Page 4 of 50 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 500
Thanks Tree178Thanks

Thread: Where's the Evidence

  1. #31
    Veteran Member John T Ford's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    23,069
    Thanks
    6485

    From
    Great State of Texas
    Quote Originally Posted by Puzzling Evidence View Post
    John, Yates declined to answer the question because it would have involved relieving information that was top secrete. Comey as well, DID NOT ANSWER. The FBI investigation, was not included in the report that Clapper was commenting on, as that investigation had not concluded. Lindsy Gram attempted to bamboozle us with his carefully crafted and highly misleading line of questioning. If this were a court of law, there would have been an objection to Gram's assertion that Comey indicated that there was no collusion and it would have been sustained by any judge. This claim was false on its face, Comey, like Yates, did not comment as the answer would have reviled classified information and Gram was attempting to suggest that this 'no answer' was in some way a admission of no collusion.


    This video conveniently cuts off just as Yates begins to talk about Flynn and HIS dealing with the Russians.

    I can only concluded that this is yet another heavily edited James O'Keeffe video.
    Yates stated she couldn't answer the question because it was classified.

    That is true.

    But, clapper said there was no evidence of collusion.

    Now, does it make sense to you that the Director of National Intelligence would be unaware of the classified information in the report that Yates was alluding to?

    Keep in mind Clapper was the one who issued said report.

    I'm going to call BS on this one.

    Remember, Sally Yates was an Obama appointee and Obviously no Trump supporter.

    I think she is hiding behind the classified information BS to continue to push the false narrative of Trump/Russia collusion.

    Either way, Trump is not under investigation and has not been officially accused of any wrong doing.

    There is no evidence that has been made public and there are multiple officials who are stating these facts.

    Oh and that was not a James O'Keefe video.

    Here's the rest of it.

    Just for you.

    Thanks from Puzzling Evidence

  2. #32
    Veteran Member John T Ford's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    23,069
    Thanks
    6485

    From
    Great State of Texas
    Quote Originally Posted by Puzzling Evidence View Post
    Balderdash, you and your merry band of republican constituents invented fake news. She never broke any 'statutes' to suggest it without evidence is intellectual dishonesty.
    You should probably re-visit James Comey's address from back in July.

    Thanks from GoaTlOver

  3. #33
    Mad Genius For Hire Puzzling Evidence's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    15,793
    Thanks
    6500

    From
    ===hiding in th3 rafters===
    Quote Originally Posted by John T Ford View Post
    Yates stated she couldn't answer the question because it was classified.

    That is true.

    But, clapper said there was no evidence of collusion.

    Now, does it make sense to you that the Director of National Intelligence would be unaware of the classified information in the report that Yates was alluding to?

    Keep in mind Clapper was the one who issued said report.

    I'm going to call BS on this one.

    Remember, Sally Yates was an Obama appointee and Obviously no Trump supporter.

    I think she is hiding behind the classified information BS to continue to push the false narrative of Trump/Russia collusion.

    Either way, Trump is not under investigation and has not been officially accused of any wrong doing.

    There is no evidence that has been made public and there are multiple officials who are stating these facts.

    Oh and that was not a James O'Keefe video.

    Here's the rest of it.

    Just for you.
    Clapper was not privy to the FBI investigation. The Senate investigation is nowhere near as pervasive as the what the FBI is capable of. I cannot understand how the senate could conclude an investigation such as this, without imput from the FBI. Was this report conclusive or an update?

  4. #34
    Veteran Member John T Ford's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    23,069
    Thanks
    6485

    From
    Great State of Texas
    Quote Originally Posted by Puzzling Evidence View Post
    Clapper was not privy to the FBI investigation. The Senate investigation is nowhere near as pervasive as the what the FBI is capable of. I cannot understand how the senate could conclude an investigation such as this, without imput from the FBI. Was this report conclusive or an update?
    Again, Clapper issued the report Yates was referring to.

    It makes absolutely no sense that Yates would be aware of some classified information of Trump and the Russians colluding and Clapper would not.

    Clapper said he did not know of any evidence of collusion. Yates refused to answer the question. Yates is propagandizing.

  5. #35
    Mad Genius For Hire Puzzling Evidence's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    15,793
    Thanks
    6500

    From
    ===hiding in th3 rafters===
    Quote Originally Posted by John T Ford View Post
    You should probably re-visit James Comey's address from back in July.

    There was no gross negligence or deliberate attempt to mishandle information. His decision to not recommend charges was consistent with the law. The unusual circumstances of this case required necessary transparency that was unprecedented. Comey had an extremely difficult job. Hillary was not found guilty of violating any laws, Comey is not a prosecutor.

  6. #36
    Mad Genius For Hire Puzzling Evidence's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    15,793
    Thanks
    6500

    From
    ===hiding in th3 rafters===
    Quote Originally Posted by John T Ford View Post
    Again, Clapper issued the report Yates was referring to.

