Jump to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

Surly Horns

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.
Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business & Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Advertise... Tailgate Donations

Featured Replies

#6851
24 minutes ago, Ragnarok said:

From Powerline:

The main basis, or pretext, for investigating Trump’s ties to Russia became the dossier ginned up by his political opponents. 

 

 

 

We've known for quite a while now that this is not true. 

  • Replies 44.5k
  • Views 3.4m
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most Popular Posts

  • SInce y'all seem to be my clearinghouse for all things political, let me tell a story.  A couple of them, actually.  Three, if you want to be specific. When I was 14 I went with a family frien

  • BingoDinoDNA
    BingoDinoDNA

  • brown water
    brown water

    Slocum’s Razor

#6852

The key source of information behind the Steele dossier appears to be the FBI informant.

#6853

Perhaps the steele dossier was just lucky in guessing the problems within the trump campaign but it appears that, at best, the trump campaign tried to collude with foreign nations to win the election.   Don jr. taking meetings with other  govts?   Jeezus.  Senate intelligence committee already stated that Russia interfered with our election and they were for trump?  And this was a group of majority gop.

#6854
53 minutes ago, Ragnarok said:

From Powerline:

The main basis, or pretext, for investigating Trump’s ties to Russia became the dossier ginned up by his political opponents. Political operatives can always gin up something about the other side that sounds improper (e.g. Obama was born outside the U.S.) or even sinister (e.g., the Clintons had Vince Foster killed). If that’s all it takes to get the FBI to spy on the political campaign of the out-of-power party’s candidate — and that’s all it seems to have taken here — then the Watergate break-in does begin to look like a second-rate burglary by comparison.

  

 

Also from Powerline:

We have no need to publish accurate information because people like Ragnarok will slurp up whatever gibberish we produce, even key facts that have been proven incorrect months/years ago.

#6857
31 minutes ago, RayDog said:

The key source of information behind the Steele dossier appears to be the FBI informant.

There were multiple key sources in the Dossier.  It wasn’t a single source intelligence report.  I’m sure the Cambridge professor was one of them.

#6858

If you want to argue he was not the most important source of information, fine.

The takeaway is his information in the dossier is real and from Trump's inner circle.

 

#6859
27 minutes ago, retread said:

image.png

Attacking the former head of the CIA. Attending the swearing in of the new CIA director later today.

#6860

The Dossier makes zero mention of Papadopoulos and Clovis.  

Seems like the significant Dossier intel that came from the source was the Carter Page stuff.

 

#6861

If the Trump campaign hadn't been interacting with Russian spies then Steele wouldn't have investigated the campaign's ties to, and manipulation by, Russian intelligence.

Edited by WhatTheBuck

#6862

Ginned up documents aren't usually correct on most of their charges.  Steele wrote a credible document.  Trump is pissed that his corruption has been exposed.

#6864
10 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Trump’s Twitter banner right now.

 

1500x500

That’s exactly how Aggy reacts on Monday after taking a 77-0 assfucking.  

#6866
1 hour ago, HenryJames said:

Attacking the former head of the CIA. Attending the swearing in of the new CIA director later today.

Brennan is a despicable character. He gets no sympathy from me.  I suspect he’s been involved from the beginning in all these shenanigans.  

#6868

Remember when the CIA under Brennan spied on the Senate panel with oversight over the CIA's used of enhanced interrogation and rendition?  Yeah, I do. 

#6869
11 hours ago, GRHorn said:

Actually I would say this guy is someone that knows he’s truly fucked.  He’s been getting progressively more desperate. 

 

 

What would Brennan be in trouble for?

#6870
45 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Brennan is a despicable character. He gets no sympathy from me.  I suspect he’s been involved from the beginning in all these shenanigans.  

What does that have to do with the FBI?

#6871

What is with the stupid thumbs up shit all the time. Look like a bunch of Aggy morons. Just stand there like men.

#6874
1 hour ago, GRHorn said:

Brennan is a despicable character. He gets no sympathy from me.  I suspect he’s been involved from the beginning in all these shenanigans.  

Investigating treason = shenanigans?  So now the real crime is not the crime, but the cops investigating the crime. 

Y’all Trumpist motherfuckers have everything backwards.  Whatever happened to “If you didn’t do anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about?”  Wasn’t that the law and order set’s operating slogan just a year ago?

