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.
If you had any proof that a judge rejected the FISA warrant because it didn’t have the dossier you would have presented it, instead you throw out a YouTube video. You have nothing.
The agenda you push, is more important than the truth.
Silence! Truth is treason!
Using Hannity as a source is certainly not about establishing the truth nor is it rational.
The left doesn't get a monopoly on what sources are acceptable. Sources in leftist media are consistently speculation about accusations with unnamed sources. Translation. They pull crap out of thin air and their cult followers take it in as fact.
If a source on the right or left makes a particular claim. Then prove the claim wrong. That's the best way to discredit a source.
When someone says something doesn't exist and it's proven it does exist then crying about the source is a sore losers cop out.
Prove Hannity was wrong in what he said. That's all you have to do. That's all I did in this thread. I proved what was said by others wasn't true.
Using Hannity as a source is certainly not about establishing the truth nor is it rational.
It is not a secret, that they tried in July, before the dossier was added and judges were shopped to get it done.
Well, maybe it was kept a secret from you.
The Guardian has learned that the FBI applied for a warrant from the foreign intelligence surveillance (Fisa) court over the summer in order to monitor four members of the Trump team suspected of irregular contacts with Russian officials. The Fisa court turned down the application asking FBI counter-intelligence investigators to narrow its focus. According to one report, the FBI was finally granted a warrant in October, but that has not been confirmed, and it is not clear whether any warrant led to a full investigation.
It is not a secret, that they tried in July, before the dossier was added and judges were shopped to get it done.
Well, maybe it was kept a secret from you.
The Guardian has learned that the FBI applied for a warrant from the foreign intelligence surveillance (Fisa) court over the summer in order to monitor four members of the Trump team suspected of irregular contacts with Russian officials. The Fisa court turned down the application asking FBI counter-intelligence investigators to narrow its focus. According to one report, the FBI was finally granted a warrant in October, but that has not been confirmed, and it is not clear whether any warrant led to a full investigation.
The Hill article only indicates that the dossier was included in the warrant, the Guardian is not a credible source. They indicated "not been confirmed" so this is conjecture.
Here is the Nunes memo, Gowdy and one of Nunes staff read the FISA Warrant in its entirety and the never indicated that the FISA warrant was turned down. Besides, how do you explain Carter Pages previously approved warrants a few years back pre-dossier.
]The Hill article only indicates that the dossier was included in the warrant, the Guardian is not a credible source. They indicated "not been confirmed" so this is conjecture.
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.
Quote:
Here is the Nunes memo, Gowdy and one of Nunes staff read the FISA Warrant in its entirety and the never indicated that the FISA warrant was turned down. Besides, how do you explain Carter Pages previously approved warrants a few years back pre-dossier.
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.
The agenda you push, is more important than the truth.
Silence! Truth is treason!
This would be hilarious parody of I didn’t know the poster was serious.
Anyone who is still talking about the dossier as a primary basis for the FISA warrant after Nunes made an absolute fool of himself on this issue is a bigger fool than Nunes
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 admit that this whole conspiracy theory is based entirely on your pure speculation and no evidence whatsoever? Ok at least now we are in agreement on one issue.
So you admit that this whole conspiracy theory is based entirely on your pure speculation and no evidence whatsoever? Ok at least now we are in agreement on one issue.
What do you do when you're not trolling or parroting media talking points ?
What do you do when you're not trolling or parroting media talking points ?
I point out obvious flaws in peoples’ arguments and conspiracy theories. What do you do when you’re not posting conspiracy theories with obvious flaws?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
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.
That shouldn't come as a surprise. 