    It makes absolutely no sense that Yates would be aware of some classified information of Trump and the Russians colluding and Clapper would not.

    Clapper said he did not know of any evidence of collusion. Yates refused to answer the question. Yates is propagandizing.
    Clapper was not privy to the information that the FBI was ascertaining, because he was given no actual report from the FBI. This was pointed out by Yates and acknowledged by Gram.

    Yates is a sharp as a tack, she manhandled Gram. It was actually pretty bad-ass.

  7. #37
    Veteran Member John T Ford's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    23,069
    Thanks
    6485

    From
    Great State of Texas
    Quote Originally Posted by Puzzling Evidence View Post
    There was no gross negligence or deliberate attempt to mishandle information. His decision to not recommend charges was consistent with the law. The unusual circumstances of this case required necessary transparency that was unprecedented. Comey had an extremely difficult job. Hillary was not found guilty of violating any laws, Comey is not a prosecutor.
    She did break several laws as Comey pointed out.

    Intent is not required for one to be in violation.

    And, if Comey is not a prosecutor then why did he make the decision to not recommend HRC be indicted?

    He was acting as a prosecutor.

    His job was to recommend indictment to the DOJ.

    It was the DOJ's job to prosecute or not.

    But, we all know Loretta Lynch would have never prosecuted HRC so it was required of Comey to take the fall.

    He was a puppet to the Obama administration, Trump knows it and rightfully canned his ass for causing everyone to lose confidence in the FBI.
    Last edited by John T Ford; 13th May 2017 at 02:10 PM.

  8. #38
    Veteran Member John T Ford's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    23,069
    Thanks
    6485

    From
    Great State of Texas
    Quote Originally Posted by Puzzling Evidence View Post
    Clapper was not privy to the information that the FBI was ascertaining, because he was given no actual report from the FBI. This was pointed out by Yates and acknowledged by Gram.

    Yates is a sharp as a tack, she manhandled Gram. It was actually pretty bad-ass.
    That's not what happened.

    Clapper issue the report Yates was referring to.

    Hiding behind "classified" information is not exactly manhandling Graham.

    Keep in mind that this so called "classified" information will have to be revealed to the House Intel Committee.

    The Senate handles the unclassified part of the investigation.

    The House handles the classified part of the investigation.

  9. #39
    Established Member
    Joined
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    4,594
    Thanks
    3661

    From
    In my mind
    Quote Originally Posted by John T Ford View Post
    As of the start date of this thread, there is no evidence of Russian collusion with the Trump administration.
    Couple of points here.

    I believe the alleged or possible collusion. Was between Russia and the Trump campaign, not the administration. As such, the campaign appears to be a sprawling free for all of sorts with folks possibly engaged with the Russians in attempts to sway the election.

    There may be no public evidence , but that does not mean there is no evidence as you claim.
    Thanks from Puzzling Evidence

  10. #40
    Veteran Member bmanmcfly's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    13,003
    Thanks
    2201

    From
    C-A-N-A-D-A-Eh
    Quote Originally Posted by Puzzling Evidence View Post
    There was no gross negligence or deliberate attempt to mishandle information.
    This is the admission of guilt according to the NDA Hilary signed on her first day.

    His decision to not recommend charges was consistent with the law.
    Incorrect. There are people who needed presidential pardons, many who lost their jobs and career, and even one guy in jail for taking a photo on a nuclear sub, the photo contained radar data which is holy classified. The investigators acknowledged that he clearly had no intention of distributing the photo in any sense, but because he mishandled the data he was convicted.

    So, there are MANY cases where people did far less than what Clinton did "unintentionally" (like she took a dump one day and there was accidentally a computer tech installing an email server), and faced punishment or were protected by presidential action.

    Serious question for you : do you know what a dead drop is? If so, do you really believe "I did not intend to" would be a real justification?

    The unusual circumstances of this case required necessary transparency that was unprecedented. Comey had an extremely difficult job. Hillary was not found guilty of violating any laws, Comey is not a prosecutor.
    No,comey's case was open and shut, listing several felonies, I listened to that the first time and I was thinking the whole time "omg, he's having her indicted... It's really happening". Until he says there's not enough proof of intent.... Are you joking?

    If it was ANYBODY ELSE but Clinton, do you REALLY BELIEVE that they would not give a recommendation for indictment?
    Thanks from John T Ford

Page 4 of 50 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 13th October 2016, 01:57 PM
  2. where is the evidence?
    By nonsqtr in forum Current Events
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 30th August 2013, 02:10 PM
  3. Evidence of Heaven, or ...
    By Leo2 in forum Philosophy and Religion
    Replies: 57
    Last Post: 4th December 2011, 08:31 AM
  4. Evidence for Creationism
    By Conservative Commander in forum Philosophy and Religion
    Replies: 279
    Last Post: 3rd December 2007, 08:45 AM
  5. Evidence for God
    By lakeman in forum Philosophy and Religion
    Replies: 280
    Last Post: 5th April 2007, 09:50 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed