LaxPower Back-Up Stick

tech37 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2019 5:54 pm Right on cue

tech37 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2019 5:48 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2019 4:10 pm You mean "conspiracy", right? blah blah "conspiracy" blah blah = no indictments

I get it that you hate Dems but why the constant apologia for Trump? Wrong, I hate arrogant liberal aholes

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2019 7:46 pm

tech37 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2019 5:48 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2019 4:10 pm You mean "conspiracy", right? blah blah "conspiracy" blah blah = no indictments

I get it that you hate Dems but why the constant apologia for Trump? Wrong, I hate arrogant liberal aholes

me too..by definition.

Same for arrogant conservative ones.

Though 'hate', I suppose I'd reserve for very few people. Thankfully.

tech37 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2019 10:43 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2019 7:46 pm

tech37 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2019 5:48 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2019 4:10 pm You mean "conspiracy", right? blah blah "conspiracy" blah blah = no indictments

I get it that you hate Dems but why the constant apologia for Trump? Wrong, I hate arrogant liberal aholes

me too..by definition.

Same for arrogant conservative ones.

Though 'hate', I suppose I'd reserve for very few people. Thankfully.

You're right, but frankly "hate" was your word. Let's say "despise" instead.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/07/ ... on-theory/

What is most interesting about Deripaska vis-à-vis the collusion caper is the fact that Christopher Steele was working for him and lobbying the U.S. government on his behalf. Steele, of course, is the British former intelligence agent who is the principal author of the “dossier” — the unverified anti-Trump research project commissioned by the Clinton campaign and the DNC.

While he was running a private intelligence business, Steele was an FBI informant — even before his anti-Trump research began in June 2016. He also provided his private intelligence reporting about Russia and Eastern Europe to the Obama State Department. Naturally, his private-eye work was heavily influenced by who was paying him. As Eric Felten has reported, the State Department’s Russia analysts were dismissive of Steele’s work due to its “Putinesque spin.” We now know that Steele was not consulting only with Deripaska; he also told the State Department (and, presumably the FBI) that he was getting information indirectly from two highly-placed Kremlin sources: top Putin adviser Vladislav Surkov and former SVR chief Vyacheslav Trubnikov. (The SVR is Russia’s foreign intelligence service.)

After nearly three years of investigation, Steele’s major anti-Trump allegations remain unverified. The FBI and the Obama Justice Department relied on Steele’s information to claim there was probable cause to believe that Carter Page was a clandestine agent of Russia, yet Page has never been charged with a crime. And Mueller closed his investigation by concluding that there was no Trump–Russia conspiracy. There is no credible reason to believe the collusion narrative. There is, however, a great deal of reason to suspect that the Russian regime used Steele to channel disinformation into the intelligence and foreign-policy arms of the United States government.

Deripaska, Surkov, and Trubnikov were not informing on the Kremlin. These are Putin’s guys. They were peddling what the Kremlin wanted the world to believe, and what the Kremlin shrewdly calculated would sow division in the American body politic. So, the question is: Did they find the perfect patsy in Christopher Steele?

CU88 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2019 1:22 pm Interesting to see how the deplorables spin this outcome:

Trump dossier author Steele gets 16-hour DOJ grilling

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/ ... lid=964328

"The interview was contentious at first, the sources added, but investigators ultimately found Steele’s testimony credible and even surprising. The takeaway has irked some U.S. officials interviewed as part of the probe — they argue that it shouldn’t have taken a foreign national to convince the inspector general that the FBI acted properly in 2016."

Option 1 is "blame the swamp",
Option 2 is "blame our failing Intelligence",
Option 3 is "Blame Obama and missing emails",
Option 4 is

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2019 2:28 pm

CU88 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2019 1:22 pm Interesting to see how the deplorables spin this outcome:

Trump dossier author Steele gets 16-hour DOJ grilling

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/ ... lid=964328

"The interview was contentious at first, the sources added, but investigators ultimately found Steele’s testimony credible and even surprising. The takeaway has irked some U.S. officials interviewed as part of the probe — they argue that it shouldn’t have taken a foreign national to convince the inspector general that the FBI acted properly in 2016."

