Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Saturday, February 16, 2019

Prosecutors said for the first time that they have evidence of Roger Stone communicating with WikiLeaks, according to a new court filing from special counsel prosecutors. During its investigation of the Russian hack of the Democrats, "the government obtained and executed dozens of search warrants on various accounts used to facilitate the transfer of stolen documents for release, as well as to discuss the timing and promotion of their release," the prosecutors wrote Friday to a federal judge.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

This is actually an interesting thing that I had not thought of before.

Was Stone actually employed by the Trump campaign during 2016? If not, could acting as a reporter be charged as collusion for trying to gain access to stolen information? Basically, as Stone never told anyone to hack the DNC (I still don't believe anyone did, this was an inside job using a USB stick), how is him asking for the information any different from ANY reporter talking with Snowden or Manning? Him asking about the nature and release dates would seem to fall under the scope of his journalist profession (he reports for InfoWars). Now, that would not exclude him from charges of lying to the FBI had he done so - but how would this be any different from any other journalist if this is simply about 'collusion'?

Not that I am defending Stone - he seems to be on the blowhard level of Turb Blossom where his perceived abilities are far outweighed by his actual abilities. But, if he was acting as a journalist - and not campaign adviser - how can you prosecute him? I think this would open up a ton of potential liability for the MSM which is absolutely liberal and could be considered conspiring with Dems - such as Maddow's Trump Tax reveal. Should Maddow be considered part of Hillary's campaign?

#1 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-15 10:29 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

Keep grasping at those straws nobrain. Stone was not acting as a reporter. Stone was acting on behalf of the Trump campaign. Fox and the trumptilians are the one's who have their "reporters" and "newsmen" acting as surrogates for campaigns-remember Hannity on stage with Trump

give it up.

#2 | Posted by truthhurts at 2019-02-15 11:25 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Stone isn't a journalist, and Trump, Manafort and Stone were friends for 40 years. Other than that, it is exactly like Maddow and Hillary and Trump's tax returns.

#3 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-15 11:30 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Stone isn't a journalist

- 100% false. He hosts a program on InfoWars. Stop spreading fake news.

and Trump, Manafort and Stone were friends for 40 years

- Irrelevant

Other than that, it is exactly like Maddow and Hillary and Trump's tax returns.
#3 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

We have a reporter releasing damaging information that was illegally obtained and not authorized to be published by the person it was stolen from in the attempt to influence elections. The only difference is that Stone didn't get priority access to any information. In the tax return analogy, I guess Maddow would be more similar to Wikileaks.

#4 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-15 11:42 PM | Reply

Fox and the trumptilians are the one's who have their "reporters" and "newsmen" acting as surrogates for campaigns
#2 | POSTED BY TRUTHHURTS

Either you have never watched CNN and MSNBC or you are too stupid to know the definition of surrogates.

#5 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-15 11:43 PM | Reply

InfoWars isn't journalism; it is fake news.

#6 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-15 11:45 PM | Reply

InfoWars isn't journalism; it is fake news.
#6 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

Are you sure you want to use that standard when defining a journalist?

#7 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-15 11:57 PM | Reply

#1

Annddd the winner of this year's Biggest Idiot Award goes to... NoBrainsPoster!!

Yea!!! Earliest it's ever been won around here.... and that's saying something.

#8 | Posted by Corky at 2019-02-16 01:02 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

Sheepie/Nobias conspires with Russia every day working at the troll farm in St. Petersburg, Russia so this is no big deal in his eyes.

#9 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2019-02-16 01:11 AM | Reply

Sheepie/Nobias conspires with Russia every day working at the troll farm in St. Petersburg, Russia so this is no big deal in his eyes.

#10 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2019-02-16 01:11 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

#10 | Posted by aborted_monson

From everything I've seen from him and a couple others here, they lunch at the Borscht Barn down the street from the Moscow GRU annex they work in.

#11 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-02-16 07:30 AM | Reply

Seems like many members of the Trump campaign conspired with the Russian GRU and WikiLeaks to weaponize stolen emails and Fake News during the 2016 campaign.

Everyone involved in this criminal conspiracy should go to jail. Lock them all up.

#12 | Posted by bored at 2019-02-16 09:08 AM | Reply

Seems like many members of the Trump campaign conspired with the Russian GRU
#12 | POSTED BY BORED

No, that was actually Hillary via Steele - who got his fake news dirt straight from the Kremlin.

#13 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-16 10:16 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"No, that was actually Hillary via Steele - who got his fake news dirt straight from the Kremlin."

Liars always leave out the part that Steele was first hired by Republicans during the primaries.

#14 | Posted by danni at 2019-02-16 10:32 AM | Reply

#12 | POSTED BY BORED

What conspiracy, we get a new one every day because the previous one turned out to be fake?

