Do any of you Dems want to see the Burisma Biden’s investigated?

[colfax_m]

It’s incriminating that Trump wanted Biden investigated for personal political reasons. We don’t make announcements about investigations in this country because the person under investigation is potentially innocent and announcing an investigation puts a cloud over them.

On the phone call, Trump tried to claim that Crowdstrike was linked to Ukraine (a lie), that the server was in Ukraine (zero evidence of that) and that Biden bragged about ending an investigation (another lie). This also is incriminating. Trump was asking for an investigation based on false pretenses.

where did he say any of this garbage? shit I should say.

Read the transcript kiddo. If that’s too hard have someone read it to you.

I did, none of what you wrote is there. so quote the piece that confirms your post.

they say Crowdstrike... I guess you have one of your wealthy people... The server, they say Ukraine has it

Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution

Be honest. Did you really read the transcript? Because if you claim you read the transcript and missed it, I want to question your literacy.

you said, and I quote "Trump was asking for an investigation based on false pretenses" no he wasn't. it was right there in the transcript, crowdstrike was from 2016? Biden was VP and not a opponent. you're really one confused parrot. I understand why.

You don’t think it was false?

Okay. Show me where Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution. Show me that’s true.

 

[progressive hunter]

where did he say any of this garbage? shit I should say.

Read the transcript kiddo. If that’s too hard have someone read it to you.

I did, none of what you wrote is there. so quote the piece that confirms your post.

they say Crowdstrike... I guess you have one of your wealthy people... The server, they say Ukraine has it

Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution

Be honest. Did you really read the transcript? Because if you claim you read the transcript and missed it, I want to question your literacy.

you said, and I quote "Trump was asking for an investigation based on false pretenses" no he wasn't. it was right there in the transcript, crowdstrike was from 2016? Biden was VP and not a opponent. you're really one confused parrot. I understand why.

You don’t think it was false?

Okay. Show me where Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution. Show me that’s true.

he didnt stop the investigation,, he just had the prosecutor fired before he could get the new one started,,,

 

[colfax_m]

Read the transcript kiddo. If that’s too hard have someone read it to you.

I did, none of what you wrote is there. so quote the piece that confirms your post.

they say Crowdstrike... I guess you have one of your wealthy people... The server, they say Ukraine has it

Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution

Be honest. Did you really read the transcript? Because if you claim you read the transcript and missed it, I want to question your literacy.

you said, and I quote "Trump was asking for an investigation based on false pretenses" no he wasn't. it was right there in the transcript, crowdstrike was from 2016? Biden was VP and not a opponent. you're really one confused parrot. I understand why.

You don’t think it was false?

Okay. Show me where Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution. Show me that’s true.

he didnt stop the investigation,, he just had the prosecutor fired before he could get the new one started,,,

That’s what you claim but let’s stick to what Trump said. Where did Biden brag about getting the prosecution stopped?

 

[progressive hunter]

I did, none of what you wrote is there. so quote the piece that confirms your post.

they say Crowdstrike... I guess you have one of your wealthy people... The server, they say Ukraine has it

Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution

Be honest. Did you really read the transcript? Because if you claim you read the transcript and missed it, I want to question your literacy.

you said, and I quote "Trump was asking for an investigation based on false pretenses" no he wasn't. it was right there in the transcript, crowdstrike was from 2016? Biden was VP and not a opponent. you're really one confused parrot. I understand why.

You don’t think it was false?

Okay. Show me where Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution. Show me that’s true.

he didnt stop the investigation,, he just had the prosecutor fired before he could get the new one started,,,

That’s what you claim but let’s stick to what Trump said. Where did Biden brag about getting the prosecution stopped?

your twisting the facts dont make you coherent,,,

 

[colfax_m]

Be honest. Did you really read the transcript? Because if you claim you read the transcript and missed it, I want to question your literacy.

you said, and I quote "Trump was asking for an investigation based on false pretenses" no he wasn't. it was right there in the transcript, crowdstrike was from 2016? Biden was VP and not a opponent. you're really one confused parrot. I understand why.

You don’t think it was false?

Okay. Show me where Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution. Show me that’s true.

he didnt stop the investigation,, he just had the prosecutor fired before he could get the new one started,,,

That’s what you claim but let’s stick to what Trump said. Where did Biden brag about getting the prosecution stopped?

your twisting the facts dont make you coherent,,,

no facts were twisted. I merely pointed out that Trump was lying to Zelensky when asking for his investigation.

 

[alang1216]

You know, since you’re so against .gov corruption and all....I’d think you’d want to see them probed pretty heavily just to be sure there’s no fire where there’s mass amounts of smoke....right?

