Quote:
Originally Posted by phma
Amazing !!!
In the first sentence you say the Guardian is not a credible source. Then in the next sentence you use it as your source for conjecture.
I suppose its only credible when its your source.  That shouldn't come as a surprise.
. |
What I indicated was that the Guardian was not a credible source, the fact that they presented a theory and in the next sentence indicated "not confirmed" says everything regarding their credibility.
Quote:
Originally Posted by phma
[
Because something is not included doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
We don't actually know what all they looked at and the denied warrant may have not been a part of what was viewed. The actual crime in question is what was used in the FISA warrants that were granted.
|
So you think that your conjecture regarding the initial rejection wasn't available although you have nothing to back that up except Hannity. Review by congressional several committees, Nunes, Sessions, IG never indicated that was true but you're willing to believe Hannity's research team.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