#15 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-02-16 10:32 AM | Reply

Liars always leave out the part that Steele was first hired by Republicans during the primaries.
#14 | POSTED BY DANNI

Liar ...

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

ather, the conservative newsroom hired the same research firm that later created it, Fusion GPS, in 2016 to investigate Trump and other Republican candidates during the GOP primaries.

After Trump had won the nomination, the Free Beacon dropped the project. It was at that point that Democratic operatives swooped in, bringing along with them former British spy Christopher Steele. It is from Steele's work that we get all this Russia business.
www.washingtonexaminer.com

#16 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-02-16 10:36 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"It is from Steele's work that we get all this Russia business."

Nonsense. It's from Republicans' 100+ lies about meetings with the Russians.

#17 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-02-16 10:38 AM | Reply

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

"Who paid for it?
During the Republican primaries, a research firm called Fusion GPS was hired by The Washington Free Beacon, a conservative website, to unearth potentially damaging information about Mr. Trump. The Free Beacon -- which was funded by a major donor supporting Mr. Trump's rival for the party's nomination, Senator Marco Rubio of Florida -- told Fusion GPS to stop doing research on Mr. Trump in May 2016, as Mr. Trump was clinching the Republican nomination."

www.nytimes.com

#18 | Posted by danni at 2019-02-16 10:38 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Once more, for good measure: Conservatives didn't fund the Steele dossier
#16 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS

I find it impossible that Danni doesn't already know that fact given the amount of time she spends on here. So, the question is, why did she knowingly lie about it?

#19 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-16 10:40 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Andrea accesses that solid source "Washington Examiner".....Hilarious! Kind of pathetic as well. I almost feel sorry for her. When I saw her idiotic post it took me one single click to pull up a real source proving she is full of crap.

#20 | Posted by danni at 2019-02-16 10:40 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#18 | POSTED BY DANNI

Steele was not even hired at that time. He was hired after Hillary paid for it. You know this. Why are you lying?

#21 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-16 10:41 AM | Reply

"I find it impossible that Danni doesn't already know that fact given the amount of time she spends on here. So, the question is, why did she knowingly lie about it?"

You are simply full of crap too Sheeple. I'm laughing at you right now!

#22 | Posted by danni at 2019-02-16 10:42 AM | Reply

#20 | POSTED BY DANNI

Although you don't deserve it, I will give you the benefit of the doubt. Here is the timeline:

www.washingtonpost.com

Don't continue to post your fake news here.

#23 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-16 10:43 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

-Andrea accesses that solid source "Washington Examiner"..

Better than Buzzfeed, though that's admittedly a low bar.

#24 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-02-16 10:43 AM | Reply

"Steele was not even hired at that time."

Ahhhh. that old defense: You had no right to discover my wrongs.

#25 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-02-16 10:43 AM | Reply

You are simply full of crap
#22 | POSTED BY DANNI

I just gave you the timeline straight from WaPo. You want to admit you are wrong now?

#26 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-16 10:44 AM | Reply

Also, so far, nothing in the Steele dossier has been disproven. Wait till the majority of the population understands what a perv Donald Trump really is.....I will be fun!

#27 | Posted by danni at 2019-02-16 10:45 AM | Reply

Ahhhh. that old defense: You had no right to discover my wrongs.
#25 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

Yes, that is exactly what the Dems said when they tried to hide the fact that they paid for the dossier. The dossier that Steele compiled straight from Kremlin sources.

Can you talk some sense into Danni? She is losing it.

#28 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-16 10:46 AM | Reply

I showed you who began that investigation and even who paid for it. I'll wait for your apology liar.

#29 | Posted by danni at 2019-02-16 10:47 AM | Reply

Rwingers are so myth-informed, which is what happens when rhetoric replaces fact.

All they have now is the logical fallacy of Whataboutism; they can't speak directly to what Trump did to win the election, all they have is, "But... but, Mommy, what about little Hillary!".

#30 | Posted by Corky at 2019-02-16 10:47 AM | Reply

Also, so far, nothing in the Steele dossier has been disproven.
#27 | POSTED BY DANNI

Irrelevant to the topic at hand which is:

1.) Dems paid for Steele, not the GOP (you lie earlier)
2.) Steele took information straight from the Kremlin

#31 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-16 10:47 AM | Reply

And for the record, I have zero respect for anyone who leaves DR and sneaks back in with a new name.

#32 | Posted by danni at 2019-02-16 10:48 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#29 | POSTED BY DANNI

That is not what you said, you said this:

"Liars always leave out the part that Steele was first hired by Republicans during the primaries.
#14 | POSTED BY DANNI"

Steele, as shown to you time and again, WAS NEVER HIRED BY THE GOP. Admit you lied already and we can move on.

#33 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-16 10:49 AM | Reply

- straight from Kremlin sources.

