RED BOX RULES

• Specific rebuttals make for good discussion … but insults, innuendo, platitudes and summary dismissals without SPECIFICS … discourage such discussion.

Address the content above … SPECIFICALLY … quote any of that content you wish to rebut, substantively expound upon, and/or, with which you concur.

More Trump consciousness of guilt …

Trump, in a panic over dud Nunes' memo, says Adam Schiff 'must be stopped'

Jess Willard Trump might consider some plea-bargaining soon; as November Mid-Term Elections approach, with some 30 Republican members of Congress "retiring" so far, a deal now may be as-good-as-it-gets. Despite all the "there's no collusion/no obstruction of justice" whining … REMEMBER, THERE ARE AT LEAST TWO CONFESSORS … and more likely on the way!

And even if Trump stops the Mueller Investigation, State investigations into Trump money laundering would proceed … WITH NO ROAD TO PARDONS!

The Obama Justice Department and FBI used anonymously sourced, Clinton-campaign generated innuendo to convince the FISA court to issue surveillance warrants against Carter Page, and in doing so, they concealed the Clinton campaign’s role."

Everything in that sentence is true. McCarthy is a precise writer and the Graham-Grassley memo supports that sentence. 

There's no evidence that the FBI spied on the Trump campaign itself

This is a strawman. McCarthy did not claim they did.

Everything in that sentence is true. McCarthy is a precise writer and the Graham-Grassley memo supports that sentence.

Ummm, let's go through that bullshit, turd by turd, shall we?

The Obama Justice Department and FBI used anonymously sourced,

The DoJ and FBI clearly included by name the Steele memo to the FISC. 

Clinton-campaign generated innuendo

The Clinton campaign simply took over the paying for the  memo that was already written at that time.  The original commission for Steele came from Paul Singer, a wealth republican patron of Marco Rubio.

 FISA court to issue surveillance warrants against Carter Page

FISC had already okayed surveillance on Page 3 previous times without the Steele memo.  The memo just added more justification for keeping it going.  

they concealed the Clinton campaign’s role."

As they concealed the memo's original funder, republican Paul Singer.  

he Obama Justice Department and FBI used anonymously sourced,

The DoJ and FBI clearly included by name the Steele memo to the FISC

Again, McCarthy is a precise writer. He did not say the memo was anonymously authored, he said it was anonymously sourced, which  it is. Have you read the dossier?  This shouldn't be news to you if you did. The FBI does not know, or at least did not provide the FISA court with, the identity of Steele's actual sources. 

The real sad part is that this your most coherent attempted rebuttal. From here you descend into make believe land. 

e Clinton campaign simply took over the paying for the  memo that was already written at that time.

Are you that dishonest or ignorant? This is not debatable and readily available information.  Steele, the author of the memo, was not hired by Fusion GPS until the Clinton project started. He did not start writing the memo until the Clinton's were paying him. Seriously, whether intentional or not, this is simply pathetic and embarrassing on your part.

 FISC had already okayed surveillance on Page 3 previous times without the Steele memo

100% false. Do you just make things up or are you dishonest.  Seriously, the  FISA application at issue  in October 2016 used the contents of the dossier and he was not under surveillance when the application was submitted in October 2016. No one on planet earth disputes this. 

Your rebuttal is simply pathetic. It's just made up, partisan bullshit that no partisan democrat who even aspires to a pretense of honesty or being informed  would  allege. You are simply out in bat shit crazy make believe world with this nonsense. 

Everything in that sentence is true. McCarthy is a precise writer and the Graham-Grassley memo supports that sentence.

He may quote precisely, Sean …

… but a precisely quoted item is not necessary a quote of a precisely FACTUAL quote.

As for McCarthy precision :

He is currently a senior fellow at the  Foundation for Defense of Democracies , serving as the director of the FDD's  Center for Law and Counterterrorism . He has served as an  attorney  for  Rudy Giuliani , and is also a  conservative  opinion columnist who writes for  National Review  and  Commentary .

"Precision" isn't necessarily accurate … as it can be precisely incorrect, biased and intentionally and precisely decptive.

t a precisely quoted item is not necessary a quote of a precisely FACTUAL quote

Then prove his statements wrong, Amac.  Simply claiming he's wrong without providing any facts  to support your conclusion is certainly not a factual argument either. 

What part of the quote you highlighted is factually incorrect? And please, don't simply make facts up.  That's  worse than simply offering unsupported conclusions. 

Then prove his statements wrong, Amac.

Ain't gonna happen, because they are true...and all these Snowflakes have is personal, opinionated, butt-hurt spin, after spin, after spin. 

