Bulls***. The FBI investigation is still ongoing.Misty » 10 May 2017 2:59 pm » wrote: You should be thrilled Puss.
The investigation is all over now.
45 saw to that.
WTF are you babbling about?We're supposed to believe that he fired Comey because he was mean to Hillary?
![]()
![]()
![]()
That's really hilarious coming from a lying leftist whose sude slept through the Cold War, psycho.Along with that investigation goes the investigation into Russia interfering in our election.
Republicans like you have proven that they don't give a **** about this country.
When have I ever said we shouldn't investigate this and that there shouldn't be appropriate repercussion, liar? Quote me.Keep laughing like the jackass that you are.
You'll change your tune when the Russians start **** with your guys, and they will.
I'll have the last laugh then.
Look at the Democrat Talking Point Liar pretend she didn't understand what I meant.Misty » 10 May 2017 2:53 pm » wrote: There is no pile of dirty socks in my laundry room.
I don't throw dirty clothes on the floor.
Maybe you live like a pig, but I don't.
That's the new Democrat Talking Point Lie.Misty » 10 May 2017 2:59 pm » wrote: You should be thrilled Puss.
The investigation is all over now.
45 saw to that.
I don't need anyone to feed me any talking points about Richard Nixon you jackass.Termin8tor » 10 May 2017 7:41 am » wrote:Yes, bringing up Nixon is the latest Democrat Talking Point Lie.
Just a coincidence that you picked up on it at the same time, right?
It takes a lot effort for me to get angry.Huey » 10 May 2017 4:09 pm » wrote: ROTFLMMFAO!
Just jerking your chain. (Your words) It is all humor, right? Don't get so angry!!!!!!
Oh, I'm sorry Pumpkin.Termin8tor » 10 May 2017 4:28 pm » wrote:Look at the Democrat Talking Point Liar pretend she didn't understand what I meant.
And of course you are full of ****. The only reasons people post in the vile manner you do is they are mad, they are are trying to piss people off, or they have mental health issues.Misty » 10 May 2017 4:33 pm » wrote: It takes a lot effort for me to get angry.
And I don't put that much effort into this place.
Ask the Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Senator Richard Burr.Termin8tor » 10 May 2017 2:43 pm » wrote:Speaking of obsessions, how's that Trump-Russia-collaboration-conspiracy-thing-ey going, psycho?
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Burr repeated that to Jim Sciutto of CNN today.March 29, 2017: Contradicting what the White House press secretary said on Tuesday, the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee said he couldn't rule out collusion between President Donald Trump's associates and Russians seeking to affect the outcome of the 2016 presidential election.
Sen. Richard Burr on Wednesday said it was too early in the committee's investigation to know whether the two parties colluded.
"It would be crazy to try to draw conclusions from where we are in the investigation," he said during a press conference with Sen. Mark Warner, the committee's ranking member.
"I think Mark and I have committed to let this process go through before we form any opinions."
http://www.businessinsider.com/senate-i ... ion-2017-3
It's not 'Trump's military' you vacuous dolt.Termin8tor » 10 May 2017 2:43 pm » wrote:I heard that the evidence proving it was buried in the Marianna Trench by Trump's military.![]()
Misty » 10 May 2017 4:52 pm » wrote: Ask the Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Senator Richard Burr.
Burr repeated that to Jim Sciutto of CNN today.
It's not 'Trump's military' you vacuous dolt.
It's our (United States) military.
So which one of those applies to you?Huey » 10 May 2017 4:50 pm » wrote:And of course you are full of ****. The only reasons people post in the vile manner you do is they are mad, they are are trying to piss people off, or they have mental health issues.
Fine if you want to waste your time, but it will go straight to the peanut gallery.Huey » 10 May 2017 4:50 pm » wrote: Regardless, butch, when you return into your vile self on real threads, when mad or instigating when posting with me you **** will be flushed and responded to in this thread.
Okay, so first you say it's all in humor and then you post that ****.Huey » 10 May 2017 4:50 pm » wrote: You are a dishonest turd and you gate the fact I kick your *** often. So too hide it you instigate. You are an ugly person ONLINE and deserve whatever POSTING abuse you get from others.
So I guess you agree with your BFF Clem that it's 'Trump's military.'Huey » 10 May 2017 4:57 pm » wrote:**** off with the "our military" crap. **** lefties USE the military for political purposes. I have seen it for 35 years. When it is politically expedient they love service members. When it is politically expedient they toss them aside. I don't give a **** if you were or are married to a squid. I have 35 years either serving in or supporting the military.
Cut the ****.
I don't even understand why you are asking that question, and what you are suggesting.Termin8tor » 10 May 2017 7:15 am » wrote:Where did Sally Yates get her information about Flynn?
So it seems that she probably learned it from the FBI, because the day after they briefed her she went to the WH.WHITEHOUSE: Following the Comey line, the director testified a few days ago in the full committee that the FBI had interviewed Mr. Flynn a day before, or two days before, your meeting at the White House, and you've just testified that you had told the White House counsel that the FBI had interviewed Flynn and he'd asked -- McGahn had asked, how'd he do?
YATES: Right.
WHITEHOUSE: Did you have the 302 with you when you were in the White House? Did you show it to White House counsel? And had you seen it at the time you went up to the White House?
YATES: No. The FBI had conducted the interview on the 24th. We got a readout from the FBI on the 25th, a detailed readout specifically from the agents that had conducted the interview.
But we didn't want to wait for the 302, because we felt that it was important to get this information to the White House as quickly as possible, so we had folks from the national security division who spent a lot of time with the agents, not only finding out exactly how the interview went but how this impacted their investigation.
WHITEHOUSE: So did you take that summary with you? Do you have any document with you that described the FBI interview of General Flynn?
YATES: At the time that I was there, I had notes that described that interview, as well as the individual that was with me -- the senior career official from the national security division -- had been part of all of those discussions with the FBI.
Full transcript: Sally Yates and James Clapper testify on Russian election interference
http://wapo.st/2po7EVI

For how many decades have you stonewalled every question I have asked you?Misty » 11 May 2017 12:38 pm » wrote:So 45 tells Lester Holt that it was his decision to fire Comey.
This after he sent his Press Secretary, his Deputy Press Secretary, Kellyanne Conway and the Vice President out to say that Comey was fired due to Deputy AG Rosenstein's recommendation.
45 also admitted to Lester Holt that he personally asked Comey if he was under investigation.
I will now unlock this thread so Clem can tell me that there was nothing improper about that.
So? It would be nice to make progress with them.Misty » 10 May 2017 11:44 pm » wrote:So the day after 45 fired the head of the FBI who was investigating Russian interference in our election, the Russian Foreign minister and the Russian Ambassador visited the WH to yuck it up with their president..
More information about your supposed professional non-partisan Sally Yates.Misty » 08 May 2017 3:23 pm » wrote:Clem, the White House lap dog doing his job.
Ignorant and malevolent applies to you, Dim.Sally Yates, an Obama appointee, is a perfect representative of the corrupt swamp that the Department of Justice became under Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch. Yates viciously politicized the department, going after political opponents and other targets of convenience with reckless abandon. She was fired for insubordination because, as an Obama holdover, she defied a direct order from her superior. By doing so, she demanded to be fired.
That wasn’t heroism, it was politically-inspired grandstanding. The idea that firing Sally Yates somehow shows that the president “chafes” at “constitutionally mandated constraints on the presidency” is either ignorant or malevolent. Most likely both.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2 ... -comey.php