Chicago Fanatics Message Board
http://chicagofanatics.com/

Diane Feinstein
http://chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=100&t=110303
Page 2 of 4

Author:  Tall Midget [ Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:30 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Diane Feinstein

Baby McNown wrote:
It's like talking to Sarah Huckabee.


Your refusal to acknowledge basic chronology is illuminating but not surprising.

Author:  Baby McNown [ Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:33 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Diane Feinstein

Tall Midget wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
It's like talking to Sarah Huckabee.


Your refusal to acknowledge basic chronology is illuminating but not surprising.

Chronology is fine. To say that there was nothing Russia involved in the dossier until the Dem's started paying for it and expecting people to believe it is very Trumpkin.

Author:  Seacrest [ Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:33 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Diane Feinstein

Tall Midget wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
It's like talking to Sarah Huckabee.


Your refusal to acknowledge basic chronology is illuminating but not surprising.


I think he is unaware of it.

Author:  Baby McNown [ Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:36 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Diane Feinstein

Seacrest wrote:
Tall Midget wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
It's like talking to Sarah Huckabee.


Your refusal to acknowledge basic chronology is illuminating but not surprising.


I think he is unaware of it.

I'm too busy trying to make sure nothing I type makes you run for the Bishop.

Author:  Seacrest [ Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:37 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Diane Feinstein

Baby McNown wrote:
Tall Midget wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
It's like talking to Sarah Huckabee.


Your refusal to acknowledge basic chronology is illuminating but not surprising.

Chronology is fine. To say that there was nothing Russia involved in the dossier until the Dem's started paying for it and expecting people to believe it is very Trumpkin.


Yeah, you are unaware.

Take a minute and educate yourself please.

Author:  Baby McNown [ Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:38 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Diane Feinstein

Seacrest wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
Tall Midget wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
It's like talking to Sarah Huckabee.


Your refusal to acknowledge basic chronology is illuminating but not surprising.

Chronology is fine. To say that there was nothing Russia involved in the dossier until the Dem's started paying for it and expecting people to believe it is very Trumpkin.


Yeah, you are unaware.

Take a minute and educate yourself please.

Take a minute and stop shoveling the shit that is spoon fed to you. It's unbecoming.

Author:  Nas [ Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:40 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Diane Feinstein

Tall Midget is now a Trumpet. Sad!

Author:  Seacrest [ Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:41 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Diane Feinstein

Baby McNown wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
Tall Midget wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
It's like talking to Sarah Huckabee.


Your refusal to acknowledge basic chronology is illuminating but not surprising.

Chronology is fine. To say that there was nothing Russia involved in the dossier until the Dem's started paying for it and expecting people to believe it is very Trumpkin.


Yeah, you are unaware.

Take a minute and educate yourself please.

Take a minute and stop shoveling the shit that is spoon fed to you. It's unbecoming.


I tried.

Log off before you look dumber and even more partisan.

You are obviously unaware of the chronology and even less inclined to find out.

Author:  Seacrest [ Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:42 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Diane Feinstein

Baby McNown wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
Tall Midget wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
It's like talking to Sarah Huckabee.


Your refusal to acknowledge basic chronology is illuminating but not surprising.


I think he is unaware of it.

I'm too busy trying to make sure nothing I type makes you run for the Bishop.


This will help your IQ look better.

Author:  Brick [ Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:42 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Diane Feinstein

Tall Midget getting the Baby McCown treatment!

Author:  Seacrest [ Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:44 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Diane Feinstein

Nas wrote:
I know JORR missed it this morning but starting at page 76 and for more than 10 pages they're discussing Steele.


Like JORR said, pretty boring stuff.

Author:  Tall Midget [ Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:45 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Diane Feinstein

Baby McNown wrote:
Tall Midget wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
It's like talking to Sarah Huckabee.


Your refusal to acknowledge basic chronology is illuminating but not surprising.

Chronology is fine. To say that there was nothing Russia involved in the dossier until the Dem's started paying for it and expecting people to believe it is very Trumpkin.


The dossier didn't exist until Steele was hired in June 2016, after the Free Beacon stopped financing the Fusion GPS investigation.

Author:  Regular Reader [ Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:48 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Diane Feinstein

Tall Midget wrote:
Regular Reader wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
He won't answer, but I'd still like to know when the Washington Free Beacon became a liberal/Dem publication.