I don't think the gov't should be able to investigate ANYONE without some evidence of a crime. I think that is a standard for a search warrant and it is a good one. Should the DOJ be used for political purposes? Nope.

If there is any evidence that the Bidens or any other Dem may have committed a crime then by all means investigate. No evidence, no investigating.

Remember, "evidence" is often circumstantial and circumstantial evidence is always highly subjective.

True enough but any evidence is better than no evidence. Do you think the gov't should be able to investigate anyone solely at their discretion?

you do. cause you think the spying on carter page was ok. so thanks for your play.

You presume to know what I think? Pretty arrogant and a demonstration of making assumptions without evidence.

If Page was investigated on false or misleading evidence that is NOT OK and there should be remedial action:

Horowitz’s report concluded that the FBI’s decision to investigate the Trump team had an appropriate “authorized purpose.”

But the inquiry began to jump the tracks in October 2016, when the FBI sought authority for intrusive spying on Page. Horowitz found that bureau officials supplied incomplete or misleading information to support their request to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court for the October warrant for Page and for three renewals that carried the targeting through September 2017.

One abuse was especially outrageous: As the FBI pressed for the Page FISA warrants, it overlooked an August 2016 CIA message that Page had been an occasional “operational contact” for the agency. That’s not the same as a vetted agent, but it should have made FBI officials wonder whether their assumptions about Page’s possible disloyalty and double-dealing were justified.​

 

[jc456]

you said, and I quote "Trump was asking for an investigation based on false pretenses" no he wasn't. it was right there in the transcript, crowdstrike was from 2016? Biden was VP and not a opponent. you're really one confused parrot. I understand why.

You don’t think it was false?

Okay. Show me where Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution. Show me that’s true.

he didnt stop the investigation,, he just had the prosecutor fired before he could get the new one started,,,

That’s what you claim but let’s stick to what Trump said. Where did Biden brag about getting the prosecution stopped?

your twisting the facts dont make you coherent,,,

no facts were twisted. I merely pointed out that Trump was lying to Zelensky when asking for his investigation.

but he wasn't, any you know no different than me on what was what. and you haven't seen anymore than me. so you're simply confused.

 

[progressive hunter]

you said, and I quote "Trump was asking for an investigation based on false pretenses" no he wasn't. it was right there in the transcript, crowdstrike was from 2016? Biden was VP and not a opponent. you're really one confused parrot. I understand why.

You don’t think it was false?

Okay. Show me where Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution. Show me that’s true.

he didnt stop the investigation,, he just had the prosecutor fired before he could get the new one started,,,

That’s what you claim but let’s stick to what Trump said. Where did Biden brag about getting the prosecution stopped?

your twisting the facts dont make you coherent,,,

no facts were twisted. I merely pointed out that Trump was lying to Zelensky when asking for his investigation.

in your opinion,,,which doesnt mean shit,,,

 

[jc456]

You know, since you’re so against .gov corruption and all....I’d think you’d want to see them probed pretty heavily just to be sure there’s no fire where there’s mass amounts of smoke....right?

I don't think the gov't should be able to investigate ANYONE without some evidence of a crime. I think that is a standard for a search warrant and it is a good one. Should the DOJ be used for political purposes? Nope.

If there is any evidence that the Bidens or any other Dem may have committed a crime then by all means investigate. No evidence, no investigating.

Remember, "evidence" is often circumstantial and circumstantial evidence is always highly subjective.

True enough but any evidence is better than no evidence. Do you think the gov't should be able to investigate anyone solely at their discretion?

you do. cause you think the spying on carter page was ok. so thanks for your play.

You presume to know what I think? Pretty arrogant and a demonstration of making assumptions without evidence.

If Page was investigated on false or misleading evidence that is NOT OK and there should be remedial action:

Horowitz’s report concluded that the FBI’s decision to investigate the Trump team had an appropriate “authorized purpose.”

But the inquiry began to jump the tracks in October 2016, when the FBI sought authority for intrusive spying on Page. Horowitz found that bureau officials supplied incomplete or misleading information to support their request to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court for the October warrant for Page and for three renewals that carried the targeting through September 2017.

One abuse was especially outrageous: As the FBI pressed for the Page FISA warrants, it overlooked an August 2016 CIA message that Page had been an occasional “operational contact” for the agency. That’s not the same as a vetted agent, but it should have made FBI officials wonder whether their assumptions about Page’s possible disloyalty and double-dealing were justified.​

I presume nothing, I use historical patterns on where one has posted. I can clear it up right here without any further work, did carter page get lawful treatment?

 

[colfax_m]

You don’t think it was false?

