Hannity Confirms Dossier was used to obtain the FISA warrant

a reply to: Scrubdog

*pukes.

I dont know why I even reply to you. Bored I guess.

I dont watch fox news, or Hanity or any one thing.

I read left, center and right wing publications. Like most Americans are becoming now, I watch, read and listen to ALL.

We watch for ALL relevant information with no commercial breaks because we only want material that is related to a subject. Not fluff to keep us interested. We are already.

So tell me sparky, of that which has been corroborated from the now known BS dossier; what is the most explosive reveal about Trumps criminality from it and how was it confirmed?

Dont let me die of old age before you answer now.

Its a real chance to show me how much smarter a non Trump supporter is than me. Go ahead.

or anyone for that matter. Whats in this Effing BS dossier which 17!!! intelligence agencies NEVER said they give any credence to?

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: Scrubdog

*pukes.

I dont know why I even reply to you. Bored I guess.

I dont watch fox news, or Hanity or any one thing.

I read left, center and right wing publications. Like most Americans are becoming now, I watch, read and listen to ALL.

We watch for ALL relevant information with no commercial breaks because we only want material that is related to a subject. Not fluff to keep us interested. We are already.

So tell me sparky, of that which has been corroborated from the now known BS dossier; what is the most explosive reveal about Trumps criminality from it and how was it confirmed?

Dont let me die of old age before you answer now.

Its a real chance to show me how much smarter a non Trump supporter is than me. Go ahead.

or anyone for that matter. Whats in this Effing BS dossier which 17!!! intelligence agencies NEVER said they give any credence to?

"Sparky"???? Hey, if it makes you feel tougher, go for it, you're not going to hurt me, troll away.

What's "proven"?

The 17 intelligence agencies agreed that Russians actively tried to sway our election toward Trump. Whether the Russians were successful in their efforts or whether Trump would've been elected anyway is speculation at this point regarding terms of cause/effect, i.e. did the Russians play a definitive role.

Or do you dispute even that?

Why else did the Russians attempt to hack at least 21 different databases, getting through to 2 that we know of? When I cite the FBI report on state databases with attempted Russian hacks, are you going to reject it as 'the deep state' analysis? Whether you do or don't, Trump doesn't care, that much we know for sure. He's done nothing to protect the 2018 vote. HE believes Putin. Putin told him it didn't happen, I guess that ends that inquiry because Putty wouldn't lie.

It's been proven that Russians bought and produced ads on Facebook on behalf of Trump. Been proven that Russians arranged for websites that appeared to be news sites but were simply, well, "fake," and Russia has intervened in 16 other countries' elections.

It's been proven that Trump has deep financial links into and from Russia. This is from Politico so it might be - by definition - "fake." www.politico.com...

Been proven that the Russians went to the Trump team with an offer of dirt on Hillary. Or do you dispute even THAT? That which is self-proving from the idiot Trump Jr's email?

Show me a part of that Dossier that's been proven wrong. Even Steele said that the reliability is 70-90%, which is nothing more than intel speak on reliability.

Tell me how it is that even if - and I don't believe for one minute it is true - even if it's true that Clinton wrongly paid Fusion to do it, how does that demonstrate Trump's innocence?

There's no question that Russia attempted to sway the election to Trump, there's no question that Trump has acted in a way that Russia would approve at every point where Russian affairs would come up (all the way to naming friend of the motherland Tillerson) and it's been proven that Kushner was looking for a way to communicate with Moscow through Russian intelligence. You know who does that? Russian agents, that's who.

You can deny all the above? Tell me there's another level here, please, I'm dying to know. You would have INFINITELY more credibility if you could point to one thing, just one thing, where Trump didn't suck up to Putin like a little whiny baby wanna-be dictator badass to his daddy.

And last thing, Ace, I have a life. I got out to dinner with my wife and daughter, I watch my alma mater play ball, I walk the dog, I write fiction, and I damn sure don't criticize others for not getting back to me for a period bc I assume they have a life and kids and bills and all that other stuff, too.

