozet, Va., brought back memories of last year’s shooting at the GOP congressional baseball team practice in Alexandria, Va., in which House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, R-La., was seriously wounded.

 

(As always, views expressed in the article lede and comments are the views of the individual commenters and the submitter of the article and do not represent the views of Baseball Think Factory or its owner.)

Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: February 05, 2018 at 07:46 AM | 2137 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: off topic, politics

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 1 of 22 pages  1 2 3 >  Last ›
   1. McCoy Posted: February 05, 2018 at 08:18 AM (#5619564)
What is this? A new thread? Unpossible
   2. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: February 05, 2018 at 08:25 AM (#5619566)
In Shocker, Deficit Explodes Yet Again Under Republican Rule

Could it be their endless mewling about the deficit is all a gigantic pile of BS to be brought out only when Democrats are in charge?
   3. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: February 05, 2018 at 08:32 AM (#5619568)
From the previous thread:

Bachmann Gets a Message
A billboard in St. Paul, Minnesota, funded by “The Good Lord Above,” is sending former Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-MN) the answer she was seeking.

Worth clicking for the picture. It is an OK used bookstore beneath the sign (not great, but OK), even though it is run by a ... well he is kind of a loon actually. Helped me a while with the title of a book I had read - amazingly just from a loose description - so go him.

I can't remember the name of that Midway owner, but of the dozen or so used shops in the Twin Cities + Stillwater that I used to scout in the 80's and 90's, it was just about the best of the lot, and the fact that it's still there is a pretty strong testament to it. I wonder if they own the building.
   4. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 05, 2018 at 08:35 AM (#5619570)
Steele's stuff doesn't even "rise" to the level of hearsay -- nowhere in the dossier does he say any person told he, himself, anything.

For a bureau agent to even have said that in an affidavit, Steele would have had to have been interviewed and told an agent that.
SBB: Always wrong, but never in doubt.


I mean, what makes SBB special as a fake lawyer is that he misstates the law and the facts. Most pretend Internet lawyers get one of those wrong; he manages to get both wrong.
   5. McCoy Posted: February 05, 2018 at 08:36 AM (#5619571)
In other news Bitcoin prices are collapsing as nations and banks are clamping down on them
   6. McCoy Posted: February 05, 2018 at 08:38 AM (#5619574)
Oh and in other other news I discovered last week that my team put the bottle of Van Winkle 10 year out to sell. Was not happy but couldn't yell at them because by just selling to drinks we've already made 250 dollars in profit. I still didn't want it out there but can't really admonish them with that kind of profit margin.
   7. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 05, 2018 at 08:39 AM (#5619575)
But let's try a variant of this thought experiment: What if the candidate in the Illinois 3rd District was Mr. Alt-Right, Richard Spencer, whose name has been repeatedly in the news for well over a year by this time. Would 10,000 or more votes for him in November tell us nothing about the state of a certain percentage of the electorate?
Correct. If you think that most people know who Spencer is, you're delusional.
Do voters have to grab a bullhorn and shout "KILL THE JEWS!" before we start to draw a few conclusions about the people who vote for them?
No. You can't draw conclusions about a voter regardless unless you show that the voter knew the facts in question.

That does not mean that there aren't some voters who agree with that and are voting for him for that reason; it means you can't conclude that they agree with him from the fact that they voted for him.
   8. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: February 05, 2018 at 08:52 AM (#5619579)
I think the preponderance of the evidence supports the very sober conclusion that people who voted for Donald Trump are, in fact, idiots.
   9. -- Posted: February 05, 2018 at 08:57 AM (#5619581)
I mean, what makes SBB special as a fake lawyer is that he misstates the law and the facts. Most pretend Internet lawyers get one of those wrong; he manages to get both wrong.


No, it's entirely right -- in every particular. Steele nowhere vouches for the credibility of any source, and nowhere says any source -- even an unnamed one -- told him anything.

Warrants can, of course, be obtained based on the statements of confidential informants, but in those instances the officer or agent says "The CI told me X, Y, and Z." There's nothing like that in the dossier, even as to Steele himself.

Hint: Merely stating something is a "misstatement" of anything isn't persuasive -- especially coming from you.
   10. Greg K Posted: February 05, 2018 at 09:07 AM (#5619584)
In other news Bitcoin prices are collapsing as nations and banks are clamping down on them

Just in case anyone is worried about my digital currency retirement savings, I'm still up on my original investment. Confidence will see us through these dark days!
   11. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: February 05, 2018 at 09:13 AM (#5619585)
In other news Bitcoin prices are collapsing as nations and banks are clamping down on them

AW, THAT'S A SHAME!
   12. McCoy Posted: February 05, 2018 at 09:14 AM (#5619586)
There's still a street sign near my work offering Bitcoin classes. I'm wondering what they are teaching right now. Don't buy it, that will be $100. Thank you
   13. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: February 05, 2018 at 09:22 AM (#5619589)
But let's try a variant of this thought experiment: What if the candidate in the Illinois 3rd District was Mr. Alt-Right, Richard Spencer, whose name has been repeatedly in the news for well over a year by this time. Would 10,000 or more votes for him in November tell us nothing about the state of a certain percentage of the electorate?

Correct. If you think that most people know who Spencer is, you're delusional.


I think that if Richard Spencer were to run as the GOP nominee in the Illinois 3rd District, you'd see

--- The media descend on that otherwise nondescript district as they'd never done before;

--- As a result, there would be story after story pondering the significance of it all;

--- Republican leaders would be openly denouncing the fact that their party had been hijacked by a flukish circumstance; and

--- By the time election day came around, most people WHO TOOK THE TROUBLE TO VOTE** would have a pretty damn good idea of who Richard Spencer was, and what a vote for him would represent.

** Note the distinction. Most people who hang around BTF all day but avoid the OTP threads might be searching for him on BB-Reference instead of googling him.

   14. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: February 05, 2018 at 09:34 AM (#5619592)
That does not mean that there aren't some voters who agree with that and are voting for him for that reason; it means you can't conclude that they agree with him from the fact that they voted for him.