The question that no trumpet will ever address


But part of JORR's point is that the Russian aspect of the Fusion GPS investigation only began after it became a DNC-funded initiative. The Free Beacon had no connection to the hiring of Steele.


But the entire point is as irrelevant as only arguing over who left the barn door open when all of the animals are running wild.

Author:  Seacrest [ Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:52 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Diane Feinstein

Tall Midget wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
Tall Midget wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
It's like talking to Sarah Huckabee.


Your refusal to acknowledge basic chronology is illuminating but not surprising.

Chronology is fine. To say that there was nothing Russia involved in the dossier until the Dem's started paying for it and expecting people to believe it is very Trumpkin.


The dossier didn't exist until Steele was hired in June 2016, after the Free Beacon stopped financing the Fusion GPS investigation.


I was unaware of this until it was brought up in this thread.

Thanks to JORR and TM for starting the discussions regarding this.

Author:  Regular Reader [ Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:54 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Diane Feinstein

Seacrest wrote:
Nas wrote:
I know JORR missed it this morning but starting at page 76 and for more than 10 pages they're discussing Steele.


Like JORR said, pretty boring stuff.


So why are the right wing defenders of the morbidly wealthy continually attempting to cover it up and lie about it?

The nothing to see here, move along crowd is fueling this.

Author:  Seacrest [ Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:55 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Diane Feinstein

Regular Reader wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
Nas wrote:
I know JORR missed it this morning but starting at page 76 and for more than 10 pages they're discussing Steele.


Like JORR said, pretty boring stuff.


So why are the right wing defenders of the morbidly wealthy continually attempting to cover it up and lie about it?

The nothing to see here, move along crowd is fueling this.


What are we supposed to be seeing?

Author:  Terry's Peeps [ Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:57 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Diane Feinstein

Shocking turn of events as fervent Bernie Sander supporter Tall Midget has now been labeled as a TRUMPET!

Author:  Regular Reader [ Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:00 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Diane Feinstein

Seacrest wrote:
Tall Midget wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
Tall Midget wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
It's like talking to Sarah Huckabee.


Your refusal to acknowledge basic chronology is illuminating but not surprising.

Chronology is fine. To say that there was nothing Russia involved in the dossier until the Dem's started paying for it and expecting people to believe it is very Trumpkin.


The dossier didn't exist until Steele was hired in June 2016, after the Free Beacon stopped financing the Fusion GPS investigation.


I was unaware of this until it was brought up in this thread.

Thanks to JORR and TM for starting the discussions regarding this.


There was considerable intelligence long since gathered about the family's Russian entanglements, that additional investigations and a compilation was produced is somewhat meaningless, perhaps as best shown by the report that it was a republican senator who first presented it to the FBI

Author:  Regular Reader [ Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:03 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Diane Feinstein

Seacrest wrote:
Regular Reader wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
Nas wrote:
I know JORR missed it this morning but starting at page 76 and for more than 10 pages they're discussing Steele.


Like JORR said, pretty boring stuff.


So why are the right wing defenders of the morbidly wealthy continually attempting to cover it up and lie about it?

The nothing to see here, move along crowd is fueling this.


What are we supposed to be seeing?


What kinds of conflicts of interest, compromised situations and Russian involvement in the election exist(ed).

Author:  Regular Reader [ Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:04 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Diane Feinstein

Terry's Peeps wrote:
Shocking turn of events as fervent Bernie Sander supporter Tall Midget has now been labeled as a TRUMPET!


Say it isn't so about a Jill Stein supporter. :D

Author:  Seacrest [ Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:06 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Diane Feinstein

Regular Reader wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
Regular Reader wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
Nas wrote:
I know JORR missed it this morning but starting at page 76 and for more than 10 pages they're discussing Steele.


Like JORR said, pretty boring stuff.


So why are the right wing defenders of the morbidly wealthy continually attempting to cover it up and lie about it?

The nothing to see here, move along crowd is fueling this.


What are we supposed to be seeing?


What kinds of conflicts of interest, compromised situations and Russian involvement in the election exist(ed).


Manafort was gone before the election.

We know about Flynn, and I still find his attachment to Turkey far more troubling then his ties to Russia.

What else should we be seeing?