Again, just as soon as Trump does something that is "America First" with respect to Russia, that takes out a great deal of my worry. But, given I've been waiting and waiting, and the fact he lies about it constantly "I have no business in Russia" and given he keeps talking about firing people who investigate it, I think I'll take the simplest explanation.

a reply to: Scrubdog

No - 17 intel agencies didnt verify the dossier. Only 3 agencies did and now today they give a disclaimer on it. The NYT and several other "media" outlets have issued retractions.

No - Russia did not hack the DNC. It was a leak and that has been confirmed. The FBI did not do a forensic analysis on the dnc server because the DNC refused them access to the server.

The only part of the dossier verified is Carter Paige's trip to russia and even then they cant say what he was doing or who he met with.

So, again, what has been verified in the dossier. You keep making the false claim now please support it.

a reply to: Scrubdog

All that matters is what the investigators report and say at this time. The mainstream media is totally unreliable because there are too many moving parts for their little minds.

The only mainstream media person who seems to have a grasp on how all the interacting parts work together is Sean Hannity.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Scrubdog

No - 17 intel agencies didnt verify the dossier. Only 3 agencies did and now today they give a disclaimer on it. The NYT and several other "media" outlets have issued retractions.

No - Russia did not hack the DNC. It was a leak and that has been confirmed. The FBI did not do a forensic analysis on the dnc server because the DNC refused them access to the server.

The only part of the dossier verified is Carter Paige's trip to russia and even then they cant say what he was doing or who he met with.

So, again, what has been verified in the dossier. You keep making the false claim now please support it.

I said that 17 intel agencies verified that Russians interfered in our election on behalf of Trump, not that 17 intel agencies verified the dossier. The entire investigation is much greater in scope than the dossier. But, the dossier was one of the first indications that Russia was deeply into manipulating our politics and the upcoming election.

The dossier stated that the Russians would do so on behalf of Trump and that the Russians have compromising material on Trump both the pee tape that I'd be surprised if it doesn't exist since that sounds like vintage Trump, porn star, prostitutes, and vintage Russia "get Kompromat on any individual who can be manipulated, it also notes that Trump has deep economic ties with Russia, many of which can be exploited, those ties have been very much verified.

I have absolutely no idea what this DNC access to server crap is.

No part of the Dossier has been disproven as wrong. I point to the above as proof,

I keep going back to the point that this entire problem is far far beyond the dossier, it goes to the ultimate question whether Putin controls Donald Trump. Hannity really really really doesn't want that question asked.

When I see Trump say he doesn't believe Russia attempted to manipulate our election on the basis that Putin told him that the Russians did it, I want to puke.

For those who are just fine to be Putin's little "B" on the world stage so long as they get to "MAGA" and be Trumpers talking about shthole countries, paying off porn stars, trying to ban books that hurt him, fine by me. Not me, though. I want to know if our president's a crook, if our president's a Russian agent.

I will let Mueller make that call in summation as to law. As to day to day appearances, it seems damned hard to argue around to me.

a reply to: Scrubdog

. As to day to day appearances, it seems damned hard to argue around to me.

yeah, totes.

a reply to: Scrubdog

No part of the Dossier has been disproven as wrong. I point to the above as proof, 

I suppose you know what you actually said here... Right?

a reply to: butcherguy

Yeah, he saw it all on the tv. Those pretty folks on the tv told him that Trump is a bad, bad man. Too bad they failed to tell him about the DNC leak.

Sometimes it just comes down to feeling sorry for these people who have been raised on a steady diet of tv. They are a bit like the people who eat a steady diet of fast food and can't understand why they are morbidly obese.

a reply to: Scrubdog

Nothing in the dossier has been verified. Even Carter Paige trip to Moscow details cant be verified (which is to say they know he was there but thats it).

So I ask you again - What parts of the dossier have been verified / corroborated?

a reply to: Xcathdra

Would you still support him if it were proven????????

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Scrubdog

Nothing in the dossier has been verified. Even Carter Paige trip to Moscow details cant be verified (which is to say they know he was there but thats it).

So I ask you again - What parts of the dossier have been verified / corroborated?