You're (generally, not David specifically) asking the question inverted from its proper form. The question is not "does the fact that this antisemite holocaust denier is running as a Republican mean everyone who votes for him is also an antisemite holocaust denier?" The question is "what about the modern GOP makes it an attractive destination for antisemitic holocaust deniers?"
   15. BDC Posted: February 05, 2018 at 09:36 AM (#5619594)
My experience of living in a barely-contested Texas district is that sometimes the Democratic nominee is a wingnut. Maybe not a Nazi wingnut, but certifiable. The party ignores said nominee and as David says, often nobody is the wiser about the person's existence in the long run. It's one of the downsides of American politics, but I'd only start worrying about the national fiber if some of these wingnuts get elected … well, I suppose Louie Gohmert is pretty darn close, no Nazi but stark raving mad otherwise; and he's an actual Congressman.
   16. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: February 05, 2018 at 09:38 AM (#5619598)
"what about the modern GOP makes it an attractive destination for antisemitic holocaust deniers?"


The GOP POTUS telling them they are very fine people.
   17. BDC Posted: February 05, 2018 at 09:44 AM (#5619606)
And just an afterthought: I do know about my Congressman, Joe Barton, who was a powerful guy before his dick-pic escapades (I've met him), and my State Rep Tony Tinderholt, who is flamboyantly Tea-Party (I hope I never meet him). And I know the *name* of my state Senator, Kelly Hancock, but I know next to nothing about him. (A) He seems to be a standard-issue Republican and (B) the Senate districts around here are a real jigsaw puzzle, so people you know in your community might be represented in the Senate by either Konni Burton or Royce West (much better-known) as often as by Hancock. People elected in one-party districts with tiny primary turnouts can be ciphers in the public eye (though for all I know Hancock is a major force behind the scenes in Austin).
   18. Traderdave Posted: February 05, 2018 at 09:45 AM (#5619608)
What is the motivation of Holocaust deniers?

Is it simply neo-Nazis' trying to burnish their public image to attract more supporters? That's counter-intuitive. People who hate Jews that much already believe in the Holocaust, they're just bummed that it wasn't completed.

   19. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: February 05, 2018 at 09:50 AM (#5619614)
What is the motivation of Holocaust deniers?

Is it simply neo-Nazis' trying to burnish their public image to attract more supporters? That's counter-intuitive. People who hate Jews that much already believe in the Holocaust, they're just bummed that it wasn't completed.


Not always. Look at David Irving.
   20. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: February 05, 2018 at 09:51 AM (#5619616)
The GOP POTUS telling them they are very fine people.


Well, yes. You know the answer. I know the answer. Hell, David knows the answer too. He's just being pedantic jackass boy because he feels weird hanging out with the liberals so often these days (despite the fact that there's liberalism right there in the name of his precious libertarianism.) But the point here is to clarify and move beyond the pedantry and bullshit (not that this will stop head-up-the-ass partisans like Jason, or paid bullshit shillers like Clapper, but clarity is it's own reward.)

Arthur Jones running as a Republican in Illinois doesn't mean all Republicans are neo-Nazis. (So yes David, dance on the head of your pedantic needle if you want.) It doesn't necessarily mean that everyone who votes for him is a neo-Nazi. (To David's point, they could simply be idiots; there's precedent there.) Hell, it doesn't even mean that the GOP, Illinois state or national variety, are neo-Nazis. What it means is that when neo-Nazis look out of the slitted windows of their fascist, antisemitic bunkers and ask themselves "where do I fit in the larger, more publicly acceptable work of American politics," they answers to themselves "with the Republicans."

And that should give GOP leaning people with a basic sense of decency and self-awareness some pause. We all know who here from that demographic will spin, ignore and try to talk around this fact. We all know better than to let them cloudy-up the water with the silt of their swamp-bog bottom bullshit again.
   21. Traderdave Posted: February 05, 2018 at 09:55 AM (#5619619)
Not always. Look at David Irving.


I have only a glance-at-the-wiki knowledge of Irving. What is his motivation (other than being a loon)?
   22. Morty Causa Posted: February 05, 2018 at 10:00 AM (#5619620)
They're starting to eat their own. That can't be bad.

Crazy is crazy, no matter how laudable that professed imaginary goal.

This is the egregious and offensive article that doesn't bear reading before condemning with fume and fury.

Oh, the shame of trying to be evenhanded and fair.
   23. Chip Posted: February 05, 2018 at 10:05 AM (#5619621)
Devin Nunes, Fox & Friends this morning:

“As far as we can tell, Papadopoulos had never even met with the President.”

THERE’S AN OFFICIAL CAMPAIGN PHOTO COMPLETE WITH TRUMP-PENCE LOGO WHICH SHOWS THEM TOGETHER AT A MEETING!

And Paul Ryan thinks this guy is doing a bang up job overseeing Intelligence.
   24. -- Posted: February 05, 2018 at 10:07 AM (#5619622)
THERE’S AN OFFICIAL CAMPAIGN PHOTO COMPLETE WITH TRUMP-PENCE LOGO WHICH SHOWS THEM TOGETHER AT A MEETING!


That doesn't mean he ever met with Trump.
   25. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: February 05, 2018 at 10:07 AM (#5619623)
Devin Nunes, Fox & Friends this morning:

“As far as we can tell, Papadopoulos had never even met with the President.”

THERE’S AN OFFICIAL CAMPAIGN PHOTO COMPLETE WITH TRUMP-PENCE LOGO WHICH SHOWS THEM TOGETHER AT A MEETING!

And Paul Ryan thinks this guy is doing a bang up job overseeing Intelligence.


He knows it's a quite obvious lie. But he and the GOP leadership have such distain for the intelligence of Fox viewers, that they feel they can tell such obvious lies with impugnity.
   26. -- Posted: February 05, 2018 at 10:10 AM (#5619624)
“As far as we can tell, Papadopoulos had never even met with the President.”


And a good-faith interpretation of this -- see the word "had" -- is that Nunes met Papa hadn't met with Trump at the time Strzok slapped the "investigation" on Papa.

A photo op with a bunch of people is not a "meeting."
   27. Crispix Attacksel Rios Posted: February 05, 2018 at 10:14 AM (#5619625)
My experience of living in a barely-contested Texas district is that sometimes the Democratic nominee is a wingnut. Maybe not a Nazi wingnut, but certifiable. The party ignores said nominee and as David says, often nobody is the wiser about the person's existence in the long run.

I thought this Arthur Jones guy was like that, in a Chicago city district where the Republicans never win, so they don't care who wins the primary and you end up with some random bozo winning because nobody campaigned. No, it's a little more worrying than that. It's about 55-60% Democratic but it's a heavily white-ethnic district and you know how the Democrats can't take them for granted anymore. The current Democrat is one of the most conservative in Congress and he's not that popular, being given the job by his dad and the ever-popular Madigan Machine. He might lose the primary, then who knows what will happen.
   28. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: February 05, 2018 at 10:14 AM (#5619626)
A photo op with a bunch of people is not a "meeting."


To meet someone does not require a meeting. I have met thousands of people in my life and never had a meeting with any of them.

By your logic, Al Franken never met any of the women who claimed they were groped by him.
   29. Swoboda is freedom Posted: February 05, 2018 at 10:17 AM (#5619628)

A photo op with a bunch of people is not a "meeting."


The photo shows 10 people sitting at a table with water, note pads etc. Sure not a meeting.No one is meeting
   30. Chip Posted: February 05, 2018 at 10:18 AM (#5619629)
The headline on the photo, as tweeted by Trump himself the day it occurred, was “National Security Meeting.”

[I’ll correct the earlier post to note that this was done over the Trump campaign logo, no Pence, since it was before he was nominated for VP.]
   31. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: February 05, 2018 at 10:19 AM (#5619630)
I thought this Arthur Jones guy was like that, in a Chicago city district where the Republicans never win, so they don't care who wins the primary and you end up with some random bozo winning because nobody campaigned. No, it's a little more worrying than that. It's about 55-60% Democratic but it's a heavily white-ethnic district and you know how the Democrats can't take them for granted anymore.


As I said in the other thread, that's the district I grew up in. Haven't been back for 30 or so years, but back in the day, it was very heavily Catholic. Lots of Poles, Italians, and Irish.
   32. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: February 05, 2018 at 10:25 AM (#5619632)
What is the motivation of Holocaust deniers?


Depends on the person. Sometimes - most times? - it's just conspiracy nuts being conspiracy nuts. Much like JFK conspiracy nuts, or alien abuction/Area 51 conspiracy nuts, the motivation there is often simply to maintain the internal belief that they know the "secret truth" that "sheeple" can't handle. It's self aggrandizement and mental instability. (See also SBB, JE, re: "the deep state".)

For deep ideological neo-Nazis, the denial is generally there to 1) deny that Hitler's regime were the monsters of history they are portrayed to be, and thus should be re-evaluated as ideological options for the future, and 2) to establish just how deep "the Jewish cabal's" tentacles reach into history.
   33. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: February 05, 2018 at 10:25 AM (#5619633)
Trump this morning:
Little Adam Schiff, who is desperate to run for higher office, is one of the biggest liars and leakers in Washington, right up there with Comey, Warner, Brennan and Clapper! Adam leaves closed committee hearings to illegally leak confidential information. Must be stopped!
Little Adam Schiff this morning:
Mr. President, I see you’ve had a busy morning of “Executive Time.” Instead of tweeting false smears, the American people would appreciate it if you turned off the TV and helped solve the funding crisis, protected Dreamers or...really anything else.
   34. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: February 05, 2018 at 10:26 AM (#5619634)
He knows it's a quite obvious lie. But he and the GOP leadership have such distain for the intelligence of Fox viewers, that they feel they can tell such obvious lies with impugnity.


Evidence suggests that they are correct.
   35. -- Posted: February 05, 2018 at 10:27 AM (#5619635)
Little Adam Schiff this morning:

Mr. President, I see you’ve had a busy morning of “Executive Time.” Instead of tweeting false smears, the American people would appreciate it if you turned off the TV and helped solve the funding crisis, protected Dreamers or...really anything else.


Yeah, sick burn, Schiff!!
   36. -- Posted: February 05, 2018 at 10:27 AM (#5619636)
The photo shows 10 people sitting at a table with water, note pads etc. Sure not a meeting.No one is meeting


Looks like a meeting.
   37. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 05, 2018 at 10:37 AM (#5619639)
No, it's entirely right -- in every particular. Steele nowhere vouches for the credibility of any source, and nowhere says any source -- even an unnamed one -- told him anything.
No, it's wrong in every particular. Steele brought the dossier to the FBI; it wasn't anonymously emailed tot them. They did in fact interview him; there's no dispute about that. To be sure, they could have been asking him about his favorite color, or his Super Bowl picks, or whether he has ever been to the Grand Canyon, but nobody sane thinks that.
Warrants can, of course, be obtained based on the statements of confidential informants, but in those instances the officer or agent says "The CI told me X, Y, and Z." There's nothing like that in the dossier, even as to Steele himself.
It's the warrant application, not the dossier, that would have such descriptors. Since you haven't seen the application, saying that "there's nothing like that" is meaningless.

But where you got the law wrong is in your idea that any of this means that it isn't hearsay. Unless the dossier contains the phrase "blurst of times" in it, it wasn't generated by monkeys; it was written by a person. It wasn't written in court. And it was being cited for the truth of the matters contained therein. That... is the definition of hearsay. (Hearsay, of course, is routinely and legitimately used in warrant applications.)
   38. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: February 05, 2018 at 10:45 AM (#5619645)
More from the hard-working leader who thinks "Little" is a searing insult:
Representative Devin Nunes, a man of tremendous courage and grit, may someday be recognized as a Great American Hero for what he has exposed and what he has had to endure!
Trump should tell Nunes' brave story himself, and win a Pulitzer Prize like Kennedy did. He can title his book "Profiles in Courtiers."

Of course, today's tweets are hot off the grill. The very best Twitter messages are worth the wait.

Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Nov. 3, 2016:
When you're attacking FBI agents because you're under criminal investigation, you're losing.
   39. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: February 05, 2018 at 10:48 AM (#5619648)
I think it is about time for the the Trumpkins to find a new pet rock. The Dossier (and THE MEMO!) are pretty played out at this point. I am a bit disappointed they are still humping that dry well. Where is the creativity?

At this point everyone can tell there is nothing to the much discussed Dossier (and less to the memo).
   40. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: February 05, 2018 at 10:48 AM (#5619649)
What is the motivation of Holocaust deniers?

