I am just going with the exact words of the DOJ Inspector General

I know. You're incapable of independent thought.

over your "read."

My "read" was a factual recitation of the FISA application. I'm sorry it's so inconvenient to your narrative that you, a lawyer, refuse to read a legal document or comment on its actual contents, and allow others to do your thinking/summarizing for you. Outsourcing the use of brain cells is not a good look.

I think Jeff actually admitted the other day that Trump has committed impeachable offenses.

But then he went right back into "But but but CarterPagePeterStrzokAndyMcCabeJamesComeyLisaPageHunterBidenKenyaPizzaParlors" mode.

It's clear he's just a regurgitator at this point.

courts were mislead...about the origins of the dossier...Now he's been vindicated

Still haven't read pages 15-16 of the declassified FISA application? It's okay for you to remain willfully stupid but please try to limit your contagion to others.

So happy cannabis is now legal...My neighbor has a decent sized outdoor operation going on.

Illinois just legalized it but it is still illegal to grow your own. Gotta protect the government-sanctioned cartels.

I get depressed reading all the idiots on the retort.
#2 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN

Stuck on your user page again?

#24-25 don't introduce anything new.

Neither do any of your posts, but here i am responding to them.

So, you're saying Horowitz is wrong?

No. Try reading 24-25 and responding to them in substance. Can you?

#33 "I can't read a declassified legal document or respond to a simple factual recitation of its contents even though i'm a lawyer so i rely on bureaucrats to read it to me and simply regurgitate their conclusions rather than form my own!"
-ROCharliekirk

Threadly reminder that:
(1) the Carter Page surveillance was not the only thing that predicated the Mueller investigation, so attempts to magnify improprieties with respect to the Page surveillance should not be misinterpreted as meaning the Mueller investigation had no legitimate basis;
(2) Republicans tell me daily that the Mueller Report was a complete and total exoneration of Trump, therefore any surveillance that led to such a complete and total exoneration should be celebrated by Republicans;
(3) the currently pending Articles of Impeachment against Trump have no relationship to the Page surveillance or the Mueller investigation.

Horowitz said he couldn't find evidentiary or testimonial proof that the investigation was politically motivated. He ALSO said that the answers he was given were unsatisfactory.

I can think of a 100% analogous situation you couldn't care less about.

Robert Mueller said he couldn't find evidentiary or testimonal proof that the Trump campaign criminally conspired with Russia. He ALSO said that the answers he was given were unsatisfactory, due to:
-lying witnesses
-destroyed evidence
-encrypted communications
-witness tampering

Horowitz flat-out said the Steele dossier was central to the Page FISA warrants.

So you have zero ability to read the declassified application or respond to my point by point recitation of it? Good to know, little sheep.

And they are threatening to enforce their anti-gun laws with...wait for it....
Guns!

Guns are a good way to get someone to do something they don't want to do. That awesome power shouldn't be entrusted to stupid ----- like you.

If DOJ/FBI employees acted improperly they should be disciplined, and if they broke any law they should (and will) be prosecuted.

That said, here is your daily reminder that:
(1) the Carter Page surveillance was not the only thing that predicated the Mueller investigation, so attempts to magnify improprieties with respect to the Page surveillance should not be misinterpreted as meaning the Mueller investigation had no legitimate basis;
(2) Republicans tell me daily that the Mueller Report was a complete and total exoneration of Trump, therefore any surveillance that led to such a complete and total exoneration should be celebrated by Republicans;
(3) the currently pending Articles of Impeachment against Trump have no relationship to the Page surveillance or the Mueller investigation.

the Steele dossier was central to the Page FISA warrants

I'm trying to understand whether Jeff has always been this partisan and gullible and i just didn't notice it before, or if this is a new thing with him.

Rightwing outrage at this is so sadly typical. A teenager agrees with the overwhelming majority of climate scientists and suddenly she's "brainwashed." I wonder what they'd say about a 16 year old Trump supporter.

To them, it's not that teenagers can't be politically active, it's that they can't be liberals. Being a female is an aggravating factor.

You need to step back for a minute and consider what voters, especially the independents, care about.

No "moderate" person is going to vote for an alt-right sexual predator like Donald Trump.

If your response is "they'll just stay home," i'm curious (1) why nominating a centrist in 2016 didn't work, and (2) whether you have accounted for the fact that an authentic progressive might turn out the left voters who typically stay home/vote Green in a manner that eclipses the number of "independents" a centrist candidate would get.

Large numbers of Republican leaders and NRA members are for universal background checks

Whatever. There's one political party and one lobbying organization responsible for a failure to implement even modest gun reforms. That's Republicans and the NRA.

Joe would be better off putting his efforts towards sensible gun regulations instead of arguing that nobody should have them.

I'm all for universal background checks. Republicans will have none of that. If they're taking an extremist position on guns, then so am i. Because the extreme of my position will prevent murder. Theirs - the opposite.

I cannot in any way understand your way of thinking.

I'm tired of seeing innocent Americans, including children, shot. I want to make it harder for those people to get shot. If you "can't understand" that, that's your problem.

When guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns.

Trump wants to "date" his daughter; so it stands to reason he'd have a problem with Steele.

If you show up to take my lawfully owned guns there is going to be a problem...

Well that's the point. I'm arguing it shouldn't be lawful in the first place.

But it's always nice to see gun owners show their true colors and admit they'll attempt to murder law enforcement just to get their way.

#9 No?

#7 I don't want black anti-semites or white rednecks or anyone else to own guns that have no relation to a well-regulated militia. My position is conistent across demographics. Is yours?

Next time Republicans want to start a war, the public should demand they answer what they always ask when Democrats propose something that actually helps people:

How are you gonna pay for that?