Author:  Nas [ Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:06 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Diane Feinstein

Terry's Peeps wrote:
Shocking turn of events as fervent Bernie Sander supporter Tall Midget has now been labeled as a TRUMPET!


#RockBottom

Author:  Tall Midget [ Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:07 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Diane Feinstein

Regular Reader wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
Nas wrote:
I know JORR missed it this morning but starting at page 76 and for more than 10 pages they're discussing Steele.


Like JORR said, pretty boring stuff.


So why are the right wing defenders of the morbidly wealthy continually attempting to cover it up and lie about it?

The nothing to see here, move along crowd is fueling this.


From what I've seen so far, the most interesting part of Simpson's testimony concerns the assertion that in 2016 many Russians were aware of Trump's relationship with the Kremlin. This information was "just sitting there," he says. "It wasn't a big secret."

This description of the intelligence-gathering environment contradicts the idea that Steele had to use extraordinary measures, including bribery or fabrication, to develop what became the collusion investigation.

Author:  Regular Reader [ Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:11 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Diane Feinstein

Seacrest wrote:
Regular Reader wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
Regular Reader wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
Nas wrote:
I know JORR missed it this morning but starting at page 76 and for more than 10 pages they're discussing Steele.


Like JORR said, pretty boring stuff.


So why are the right wing defenders of the morbidly wealthy continually attempting to cover it up and lie about it?

The nothing to see here, move along crowd is fueling this.


What are we supposed to be seeing?


What kinds of conflicts of interest, compromised situations and Russian involvement in the election exist(ed).


Manafort was gone before the election.

We know about Flynn, and I still find his attachment to Turkey far more troubling then his ties to Russia.

What else should we be seeing?


I'd love to start with discovering just how much coordination went on between the Mercers Cambridge Analytic firm, Jared/campaign and the Russian criminals with Guccifer/Wilileaks/social media

Author:  Seacrest [ Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:16 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Diane Feinstein

Start there then

I find this far more enlightening then what we usually do here.

Author:  Regular Reader [ Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:25 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Diane Feinstein

Seacrest wrote:
Start there then

I find this far more enlightening then what we usually do here.


But then everyone runs into the roadblocks presented by goofs like Grassley, Graham and the tea partiers in the House trying to have criminal proceedings initiated against any whistle blower and investigator.

Author:  Seacrest [ Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:49 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Diane Feinstein

Regular Reader wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
Start there then

I find this far more enlightening then what we usually do here.


But then everyone runs into the roadblocks presented by goofs like Grassley, Graham and the tea partiers in the House trying to have criminal proceedings initiated against any whistle blower and investigator.


Who have they threatened with arrest to cover stuff up?

Author:  Nas [ Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:58 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Diane Feinstein

Seacrest wrote:
Regular Reader wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
Start there then

I find this far more enlightening then what we usually do here.


But then everyone runs into the roadblocks presented by goofs like Grassley, Graham and the tea partiers in the House trying to have criminal proceedings initiated against any whistle blower and investigator.


Who have they threatened with arrest to cover stuff up?


Steele. No chance he comes here now. My guess is that was by design. That's why Feinstein got upset (because it was never discussed with her) and broke protocol.

Author:  Joe Orr Road Rod [ Wed Jan 10, 2018 1:13 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Diane Feinstein

The problem I have with that theory is that these congressmen, many of whom were/are never-Trumpers are going to bat to such a degree for a guy many of them hate.

Do you think the Tea Partiers were thrilled with his immigration meeting yesterday? Suddenly Tucker Carlson wants him impeached more than a black lesbian in a pussy hat does. :lol:

Author:  Seacrest [ Wed Jan 10, 2018 1:14 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Diane Feinstein

Nas wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
Regular Reader wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
Start there then

I find this far more enlightening then what we usually do here.


But then everyone runs into the roadblocks presented by goofs like Grassley, Graham and the tea partiers in the House trying to have criminal proceedings initiated against any whistle blower and investigator.


Who have they threatened with arrest to cover stuff up?


Steele. No chance he comes here now. My guess is that was by design. That's why Feinstein got upset (because it was never discussed with her) and broke protocol.


Who threatened him?

And why can he not be subpeonad or give sworn testimony outside of the committee?

Page 2 of 4 All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/