#6875

Sometimes Salty Sailor gots to grab the pussy. Who are you to argue, bitch?

Sometimes Salty Sailor gots to launder the money. Get the fuck outta here with yo sorry ass "witch hunt."

#6876
10 hours ago, RomaVicta said:

 

 

Sally Yates on Trump’s Calls to Investigate FBI: He’s Conducting An ‘All-Out Assault On The Rule of Law’

Former Acting Attorney General Sally Yates had a strong warning about President Donald Trump‘s actions – both prior and recent – regarding the Justice Department.

In an interview on Morning Joe Monday, Yates said that by asking the DOJ to investigate whether there was a politically-motivated FBI informant in his campaign, Trump just crossed a new line.

“I think what we’re seeing here is the president has taken his all-out assault of the rule of law to a new level and this time he is ordering up an investigation of the investigators who are examining his own campaign. You know, that’s really shocking,” she said.

“I know it was just a tweet but he did say something to the effect of, if I recall correctly, ‘I hereby order.’ And we saw the Justice Department respond to that, she added. “I think [Deputy Attorney General] Rod Rosenstein is trying to strike a balance here between defusing the situation and also protecting the rule of law and the institutional integrity of the department.”

Yates then cautioned more broadly against becoming inured to the president’s actions and statements which threaten the rule of law.

“I think one of the things we have to look out for is the old boiling the frog slowly issue,” she said. “We become accustomed to things that the president does, in directing DOJ. You know, I can remember a time when he would issue a tweet or directive and the reports would be: 

In an unprecedented act, the president did X or Y.’ It’s not so unprecedented anymore and oftentimes it doesn’t even make it through the full 24-hour news cycle.”

 

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/sally-yates-on-trumps-calls-to-investigate-fbi-hes-conducting-an-all-out-assault-on-the-rule-of-law/

#6877

man, twitter thread posts really underline what a shitty platform it is for real ideas. just write up a goddamn article, screenshot it, and post that. 

#6880

I first posted a tweet thread but then I noticed Hayden's admonishment, so he's really the one to blame here.

#6882

So I'm not following everything as closely as all of you guys here.  We know Trump did shady/illegal shit prior to becoming president, most likely with money laundering, etc.  I'm 99.9% sure he broke the law in some form or fashion prior to the the campaign.  We also know aides have been indicted for stuff prior to the campaign as well.  My question, I guess, centers around this aspect of the dossier/informant/etc. that a lot of posters seem to be ok with since we know he previously did illegal shit. Is this (dossier/spy) the equivalent of planting evidence on a known criminal? Like cops sprinkling crack or planting a weapon?

#6884
1 minute ago, babysdaddy said:

So I'm not following everything as closely as all of you guys here.  We know Trump did shady/illegal shit prior to becoming president, most likely with money laundering, etc.  I'm 99.9% sure he broke the law in some form or fashion prior to the the campaign.  We also know aides have been indicted for stuff prior to the campaign as well.  My question, I guess, centers around this aspect of the dossier/informant/etc. that a lot of posters seem to be ok with since we know he previously did illegal shit. Is this (dossier/spy) the equivalent of planting evidence on a known criminal? Like cops sprinkling crack or planting a weapon?

No. 

#6885
2 minutes ago, babysdaddy said:

So I'm not following everything as closely as all of you guys here.  We know Trump did shady/illegal shit prior to becoming president, most likely with money laundering, etc.  I'm 99.9% sure he broke the law in some form or fashion prior to the the campaign.  We also know aides have been indicted for stuff prior to the campaign as well.  My question, I guess, centers around this aspect of the dossier/informant/etc. that a lot of posters seem to be ok with since we know he previously did illegal shit. Is this (dossier/spy) the equivalent of planting evidence on a known criminal? Like cops sprinkling crack or planting a weapon?

No

#6887
3 minutes ago, babysdaddy said:

So I'm not following everything as closely as all of you guys here.  We know Trump did shady/illegal shit prior to becoming president, most likely with money laundering, etc.  I'm 99.9% sure he broke the law in some form or fashion prior to the the campaign.  We also know aides have been indicted for stuff prior to the campaign as well.  My question, I guess, centers around this aspect of the dossier/informant/etc. that a lot of posters seem to be ok with since we know he previously did illegal shit. Is this (dossier/spy) the equivalent of planting evidence on a known criminal? Like cops sprinkling crack or planting a weapon?