Okay. Show me where Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution. Show me that’s true.

he didnt stop the investigation,, he just had the prosecutor fired before he could get the new one started,,,

That’s what you claim but let’s stick to what Trump said. Where did Biden brag about getting the prosecution stopped?

your twisting the facts dont make you coherent,,,

no facts were twisted. I merely pointed out that Trump was lying to Zelensky when asking for his investigation.

but he wasn't, any you know no different than me on what was what. and you haven't seen anymore than me. so you're simply confused.

Still waiting for you to show me where Biden bragged about stopping the investigation.

 

[colfax_m]

You don’t think it was false?

Okay. Show me where Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution. Show me that’s true.

he didnt stop the investigation,, he just had the prosecutor fired before he could get the new one started,,,

That’s what you claim but let’s stick to what Trump said. Where did Biden brag about getting the prosecution stopped?

your twisting the facts dont make you coherent,,,

no facts were twisted. I merely pointed out that Trump was lying to Zelensky when asking for his investigation.

in your opinion,,,which doesnt mean shit,,,

In fact. Crowdstrike is not owned by a wealthy Ukrainian. That’s a fact. Not an opinion. Biden did not brag about stopping the prosecution. That’s a fact. Not an opinion.

You can’t take facts and label them opinions just because you don’t like them.

 

[progressive hunter]

he didnt stop the investigation,, he just had the prosecutor fired before he could get the new one started,,,

That’s what you claim but let’s stick to what Trump said. Where did Biden brag about getting the prosecution stopped?

your twisting the facts dont make you coherent,,,

no facts were twisted. I merely pointed out that Trump was lying to Zelensky when asking for his investigation.

but he wasn't, any you know no different than me on what was what. and you haven't seen anymore than me. so you're simply confused.

Still waiting for you to show me where Biden bragged about stopping the investigation.

 

[jc456]

he didnt stop the investigation,, he just had the prosecutor fired before he could get the new one started,,,

That’s what you claim but let’s stick to what Trump said. Where did Biden brag about getting the prosecution stopped?

your twisting the facts dont make you coherent,,,

no facts were twisted. I merely pointed out that Trump was lying to Zelensky when asking for his investigation.

but he wasn't, any you know no different than me on what was what. and you haven't seen anymore than me. so you're simply confused.

Still waiting for you to show me where Biden bragged about stopping the investigation.

52 minute mark.

 

[jc456]

he didnt stop the investigation,, he just had the prosecutor fired before he could get the new one started,,,

That’s what you claim but let’s stick to what Trump said. Where did Biden brag about getting the prosecution stopped?

your twisting the facts dont make you coherent,,,

no facts were twisted. I merely pointed out that Trump was lying to Zelensky when asking for his investigation.

in your opinion,,,which doesnt mean shit,,,

In fact. Crowdstrike is not owned by a wealthy Ukrainian. That’s a fact. Not an opinion. Biden did not brag about stopping the prosecution. That’s a fact. Not an opinion.

You can’t take facts and label them opinions just because you don’t like them.

52 minute mark. if that isn't biden, who is it?

 

[alang1216]

I don't think the gov't should be able to investigate ANYONE without some evidence of a crime. I think that is a standard for a search warrant and it is a good one. Should the DOJ be used for political purposes? Nope.

If there is any evidence that the Bidens or any other Dem may have committed a crime then by all means investigate. No evidence, no investigating.

Remember, "evidence" is often circumstantial and circumstantial evidence is always highly subjective.

True enough but any evidence is better than no evidence. Do you think the gov't should be able to investigate anyone solely at their discretion?

you do. cause you think the spying on carter page was ok. so thanks for your play.

You presume to know what I think? Pretty arrogant and a demonstration of making assumptions without evidence.

If Page was investigated on false or misleading evidence that is NOT OK and there should be remedial action:

Horowitz’s report concluded that the FBI’s decision to investigate the Trump team had an appropriate “authorized purpose.”

But the inquiry began to jump the tracks in October 2016, when the FBI sought authority for intrusive spying on Page. Horowitz found that bureau officials supplied incomplete or misleading information to support their request to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court for the October warrant for Page and for three renewals that carried the targeting through September 2017.

One abuse was especially outrageous: As the FBI pressed for the Page FISA warrants, it overlooked an August 2016 CIA message that Page had been an occasional “operational contact” for the agency. That’s not the same as a vetted agent, but it should have made FBI officials wonder whether their assumptions about Page’s possible disloyalty and double-dealing were justified.​

I presume nothing, I use historical patterns on where one has posted. I can clear it up right here without any further work, did carter page get lawful treatment?

I'm no lawyer but it seems they did not and an FBI official was correctly fired and is under criminal investigation:

The Justice Department has concluded that two of the four court orders allowing the FBI to conduct secret national security surveillance on former Trump campaign aide Carter Page were not valid because the government made "material misstatements" in obtaining them, according to a newly declassified judicial order.