More lies. Steele used long-time sources not controlled by the Kremlin; sources that have been used by Brit and US Intel to secure trials and convictions.

#34 | Posted by Corky at 2019-02-16 10:49 AM | Reply

"But... but, Mommy, what about little Hillary!".
#30 | POSTED BY CORKY

Easier to talk about Hillary as that is 100% proven and admitted. Your Trump conspiracy theories are the myth part as after 2 years, you still have nothing.

#35 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-16 10:51 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Where'd it come from?
During the 2016 Republican presidential primaries, the leaders of the conservative news outlet Washington Free Beacon hired a private intelligence company, Fusion GPS, to conduct research into the candidates, including Trump. Early in the year, the Free Beacon's interest in the work lapsed. So by "early March," Fusion GPS approached the law firm Perkins Coie, which represents the Democratic National Committee, offering to continue its investigations into Trump. In April, the law firm agreed, and it began to underwrite the investigation."

I can keep posting more links liar.

#36 | Posted by danni at 2019-02-16 10:53 AM | Reply

--Also, so far, nothing in the Steele dossier has been disproven.

Are you even remotely familiar with the concept of "burden of proof?"

#37 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-02-16 10:54 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

- proven and admitted.

Only in your tiny pea brain.

What Mueller has is Manafort passing GOP voter data to a Russian agent to be used at the Russian Troll Farm who then put in on a plane to Moscow a few hours later.

If you could keep up you'd know that, panty-waist.

#38 | Posted by Corky at 2019-02-16 10:54 AM | Reply

Steele used long-time sources not controlled by the Kremlin
#34 | POSTED BY CORKY

You are dumber than a bag of hammers. He used sources STILL WORKING IN THE KREMLIN for goodness sake. How dumb are you?

How good were these sources? Consider what Steele would write in the memos he filed with Simpson: Source A -- to use the careful nomenclature of his dossier -- was "a senior Russian Foreign Ministry figure." Source B was "a former top level intelligence officer still active in the Kremlin." And both of these insiders, after "speaking to a trusted compatriot," would claim that the Kremlin had spent years getting its hooks into Donald Trump.

#39 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-16 10:54 AM | Reply

#36 | POSTED BY DANNI

You keep knowingly lying. Steele was not hired by Fusion GPS until the Dems assumed funding. Nothing you post changes that fact so why keep lying? Do you not believe the Washington Post? Why lie?

#40 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-16 10:56 AM | Reply

" that is exactly what the Dems said when they tried to hide the fact that they paid for the dossier."

At this point, what does it matter?

You're trying to pretend it's some fruit of a poisoned tree. That's deflection on steroids.

#41 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-02-16 10:58 AM | Reply

- He used sources STILL WORKING IN THE KREMLIN

Citation necessary.

#42 | Posted by Corky at 2019-02-16 11:01 AM | Reply

You're trying to pretend it's some fruit of a poisoned tree. That's deflection on steroids.
#41 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

Damn you are obtuse - THAT IS NOT WHAT I AM ARGUING.

I am arguing that if you want to define 'collusion' as seeking help from a hostile foreign government in an attempt to influence US elections - then that is exactly was Hillary did when she paid Steele for the Dossier. We have the Russia government providing help to a campaign. It doesn't matter if the information is true or false. The fact that it came from the Russia government is what makes it collusion.

So, given this is already known, why do you have no outrage over this? Your entire argument against Trump is that he received aid from the Russians to help influence the election - EXACTLY WHAT THE STEELE DOSSIER REPRESENTS. The only difference is that we don't don't have a single shred of evidence that Trump actually colluded. But we know 100% that Hillary did.

#43 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-16 11:04 AM | Reply

- How good were these sources?

Good enough for US courts to issue subpoenas and get convictions based on them.

#44 | Posted by Corky at 2019-02-16 11:05 AM | Reply

Citation necessary.
#42 | POSTED BY CORKY

Here you go. Not that I expect you to be honest enough to actually read it.

www.vanityfair.com

#45 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-16 11:05 AM | Reply

Good enough for US courts to issue subpoenas and get convictions based on them.
#44 | POSTED BY CORKY

Irrelevant. All that matters is that they are government officials of a foreign country. It is the definition of Russian collusion.

#46 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-16 11:07 AM | Reply | Funny: 3

How funny. Talking to Sheeple is like discussing physics with a 5 year old, only less enlightening.

Here, do try to catch up:

www.drudge.com

#47 | Posted by Corky at 2019-02-16 11:10 AM | Reply

Sheeple has just gotten so crazy that it's impossible to take his posts seriously any more.

#48 | Posted by danni at 2019-02-16 11:10 AM | Reply

#43

More Whataboutism, which is all he's got to defend Der TrumpenFuhrer.

