Flynn

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Please for once fact check yourself.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So Donna Brazile, as an employee of CNN, didn't sneak a debate question to her preferred presidential candidate, in the hopes of helping her win? Yes or no?

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

So Donna Brazile, as an employee of CNN, didn't sneak a debate question to her preferred presidential candidate, in the hopes of helping her win? Yes or no?

Not against Trump.

[scottw]

did the democrats just vote to impeach trump for
"high misdemeanors" ?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Not against Trump.

You are correct, it was against Bernie. How is it not an act that undermines the democratic process? I guess your side doesn’t give a fig about that, or they wouldn’t have superdelegates used theyvway you use them, the sole purpose of which is to reverse the democratic process if the DNC leaders don’t happen to like the way it turned out.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

You are correct, it was against Bernie. How is it not an act that undermines the democratic process? I guess your side doesn’t give a fig about that, or they wouldn’t have superdelegates used theyvway you use them, the sole purpose of which is to reverse the democratic process if the DNC leaders don’t happen to like the way it turned out.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I don't see how a democratic operative telling a democratic candidate about a single town hall debate topic is "undermining our democratic process." It's a bit of foul play on Brazile's part but statistically insignificant as far as the debates were concerned.

[Slipknot]

you know Jim, the RNC would have done similar to keep Trump out if they could have

[Slipknot]

Originally Posted by spence

I don't see how a democratic operative telling a democratic candidate about a single town hall debate topic is "undermining our democratic process." It's a bit of foul play on Brazile's part but statistically insignificant as far as the debates were concerned.

insignificant in your mind maybe, the fix was in admit it

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

I don't see how a democratic operative telling a democratic candidate about a single town hall debate topic is "undermining our democratic process." It's a bit of foul play on Brazile's part but statistically insignificant as far as the debates were concerned.

"I don't see how a democratic operative"

She also worked for CNN, are you conceding that CNN is part of the Democratic party?

"It's a bit of foul play on Brazile's part"

Which she denied, then admitted doing it and said she was proud...

"statistically insignificant as far as the debates were concerned"

As opposed to the Wikileaks email dumps, which merely told the truth about what the Democrats were doing. Is there evidence that the email dumps had a statistically significant effect on the election?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Slipknot

you know Jim, the RNC would have done similar to keep Trump out if they could have

A great point to bring up.

They could have if they chose to. Foxnews hosted a debate. People there could have sabotaged Trump's performance if they wanted to. They did not. And THAT tells you a lot about the 2 parties. The GOP establishment hated Trump, were praying he would not be the candidate. But they let the process play out as it's supposed to.

The GOP doesn't have superdelegates whose sole purpose is to undermine the democratic process if desired.

[Sea Dangles]

Originally Posted by Slipknot

insignificant in your mind maybe, the fix was in admit it

Until people like Jeff understand that is a bad look for the dems,they will run into stiff resistance.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/...82070?lo=ap_a1

This doesn't look good.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

how about this....aaannnd...what happened to that?


Judge(Rudolph Contreras) recuses in Michael Flynn case

By JOSH GERSTEIN 12/07/2017

.......

Judge Rudolph Contreras is one of a very small group of FISA Court Judges.

Judge Contreras may be the judge who signed off on the FISA warrant that led to the surveillance of Donald Trump’s campaign officials, that included National Security Advisor General Michael Flynn.

Those FBI FISA warrants are now coming under scrutiny.

It would be EXPLOSIVE if it turned out that the FISA warrants were gained by deception, misleading information, manipulated information, or fraud…. and that warrant led to the wiretapping and surveillance of General Michael Flynn was authorized by Contreras…. who would now be the judge in Flynn’s case.


the plot thickens

[scottw]

this whole Russia, collusion etc. thing is coming back on the democrats like a boomerang....Trump Effect

and the media...fake news all week......Three stories in the past seven days have crumbled under greater scrutiny.

The misses

Flynn's testimony: Last Friday, ABC News reported that former national security advisor Michael Flynn was prepared to testify that President Trump, while still a candidate, directed him to contact Russian officials. But later in the day, the network issued a "clarification" that the direction came when Trump was president-elect. That changed the impact of the story entirely as it's a common occurrence for presidential transition teams to reach out to foreign governments.

Deutsche Bank subpoena: Reuters and Bloomberg both reported on Tuesday that Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation had subpoenaed Deutsche Bank for information on accounts relating to President Trump and his family members — seemingly confirming that Mueller had expanded his probe to investigate the president's financial dealings. The WSJ defused that bombshell in a follow-up report stating that the subpoenas actually dealt with "people or entities close to Mr. Trump."

WikiLeaks emails: CNN reported this morning that senior Trump campaign officials, including Trump himself, received an email from an unknown sender on September 4, 2016 that linked them to what could have been unreleased WikiLeaks documents. WaPo issued their own report later in the afternoon that the email was actually sent on September 14 — and linked to a trove of documents that WikiLeaks had publicly released a day earlier.

[spence]

Originally Posted by scottw

this whole Russia, collusion etc. thing is coming back on the democrats like a boomerang....Trump Effect

and the media...fake news all week......Three stories in the past seven days have crumbled under greater scrutiny.

The misses

Flynn's testimony: Last Friday, ABC News reported that former national security advisor Michael Flynn was prepared to testify that President Trump, while still a candidate, directed him to contact Russian officials. But later in the day, the network issued a "clarification" that the direction came when Trump was president-elect. That changed the impact of the story entirely as it's a common occurrence for presidential transition teams to reach out to foreign governments.

Deutsche Bank subpoena: Reuters and Bloomberg both reported on Tuesday that Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation had subpoenaed Deutsche Bank for information on accounts relating to President Trump and his family members — seemingly confirming that Mueller had expanded his probe to investigate the president's financial dealings. The WSJ defused that bombshell in a follow-up report stating that the subpoenas actually dealt with "people or entities close to Mr. Trump."

WikiLeaks emails: CNN reported this morning that senior Trump campaign officials, including Trump himself, received an email from an unknown sender on September 4, 2016 that linked them to what could have been unreleased WikiLeaks documents. WaPo issued their own report later in the afternoon that the email was actually sent on September 14 — and linked to a trove of documents that WikiLeaks had publicly released a day earlier.

Actually the investigation appears to be charging along. You're just caught up in the turbulence of those trying to spin it away.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device