Right … if it's an inconvenient truth … Trump sycophants call it 'fake news," and, for good measure, toss in a disparaging name … 

Here's how it works in America … when an allegation is made (as McCarthy has done), the BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON THE ONE MAKING THE ALLEGATION.

Take that bad ass-tough-talk shit and leave it outside.

Take that bad ass-tough-talk shit and leave it outside.

Thank You, Sir...

This is why all this discussing articles as we would like it to be, but can rarely define it in such a manner is so frustrating to me, Amac.  Above you post a comment...

Trump, in a panic over dud Nunes' memo, says Adam Schiff 'must be stopped'   by The Daily Kos, which is about as left wing as it gets and they say Trump says 'Adam Schiff must be stopped', which I haven't seen and they didn't provide the proof he even said it.

Daily Kos

https://i1.wp.com/mediabiasfactcheck.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/left3.png?w=700&ssl=1 700w, i1.wp 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" width="700" height="78">

mediabiasfactcheck

The Democrats were frantic about the Nunes memo being made public and complained about releasing it because of the classified information that would be detrimental to our national security.  They weren't disturbed in the least when Hillary's servers were discovered.  They weren't concerned in the least when Iranian spies were killed possibly by some of the things exposed by Hillary's email server.  They weren't concerned when it was proven Hillary's campaign or the DNC had rigged the election against Bernie Sanders behind closed doors.  They're not concerned that Hillary Clinton and/or her minions colluded against Trump with Russia. 

They are not concerned with the release of Schiff's memo, as it is, without knowing whether it contains real danger to our national security or not.  And after the most dangerous memo that could have ever existed was released, all of a sudden it was promoted as a 'dud', when it didn't contain anything to jeopardized our national security, but did provide information that indicated non-compliance from the FBI. to say the least.

They aren't concerned as it appears both Warner and Schiff tried to collude with the Russians, but go out of their minds about Trump Jr having a meeting with the attorney who was in the USA only because Loretta Lynch allowed it to be so.  They weren't concerned about national security when Hillary's emails contained classified information, some of it top secret and worse.  They weren't concerned when Obama used Executive Privilege to save Holder's ass during 'Fast and Furious'.  They weren't concerned when Holder lied to Congress and Clapper lied to Congress.  They weren't concerned when it was proven Obama knew you couldn't keep your insurance and kept telling everyone they could anyway.  They weren't concerned when the intelligence agencies were spying on American citizens during the time Obama was President.  They weren't concerned when conservative 501c's were being held up from getting their 501c's approved and Lerner spoke and then refused to testify.  Obama always seemed to find out about everything on TV with the rest of us and they weren't concerned about that.

I hope you can understand our loss of faith in the Democrats and the MSM, because it is without doubt they are one in the same and they have an agenda at any cost to remove Trump from office.  With the knowledge we have today, we realize we would never have it had Hillary Clinton won the election.  Even Obama was sure Hillary would win the election.  He already knew everything he knows today long before the election.  He knew the Russians meddled in our elections in 2012.  He just figured Hillary was going to be the next President and didn't want to expose the meddling before the election, which he knew would stain himself and Hillary's win.

The typical liberal response to actual facts that destroy their world view is...nuh uh...

The Obama Justice Department and FBI used anonymously sourced, Clinton-campaign generated innuendo to convince the FISA court to issue surveillance warrants against Carter Page, and in doing so, they concealed the Clinton campaign’s role."

Everything in that sentence is true. McCarthy is a precise writer and the Graham-Grassley memo supports that sentence.

The FBI KNOWS the sources of the information in the dossier since they received the underlying research from Steele in July 2016. So the information is NOT 'anonymously sourced'. 

The dossier is NOT 'Clinton-campaign generated innuendo', it was generated by Fusion and paid for by the Clinton campaign law firm. BTW, Clinton wasn't the one to release the dossier, either to the media or to the FBI, you know that right? 

Representatives for the Washington Free Beacon, a conservative online news site, informed congressional investigators Friday the outlet had originally funded the research firm that created the salacious dossier containing allegations of ties between Donald Trump's campaign and Russian operatives, the publication said in a statement.

The firm, Fusion GPS — which has been entwined in federal and congressional probes into Russian election interference in 2016 — was retained by the Free Beacon during the 2016 elections "to provide research on multiple candidates in the Republican presidential primary," Free Beacon editor and chief Matthew Continetti and chairman Michael Goldfarb said in the statement.

politico

The FBI KNOWS the sources of the information in the dossier since they received the underlying research from Steele in July 201

Really? What source do you have for that? 

