The Fake News Depot

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
A WSJ article also mentioned the Putin meeting as the reason for the text about Obama wanting to know everything. They used as their source 'associates to Strzok and Page'. In other words, Strzok and Page were the sources. And we are supposed to believe them? :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Just curious about something. The Strzok/ Page text was about preparing talking points for Comey to give to Obama. Would Comey discuss this with POTUS Obama personally? If so, that would contradict Comey's Congressional testimony that he spoke alone with Obama only twice and never on the phone.
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
OMG, Dood. The provenance of the dossier is material to probable cause.

You might wanna look up the difference between probable cause for a FISA warrant and typical probable cause used for a criminal warrant ... they are actually different.


Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
OMG, Dood. The provenance of the dossier is material to probable cause.

You might wanna look up the difference between probable cause for a FISA warrant and typical probable cause used for a criminal warrant ... they are actually different.


Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums
That's true, they are different. But a fabricated base for probable cause doesn't cut it in either venue.
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
That's true, they are different. But a fabricated base for probable cause doesn't cut it in either venue.

"Fabricated base" assumes facts not actually in evidence ... raw, unverified intel is another plausible possibility.

In any event, none of us knows what the Feds have been able to verify or not ... nor do we actually know what other evidence was presented.


Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
"Fabricated base" assumes facts not actually in evidence ... raw, unverified intel is another plausible possibility.
The key fact you keep dismissing is, raw, unverified intelligence doesn't meet the standards for probable cause, either, regardless of whether it's in a real court or a super sekrit FISA court. The provenance of intelligence is what makes the intelligence credible, or incredible.
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
The key fact you keep dismissing is, raw, unverified intelligence doesn't meet the standards for probable cause, either, regardless of whether it's in a real court or a super sekrit FISA court. The provenance of intelligence is what makes the intelligence credible, or incredible.

Nope ... didn't dismiss it at all ... the portion of my answer that you didn't quote covered it nicely.


Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
The key fact you keep dismissing is, raw, unverified intelligence doesn't meet the standards for probable cause, either, regardless of whether it's in a real court or a super sekrit FISA court. The provenance of intelligence is what makes the intelligence credible, or incredible.

Nope ... didn't dismiss it at all ... the portion of my answer that you didn't quote covered it nicely.
I didn't quote it because it didn't cover it at all, much less nicely. The part I quoted is the only thing that matters. But I'll quote it right here and comment on it.
In any event, none of us knows what the Feds have been able to verify or not ... nor do we actually know what other evidence was presented.
We know that Comey testified under oath that the dossier was salacious and unverified, or parts of it were, depending on how hard you want to parse his words (and if you want to use the absence of something as evidence of something), and he testified to that after he used it to obtain a FISA warrant, and then used the dossier again after testifying. We also know that the Fusion GPS co-founder testified that he made no attempt to verify any of it. And we know the dossier as a complete document was presented to the FISA judge. If any part of the dossier presented as probable cause evidence was unverified, the unverified portion must be highlighted as such, and in doing so would necessitate divulging the provenance of the dossier itself, and we know that didn't happen.

As for not knowing what other evidence was presented, we don't have to know. If you go before a judge and ask for a warrant, in a real court of a sekret court, if you tell the judge 9 truths and a lie, and the judge finds out about the 1 lie, the entire warrant application is void (not to mention the applicants being subject to criminal contempt). You can't go to a FISA judge and just throw things up against the wall an hope something sticks. At least you're supposed to be able to.
 

Scuba

Veteran Expediter
Well well talk about Fake News your number 1 on the hit parade it was actually Hillary clintons chief campaign spokesman from Pa that started the birther movement. And while the truth won't come out in my life time I have just one question for you. Since the term African American is only about 20 years old how is it that it ended up on a birth certificate from 1961? I know only one black guy from that year his said colored. But hey he's a democrat so its all good. Killery being too ill well how has a history of falling down who got " over heated in 65 degree weather in Ny? #3 lmao even the report says well he never said it but if your a liberal and hate him you can interpret what you think he was saying. ^ the muslims cheering on 9-11 oops wasn't that on cnn I knew it was pulled fast but it was found remember once something hits the internet its never gone I could go on and on but got tired of reading the dribble from a hate Trump page which is where all of your so called facts come from. I am sure there is the fake wiretap story oops but look Johnny behind Curtin #2 here it is he was right they did wiretap the campaign
 

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
As Maxwell Smart use to say "Missed it by that much."
At bottom of the NYTimes article:
An earlier version of this article incorrectly described the probable effect of the new tax law on a hypothetical couple’s 2018 tax bill. The TurboTax “What-If Worksheet” that generated the projection for their 2018 taxes failed to indicate that the couple would probably be entitled to claim a sizable deduction for income earned from consulting. As a result of that deduction, the amount they would likely owe on taxes would decline by $43, not rise by $3,896.

Nolte: New York Times Issues Humiliating Correction to Hit Piece on Trump Tax Cuts
 
  • Like
Reactions: Turtle

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
On Fox News Sunday, in a lead-in to the story about the Pence bunny rabbit and the bunny book, Chris Wallace said that this is the first time in 150 years that there wasn't a pet in the White House.

Helllll-ooooo?!? Kellyanne Conway!

I think Trump should get large rat for a White House pet. When the press asks about it, he should say that it just wandered in from the swamp one day and he decided to keep it as a souvenir. And name it Adam.
 

Moot

Veteran Expediter
Owner/Operator
In keeping with the times, maybe the term " Fake News" should be called "Artisan Crafted Signature News". Most of the news I see on TV or read has a kernel of truth. Its how it is crafted to support a certain agenda that gives it a fake quality.
 
  • Like
Reactions: skyraider
Top