#49 | Posted by Corky at 2019-02-16 11:11 AM | Reply

#47 | POSTED BY CORKY

You are the definition of smugnorant.

#50 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-16 11:12 AM | Reply

#50

Hillary didn't give Putin anything to help her win the election, Trump did give Putin something to help him win... and then publicly supported the positions on sanctions and the Ukraine that Putin asked him to support, a classic quid pro quo.

Hope that helps your sad case of denial and your laughable Whataboutisms.

#51 | Posted by Corky at 2019-02-16 11:17 AM | Reply

Hillary didn't give Putin anything to help her win the election
#51 | POSTED BY CORKY

No, she got the dossier and then she would be compromised had she been elected.

#52 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-16 11:23 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

#52

All you've said here is that Trump is probably guilty of colluding with the Russians, but hey, "What about Hillary?".

Well, I'll tell you; she did ops research, but she didn't provide Russia with tools to use against her opponent in exchange for pushing Putin's agenda, it was your Dear Leader who did that.

Plus, he's the Pres and she's not, which is quite the difference.

#53 | Posted by Corky at 2019-02-16 11:31 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

All you've said here is that Trump is probably guilty of colluding with the Russians,

- Actually, I never said that. How you can conclude that is beyond me.

#54 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-16 11:39 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The major difference Sheeple always overlooks is that Steele went to the FBI with the information he was being given by the Russians; no one on Team Trump did this even after they were warned by the FBI that the Kremlin might try to infiltrate his campaign. If Steele, and through him Hillary, were colluding with the Russians, he would not have contacted the FBI. If Don Jr, Manaford, Flynn et al, and through them Trump, hadn't been willing to collude with the Russians, they too would have gone to the FBI. As Nulli likes to say, Next!

#55 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-16 11:41 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"if you want to define 'collusion' as seeking help from a hostile foreign government in an attempt to influence US elections - then that is exactly was Hillary did when she paid Steele for the Dossier"

So England is now a hostile foreign government?

#56 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-02-16 11:47 AM | Reply

"All that matters is that they are government officials of a foreign country. It is the definition of Russian collusion."

So the defense is we're innocent because someone else is guilty.

#57 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-02-16 11:48 AM | Reply

Tell us, Nob...

Why didn't Team Trump go to the FBI about all those Russian contacts, after the FBI had warned them about Russian interference attempts and told Team Trump to alert them if any Russians contacted them?

#58 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-02-16 11:50 AM | Reply

"If Don Jr, Manafort, Flynn et al, and through them Trump, hadn't been willing to collude with the Russians, they too would have gone to the FBI."

Not only did Don Jr, Manafort, Flynn et all not go willingly to the FBI, they lied about the contacts they did have with the Russians when questioned by the FBI and/or Congressional investigators.

#59 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-16 11:55 AM | Reply

"we don't don't have a single shred of evidence that Trump actually colluded."

Riiiiiiight. Just everyone else on his election team, and they ALL kept Donnie in the dark.

#60 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-02-16 11:59 AM | Reply

So England is now a hostile foreign government?
#56 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

Steele wrote the dossier with British intelligence folks? And all this time I thought it was from Kremlin sources. Please tell me you are not that damn dumb.

#61 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-16 12:02 PM | Reply

So the defense is we're innocent because someone else is guilty.
#57 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

It is either a crime and the Dems are guilty and Trump's guilt is still TBD by Mueller - OR - it is not a crime. As of right now, Trump is innocent until proven guilty. For the Dems, they are admitted that they colluded.

#62 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-16 12:05 PM | Reply

"and Trump's guilt is still TBD by Mueller"

Do you admit Junior is guilty of attempted conspiracy?

#63 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-02-16 12:15 PM | Reply

"Steele wrote the dossier with British intelligence folks?"

Some, yes. And he represented a friendly foreign government. In fact, Steele came forward to the US because of what he believed he had uncovered.

And the Steele Dossier didn't influence Carter Page's initial FISA warrant application; it was a renewal. For renewals, you need tangible proof of new discovery from the prior FISA warrant.

#64 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-02-16 12:19 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Steele wrote the dossier with British intelligence folks?"
Some, yes.

- AND RUSSIAN intelligence.

In fact, Steele came forward to the US because of what he believed he had uncovered.

- No he didn't. He came forward because nobody with credibility took the dossier seriously so Buzzfeed stepped in. Steele talked with the FBI so the MSM papers could report on the "dossier being discussed with the FBI". It is the same pile of crap, but the Steele talks with the FBI was a way for them to pretend there was something there.

"And the Steele Dossier didn't influence Carter Page's initial FISA warrant application; it was a renewal. For renewals, you need tangible proof of new discovery from the prior FISA warrant.
#64 | POSTED BY DANFORTH"

I never claimed that it did. However, Page had multiple renewals using the dossier and, as you you, NOTHING came of it proving that the extensions should not have been granted using the dossier as supporting evidence (especially when the source of the document was not revealed).