Option 1 is "blame the swamp",
Option 2 is "blame our failing Intelligence",
Option 3 is "Blame Obama and missing emails",
Option 4 is

Wait for it, IG Horowitz and his team will be the next for Salty and Trump & Co to smear.

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2019 12:52 am The FBI and the Obama Justice Department relied on Steele’s information to claim there was probable cause to believe that Carter Page was a clandestine agent of Russia, yet Page has never been charged with a crime.

seacoaster wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2019 3:28 pm More from the Post on the IG interview of Steele:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... ddf5ecdd37

Randy has to get in there and set the DOJ straight on what a bad guy Steele is.

This paragraph could be about some of our cohorts here on LP:

"What’s funny here, in a morbid sort of way, is the idea that this might dissuade Trump’s allies even for a second in their quest to use the Steele dossier to undermine the Russia investigation’s legitimacy. It will not, of course — Horowitz’s findings will be spun into proof that the entire probe was criminal to its core, no matter what Horowitz actually determines."

a fan wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2019 3:32 pm He's predicting that no matter what Horowitz says, you already have your own conclusion. And you'll fit and shape the report to your own needs.

Is he wrong?

a fan wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2019 3:46 pm Well, then you're kinda speaking to his point there. But I'd imagine you know that already.

If Horowitz tells you what you want to hear, he's awesome, and you'll use it to bash the people who were mean to Trump. You'll use the report as your Bible.

If Horowitz doesn't tell you what you want to hear, you'll hit Horowitz (like you hit Mueller), and say he "didn't investigate right". The Horowitz Report is then subject to your ridicule.

a fan wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2019 3:46 pm Well, then you're kinda speaking to his point there. But I'd imagine you know that already.

If Horowitz tells you what you want to hear, he's awesome, and you'll use it to bash the people who were mean to Trump. You'll use the report as your Bible.

If Horowitz doesn't tell you what you want to hear, you'll hit Horowitz (like you hit Mueller), and say he "didn't investigate right". The Horowitz Report is then subject to your ridicule.

old salt wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 1:11 am

afan wrote :
My issue has been Old Salt and others calling for more investigations into the FBI and Hillary, while at the same time saying things like "show me the man, and I'll show you the crime".

Wrong again. I haven't called for a SC for Clinton or even Trump. I've written off holding Clinton accountable. We know what went down with & for her. I'm content with the IG investigation.

I just want some sort of credible investigation of what went on inside the DOJ, IC & Obama Admin in investigating the Trump campaign & admin.
I don't care if it's a SC, US Atty Huber, or IG Horowitz. I just want a credible investigation that identifies the bad actors, however many or few there were. We may already know all of their names & some of them may have been acting in good faith. But we need to know what happened & why, & how they exercised their powers of office.

a fan wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2019 3:32 pm He's predicting that no matter what Horowitz says, you already have your own conclusion. And you'll fit and shape the report to your own needs.

Is he wrong?

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2019 3:58 pm Ask me after I see the IG's report.

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2019 3:31 pm

seacoaster wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2019 3:28 pm More from the Post on the IG interview of Steele:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... ddf5ecdd37

Randy has to get in there and set the DOJ straight on what a bad guy Steele is.

This paragraph could be about some of our cohorts here on LP:

"What’s funny here, in a morbid sort of way, is the idea that this might dissuade Trump’s allies even for a second in their quest to use the Steele dossier to undermine the Russia investigation’s legitimacy. It will not, of course — Horowitz’s findings will be spun into proof that the entire probe was criminal to its core, no matter what Horowitz actually determines."

Why can't you wait & see what Horowitz reports ? ....pre-spin ?