That the Russians interfered in our election on behalf of Trump has been verified.

But, you're even disputing the Carter Page trip, so you'll grant cover whenever necessary, and to whatever degree necessary.

originally posted by: diggindirt
a reply to: butcherguy

Yeah, he saw it all on the tv. Those pretty folks on the tv told him that Trump is a bad, bad man. Too bad they failed to tell him about the DNC leak.

Sometimes it just comes down to feeling sorry for these people who have been raised on a steady diet of tv. They are a bit like the people who eat a steady diet of fast food and can't understand why they are morbidly obese.

Do you even know who you are talking about and a "steady diet of TV"?

never mind, no, you don't.

I have had wingers here lecturing me on criminal law, which I didn't actually learn on TV, citing Hannity as their source, indeed the friggin thread is named after Hannity as the "proof" of some evil plot against the DNC.

Here's what I know, even if you can prove there's some issue with the DNC (and I doubt you can), it doesn't disprove your guy is a Russian asset, but all of you are acting as if merely "winning" is the "game" and thus are'n't "thinking" about what's really going on. It can't possibly be that if Hannity - TV show Sean - says enough frothingly bad things about the DNC, you'll forget that none of it excuses Trump's actual criminal ties to Russia, does it?

Because no one here wants to address all the things I've listed that Trump's done, things to Russia's favor.

Nothing came from the DNC against Trump, so I am far more skeptical.

Regardless, none of this saves your boy, whether you know it or not.

I'll go back to my TV watching. Save your pity, sport.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Scrubdog

Nothing in the dossier has been verified. Even Carter Paige trip to Moscow details cant be verified (which is to say they know he was there but thats it).

So I ask you again - What parts of the dossier have been verified / corroborated?

You do know that I've answered this 15 times, right?

And I've asked you which parts have been proven wrong, and you keep ignoring that aspect.

originally posted by: Scrubdog

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Scrubdog

Nothing in the dossier has been verified. Even Carter Paige trip to Moscow details cant be verified (which is to say they know he was there but thats it).

So I ask you again - What parts of the dossier have been verified / corroborated?

You do know that I've answered this 15 times, right?

And I've asked you which parts have been proven wrong, and you keep ignoring that aspect.

Well, I know who I want as part of the jury if prosecuting...

a reply to: Scrubdog

No you have not answered the question. Everything but the Paige going to Russia is debunked. None of it is confirmed / corroborated.

Nothing in the dossier has been confirmed / corroborated except Carter Paige's trip to Moscow. So if you know better then you need to contact Mr. Simpson and let him know. It seems as the head of FusionGPS Mr. Simpson could only confirm Carter Paige and nothing else.

So if he cant corroborate anything then you certainly cant either.

a reply to: Scrubdog

That's an argument from silence and is a massive fallacy on your part. Much of the dossier is not provable one way or another based on the manner it is given. However, one thing that was debunked was that Cohen had never been to Prague. Anyone who claims he was or could have is engaging in baseless conspiracy theory.

However, YOU made the claim that much of it was verified. It should be very easy for you to provide a list of what has been verified.

edit: I refer you to this post from almost a year ago. raymundoko

Surely a year would have been enough time to make a handy, easily accessible list? I understand that wasn't in reply to you, but that same question has been asked THOUSANDS of times on these forums. It always goes unanswered. The fact you think some of it has been verified shows that you do NOT do your own research and are obviously basing your opinion on was a TV Talking head has told you.

a reply to: hoss53

Would you support him if it was proven false?

originally posted by: Scrubdog

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Scrubdog

Nothing in the dossier has been verified. Even Carter Paige trip to Moscow details cant be verified (which is to say they know he was there but thats it).

So I ask you again - What parts of the dossier have been verified / corroborated?

You do know that I've answered this 15 times, right?

And I've asked you which parts have been proven wrong, and you keep ignoring that aspect.

Just stop already. You're starting to look like a petulant child who had their favorite toy taken away.

FISA is fake news. sorry.

originally posted by: Truth4Alls
FISA is fake news. sorry.

Huh??