By all means, please provide a link to any document that claims Steele told the FBI who his anonymous sources were. Funny the FBI didn't mention that and instead told the Court they were relying on  Steele's reputation since they couldn't corroborate the allegations. 

he dossier is NOT 'Clinton-campaign generated innuendo', it was generated by Fusion and paid for by the Clinton campaign law firm

It's almost like you didn't understand your own sentence.  The dossier exists because the Clintons paid for it. 

By all means, please provide a link to any document that claims Steele told the FBI who his anonymous sources were. Funny the FBI didn't mention that and instead told the Court they were relying on Steele's reputation since they couldn't corroborate the allegations.

"On July 5—the same day as then-FBI Director James Comey’s news conference exonerating Hillary Clinton—Christopher Steele provided his research to an FBI contact in Europe.[12] He also presented his research to British intelligence.[13] Later that month, then-Deputy Head of Counterintelligence Peter Strzok began supervising a probe into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election process, including possible collusion with the Trump campaign."

forerunnersofamerica

You're welcome. 

It's almost like you didn't understand your own sentence.  The dossier exists because the Clintons paid for it. 

It's almost like you don't know what the definition of 'generated'...'paid for' is not 'generated'. 

WTF kind of link is THAT? Are you f-ing serious. If your myth was true....It would be all over PMSNBC & CNN.....And yet you deliver THAT... as a source. Please. Next...

So you can't refute the information so you attack the link. Pathetic. 

Next...

Here's your next. 

Mr Simpson says that Mr Steele became so concerned by his findings that he approached the FBI in the summer of July 2016, when Mr Trump as the Republican presidential candidate.
In September 2016, Mr Steele met with an FBI agent in Rome to fully “debrief” US intelligence about his findings. telegraph.co.uk

Unless you can refute the facts, go pound sand.

I hope you don't mean to indicate the Free Beacon or promote the idea they funded or even started the Dossier.

You know how things can be misinterpreted on this site.  We don't want anyone to think the Free Beacon financed the Dossier or even had any dealings with Michael Steele at all, since that would be untrue.

Once more, for good measure: Conservatives didn't fund the Steele dossier

washingtonexaminer

Fusion GPS and the Washington Free Beacon

10/27/2017

Since its launch in February of 2012, the Washington Free Beacon has retained third party firms to conduct research on many individuals and institutions of interest to us and our readers. In that capacity, during the 2016 election cycle we retained Fusion GPS to provide research on multiple candidates in the Republican presidential primary, just as we retained other firms to assist in our research into Hillary Clinton. All of the work that Fusion GPS provided to the Free Beacon was based on public sources, and none of the work product that the Free Beacon received appears in the Steele dossier. The Free Beacon had no knowledge of or connection to the Steele dossier, did not pay for the dossier, and never had contact with, knowledge of, or provided payment for any work performed by Christopher Steele. Nor did we have any knowledge of the relationship between Fusion GPS and the Democratic National Committee, Perkins Coie, and the Clinton campaign.

Representatives of the Free Beacon approached the House Intelligence Committee today and offered to answer what questions we can in their ongoing probe of Fusion GPS and the Steele dossier. But to be clear: We stand by our reporting, and we do not apologize for our methods. We consider it our duty to report verifiable information, not falsehoods or slander, and we believe that commitment has been well demonstrated by the quality of the journalism that we produce. The First Amendment guarantees our right to engage in news-gathering as we see fit, and we intend to continue doing just that as we have since the day we launched this project.

Matthew Continetti
Editor in Chief

Michael Goldfarb
Chairman

freebeacon

Wrong..

In 2016, a law firm representing Hillary Clinton’s campaign for president and the Democratic National Committee  hired  Fusion GPS, which subsequently hired Steele. Previously, the conservative  Washington Free Beacon   hired  Fusion GPS to investigate Trump and other Republican primary candidates.

factcheck

I hate John McCain is dying from brain cancer, but he campaigned entirely against Obamacare and then voted the exact opposite.  If this was the first time McCain had done things like this, I would look at it different, but McCain and some others like Mitch McConnell are two of the people who always campaign one way to win and then vote exactly the opposite once re-elected.  This isn't anything new.

I just don't know how to respond to that. LOL

the venerable "forerunners of America" website does not claim Steele identified his sources to the FBI.

Vague statements about "providing research" don't cut it. His research is the dossier.  You made a specific allegation that Steele identified his anonymous sources to the FBI.  Support it or do the honest thing and withdraw it. 