#65 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-16 12:26 PM | Reply

"It is either a crime and the Dems are guilty and Trump's guilt is still TBD by Mueller - OR - it is not a crime. As of right now, Trump is innocent until proven guilty. For the Dems, they are admitted that they colluded."

Then Mueller will prosecute whoever is thought to be guilty, as his directive does not limit him to investigating the Trump campaign:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Wednesday, May 17, 2017

Appointment of Special Counsel

Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein today announced the appointment of former Department of Justice official and FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III to serve as Special Counsel to oversee the previously-confirmed FBI investigation of Russian government efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election and related matters.

www.justice.gov

#66 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-16 12:26 PM | Reply

"However, Page had multiple renewals using the dossier and, as you you, NOTHING came of it proving that the extensions should not have been granted using the dossier as supporting evidence (especially when the source of the document was not revealed)."

Link?

#67 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-16 12:27 PM | Reply

It's not the crime.. but the cover up that exposes these clowns everytime.

#68 | Posted by 503jc69 at 2019-02-16 12:27 PM | Reply

Steele talked with the FBI so the MSM papers could report on the "dossier being discussed with the FBI". It is the same pile of crap, but the Steele talks with the FBI was a way for them to pretend there was something there.

Link?

#69 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-16 12:30 PM | Reply

Link?
#67 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

www.washingtontimes.com

That is a picture of Carter Page walking around 100% free in 2019 with ZERO charges ever filed against him. They had him under surveillance for years, and have filed nothing against him.

#70 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-16 12:36 PM | Reply

Link?
#69 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

You, Slow Joe, Corky, and Danni keep asking for links. Have you actually ever read one? On this very thread I have provided about 5 links already. Heck, I provided one and Danni still continue to lie with the evidence thrown right into her smugnorant face.

#71 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-16 12:39 PM | Reply

"NOTHING came of it proving that the extensions should not have been granted"

Nonsense. Proof was given aside from the Dossier that the Page warrants were producing new evidence. You get that, right? You need NEW EVIDENCE from the prior FISA warrant to get a FISA warrant renewal.

"They had him under surveillance for years, and have filed nothing against him."

That doesn't mean they "got nothing" at all.

#72 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-02-16 12:39 PM | Reply

Nonsense. Proof was given aside from the Dossier that the Page warrants were producing new evidence.
#72 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

FISA warrants are granted 99% of the time. Further, the dossier formed the bulk of the renewals. That was already testified to.

#73 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-16 12:42 PM | Reply

"However, Page had multiple renewals using the dossier and, as you you, NOTHING came of it proving that the extensions should not have been granted using the dossier as supporting evidence (especially when the source of the document was not revealed)."

Link?

#74 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-16 12:43 PM | Reply

" the dossier formed the bulk of the renewals"

Ah, but not ALL of the the renewal.

And new evidence from the prior warrant had to be produced to get a renewal. Do they not cover that fact on Fox and Friends?

#75 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-02-16 12:44 PM | Reply

"FISA warrants are granted 99% of the time. Further, the dossier formed the bulk of the renewals. That was already testified to."

Link?

#76 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-16 12:44 PM | Reply

"FISA warrants are granted 99% of the time. Further, the dossier formed the bulk of the renewals. That was already testified to."
Link?
#76 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

This is the last education I am providing to your without charging you tuition. Libs are like kids - you need to try 2 different things before asking for help. Don't as for a link again that you are google yourself.

99% approval rate
en.wikipedia.org
Over the entire 33-year period, the FISA court granted 33,942 warrants, with only 12 denials – a rejection rate of 0.03 percent of the total requests.

www.bostonherald.com
As various commentators predicted would be proven, the bulk of the information that formed the basis for the FISA warrant applications was the "dossier" of allegations about Donald Trump's activities in Russia.

#77 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-16 12:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"You, Slow Joe, Corky, and Danni keep asking for links."

I ask because, as a good little propagandist should, you state as fact a lot of stuff that isn't true.

#78 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-16 12:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"www.bostonherald.com
As various commentators predicted would be proven, the bulk of the information that formed the basis for the FISA warrant applications was the "dossier" of allegations about Donald Trump's activities in Russia."

Sorry, no, not factal:

Opinion Op-Ed

FISA documents reveal FBI collusion

#79 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-16 12:52 PM | Reply

I ask because, as a good little propagandist should, you state as fact a lot of stuff that isn't true.
#78 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

Nothing that I wrote has been wrong. Link to something I posted that was factually/objectively wrong.

Link?

#80 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-16 12:57 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"99% approval rate
en.wikipedia.org
Over the entire 33-year period, the FISA court granted 33,942 warrants, with only 12 denials – a rejection rate of 0.03 percent of the total requests."

