So I haven't seen the one that was on hanity anywhere. It was a huge one. I expected some more to come up today. They didn't.
Quote:
Well, well, well. that's a shift in language. Congressional Rep Matt Gaetz: "I believe there's been a criminal conspiracy". This specific language elevates the current political dynamic toward an exponential level of risk for those within the "conspiracy".
18 U.S. Code 241 Conspiracy against rights: If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or
If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both. (link)
Finn, if the Dems showed up in Houston the day after all of the Harvey rain, with Pelosi, Schumer, and the "talking points" saying "there's no way a hurricane could do this", then nearly ALL of the news stations would run with it, and nearly all of the Dems would believe it wasn't a hurricane!Finn said:
Going to be a long week waiting and the fallout is going to be spectacular. One side is going to take it on the chin politically. Rs for attacking without cause or Ds for not wanting this to come out to protect their own.
That's why the backup docs will have to be released also.chach said:
They won't believe it when there is proof either.
Things will start getting real once there are charges and a arrest, IMO. Until then the dems and the MSM will trash anything the R's do.fasthorses05 said:Finn, if the Dems showed up in Houston the day after all of the Harvey rain, with Pelosi, Schumer, and the "talking points" saying "there's no way a hurricane could do this", then nearly ALL of the news stations would run with it, and nearly all of the Dems would believe it wasn't a hurricane!Finn said:
Going to be a long week waiting and the fallout is going to be spectacular. One side is going to take it on the chin politically. Rs for attacking without cause or Ds for not wanting this to come out to protect their own.
What I'm trying to say is that until the Right lays out the proof, the Nunes/Gowdy memo will be cast aside as trash, unverifiable, baseless, etc.. Pretty much what's been said for the last week by the left, and therefore, the media.
Troll elsewhere, commie.etcetera said:
Another GOP Congressional fishing expedition?
Good luck.
The whole "Russian collusion" has been a Dem fishing expedition.etcetera said:
I agree with Aggiehawg. These things are fun to watch.
Another GOP Congressional fishing expedition?
Good luck.
Beat it.etcetera said:No offense intended to you, but I hope most Americans have enough sense to not blindly believe any allegation from any Congresscritter, regardless of their party affiliation, unless it is accompanied by solid proof.Quote:
What I'm trying to say is that until the Right lays out the proof, the Nunes/Gowdy memo will be cast aside as trash, unverifiable, baseless, etc.. Pretty much what's been said for the last week by the left, and therefore, the media.
drcrinum said:
Grassley letter to DNC, copy to Perkins Coie:
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2018-01-25%20CEG%20LG%20to%20DNC%20(Steele%20Dossier).pdf
Grassley letter to Hillary for America, copy to Perkins Coie:
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2018-01-25%20CEG%20LG%20to%20Hillary%20for%20America%20(Steele%20Dossier).pdf
Grassley letter to Debbie Wasserman-Schultz:
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2018-01-25%20CEG%20LG%20to%20DWS%20(Steele%20Dossier).pdf
Grassley letter to Donna Brazile:
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2018-01-25%20CEG%20LG%20to%20Brazile%20(Steele%20Dossier).pdf
Grassley letter to John Podesta, copy to Perkins Coie:
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2018-01-25%20CEG%20LG%20to%20Podesta%20(Steele%20Dossier).pdf
Grassley letter to Joel Benenson:
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2018-01-25%20CEG%20LG%20to%20Benenson%20(Steele%20Dossier).pdf
Grassley (& Graham) doing serious work. These letters of inquiry relate to Christopher Steele. Similar to questions asked at a formal deposition. Unless you are a zealot, I suggest you read either the DNC or the HFA letters to grasp the intent behind these inquiries and to see the parties involved in the background.
Edit: Looks like CrowdStrike will be called back to duty again.
Ellis Wyatt said:
Not sure what responses they expect, but I can't help but think they already know answers to some of the questions and they're going to see who lies in their answers.
Just standard operating procedure, crossing t's and dotting i's. Need to get their statement/responses now so later on they can be held accountable to them, catch them in any lies.HeardAboutPerio said:drcrinum said:
Grassley letter to DNC, copy to Perkins Coie:
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2018-01-25%20CEG%20LG%20to%20DNC%20(Steele%20Dossier).pdf
Grassley letter to Hillary for America, copy to Perkins Coie:
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2018-01-25%20CEG%20LG%20to%20Hillary%20for%20America%20(Steele%20Dossier).pdf
Grassley letter to Debbie Wasserman-Schultz:
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2018-01-25%20CEG%20LG%20to%20DWS%20(Steele%20Dossier).pdf
Grassley letter to Donna Brazile:
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2018-01-25%20CEG%20LG%20to%20Brazile%20(Steele%20Dossier).pdf
Grassley letter to John Podesta, copy to Perkins Coie:
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2018-01-25%20CEG%20LG%20to%20Podesta%20(Steele%20Dossier).pdf
Grassley letter to Joel Benenson:
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2018-01-25%20CEG%20LG%20to%20Benenson%20(Steele%20Dossier).pdf
Grassley (& Graham) doing serious work. These letters of inquiry relate to Christopher Steele. Similar to questions asked at a formal deposition. Unless you are a zealot, I suggest you read either the DNC or the HFA letters to grasp the intent behind these inquiries and to see the parties involved in the background.
Edit: Looks like CrowdStrike will be called back to duty again.
So I read the DNC letter and can't help but wonder what kind of response does he expect. "Don't recall or don't know" may be the recurring theme on The Who knew questions. However, the correspondence records regarding an impressive list of people is where it gets really interesting. Is this truly a fishing expedition? I suspect they already have evidence of this and want to get them denying it on record.
Here's the list of persons in the communications request:
Fusion GPS; Bean LLC; Glenn Simpson; Mary Jacoby; Peter Fritsch; Tom Catan; Jason Felch; Neil King; David Michaels; Taylor Sears; Patrick Corcoran; Laura Sego; Jay Bagwell; Erica Castro; Nellie Ohr; Rinat Akhmetshin; Ed Lieberman; Edward Baumgartner; Orbis Business Intelligence Limited; Orbis Business International Limited.; Walsingham Training Limited; Walsingham Partners Limited; Christopher Steele; Christopher Burrows; Sir Andrew Wood, Paul Hauser;4 Oleg Deripaska; Cody Shearer; Sidney Blumenthal; Jon Winer;5 Kathleen Kavalec; Victoria Nuland; Daniel Jones;6 Bruce Ohr; Peter Strzok; Andrew McCabe; James Baker;7 Sally Yates; Loretta Lynch; John Brennan.
get out of my headJavelina said:Ellis Wyatt said:
Not sure what responses they expect, but I can't help but think they already know answers to some of the questions and they're going to see who lies in their answers.
That's the exact thought I had when I was reading those letters.
Or who responds. Lot of lawyers busy this weekend. I agree the committee already knows the answers. One way or another, they are going to get these people on record.Ellis Wyatt said:
Not sure what responses they expect, but I can't help but think they already know answers to some of the questions and they're going to see who lies in their answers.