In September 2016, Mr Steele met with an FBI agent in Rome to fully “debrief” US intelligence about his findings. telegraph.co.uk

BTFW, your 'venerable source' is McCarthy's fever dream...

Steel LIED to the FBI...

You know this how? 

Your question should be....why hasn't the AG yet, indicated that liar?

What would he be indicting him for? You know that they talked to Steele in Rome and London right? So what CRIME did he commit? 

Here's the short answer....The Brits would probably not extradite.....

Here's a question for you. What jurisdiction does the US government have over the actions of a British citizen on foreign soil? 

BTFW, that's a trick question. 

Congress can release whatever it wants. Congress voted to release both memos and, pursuant to House rules, they forwarded them to the president to determine whether the memos contain information that would pose a risk to national security if released.

The president (through appropriate officers) reviewed the Nunes memo and found that it did not pose a risk to national security. I read it myself and it poses no security risk whatsoever. It’s embarrassing to the FBI but embarrassment, in and of itself, is not a security risk. The memo poses no security risk and that remains the case no matter what Trump said about it.

On the other hand, the president determined that the democratic response contains classified information. Although the president could arguably order it declassified, he was only asked to determine whether the memo (as written) contains sensitive information.  He determined that it did. I haven’t read it so I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt. All democrats have to do is revise the memo to remove the problematic information and resubmit it. 

Democtrats have called Trump a Russian stooge who only won with Putin’s help and Trump’s using the Nunes memo to expose a Democratic conspiracy against him that stretches into the bowels of the DOJ, the FBI and beyond. All of this partisan kabuki dancing is entertaining (in a who’s the biggest rat kind of way) but, when you get back to the memos, no one has established that the president erred in his determination on either memo. 

Democrats have called Trump a Russian stooge who only won with Putin’s help

Bigots and Bots and Comey and Assange … and eventually, we'll learn of the others …

If there was no collusion and no Putin and no conspiracy … then why won't Trump allow investigations to go forward unimpeded to prove his innocence …

And by the way …

THERE ARE CONFESSIONS!

Further …

“consciousness of guilt”

The basic concept is quoted from Jury Instructions cited from   ALBERTY v. U S, 162 U.S. 499 (1896) :

It is a principle of human nature-and every man is conscious of it, I apprehend-that, if he does an act which he is conscious is wrong, his conduct will be along a certain line. He will pursue a certain course not in harmony with the conduct of a man who is conscious that he has done an act which is innocent, right, and proper.  

Men who are conscious of right have nothing to fear.  They do not hesitate to confront a jury of their country, because that jury will protect them. It will shield them, and the more light there is let in upon their case the better it is for them.  

We’re all conscious of that condition, and it is therefore a proposition of the law that, when a man flees (metaphorically or in fact), the fact that he does so may be taken against him, provided he does not explain it away upon some other theory than that of his flight because of his guilt.

Although the courts typically require evidence beyond a  reasonable doubt  that directly connects the accused to a crime, known human behaviors are critical in the development of a case.   While consciousness of guilt is not enough to convict in a criminal trial, it provides important clues as to the credibility of witnesses, victims and the accused.

These behavioral attributes apply to individuals, corporations and governments.

More signs of guilt: Trump’s campaign was warned about Russia, and said nothing

In the summer of 2016, the FBI was already investigating “pervasive connections” between Trump and the Russians

Trump continues to deny that Russians were behind the election interference. He has made numerous moves as president to shut down the investigation, including firing former FBI Director James Comey. Now we know that Trump was warned that Russian actors would try to infiltrate his campaign and that he never reported the dozens of contacts we now know about. Trump's behavior certainly appears to show what prosecutors call a "consciousness of guilt." And that is always what leads to a cover-up.

salon

And now, we await the cries of "fake news," the equivocations, the "snowflake" faux bad ass flexion of cyber muscle … everything but acknowledging the obvious … Trump is slow walking a Nixon-like Saturday Night Massacre, only selectively releases memos, is likely wetting his pants over Flynn, Papadopolous, Gates and all those insiders who may already have covered their asses by telling truths.

November, 2018 … THE FOOTSTEPS ARE GETTING LOUDER MY FRIENDS.

And now, we await the cries of "fake news," the equivocations, the "snowflake" faux bad ass flexion of cyber muscle …

How can we tell any difference? Righties on-line have all been in full throated denial of Russia facts for a year...

And by the way …

THERE ARE CONFESSIONS!

You don't say.  Hey, how about enlightening us with some of them.  Please be specific, not just that Flynn lied.  And make sure to let us know if any of them relate to Trump, if you will.

Men who are conscious of right have nothing to fear.  They do not hesitate to confront a jury of their country, because that jury will protect them.

Oh yes, I remember that one.

Obama promised transparency. But his administration is one of the most secretive

And if this is from the Washington Post, you can imagine what the real truth of the matter is.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/obama-promised-transparency-but-his-administration-is-one-of-the-most-secretive/2016/05/24/5a46caba-21c1-11e6-9e7f-57890b612299_story.html?utm_term=.94635e6747a5

Oh by the way, did the FBI ever get their hands on those Hillary Clinton servers from Crowd Source?  Probably can't find them now.  Probably didn't think they would be important after Hillary won the election.

Do you think Congress has ever received all the information requested from the Obama Administration over the years?  I doubt it.  I know some of the request had not been filled for a couple of years after they were made and then of course there's always the lost hard drives or destroyed hard drives, like at the IRS. 

Yes the footsteps are getting louder!!!

facebook

Six, 

That does not negate the fact that Flynn, Papadopolous, Gates and likely many others have confessed and/or shared likely bombshells regarding Trump, Russia and a load of other information.

Back in the day when grievance hearings and arbitrations were part of my routine, in preparing and presenting cases, I and my colleagues were reminded frequently, that arbitrators don't consider information that brings in the "whole-wide-world," just that related to the case at hand.

The Obama Administration, with its many faults, is in no way, quantitatively nor qualitatively comparable to the current and life-long history of Trump's world. That you would try to make such an argument implies you have none on this issue.

“consciousness of guilt”

.

To me, his actions are comparable to some other one, whom it was possibly obvious, as to there being some possible guilt, surrounding his behavior. I Just picture Trump, driving down 5th avenue in a

White Bronco  MONSTER TRUCK (with Kelley \Al Cowlins shot gunning)while Trump continues running ,over the pedestrians he had already gunned down like miniscule speed bumps that have not a problem being run over , and over, as he jambs it from Drive to Reverse, over and over yet,     his supporters               can SOMEHOW NEVER REVERSE their DRIVE & support

for one who never deserved it, from the get go can't wait till he is get gone, and I am convinced he will be long gone, before 2020

Good article on that topic here:

Trump's core supporters won't reject him. It would mean rejecting their own values.

But the back of the Trump base is not likely to break any time soon, because Trump’s supporters aren’t beholden to politics or logic. Instead, they are creatures of a group psychology dynamic more commonly seen in religious and fraternal organizations.

In the “communion mode” authority structure, described by Andrew Gray , people's recognition of legitimate authority is "based on an appeal to common values and creeds."

"In this mode," added Gray, "the legitimacy for actions lies in consistency with the understandings, protocols, and guiding values of shared frames of reference.”

Compare that to the contractual mode, which is based an agreement that sets out obligations and rewards, or “command mode,” which Gray said, "is based on the rule of law emanating from a sovereign body and delivered through a scalar chain of superior and subordinate authority."

Communion governance structures rely on regular in-person meetings, call and response rituals (witness the continued usefulness of "Lock her up!" chants at Trump rallies, despite Hillary Clinton's 2016 loss) and faith in shared values and experiences. Groups built around communion authority are tightly connected and very strong in part because, research shows , they display “homophily and parochialism directed to those outside the group.” (That is a scholarly way of saying that those in communion groups tend to associate and bond with people that are similar to themselves and view those who are not with suspicion and hostility.)

Significantly, researchers have also found that religious communion authority followers make contributions as a show of their values rather than to affect any consequence. That’s key to understanding Trump’s base because it means that contributions to the cause — whether money, posting on social media or voting — were unlikely to be influenced by whether Trump could actually deliver on his promises.

And it explains why political arguments about whether the wall will really get built (Trump has admitted that it doesn't need to be a full scale wall ), whether Mexico is going to pay for it ( they won't , and Trump knows it ) or whether he's brought coal jobs back ( he didn't ) did not, do not and will not matter to Trump supporters.

nbcnews

more nonsense.

100% of life insurance policies will terminate either at death or for non payment.

Auto policy holders switch insures all the time.  People tend to graduate from sub standard programs to better, less expensive policies as they grow older.

Health insurance policies under the ACA were expected to be terminated by the policy holders ( in the 40 to 67% range ) over time, due to a number of factors,

not the least of which was finding a job which provided health insurance, moving to another state or yes, death.

It's all in the actuarial charts....

Not a smoking gun, just another off topic derail.

mrc.org,  good chuckle !