99% approval rate over a 33 year period proves nothing. FISA warrants were denied 34 times in 2016 and 34 times in 2017. One of the ones denied in 2016 was related to members of Team Trump.

#81 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-16 01:01 PM | Reply

"Nothing that I wrote has been wrong. Link to something I posted that was factually/objectively wrong."

Sheeple, it would take all day to chase down your misinformation on various threads. That's why I said you are like H-rat but with better sentence structure.

#82 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-16 01:04 PM | Reply

99% approval rate over a 33 year period proves nothing. FISA warrants were denied 34 times in 2016 and 34 times in 2017.
#81 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

Because Obama attempted to corrupt the FISA court. Basically, he was pushing cases based on BS to smear political opponents.

#83 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-16 01:06 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

it would take all day to chase down your misinformation on various threads.
#82 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

Weak.

#84 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-16 01:08 PM | Reply

Your Trump conspiracy theories are the myth part as after 2 years, you still have nothing.

#35 | Posted by nobiasposter101

It's interesting that rcade drops the hammer on blatant climate change lies but allows this kind of tripe to pass.

Piss off, moron. Or at least go back to using your original name.

#85 | Posted by jpw at 2019-02-16 01:13 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Weak.

#84 | Posted by nobiasposter101

No, it's the truth.

You're a liar of Trump's caliber.

#86 | Posted by jpw at 2019-02-16 01:14 PM | Reply

A criminal conspiracy is an agreement between two or more people to commit a crime.

Stealing DNC emails was a crime.
Trumps campaign conspired with the GRU to share those stolen emails with Wikileaks and then lied repeatedly about their contacts with Russian spies.
Trump conspired with Cohen to commit campaign violations.

Hillary's campaign did not conspire to commit a crime.

#87 | Posted by bored at 2019-02-16 01:14 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

Trumps campaign was full of criminals.
Trump is a crook or an idiot, or both.

#88 | Posted by bored at 2019-02-16 01:17 PM | Reply

"FISA warrants are granted 99% of the time"

So now the defense is prosecutors take this seriously by bringing ample evidence, and judges put their reputations on the line approving FISA warrants, so...

...that's proof of corruption by Obama.

#89 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-02-16 01:49 PM | Reply

aren't most of the FISA judges rhenquist approved republicans?

#90 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2019-02-16 01:52 PM | Reply

"aren't most of the FISA judges rhenquist approved republicans?"

See?

If that's not proof of Obama trying to corrupt the FISA court, I don't know what is.

#91 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-02-16 01:57 PM | Reply

#90

Not really-

CJ Roberts has sole authority to appoint FISA judges from the ranks of the District and Appellate Court Judges, and 5 out of the 11 current FISA judges and 2 out of 3 FISA Review judges were appointed by Democratic Presidents to the bench.

#92 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-02-16 02:09 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

If that's not proof of Obama trying to corrupt the FISA court, I don't know what is.

#91 | POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2019-02-16 01:57 PM

Snark aside, actually, 4 of the last 5 FISA appointments were either Obama or Clinton appointed judges for what it is worth. When you count all of the FISA judges, the split is 7 Dem/7 GOP appointees.

#93 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-02-16 02:12 PM | Reply

Judges Who Approved Carter Page FISA Warrants Were All Nominated by GOP Presidents

Former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page has blasted the process that led to surveillance of him as a "joke," but lest one think that everyone involved was playing partisan politics, all of the judges who signed off on FISA warrants for Page were nominated to become federal judges by Republican presidents. Not only that, they were then and appointed to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court by a conservative.

George W. Bush nominated Rosemary Collyer to D.C. federal court, and Michael Mosman to the District of Oregon. Ann Conway was a George H.W. Bush pick to the Middle District of Florida. Ronald Reagan tapped Raymond J. Dearie to take a seat in the Eastern District of New York. FISA court judges are appointed by the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, and the conservative Roberts named all of them to those position. Roberts was nominated to the Supreme Court by President George W. Bush.

lawandcrime.com

#94 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-16 02:18 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Orlando judge signed off on FISA surveillance of Trump adviser Carter Page

Conway was named to the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court on a rotating basis in 2016. The court considers applications by the United States government, often the FBI, for approval of surveillance for "foreign intelligence purposes."

The court was established by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978. Judges serve a maximum of seven years, in staggered terms. Conway was appointed to the court by U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts, a President George W. Bush appointee.

The other three judges who approved the surveillance of Page were also appointed by Republican presidents, according to the Washington Post: two by George W. Bush and one by Ronald Reagan.

www.orlandosentinel.com

#95 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-16 02:20 PM | Reply

"Because Obama attempted to corrupt the FISA court. Basically, he was pushing cases based on BS to smear political opponents."