Depends on the person. Sometimes - most times? - it's just conspiracy nuts being conspiracy nuts. Much like JFK conspiracy nuts, or alien abuction/Area 51 conspiracy nuts, the motivation there is often simply to maintain the internal belief that they know the "secret truth" that "sheeple" can't handle. It's self aggrandizement and mental instability. (See also SBB, JE, re: "the deep state".)

For deep ideological neo-Nazis, the denial is generally there to 1) deny that Hitler's regime were the monsters of history they are portrayed to be, and thus should be re-evaluated as ideological options for the future, and 2) to establish just how deep "the Jewish cabal's" tentacles reach into history.


IMO in Irving's case it's partially genuine anti-semitism, and partially a way of distinguishing himself from mainstream historians. He may be discredited by every serious historian when it comes to his Holocaust denial, but until Deborah Lipstadt put the kibosh on him in a famous libel suit, it proved to be a very good career move. I had more than a few strange people berate me in my former shop when I told them I refused to stock any of his books, even though I often carried Mein Kampf and The Foundations of the Nineteenth Century, etc. In many ways even Hitler and Houston Stewart Chamberlain were more honest than Irving, in the sense that they seldom tried to conceal their true beliefs.
   41. -- Posted: February 05, 2018 at 10:49 AM (#5619650)
They did in fact interview him; there's no dispute about that.


You have no idea whether that's the case. None.

And that's not what I said anyway. I said nowhere in the dossier does Steele vouch for the credibility of any of his sources, and nowhere in the dossier does Steele say anyone, named or unnamed, told him, Steele, anything.

It's the warrant application, not the dossier, that would have such descriptors.


I was talking about the dossier, not the warrant application. You have no idea whether the warrant application "has such descriptors."(*) You're completely inventing things.

It sounds like it did not.

(*) The affidavit in the application could have been, as they frequently are, "Attached as Exhibit A is a written summary of Mr. Steele's findings," with Exhibit A being the raw dossier. It sounds like that in fact was the case.
   42. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 05, 2018 at 10:49 AM (#5619651)
You're (generally, not David specifically) asking the question inverted from its proper form. The question is not "does the fact that this antisemite holocaust denier is running as a Republican mean everyone who votes for him is also an antisemite holocaust denier?" The question is "what about the modern GOP makes it an attractive destination for antisemitic holocaust deniers?"
You can have the discussion you want to have with yourself. I'm having a different one, about the significance of votes.

Oh, and the social science surveys all show that Democrats are more anti-semitic than Republicans. (But liberals need to look away and pretend otherwise, because so much Democratic anti-Semitism is from minority groups, and white liberals are embarrassed by that.)
   43. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 05, 2018 at 10:50 AM (#5619652)
I was talking about the dossier, not the warrant application.
No, you weren't. You said
Warrants can, of course, be obtained based on the statements of confidential informants, but in those instances the officer or agent says "The CI told me X, Y, and Z."
That's a statement about warrant applications. Then you complained that the dossier didn't have a statement like that, but of course it wouldn't, since it isn't a warrant application.


They did in fact interview him; there's no dispute about that.

You have no idea whether that's the case. None.
No; you may not have any idea about that; that wouldn't be surprising since you don't have any clue about anything. I do know that's the case. There's no dispute that Steele was interviewed by the FBI.
   44. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: February 05, 2018 at 10:52 AM (#5619653)
Oh, and the social science surveys all show that Democrats are more anti-semitic than Republicans.


And yet the neo-Nazis campaign as Republicans. Why is that?
   45. -- Posted: February 05, 2018 at 10:54 AM (#5619654)
That's a statement about warrant applications.


Not this warrant application.

Then you complained that the dossier didn't have a statement like that, but of course it wouldn't, since it isn't a warrant application.


Uh, it was part of the application. That's what all this is about.
   46. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: February 05, 2018 at 10:54 AM (#5619656)
More from the hard-working leader who thinks "Little" is a searing insult:
Representative Devin Nunes, a man of tremendous courage and grit, may someday be recognized as a Great American Hero for what he has exposed and what he has had to endure!

Trump should tell Nunes' brave story himself, and win a Pulitzer Prize like Kennedy did. He can title his book "Profiles in Courtiers."

Of course, these tweets are hot off the grill. The very best Twitter messages are worth the wait.


Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Nov. 3, 2016:
When you're attacking FBI agents because you're under criminal investigation, you're losing

Anyone remember The Little Red Book of Quotations of Chairman Mao? It may be time for The Little Orange Book of Donald Trump Tweets.
   47. -- Posted: February 05, 2018 at 10:57 AM (#5619659)
I do know that's the case. There's no dispute that Steele was interviewed by the FBI.


Yes, as to any particular part of the dossier, there very much is a dispute over that.

You have no idea whether Steele was "interviewed" about a single thing he put in the dossier. None.

OTOH, we have the evidence from two FBI sources that there was little to any corroboration of any of the dossier. An FBI agent testing Steele's statements and independently finding them credible would be corroboration.

   48. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 05, 2018 at 10:59 AM (#5619663)
And a good-faith interpretation of this -- see the word "had" -- is that Nunes met Papa hadn't met with Trump at the time Strzok slapped the "investigation" on Papa.
That's not a good faith interpretation in the first place, and it would still be a lie. The meeting shown in the photograph was from March 2016; the investigation of George Papadopoulos began in July 2016.
A photo op with a bunch of people is not a "meeting."
It literally is the definition of a meeting.
   49. -- Posted: February 05, 2018 at 11:00 AM (#5619665)
Yes, there was a meeting in March. The picture shows it.
   50. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 05, 2018 at 11:13 AM (#5619678)
Yes, there was a meeting in March. The picture shows it.
Uh oh, the truth fairy hacked SBB's account.
   51. -- Posted: February 05, 2018 at 11:20 AM (#5619681)
Uh oh, the truth fairy hacked SBB's account.


From my very first post here.
   52. Chip Posted: February 05, 2018 at 11:31 AM (#5619691)
Yes, there was a meeting in March. The picture shows it.


A meeting at which Papadopoulos met with Trump.
   53. Ray (CTL) Posted: February 05, 2018 at 11:32 AM (#5619692)
A photo op with a bunch of people is not a "meeting."

It literally is the definition of a meeting.


Normally I'd agree, but we had David last week claiming that Glenn Simpson being at a dinner which included Natalia Veselnitskaya was not a meeting, so... :-)
   54. Zonk, Bearer of Responsibility Posted: February 05, 2018 at 11:36 AM (#5619696)

Donald J. Trump

@realDonaldTrump
Representative Devin Nunes, a man of tremendous courage and grit, may someday be recognized as a Great American Hero for what he has exposed and what he has had to endure!

9:08 AM - Feb 5, 2018
   55. Ray (CTL) Posted: February 05, 2018 at 11:36 AM (#5619697)
I agree with David -- if indeed this is one of his points -- that the FISA warrant would likely have been granted even if the warrant had disclosed all of the things that Team Red wanted disclosed. The probable cause standard for granting a FISA warrant is not very difficult to meet, and indeed we see that in the vast vast majority of cases it is indeed met.

Which raises the question of why the FBI withheld such... interesting and potentially material information from the warrant.

(And with this "question" I'm claiming no vast conspiracy; I'm making a simple and narrow point that it shows the bias of the FBI.)
   56. Commissioner Bud Black Beltre Hillman Posted: February 05, 2018 at 11:37 AM (#5619698)
Oh, and the social science surveys all show that Democrats are more anti-semitic than Republicans.



And yet the neo-Nazis campaign as Republicans. Why is that?
Well, aren't you talking about two very different strains of anti-semitism? My assumption is that "Democrats are more anti-semitic" overwhelmingly in the context of the state of Israel and its relationship with Palestine; admittedly with some bleedover into conspiracy nutters who might take those ideas and go... further. Whereas the neo-Nazis form of anti-semitism is more focused on blood and purity and stuff. Now whether it's accurate or useful to refer to both those sets of ideas as "anti-semitic" is a whole other discussion, but I don't see those two groups, or their ideas, having much in common.
   57. Shredder Posted: February 05, 2018 at 11:41 AM (#5619701)
Representative Devin Nunes, a man of tremendous courage and grit, may someday be recognized as a Great American Hero for what he has exposed and what he has had to endure!
I hear he also tosses one hell of a salad.
   58. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: February 05, 2018 at 11:42 AM (#5619703)
Now here's a pretty good template for how Illinois Republicans can deal with that Holocaust denier:

‘Thank you’ for letting ‘me use the girls’ bathroom’: Ill. campaign ad draws fire

In political campaigns, negative advertisements tend to trade on controversy and exaggeration. But a new ad out of Illinois is so inflammatory that a bipartisan group of state officials is blasting it as bigoted and calling for it to be taken down, while others appear to have mistaken it for some sort of parody.

The ad from state Rep. Jeanne Ives, a Republican mounting a primary challenge to Gov. Bruce Rauner (R), is a mocking thank-you message to the governor, who has faced criticism from some conservatives who consider him too moderate on certain issues.

The one-minute segment opens with a shot of several smiling people. Among them is a man with a faint five o’clock shadow wearing a dress and carrying a purse. “Thank you for signing legislation that lets me use the girls’ bathroom,” the deep-voiced actor says.

Next comes a woman wearing one of the pink hats associated with the Women’s March. “Thank you for making all Illinois families pay for my abortions,” she says.

The video then cuts to a man clad in a black-hooded sweatshirt, his mouth covered by a red bandanna, an apparent nod to the masked anarchist protesters that have wreaked havoc at conservative events in the past year. “Thank you,” he mockingly tells the governor, “for opposing law enforcement and making Illinois a sanctuary state for illegal immigrant criminals.”

After that, a black woman in a teacher’s union T-shirt “thanks” Rauner for purportedly making the state “bail out Chicago teacher pensions.” The segment ends with a series of clips accusing the governor of “betraying” Republicans.....

And here's the reaction from Illinois GOP leaders. Team Trump might want to take note:
A chorus of politicians and advocacy groups promptly issued denunciations. Tim Schneider, chairman of the Illinois Republican Party, called on Ives to pull the segment, saying it was a “cowardly attempt to stoke political division.”

“There is no place in the Illinois Republican Party for rhetoric that attacks our fellow Illinoisans based on their race, gender or humanity,” Schneider said in a statement Saturday. “Rep. Ives’ campaign ad does not reflect who we are as the Party of Lincoln and as proud residents of our great and diverse state.”

Pat Brady, a former state GOP chairman, added on Twitter: “There is no room in the Republican Party for racist, bigoted, homophobic candidates like her.”

It isn't really that hard.
   59. -- Posted: February 05, 2018 at 11:49 AM (#5619707)
I agree with David -- if indeed this is one of his points -- that the FISA warrant would likely have been granted even if the warrant had disclosed all of the things that Team Red wanted disclosed. The probable cause standard for granting a FISA warrant is not very difficult to meet, and indeed we see that in the vast vast majority of cases it is indeed met.


It's possible, but ultimately irrelevant to the government's conduct.

Nor would I conclude that the standard isn't difficult to meet. Unlike non-US citizens, for US citizens, to be classified as a "foreign agent" his clandestine intelligence activities would also have to constitute a federal crime. (50 USC 1801(b)(2)).

So the probable cause would have to go not just to ties to Russia but also involvement in one or more federal crimes.
   60. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 05, 2018 at 11:54 AM (#5619712)
I agree with David -- if indeed this is one of his points -- that the FISA warrant would likely have been granted even if the warrant had disclosed all of the things that Team Red wanted disclosed. The probable cause standard for granting a FISA warrant is not very difficult to meet, and indeed we see that in the vast vast majority of cases it is indeed met.

Which raises the question of why the FBI withheld such... interesting and potentially material information from the warrant.
Actually, it answers the question; it doesn't raise it.
   61. gef the talking mongoose, amorphous lefty blob Posted: February 05, 2018 at 11:55 AM (#5619713)
It isn't really that hard.


That's what she ...

... oh, never mind.

(This is what I get for coming straight here after reading the latest round of posts on Forrest J. Ackerman's apparent sexually predatory ways.)
   62. Ray (CTL) Posted: February 05, 2018 at 11:56 AM (#5619714)
I mean, are they so successful at getting FISA warrants because the standard is so low or are they so successful because they don't apply for warrants unless there's a solid basis for probable cause (i.e., we're looking at a carefully selected group). Maybe some of both but likely it's more of the former.

Now in this case coming down the home stretch of a heated political campaign the FBI may well have believed that if the judge knew the missing information it would be difficult to secure the warrant.

Usually with warrants cops may stretch things but they're doing so in furtherance of investigating the crime at issue. But here there's a good case to be made that the FISA warrant was simply a pretext for spying on the other campaign. That's the problem with all of this, and why it smells.
   63. OCF Posted: February 05, 2018 at 11:57 AM (#5619715)
My experience of living in a barely-contested Texas district is that sometimes the Democratic nominee is a wingnut. Maybe not a Nazi wingnut, but certifiable. The party ignores said nominee and as David says, often nobody is the wiser about the person's existence in the long run.

Where I live in California, two redistrictings ago (which is to say the 90's), the district I was in should have been swingy. It was represented by a Republican who was generally sane (he made a better Congressman then he'd been as a university president). The institutional Democratic party never found and never supported any challengers, so one particular person jumped into the vacuum and ran multiple times. He wasn't a wingnut, and he did have some supportive roots in one ethnic community (Indian-American), but he was kind of eccentric. And some of the advertising flyers he sent out were downright reprehensible, such as trying to make a scandal out of the fact that the incumbent was supported by a former dean of his who had an Arabic name. (In this media market, congressional candidates didn't use TV, but tended to rely on direct mail.) I didn't want to vote for a guy who would vote for Gingrich for Speaker, but I couldn't go for the other guy, either. Of course, the general elections were never close.
   64. -- Posted: February 05, 2018 at 11:58 AM (#5619716)
I mean, are they so successful at getting FISA warrants because the standard is so low or are they so successful because they don't apply for warrants unless there's a solid basis for probable cause


Supposedly, the latter. The statute in fact requires a great deal of information and senior sign-offs. Whether all that info is superfluous and the court is just rubber-stamping things is unclear. But the defenders of the highly-non-libertarian process insist that the high success rate is because the government only goes in for slam-dunks.

Carter Page was nothing remotely close to a slam dunk.
   65. Count Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:01 PM (#5619717)
Ray, they didn't spy on an opposing campaign, and they reportedly did include that the dossier was funded by a political party (we can't know for sure without seeing underlying application but based on Nunes' lack of credibility and the careful way the memo was worded to insinuate omissions without spelling them out that seems more likely to me).
   66. Ray (CTL) Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:01 PM (#5619718)
Which raises the question of why the FBI withheld such... interesting and potentially material information from the warrant.

Actually, it answers the question; it doesn't raise it.


And the answer is...?

   67. -- Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:02 PM (#5619720)
And the answer is...?


The answer is he continues to propagate the false theory that the government can mislead a court if it would have gotten the relief or action it wanted even if it hadn't.
   68. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:04 PM (#5619721)

Carter Page was nothing remotely close to a slam dunk.
"You have no idea whether that's the case. None."
   69. Ray (CTL) Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:04 PM (#5619722)
Ray, they didn't spy on an opposing campaign,


The logic train here fails. Page doesn't speak to himself, unless he's ready for the loony bin. He speaks to..... wait for it..... other people.
   70. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:05 PM (#5619724)
And the answer is...?
That if it wouldn't have affected the granting of the warrant, then by definition it's not material, and they don't normally put stuff in that isn't helpful or material.
   71. Ray (CTL) Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:06 PM (#5619725)
Ray, they didn't spy on an opposing campaign, and they reportedly did include that the dossier was funded by a political party (we can't know for sure without seeing underlying application but based on Nunes' lack of credibility and the careful way the memo was worded to insinuate omissions without spelling them out that seems more likely to me).


I've agreed from the beginning that Nunes is heavily partisan and likely left important material out of the memo.

Now. Do folks on Team Blue here agree that Schiff is heavily partisan and would likely distort his memo?

Let's see who can pass the barest of giggle tests here.
   72. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:06 PM (#5619727)

The logic train here fails. Page doesn't speak to himself, unless he's ready for the loony bin. He speaks to..... wait for it..... other people.
Right. Like Russians. Not like Donald Trump (or Paul Manafort, or Steve Bannon or Donald Trump Jr. or Jared Kushner) after he's no longer part of the campaign.
   73. Count Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:07 PM (#5619729)
69- as you know, Page had ostensibly been off the campaign for a month when the surveillance started.
   74. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:08 PM (#5619730)
Well, aren't you talking about two very different strains of anti-semitism? My assumption is that "Democrats are more anti-semitic" overwhelmingly in the context of the state of Israel and its relationship with Palestine


I think you're wrong on the assumption here. David is almost certainly referencing the very real undercurrent of antisemitism that runs through much of the African American community. That exists, both in the generic "Jews got the money" sort of thing, and bleeding into the deeper, more virulent Nation of Islam type antisemitism. Those folks are overwhelmingly Democratic voters. (Similarly, much to YR's distress, there's a hell of a lot of creationism and religious nonsense in that same AA community.)

EDIT: that said, the community also tends to recognize the support from Jewish liberals during the Civil Rights era. The world; it is myriad and complex.
   75. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:09 PM (#5619731)
The logic train here fails. Page doesn't speak to himself, unless he's ready for the loony bin. He speaks to..... wait for it..... other people.


I don't see what the relevance of this is with regards to the Trump campaign. How much coffee-related discussion would a low-level functionary like him be expected to have once he'd been relieved of his extremely limited duties?
   76. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:11 PM (#5619732)
Do folks on Team Blue here agree that Schiff is heavily partisan and would likely distort his memo?


This would be more of a concern if we didn't already have the Team Trump spin already in play. We already know the most damning edit possible of the underlying facts. Schiff's release (assuming it is released) will only counter that spin.

Your continued embrace of the nihilism of "there is no truth at heart" is still not a good look.
   77. Ray (CTL) Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:14 PM (#5619734)
That if it wouldn't have affected the granting of the warrant, then by definition it's not material, and they don't normally put stuff in that isn't helpful or material.


No, your "by definition" doesn't remotely follow. It's clearly wrong.

Let's say you're seeking a search warrant on a suspect in a murder. You put in the warrant request that you have a witness who saw the suspect commit the murder. You leave out from the warrant request that you have a witness who claims that she was with the suspect at the time of the murder.

