Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
edjr

James Comey kept memos from phone calls with Trump

Recommended Posts

 

"according to two current and two former officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity"

 

Remember liberals, you don't believe stuff from anonymous sources.

 

Please hang up and try your call again.

 

That's not necessarily true. It really all depends on who is citing the anonymous source. If you have a person who has consistently been shown to be correct when citing anonymous sources over a period of time, they can be believed.

 

Not saying that's the case here (didn't read the article and not going to), but the logic behind your statement is faulty.

 

Obviously, if you've got some random Joe citing an anonymous source, you should be skeptical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That's not necessarily true. It really all depends on who is citing the anonymous source. If you have a person who has consistently been shown to be correct when citing anonymous sources over a period of time, they can be believed.

 

Not saying that's the case here (didn't read the article and not going to), but the logic behind your statement is faulty.

 

Obviously, if you've got some random Joe citing an anonymous source, you should be skeptical.

And what's been said is that multiple sources corroborating the same story is better than a single anonymous source.

 

This has been explained multiple times..they either don't get it or have chosen not to get it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That's not necessarily true. It really all depends on who is citing the anonymous source. If you have a person who has consistently been shown to be correct when citing anonymous sources over a period of time, they can be believed.

 

Not saying that's the case here (didn't read the article and not going to), but the logic behind your statement is faulty.

 

Obviously, if you've got some random Joe citing an anonymous source, you should be skeptical.

 

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sarcasm

 

And what's been said is that multiple sources corroborating the same story is better than a single anonymous source.

 

This has been explained multiple times..they either don't get it or have chosen not to get it.

 

:lol:

 

You consistently do that for anonymous sources. Please try your call again later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of this reminds me of the way simple minds react to polls......Sure the statistical science says they'll be within a certain margin of error 98% of the time....but when that 2% hits, simple minds give themselves permission to ignore all future polls. America.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of this reminds me of the way simple minds react to polls......Sure the statistical science says they'll be within a certain margin of error 98% of the time....but when that 2% hits, simple minds give themselves permission to ignore all future polls. America.

The right uses the election now as an excuse to dismiss all polls in which they don't like the results. The ones that shine favorably on Trump/conservatives, they still agree with those. :doh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who do I believe...that guy in an article from March with no evidence of the CIA doing this...or Brennen.

Hmmmm...let me think.

 

You're capable of thinking?

 

Think......................why won't the DNC allow Federal Investigators to examine the hacked equipment?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ironically, today is the best day Trump has had since he took office. His sneakiness and retardedness seem much less important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You're capable of thinking?

 

Think......................why won't the DNC allow Federal Investigators to examine the hacked equipment?

Why won't you acknowledged the FBI did more than just read a report in their investigation?

I don't work for the DNC so I can't really speak for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why won't you acknowledged the FBI did more than just read a report in their investigation?

I don't work for the DNC so I can't really speak for them.

 

I don't know for a fact they did more than just accept CrowdStrike's report.

 

I'm not asking you to speak for the DNC. Please provide your opinion on why not letting Federal Investigators to examine the equipment is acceptable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You're capable of thinking?

 

Think......................why won't the DNC allow Federal Investigators to examine the hacked equipment?

is there a logical answer to this great question ? The hacks choose to ignore it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is there a logical answer to this great question ? The hacks choose to ignore it.

 

In what way, shape or form does the FBI allow given they're performing an investigation into Russian involvement in our National elections?

 

If I were legal counsel for ANYONE implicated, I'd demand access to that equipment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

In what way, shape or form does the FBI allow given they're performing an investigation into Russian involvement in our National elections?

 

If I were legal counsel for ANYONE implicated, I'd demand access to that equipment.

It's been bleached already. "At this point, what difference does it make?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's been bleached already. "At this point, what difference does it make?"

Hillary :cry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hillary :cry:

What about her? Never said "hillary". It was about the DNC. Just add this to your list of b!tch slaps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please provide your opinion on why not letting Federal Investigators to examine the equipment is acceptable.

 

 

In what way, shape or form does the FBI allow given they're performing an investigation into Russian involvement in our National elections?

 

 

 

 

Please give your insight to the above questions since Sho is down for a nap or crafting some way of not answering them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

In what way, shape or form does the FBI allow given they're performing an investigation into Russian involvement in our National elections?

 

If I were legal counsel for ANYONE implicated, I'd demand access to that equipment.

without them getting access to the equipment, there will never be a conviction of any kind.

They know there's nothing there with the collusion, they'd never even take it to court. This is all just a dog and pony show by the democrats and the media to prevent Trump from doing the job he was fairly elected to do.