The disclosure by James Boasberg, the top judge on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, underscores the extent to which the FBI bungled its handling of a highly sensitive case, a failure that is continuing to have serious policy and political repercussions.

The order says the department told the court it now believes it did not have probable cause to believe that Page was acting as an agent of a foreign power, which was required to obtain the surveillance.​

 

[WillowTree]

I did, none of what you wrote is there. so quote the piece that confirms your post.

they say Crowdstrike... I guess you have one of your wealthy people... The server, they say Ukraine has it

Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution

Be honest. Did you really read the transcript? Because if you claim you read the transcript and missed it, I want to question your literacy.

you said, and I quote "Trump was asking for an investigation based on false pretenses" no he wasn't. it was right there in the transcript, crowdstrike was from 2016? Biden was VP and not a opponent. you're really one confused parrot. I understand why.

You don’t think it was false?

Okay. Show me where Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution. Show me that’s true.

he didnt stop the investigation,, he just had the prosecutor fired before he could get the new one started,,,

That’s what you claim but let’s stick to what Trump said. Where did Biden brag about getting the prosecution stopped?

Here!

 

[colfax_m]

That’s what you claim but let’s stick to what Trump said. Where did Biden brag about getting the prosecution stopped?

your twisting the facts dont make you coherent,,,

no facts were twisted. I merely pointed out that Trump was lying to Zelensky when asking for his investigation.

but he wasn't, any you know no different than me on what was what. and you haven't seen anymore than me. so you're simply confused.

Still waiting for you to show me where Biden bragged about stopping the investigation.

Great. Notice how he didn’t say anything about stopping a prosecution?

I noticed that wasn’t in the conversation. Trump lied.

 

[jc456]

Remember, "evidence" is often circumstantial and circumstantial evidence is always highly subjective.

True enough but any evidence is better than no evidence. Do you think the gov't should be able to investigate anyone solely at their discretion?

you do. cause you think the spying on carter page was ok. so thanks for your play.

You presume to know what I think? Pretty arrogant and a demonstration of making assumptions without evidence.

If Page was investigated on false or misleading evidence that is NOT OK and there should be remedial action:

Horowitz’s report concluded that the FBI’s decision to investigate the Trump team had an appropriate “authorized purpose.”

But the inquiry began to jump the tracks in October 2016, when the FBI sought authority for intrusive spying on Page. Horowitz found that bureau officials supplied incomplete or misleading information to support their request to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court for the October warrant for Page and for three renewals that carried the targeting through September 2017.

One abuse was especially outrageous: As the FBI pressed for the Page FISA warrants, it overlooked an August 2016 CIA message that Page had been an occasional “operational contact” for the agency. That’s not the same as a vetted agent, but it should have made FBI officials wonder whether their assumptions about Page’s possible disloyalty and double-dealing were justified.​

I presume nothing, I use historical patterns on where one has posted. I can clear it up right here without any further work, did carter page get lawful treatment?

I'm no lawyer but it seems they did not and an FBI official was correctly fired and is under criminal investigation:

The Justice Department has concluded that two of the four court orders allowing the FBI to conduct secret national security surveillance on former Trump campaign aide Carter Page were not valid because the government made "material misstatements" in obtaining them, according to a newly declassified judicial order.

The disclosure by James Boasberg, the top judge on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, underscores the extent to which the FBI bungled its handling of a highly sensitive case, a failure that is continuing to have serious policy and political repercussions.

The order says the department told the court it now believes it did not have probable cause to believe that Page was acting as an agent of a foreign power, which was required to obtain the surveillance.​

dude, I rest my case.

 

[jc456]

your twisting the facts dont make you coherent,,,

no facts were twisted. I merely pointed out that Trump was lying to Zelensky when asking for his investigation.

but he wasn't, any you know no different than me on what was what. and you haven't seen anymore than me. so you're simply confused.

Still waiting for you to show me where Biden bragged about stopping the investigation.

Great. Notice how he didn’t say anything about stopping a prosecution?

I noticed that wasn’t in the conversation. Trump lied.

he said he was fired. that's stopping a prosecution. you have no idea what he was prosecuting to make any suggestion. check mate mate

 

[progressive hunter]

your twisting the facts dont make you coherent,,,

no facts were twisted. I merely pointed out that Trump was lying to Zelensky when asking for his investigation.

but he wasn't, any you know no different than me on what was what. and you haven't seen anymore than me. so you're simply confused.

Still waiting for you to show me where Biden bragged about stopping the investigation.

Great. Notice how he didn’t say anything about stopping a prosecution?

I noticed that wasn’t in the conversation. Trump lied.

now youre back to twisting facts to meet your narrative,,,