The exculpatory information left out of the warrant request is clearly material. But just as clearly, even if the exculpatory information were put in the warrant request the judge would have granted the search warrant. Your analysis fails, because the standard for granting the warrant is probable cause, not beyond a reasonable doubt or some higher standard.

Thus it's very clear that just because a FISA (or any) warrant would have been granted without missing information X that that does NOT necessarily mean that missing information X is immaterial. You're simply wrong in your legal analysis there.

So the question remains: Why did they leave the information out of the FISA warrant request? Presuming Nunes -- actually while we keep saying Nunes we're really talking about Gowdy here -- is correct that they did. Now, it could be something simple like they didn't think it was material information. But really how could they not; that doesn't really pass any sanity test.
   78. Count Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:16 PM (#5619736)
71- Schiff certainly is a Democrat and has an interest in protecting the investigation from this tangential attack on FISA warrants. He is also more credible than Nunes (a low bar!) and if the Democratic memo is released we will be able to evaluate how credible it comes across with various indicia: Is it plausible? Does it misstate or mislead about facts that we know, like the Nunes memo did (for example in misleading description of briefing of dossier to Trump)? Is it vague in places where it would help to be specific? Etc.
   79. Ray (CTL) Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:18 PM (#5619739)
Right. Like Russians. Not like Donald Trump (or Paul Manafort, or Steve Bannon or Donald Trump Jr. or Jared Kushner) after he's no longer part of the campaign.


Umm, that doesn't remotely follow, but even if it did, Page could well be speaking to other people about various goings on at the campaign while he was there. Things they did, strategies, etc., that still live on even AFTER Page leaves the campaign.

Really now, the logic on your part is just so poor.
   80. Ray (CTL) Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:21 PM (#5619741)
Do folks on Team Blue here agree that Schiff is heavily partisan and would likely distort his memo?

This would be more of a concern if we didn't already have the Team Trump spin already in play. We already know the most damning edit possible of the underlying facts. Schiff's release (assuming it is released) will only counter that spin.

Your continued embrace of the nihilism of "there is no truth at heart" is still not a good look.


It's really a yes or no question. Actually it's a two-part question. You can take it in two parts if you like.

But the above is not an answer to either part of it.
   81. -- Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:23 PM (#5619742)
Carter Page was nothing remotely close to a slam dunk.

"You have no idea whether that's the case. None."


Uh, yeah -- I do. They didn't have enough to go to court to get a warrant without the dossier (McCabe's testimony). Which means that the -- barely, if at all, corroborated (*) -- dossier would have had to convert the matter from "not enough" to "slam dunk."

The idea that the dossier so converted it is ... is ... well, it's insane.

(*) Two FBI sources, including the counterinteligence head.
   82. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:25 PM (#5619744)
Umm, that doesn't remotely follow, but even if it did, Page could well be speaking to other people about various goings on at the campaign while he was there.


"Who's making the coffee now? Really? She's making too weak again isn't she. Like hot water stirred with a brown crayon."
   83. -- Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:27 PM (#5619746)
Ray, they didn't spy on an opposing campaign,


Yeah, they did -- Manafort was also bugged, during the campaign.
   84. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:32 PM (#5619749)
It's really a yes or no question. Actually it's a two-part question. You can take it in two parts if you like.


Yes, of course Schiff is partisan. There is no room in the current political environment for a non-partisan actor. Schiff happens to be partisan to the side more concerned with facts and application of the law against everyone (not just poor people.) (This is probably a position of convenience, but nonetheless, this is where they are.)

No, I do not have any reason to suspect that Schiff is going to significantly distort his memo. I do not rank "correcting already existing distortions from Nunes" as a distortion itself.
   85. Srul Itza Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:32 PM (#5619750)
There is no room in the Republican Party for racist, bigoted, homophobic candidates like her.”


Because we already have so many of them, we're literally running out of room.
   86. -- Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:34 PM (#5619751)
So the question remains: Why did they leave the information out of the FISA warrant request? Presuming Nunes -- actually while we keep saying Nunes we're really talking about Gowdy here -- is correct that they did. Now, it could be something simple like they didn't think it was material information. But really how could they not; that doesn't really pass any sanity test.


True, but also keep in mind that they didn't just leave out information. If they in fact, as appears to be the case since it's the defenders' statement, they said in the application that Steele was paid by a law firm working for "a major political party," that's not an omission -- it's an affirmatively misleading statement. (For the reasons I've explained.)

   87. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:38 PM (#5619755)
Yes, of course Schiff is partisan. There is no room in the current political environment for a non-partisan actor. Schiff happens to be partisan to the side more concerned with facts and application of the law against everyone (not just poor people.) (This is probably a position of convenience, but nonetheless, this is where they are.)


False equivalence is an integral part of the how The Stupids are taught to handle their own ignorance. "Your belief in evolution requires as much faith as my belief in Creationism - you weren't there thousands of years ago!"
   88. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:40 PM (#5619757)
False equivalence is an integral part of the how The Stupids are taught to handle their own ignorance. "Your belief in evolution requires as much faith as my belief in Creationism - you weren't there thousands of years ago!"


Yes. I know.
   89. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:43 PM (#5619758)
13

There's still a street sign near my work offering Bitcoin classes. I'm wondering what they are teaching right now. Don't buy it, that will be $100. Thank you


Nah, that can't be it: Trump U shut down a couple of years ago...
   90. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:45 PM (#5619759)
As BitCoin collapses, all of my deep crypto-currency friends have switched immediately into "BitCoin was the beta, it's not even the best option out there anyway" talking points.
   91. The Yankee Clapper Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:45 PM (#5619760)
Oh, and the social science surveys all show that Democrats are more anti-semitic than Republicans.

And yet the neo-Nazis campaign as Republicans. Why is that?

Fred Phelps, of Westboro Baptist Church fame, always ran as a Democrat. He even got 31% of the vote in a Senate primary. Why was that?
   92. Stormy JE Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:49 PM (#5619764)
   93. Zonk, Bearer of Responsibility Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:52 PM (#5619767)
I don't see what the relevance of this is with regards to the Trump campaign. How much coffee-related discussion would a low-level functionary like him be expected to have once he'd been relieved of his extremely limited duties?


