My post is My analysis based on what I've been seeing. I go lots of places and read. I also have a grasp of the level of angst over Trump being elected. You guys are not alone. The establishment HATES Trump, and the willingness to break laws and engage in unethical behavior to destroy him isn't limited to the lefties on the street. This is the beginnings of the spotlight shining on an attempted coup. I would say that based on my ability to see truths, regardless of political affiliation. Maybe you have missed my criticisms of Trump. Maybe you didn't see my criticisms of Bush.
I wonder how many people here would cheat at a game and Still be jubilant that they won.
You CAN'T cheat Aaand Win.

There's nowhere I know of where anyone is saying what I said.

@justin_o_guy2

If you're serious about wanting to find out what's what then you should check out the lawfare podcast I linked to earlier, it's a straightforward non partisan analysis by lawyers who have actually worked on the FISA courts and know how the who procedure works. It's the best you'll get till the process is over.

eau de sauvage wrote on 02/03/18 at 14:30:34:


I can't take notes and don't want to forget, so.

A point was made that the memo suggests that the judge was left in the dark regarding who funded the research.

At the same time the memo failed to inform the reader of something, I'll have to go back unless someone got that.

One thing they're talking about is the verification of the information.
I'm not seeing anyone stand up and say what parts of the information that was used to get a warrant has been verified.

justin_o_guy2 wrote on 02/05/18 at 04:06:05:



that's because it was left out of the memo you seem to put so much faith in and cherish so much to prove..... oh wait, yeah, no verification, either way...

*sniff*... *sniff*....

Hmm... I smell something (someone?) burning.

The dossier is easy to find.
The list of things proven?
I don't have it.
Bot seems to have access to information I haven't seen.
How about sharing?

justin_o_guy2 wrote on 02/05/18 at 11:14:38:



here's a Vox article that kinda breaks it down:

https://www.vox.com/2018/1/5/16845704/steele-dossier-russia-trump

this is the key takeaway for me:
"The most one can really say has been confirmed about the Steele dossier is that a) there was in fact a Russian effort to help Trump, and b) the Trump camp clearly knew more about it than they said publicly. Given those conclusions, it’s certainly possible that the other stuff Steele alleges is also true, but virtually none of the particulars have been verified."

still waiting to see here.

from Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), whose partisan credentials are unimpeachable — he led the Benghazi inquisition — and who was dispatched by Nunes to review all the classified intelligence used to obtain the Page warrant.

“There is a Russia investigation without a dossier,” he said Sunday. “The dossier has nothing to do with the meeting at Trump Tower. The dossier has nothing to do with an email sent by Cambridge Analytica. The dossier really has nothing to do with George Papadopoulos’s meeting in Great Britain. It also doesn’t have anything to do with obstruction of justice.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-nunes-memo-vindicates-our-worst-f...