Trump was right, they are the enemy of the people, CNN being the leader in this anti American criminal interfernce.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Brennan's comments were made during a tense exchange with Republican Rep. Trey Gowdy, who pressed the Obama-era official on what evidence he had of a "connection" between the Trump campaign and Russian state actors.

"As I said Mr. Gowdy, I don't do evidence," Brennan said.

The South Carolina congressman responded, "I appreciate that you don't do evidence, Director Brennan. Unfortunately, that's what I do."

So no evidence Mr. Brennan? Thought so.......

 

Still no answer to those questions Sho/Newbs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about her? Never said "hillary". It was about the DNC. Just add this to your list of b!tch slaps

LOL Yeah, I guess that wasn't a Hillary quote. At least you're ashamed enough to know you should backpedal. (She lost the election, bud)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Please give your insight to the above questions since Sho is down for a nap or crafting some way of not answering them.

Here's my insight. I wish the FBI would examine and inspect any thing necessary to get to the truth. Both with the emails and with Russia. I'd have no problem with Hillary going to jail too. How's that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's my insight. I wish the FBI would examine and inspect any thing necessary to get to the truth. Both with the emails and with Russia. I'd have no problem with Hillary going to jail too. How's that?

 

Good start.

 

Given the fact the DNC won't allow Federal Investigators access to the hacked equipment, does that raise any doubt in your mind this equipment was hacked?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I don't know for a fact they did more than just accept CrowdStrike's report.

 

I'm not asking you to speak for the DNC. Please provide your opinion on why not letting Federal Investigators to examine the equipment is acceptable.

First part...then you are being willfully ignorant. The report they issued has told you that. Ive said it over and over again. If you don't know by know...it's because your head is buried in the sand or up Trumps rectum.

 

Because they are a private entity with no requirement to do so and hired a reputable third party to examine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

without them getting access to the equipment, there will never be a conviction of any kind.

They know there's nothing there with the collusion, they'd never even take it to court. This is all just a dog and pony show by the democrats and the media to prevent Trump from doing the job he was fairly elected to do.

Trump was right, they are the enemy of the people, CNN being the leader in this anti American criminal interfernce.

You again shown the complete ignorance again. Just mindnumbingly stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brennan's comments were made during a tense exchange with Republican Rep. Trey Gowdy, who pressed the Obama-era official on what evidence he had of a "connection" between the Trump campaign and Russian state actors.

"As I said Mr. Gowdy, I don't do evidence," Brennan said.

The South Carolina congressman responded, "I appreciate that you don't do evidence, Director Brennan. Unfortunately, that's what I do."

So no evidence Mr. Brennan? Thought so.......

 

Still no answer to those questions Sho/Newbs?

Nice partial quote again...what a shock. How about post the rest of what Brennan said?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 



Nice partial quote again...what a shock. How about post the rest of what Brennan said?


The same could be said about you (the post I quote you on twitter one).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The same could be said about you (the post I quote you on twitter one).

It was the gist of his testimony.

Yours was a partial quote meant to not include what he said after...to discredit what he is saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because they are a private entity with no requirement to do so and hired a reputable third party to examine.

 

Why block Federal Investigators if you have nothing to hide? Remember Why Plead the Fifth if you have nothing to hide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was the gist of his testimony.

Yours was a partial quote meant to not include what he said after...to discredit what he is saying.

 

What more needs to be said after 'I don't do evidence'? So he doesn't have or won't provide evidence to support those claims.

 

He might claim he's actually the President. Does that make it true?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Why block Federal Investigators if you have nothing to hide? Remember Why Plead the Fifth if you have nothing to hide.

Perhaps there are other things they are hiding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What more needs to be said after 'I don't do evidence'? So he doesn't have or won't provide evidence to support those claims.

 

He might claim he's actually the President. Does that make it true?

Either you didn't read what all he had to say...or just being your usual moronic self.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Either you didn't read what all he had to say...or just being your usual moronic self.

No evidence but Trust me, I'm with the Government. What case is built without evidence?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like Flynn? You can't have it both ways.

What did I want both ways? You seriously just like to make false equivalency BS all the time.

Because you really have zero backing for your thoughts in these threads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No evidence but Trust me, I'm with the Government. What case is built without evidence?

I'm still not sure if it's willful ignorance or just stupidity with you.

The belief in crackpot conspiracy theories while denying facts makes me think it's the latter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"according to two current and two former officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity"

 

Remember liberals, you don't believe stuff from anonymous sources.

 

Please hang up and try your call again.

 

:ninja: = source

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Appears Gowdy is asking a very direct question on Brennan's last day (Jan 20th, 2017) and if he made an unmasking request that day.

 

Is Gowdy pressing this because Brennan unmasked people on last day or is it possible he is one of the leakers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×