A month AFTER he (allegedly!) parted ways/was parted from the Trump campaign anyway!

That's the bottom line. Trumpkins can keep dancing and dancing, spinning and spinning.

But the same thing that was true last Friday remains true today. This is about FISA warrant application for Carter Page.

If the Trumpkins want to clearly state/agree to two things:

#1 - Page was a bigger deal in the Trump campaign than previously claimed

#2 - Page remained in contact - as a "bigger deal" than previously claimed - with the Trump campaign well after he left it.

Until Team Trumpkin gets on board with those two items, I really don't see the point in following them down their rabbit holes. Absent agreement with those two things, the whole Trumpkin argument collapses like a house of cards.

   94. Stormy JE Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:55 PM (#5619771)
A month AFTER he (allegedly!) parted ways/was parted from the Trump campaign anyway!

That's the bottom line. Trumpkins can keep dancing and dancing, spinning and spinning.
Are you deliberately ignoring that prior electronic communications were covered under the FISA warrant?

And care to respond to why suddenly you think he's a measly volunteer when a few weeks back lefties were claiming Page and Papadopoulos were important FP advisors?
   95. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:59 PM (#5619773)
Fred Phelps, of Westboro Baptist Church fame, always ran as a Democrat. He even got 31% of the vote in a Senate primary. Why was that?


As we said to start, we already know who is going to come in spinning, churning, and kicking up as much silt in the water as possible to make his bullshit seem reasonable. You are a predictable cockholster, Clappy. As for Phelps:

Phelps ran in various Kansas Democratic Party primaries five times, but never won. These included races for governor in 1990, 1994, and 1998, receiving about 15 percent of the vote in 1998.[84] In the 1992 Democratic Party primary for U.S. Senate, Phelps received 31 percent of the vote.[85]


But hey. Losing primaries in 1990-94 vs a neo-Nazi sympathizer in the Oval Office in 2018. All the same to you. Because you're a centerless, amoral cnvt.
   96. Zonk, Bearer of Responsibility Posted: February 05, 2018 at 12:59 PM (#5619774)
Are you deliberately ignoring that prior electronic communications were covered under the FISA warrant?

And care to respond to why suddenly you think he's a measly volunteer when a few weeks back lefties were claiming Page and Papadopoulos were important FP advisors?


So you guys lied about him 2016?

Why don't you guys make your mind first - he's your guy, not mine. So you tell me... Nobody coffee fetcher whose volunteer time with Team Trump ended in September 2016 or - key adviser the Deep State used to get Trump. It cannot be both.

Which is it?
   97. Stormy JE Posted: February 05, 2018 at 01:01 PM (#5619776)
So you guys lied about him 2016?

Why don't you guys make your mind first - he's your guy, not mine. So you tell me... Nobody coffee fetcher whose volunteer time with Team Trump ended in September 2016 or - key adviser the Deep State used to get Trump. It cannot be both.

Which is it?
You're the one repeatedly clucking over Page. Instead of clucking and now ducking, please answer the questions.
   98. Zonk, Bearer of Responsibility Posted: February 05, 2018 at 01:04 PM (#5619777)
You're the one repeatedly clucking over Page. Instead of ducking, please answer the questions.


Page is what your ####### memo is all about.... FFS, is there some kind of secret memo about the memo that's supposed to clarify how the memo about Carter Page isn't actually about Carter Page?

   99. Stormy JE Posted: February 05, 2018 at 01:08 PM (#5619779)
Page is what your ####### memo is all about.... FFS, is there some kind of secret memo about the memo that's supposed to clarify how the memo about Carter Page isn't actually about Carter Page?
So you can't/won't answer the questions about prior electronic communications within the scope of the warrant and recasting of Page's role? You'd rather keep doing the Canadian Monkey Dance?

Fine. I'm dust.
   100. -- Posted: February 05, 2018 at 01:10 PM (#5619781)
Page is what your ####### memo is all about..


Page was bugged based on the fake news dossier. Manafort was bugged. Papadopolous was "investigated" with no underlying meets-the-laugh-test basis.

Etc.

The common theme is obvious.
Page 1 of 22 pages  1 2 3 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Edmundo got dem ol' Kozma blues again mama
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOTP 2018 May 21: President takes British royalty to a baseball game, May 15, 1991
(191 - 8:46pm, May 21)
Last: Stormy JE

NewsblogOf all the chats in all the world, you walked into OMNICHATTER! for May 21, 2018
(20 - 8:46pm, May 21)
Last: ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

NewsblogCardinals' Jordan Hicks throws MLB's fastest pitch of the year, clocking 105 mph twice
(18 - 8:44pm, May 21)
Last: cardsfanboy

NewsblogHow gambling can help make baseball America's pastime again
(110 - 8:42pm, May 21)
Last: Greg Pope

NewsblogHader's feats generating All-Star, Cy Young buzz
(3 - 8:37pm, May 21)
Last: puck

NewsblogOT - 2017-18 NBA thread (All-Star Weekend to End of Time edition)
(4614 - 8:35pm, May 21)
Last: JC in DC

NewsblogWhitey Herzog Offered Hernandez to the Mets in 1980, 2+ Years Before Trade
(21 - 8:27pm, May 21)
Last: cardsfanboy

NewsblogDan Duquette, Orioles Understand Trading Manny Machado Seems Inevitable
(71 - 8:26pm, May 21)
Last: donlock

NewsblogPosnanski: Modern Romonce
(84 - 8:10pm, May 21)
Last: Nasty Nate

NewsblogOT - Catch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (April - June 2018)
(2106 - 8:06pm, May 21)
Last: cardsfanboy

NewsblogOT: Winter Soccer Thread
(2017 - 7:43pm, May 21)
Last: J. Sosa

Gonfalon CubsPadding
(13 - 7:43pm, May 21)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogJordan Hicks, Vladimir Guerrero Jr. among the MLB's youth surge
(26 - 7:24pm, May 21)
Last: Los Angeles El Hombre of Anaheim

NewsblogVHS via Leitch: Phillie broadcast commenting on impending rain delay
(10 - 6:35pm, May 21)
Last: Leroy Kincaid

NewsblogOT: Wrestling Thread November 2014
(2234 - 1:44pm, May 21)
Last: aberg

Page rendered in 0.5993 seconds
47 querie(s) executed