Concern troll

#6888

The dossier is not planted evidence.  Most of it is accurate.

Edited by kevwun

#6889
7 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

 

Gold Star moms swell with pride.

We voted for this wonderful man to enrich his wonderful hotels. So what if there is an occasional f bomb. 

#6890
4 minutes ago, babysdaddy said:

So I'm not following everything as closely as all of you guys here.  We know Trump did shady/illegal shit prior to becoming president, most likely with money laundering, etc.  I'm 99.9% sure he broke the law in some form or fashion prior to the the campaign.  We also know aides have been indicted for stuff prior to the campaign as well.  My question, I guess, centers around this aspect of the dossier/informant/etc. that a lot of posters seem to be ok with since we know he previously did illegal shit. Is this (dossier/spy) the equivalent of planting evidence on a known criminal? Like cops sprinkling crack or planting a weapon?

No.

#6891
21 minutes ago, babysdaddy said:

So I'm not following everything as closely as all of you guys here.  We know Trump did shady/illegal shit prior to becoming president, most likely with money laundering, etc.  I'm 99.9% sure he broke the law in some form or fashion prior to the the campaign.  We also know aides have been indicted for stuff prior to the campaign as well.  My question, I guess, centers around this aspect of the dossier/informant/etc. that a lot of posters seem to be ok with since we know he previously did illegal shit. Is this (dossier/spy) the equivalent of planting evidence on a known criminal? Like cops sprinkling crack or planting a weapon?

No. Not in any way

#6893

I am.  Read some the Wall Street Journal coverage this morning and their timeline discussions and people involved smelled a bit like what I described.  

#6895
28 minutes ago, babysdaddy said:

So I'm not following everything as closely as all of you guys here.  We know Trump did shady/illegal shit prior to becoming president, most likely with money laundering, etc.  I'm 99.9% sure he broke the law in some form or fashion prior to the the campaign.  We also know aides have been indicted for stuff prior to the campaign as well.  My question, I guess, centers around this aspect of the dossier/informant/etc. that a lot of posters seem to be ok with since we know he previously did illegal shit. Is this (dossier/spy) the equivalent of planting evidence on a known criminal? Like cops sprinkling crack or planting a weapon?

Nope.  Look at how much of it has already been shown as true. 

 

#6896
Just now, babysdaddy said:

I am.  Read some the Wall Street Journal coverage this morning and their timeline discussions and people involved smelled a bit like what I described.  

The timeline should kind of tip you off that it's a bunch of nonsense. If the FBI was spying on Trump's campaign for political purposes, then why did they go to great lengths to keep everything they learned a secret until after the election? Only Republicans are dumb enough to believe that the FBI would engage in nefarious behavior to keep a Republican from being elected President and not publicly release any of the extremely politically damaging information they had until after he had been elected. And that's not even getting into the fact that the FBI was breaking protocol to publicly tar Hillary's campaign at the same time. 

#6897

The dossier is equivalent to a credible informant who is corroborated by existing evidence.  And the judgment exercised in referencing it has been validated by how much of it has proven accurate.

#6898
6 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

Interesting.  What do the Weekly Standard and National Review have to say?  

"The more important question is what any of this has to do with Mueller. While then-FBI director James Comey and his band of merry men were investigating Clinton, the man who would become the special counsel was plugging away at his private practice at WilmerHale. Whatever gaffes the FBI might have made during that investigation or during the early stages of the Russia investigation, it is preposterous to lay them at Mueller’s feet—particularly considering that he was hired in part because that investigation had become such a political mess that it was necessary to bring in an objective third party to take over.

The president has not bothered to let such distinctions get in the way of his story. Trump does not seem to understand that Mueller, the FBI, and the Department of Justice are separate entities. Rather, they are all simply the “Witch Hunt”—a monolithic force of destruction and obstruction that, like its close cousin “fake news,” exists for no purpose other than being unfair to him."

https://www.weeklystandard.com/andrew-egger/trump-sunday-twitter-mueller-meltdown

#6899
11 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

Interesting.  What do the Weekly Standard and National Review have to say?  

So in your opinion the Wall Street Journal is not a credible news source?

#6900

“On the one hand, as many conservative writers have noted, the president is justified in being steamed that prosecutors were more deferential to Hillary Clinton than they have been to him”

lol you could argue Comey handed Trump the election. 

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business & Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Advertise... Tailgate Donations

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.