Link?

#96 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-16 02:23 PM | Reply

Link?
#96 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

www.google.com

#97 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-16 02:28 PM | Reply

That's just the luck of the draw, Gal. Like all District Court cases, the FISA court assigns warrants to judges on "the Wheel", which means that the last digit of the case number determines who gets the warrant.

#98 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-02-16 02:29 PM | Reply

"Because Obama attempted to corrupt the FISA court. Basically, he was pushing cases based on BS to smear political opponents."

Proof? You have none, and no amount of googling will change that.

#99 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-16 02:30 PM | Reply

That's just the luck of the draw, Gal. Like all District Court cases, the FISA court assigns warrants to judges on "the Wheel", which means that the last digit of the case number determines who gets the warrant.

And as luck would have it, all those judges were appointed by GOP presidents.

#100 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-16 02:31 PM | Reply

"Because Obama attempted to corrupt the FISA court. Basically, he was pushing cases based on BS to smear political opponents."

Lies.

#101 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-16 02:32 PM | Reply

"After Trump had won the nomination, the Free Beacon dropped the project. It was at that point that Democratic operatives swooped in, bringing along with them former British spy Christopher Steele. It is from Steele's work that we get all this Russia business."

Democratic operatives did not hire Steele. Glenn Simpson, who had worked with him before, did:

In September 2015, as the Republican primary campaign was heating up, he was hired to compile an opposition-research dossier on Donald Trump. Who wrote the check? Simpson, always secretive, won't reveal his client's identity. However, according to a friend who had spoken with Simpson at the time, the funding came from a "Never Trump" Republican and not directly from the campaign war chests of any of Trump's primary opponents.

But by mid-June 2016, despite all the revelations Simpson was digging up about the billionaire's roller-coaster career, two previously unimaginable events suddenly affected both the urgency and the focus of his research. First, Trump had apparently locked up the nomination, and his client, more pragmatic than combative, was done throwing good money after bad. And second, there was a new cycle of disturbing news stories wafting around Trump as the wordy headline splashed across the front page of The Washington Post on June 17 heralded, INSIDE TRUMP'S FINANCIAL TIES TO RUSSIA AND HIS UNUSUAL FLATTERY OF VLADIMIR PUTIN.

Simpson, as fellow journalists remembered, smelled fresh red meat. And anyway, after all he had discovered, he'd grown deeply concerned by the prospect of a Trump presidency. So he found Democratic donors whose checks would keep his oppo research going strong. And he made a call to London, to a partner at Orbis he had worked with in the past, an ex-spy who knew where all the bodies were buried in Russia, and who, as the wags liked to joke, had even buried some of them.


www.vanityfair.com

#102 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-16 03:48 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Look at you all talking about ancient history. Fact is Mueller is way beyind Steele and Fusion and now has named Stone as a conspirator. This after filings showed prosecuters have evidence that this was in cooperation with a top ranking official in the Trump campaign.

#103 | Posted by johnny_hotsauce at 2019-02-16 04:05 PM | Reply

Trump did give Putin something to help him win... and then publicly supported the positions on sanctions and the Ukraine that Putin asked him to support, a classic quid pro quo.
Hope that helps your sad case of denial and your laughable Whataboutisms.
#51 | POSTED BY CORKY

No comment, Sheeplbrainsposter.

#104 | Posted by Corky at 2019-02-16 04:59 PM | Reply

"Was Stone actually employed by the Trump campaign during 2016?"

Yes. And it was easily verifiable in far less time than it took you to type out that misleading and deceptive speculation that followed your initial question. But we all know you knew this even before you started.

#105 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2019-02-16 07:11 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

Someone send an aidcar quick to the troll farm in St Petersburg Russia, Putin's troll farm. Sheepie/Nobias is have a mental meltdown!

#106 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2019-02-16 10:22 PM | Reply

Yes. And it was easily verifiable in far less time than it took you to type out that misleading and deceptive speculation that followed your initial question. But we all know you knew this even before you started.
#105 | POSTED BY HAGBARD_CELINE

I rarely ask questions that I don't know the answer to - I use it as a means to make Liberals think and demonstrate how ill informed they are:

en.wikipedia.org
Stone officially left the Trump campaign on August 8, 2015;

Sooooo, your easily verifiable 'fact' is a actually untrue. Do you want to clarify your prior post now?

Follow up, given that Stone didn't have a position on the Trump campaign when the Wikileaks 'collusion' is alleged to have occurred and was back in his job as a host for InfoWars, tell me again how this was Trump campaign collusion and not a journalist doing their job even if the entire narrative from Mueller is true?

#107 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-16 10:34 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

How many times will Liberals continue to post things that are untrue? We have Celine not knowing when Stone worked for the campaign, we have Danni continuing to lie about when Steele was hired and who paid for him - here is a hint, if you need to resort to lying to make your argument work, you have already lost the argument.

#108 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-16 10:37 PM | Reply | Funny: 3

"when Stone worked for the campaign"

which doesn't matter, since he's been allied with trump for 40 years.

you're dishonest.

#109 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2019-02-16 10:45 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Sheeple has been deeply allied with obtusity for even longer!

#110 | Posted by Corky at 2019-02-16 11:13 PM | Reply

which doesn't matter, since he's been allied with trump for 40 years.
you're dishonest.
#109 | POSTED BY ALEXANDRITE

I specifically said "work" - as a liberal, you are probably unfamiliar with that term. But, it is central to Celine's ignorance.

#111 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-16 11:13 PM | Reply

you're the moron that thinks anyone at infowars is a "journalist", sheep.

#112 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2019-02-16 11:19 PM | Reply

Stone was an informal adviser to the Trump campaign in the early stages of the race. Even after he stopped advising the campaign, Stone and Trump had frequent late-night phone calls. Both Stone and Trump have said they did not discuss WikiLeaks, Russia, or WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange during their calls.

www.businessinsider.com.au

Mueller looking into Trump's late-night phone calls with Roger Stone: report

President Trump and Roger Stone engaged in a "series" of calls during the 2016 presidential campaign

www.salon.com

#113 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-02-16 11:28 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

"I specifically said "work" - as a liberal, you are probably unfamiliar with that term."

Actually, your definition limits "work" to "work for money", which isn't correct.

#114 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-02-17 01:31 AM | Reply

Actually, your definition limits "work" to "work for money", which isn't correct.
#114 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

Not true - you liberals are not very good with honesty. You can work and be unpaid, like Papadopolous. Stone officially left the campaign in 2015, meaning no work, not no pay. Get your facts straight.

#115 | Posted by nobiasposter101 at 2019-02-17 02:06 AM | Reply | Funny: 3

" Stone officially left the campaign in 2015, meaning no work, not no pay."

#1, you're guessing.
#2, the guy you're backing is a proud serial liar.
#3, MY claim was you can "work" and be unpaid.

#116 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-02-17 09:54 AM | Reply

" you liberals are not very good with honesty. "

Too rich.

You're the guy who claimed he paid over 50% in income taxes.

#117 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-02-17 09:54 AM | Reply

here is a hint, if you need to resort to lying to make your argument work, you have already lost the argument.

POSTED BY NOBIASPOSTER101

So what does it say when Trump said there was no contact between his campaign and Russia and investigators have now found dozens of contacts between the campaign and Russia?
What does it say when Trump says he knew nothing about the campaign finance fraud in regard to payments to his whores and investigators have found evidence that he knew and approved? +
What does it say about Trump's border wall when he says El Paso used to be one of our "most dangerous cities" until a border fence was built even though El Paso has long had a much lower crime rate compared to cities of similar size and the crime rate actually increased in El Paso after the fence was constructed?

#118 | Posted by johnny_hotsauce at 2019-02-17 12:31 PM | Reply

Liars always leave out the part that Steele was first hired by Republicans during the primaries. - #14 | Posted by danni at 2019-02-16 10:32 AM
Danni. You're either a liar or you're ignorant.
From the link that YOU used in your #18:

After Mr. Trump secured the nomination, Fusion GPS was hired on behalf of Mrs. Clinton's campaign and the D.N.C. by their law firm, Perkins Coie, to compile research about Mr. Trump, his businesses and associates -- including possible connections with Russia. It was at that point that Fusion GPS hired Mr. Steele, who has deep sourcing in Russia, to gather information.

Please allow me to quote you 'I'll wait for your apology liar.'

#119 | Posted by Avigdore at 2019-02-17 11:29 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Wait till the majority of the population understands what a perv Donald Trump really is.....I will be fun!"

You sound exactly like Ann Coulter salivating over salacious rumours that Bill Clinton jerked off into the White House sink.

And literally no one cares about Trump's sex life. The idea of Trump and sex is so disgusting most people will resent those trying to bring it up.

#120 | Posted by sentinel at 2019-02-18 12:12 AM | Reply

"It's interesting that rcade drops the hammer on blatant climate change lies but allows this kind of tripe to pass."

That's probably because there's a difference between scientific data and speculation about allegations which have yet to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Also, trying to find consistency in Rcade's behavior is about as futile as trying to find consistency in recent Doctor Who producers' works. :)

#121 | Posted by sentinel at 2019-02-18 07:45 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

"So what does it say when Trump said"
"What does it say when Trump says"
"What does it say about Trump's border wall when he says"

What you're doing here fits the very definition of whataboutism. You're pointing to Trump's lies to deflect from if not excuse another lie.

#122 | Posted by sentinel at 2019-02-18 07:52 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort