Sheriff Joe
DA
That was before the invasion when Americans did it all.
The Inevitable New The Inevitable Trump Mocking Thread
- Thread starter Nonononono
- Start date
Sheriff Joe
DA
Hopefully black folks will soon realize the white racist liberals are still just using them.What does that have do with anything? . . . and t once had a "black" on his payroll.
‘Completely Erroneous’: New York Times Busted for Fake News Story on Harriet Tubman $20 Bill
Harvey B. Lindsley/Library of Congress via AP
HANNAH BLEAU15 Jun 20191,371
5:08
The U.S. Treasury is denying a piece from the New York Times which accused the Trump administration of delaying the release of the $20 Harriet Tubman bill and doing so for political reasons.
The New York Times ran a piece Friday, wrought with speculation on Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin’s rationale for “delaying” the release of Harriet Tubman’s $20 bill.
Former Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew set the process in motion in 2016. Proponents of the bill change hoped that it would be completed by 2020, in conjunction with the 100th anniversary of the passage of the 19th Amendment. However, during an appearance before the House Financial Services Committee in May, Mnuchin noted that a 2020 rollout was improbable– if not impossible– due to daunting technical issues. Mnuchin indicated that the redesigned bill would make an emergence in 2028 with designs coming out two years prior.
However, the New York Times spoke to an anonymous employee of the bureau, who supposedly viewed a digital image of the redesigned bill.
The development of the note did not stop there. A current employee of the bureau, who asked not to be named because of the sensitivity of the matter, personally viewed a metal engraving plate and a digital image of a Tubman $20 bill while it was being reviewed by engravers and Secret Service officials as recently as May 2018. This person said that the design appeared to be far along in the process.
View image on Twitter
Alan Rappeport
✔@arappeport
https://twitter.com/arappeport/status/1139503199159750656
Here’s an early design of the Harriet Tubman $20 bill created by the Bureau of Engraving and Printing. Steven Mnuchin said designs would be delayed until 2026 and a future Treasury secretary will decide who’s on the face of the note. https://nyti.ms/2XL7gCH
https://twitter.com/intent/like?tweet_id=1139503199159750656
That source fueled speculation from the New York Times, which pondered if Mnuchin “delayed” the release in order to avoid conflict from Trump, who is a fan of the Andrew Jackson $20 bill.
But the Treasury Department, which oversees the engraving bureau, decided that a new $20 bill would not be made public next year. Current and former department officials say Mr. Mnuchin chose the delay to avoid the possibility that Mr. Trump would cancel the plan outright and create even more controversy.
Mnuchin has denied that.
Further, by citing the anonymous employee, the Times implied that the design is much further along than the current administration is willing to admit.
The U.S. Treasury Department is denying the Times’ story altogether. Senior Adviser for Public Affairs to the Secretary of the Treasury Monica Crowley said the existing timetable is “consistent” with the previous administration’s, adding that Mnuchin is focused solely on “security features and anti-counterfeiting measures.”
“The scheduled release (printing) of the $20 bill is on a timetable consistent with the previous administration,” Crowley said in a statement.
“The Secretary at this point is focused on security features and anti-counterfeiting measures related to the currency,” the statement continued. “The suggestion that the process is being delayed is completely erroneous.”
View image on Twitter
Treasury Public Affairs
✔@TreasurySpox
https://twitter.com/TreasurySpox/status/1139633270709243906
Treasury spokesperson response to today’s misleading New York Times story:
57
1:38 PM - Jun 14, 2019
69 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
Bureau of Engraving and Printing Director Len Olijar also released a strong statement denying the existence of a potential 2020 release. That was never going to happen, he claimed, while adding that the focus lies squarely with implementing advanced security features. Because those take years to finalize, it would be impossible to make legitimate mock-ups of the bill public.
The statement reads in part:
“As technology has evolved, banknote production has vastly changed over the last three decades. The next family of notes require new, overt and covert security features for the public, the banknote equipment manufacturers, and the central bank, to keep our currency safe and secure. Security features also need to work in mass production. A design can change during testing. The overwhelming success of the redesigned $100 in thwarting counterfeiting, is greatly due to the effectiveness of the blue security thread which is a public feature (and which a design was integrated around afterwards). That development alone of that security feature took approximately 10 years to finalize.
“Moreover, BEP was never going to unveil a note design in 2020. To keep our currency safe and secure, it is unwise to give counterfeiters a look at a potential future note far in advance of a note going into circulation. Additionally, if the concept of a note that was made public by the government were to change during that lengthy amount of time, it would create confusion in the global marketplace, further aiding counterfeiters.”
“No Bureau or Department official has ‘scrapped’ anything; it is too early to develop an integrated concept or design until security features are finalized. The aesthetics or look of the note has always come after and been driven by the security features. Everything remains on the table.
Olijar added that the Times’ “sneak peek” of the Tubman $20 bill is not anything new. Rather, it is merely a “copy of an old Series note with the signatures of former officials, with a different image super-imposed on it.”
“It is not a new $20 note, as incorrectly stated by the New York Times, in any way, shape or form,” Olijar said. “The facsimile contained no security features or offset printing included on currency notes.”
“There is nothing about that illustration that even begins to meet technical requirements for the next family of notes,” he added.
Sheriff Joe
DA
‘Completely Erroneous’: New York Times Busted for Fake News Story on Harriet Tubman $20 Bill
Harvey B. Lindsley/Library of Congress via AP
HANNAH BLEAU15 Jun 20191,371
5:08
The U.S. Treasury is denying a piece from the New York Times which accused the Trump administration of delaying the release of the $20 Harriet Tubman bill and doing so for political reasons.
The New York Times ran a piece Friday, wrought with speculation on Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin’s rationale for “delaying” the release of Harriet Tubman’s $20 bill.
Former Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew set the process in motion in 2016. Proponents of the bill change hoped that it would be completed by 2020, in conjunction with the 100th anniversary of the passage of the 19th Amendment. However, during an appearance before the House Financial Services Committee in May, Mnuchin noted that a 2020 rollout was improbable– if not impossible– due to daunting technical issues. Mnuchin indicated that the redesigned bill would make an emergence in 2028 with designs coming out two years prior.
However, the New York Times spoke to an anonymous employee of the bureau, who supposedly viewed a digital image of the redesigned bill.
The development of the note did not stop there. A current employee of the bureau, who asked not to be named because of the sensitivity of the matter, personally viewed a metal engraving plate and a digital image of a Tubman $20 bill while it was being reviewed by engravers and Secret Service officials as recently as May 2018. This person said that the design appeared to be far along in the process.
View image on Twitter
Alan Rappeport
✔@arappeport
https://twitter.com/arappeport/status/1139503199159750656
Here’s an early design of the Harriet Tubman $20 bill created by the Bureau of Engraving and Printing. Steven Mnuchin said designs would be delayed until 2026 and a future Treasury secretary will decide who’s on the face of the note. https://nyti.ms/2XL7gCH
4,777
5:01 AM - Jun 14, 2019
2,413 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
That source fueled speculation from the New York Times, which pondered if Mnuchin “delayed” the release in order to avoid conflict from Trump, who is a fan of the Andrew Jackson $20 bill.
But the Treasury Department, which oversees the engraving bureau, decided that a new $20 bill would not be made public next year. Current and former department officials say Mr. Mnuchin chose the delay to avoid the possibility that Mr. Trump would cancel the plan outright and create even more controversy.
Mnuchin has denied that.
Further, by citing the anonymous employee, the Times implied that the design is much further along than the current administration is willing to admit.
The U.S. Treasury Department is denying the Times’ story altogether. Senior Adviser for Public Affairs to the Secretary of the Treasury Monica Crowley said the existing timetable is “consistent” with the previous administration’s, adding that Mnuchin is focused solely on “security features and anti-counterfeiting measures.”
“The scheduled release (printing) of the $20 bill is on a timetable consistent with the previous administration,” Crowley said in a statement.
“The Secretary at this point is focused on security features and anti-counterfeiting measures related to the currency,” the statement continued. “The suggestion that the process is being delayed is completely erroneous.”
View image on Twitter
Treasury Public Affairs
✔@TreasurySpox
https://twitter.com/TreasurySpox/status/1139633270709243906
Treasury spokesperson response to today’s misleading New York Times story:
57
1:38 PM - Jun 14, 2019
69 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
Bureau of Engraving and Printing Director Len Olijar also released a strong statement denying the existence of a potential 2020 release. That was never going to happen, he claimed, while adding that the focus lies squarely with implementing advanced security features. Because those take years to finalize, it would be impossible to make legitimate mock-ups of the bill public.
The statement reads in part:
“As technology has evolved, banknote production has vastly changed over the last three decades. The next family of notes require new, overt and covert security features for the public, the banknote equipment manufacturers, and the central bank, to keep our currency safe and secure. Security features also need to work in mass production. A design can change during testing. The overwhelming success of the redesigned $100 in thwarting counterfeiting, is greatly due to the effectiveness of the blue security thread which is a public feature (and which a design was integrated around afterwards). That development alone of that security feature took approximately 10 years to finalize.
“Moreover, BEP was never going to unveil a note design in 2020. To keep our currency safe and secure, it is unwise to give counterfeiters a look at a potential future note far in advance of a note going into circulation. Additionally, if the concept of a note that was made public by the government were to change during that lengthy amount of time, it would create confusion in the global marketplace, further aiding counterfeiters.”
“No Bureau or Department official has ‘scrapped’ anything; it is too early to develop an integrated concept or design until security features are finalized. The aesthetics or look of the note has always come after and been driven by the security features. Everything remains on the table.
Olijar added that the Times’ “sneak peek” of the Tubman $20 bill is not anything new. Rather, it is merely a “copy of an old Series note with the signatures of former officials, with a different image super-imposed on it.”
“It is not a new $20 note, as incorrectly stated by the New York Times, in any way, shape or form,” Olijar said. “The facsimile contained no security features or offset printing included on currency notes.”
“There is nothing about that illustration that even begins to meet technical requirements for the next family of notes,” he added.
Harvey B. Lindsley/Library of Congress via AP
HANNAH BLEAU15 Jun 20191,371
5:08
The U.S. Treasury is denying a piece from the New York Times which accused the Trump administration of delaying the release of the $20 Harriet Tubman bill and doing so for political reasons.
The New York Times ran a piece Friday, wrought with speculation on Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin’s rationale for “delaying” the release of Harriet Tubman’s $20 bill.
Former Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew set the process in motion in 2016. Proponents of the bill change hoped that it would be completed by 2020, in conjunction with the 100th anniversary of the passage of the 19th Amendment. However, during an appearance before the House Financial Services Committee in May, Mnuchin noted that a 2020 rollout was improbable– if not impossible– due to daunting technical issues. Mnuchin indicated that the redesigned bill would make an emergence in 2028 with designs coming out two years prior.
However, the New York Times spoke to an anonymous employee of the bureau, who supposedly viewed a digital image of the redesigned bill.
The development of the note did not stop there. A current employee of the bureau, who asked not to be named because of the sensitivity of the matter, personally viewed a metal engraving plate and a digital image of a Tubman $20 bill while it was being reviewed by engravers and Secret Service officials as recently as May 2018. This person said that the design appeared to be far along in the process.
View image on Twitter
Alan Rappeport
✔@arappeport
https://twitter.com/arappeport/status/1139503199159750656
Here’s an early design of the Harriet Tubman $20 bill created by the Bureau of Engraving and Printing. Steven Mnuchin said designs would be delayed until 2026 and a future Treasury secretary will decide who’s on the face of the note. https://nyti.ms/2XL7gCH
4,777
5:01 AM - Jun 14, 2019
2,413 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
That source fueled speculation from the New York Times, which pondered if Mnuchin “delayed” the release in order to avoid conflict from Trump, who is a fan of the Andrew Jackson $20 bill.
But the Treasury Department, which oversees the engraving bureau, decided that a new $20 bill would not be made public next year. Current and former department officials say Mr. Mnuchin chose the delay to avoid the possibility that Mr. Trump would cancel the plan outright and create even more controversy.
Mnuchin has denied that.
Further, by citing the anonymous employee, the Times implied that the design is much further along than the current administration is willing to admit.
The U.S. Treasury Department is denying the Times’ story altogether. Senior Adviser for Public Affairs to the Secretary of the Treasury Monica Crowley said the existing timetable is “consistent” with the previous administration’s, adding that Mnuchin is focused solely on “security features and anti-counterfeiting measures.”
“The scheduled release (printing) of the $20 bill is on a timetable consistent with the previous administration,” Crowley said in a statement.
“The Secretary at this point is focused on security features and anti-counterfeiting measures related to the currency,” the statement continued. “The suggestion that the process is being delayed is completely erroneous.”
View image on Twitter
Treasury Public Affairs
✔@TreasurySpox
https://twitter.com/TreasurySpox/status/1139633270709243906
Treasury spokesperson response to today’s misleading New York Times story:
57
1:38 PM - Jun 14, 2019
69 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
Bureau of Engraving and Printing Director Len Olijar also released a strong statement denying the existence of a potential 2020 release. That was never going to happen, he claimed, while adding that the focus lies squarely with implementing advanced security features. Because those take years to finalize, it would be impossible to make legitimate mock-ups of the bill public.
The statement reads in part:
“As technology has evolved, banknote production has vastly changed over the last three decades. The next family of notes require new, overt and covert security features for the public, the banknote equipment manufacturers, and the central bank, to keep our currency safe and secure. Security features also need to work in mass production. A design can change during testing. The overwhelming success of the redesigned $100 in thwarting counterfeiting, is greatly due to the effectiveness of the blue security thread which is a public feature (and which a design was integrated around afterwards). That development alone of that security feature took approximately 10 years to finalize.
“Moreover, BEP was never going to unveil a note design in 2020. To keep our currency safe and secure, it is unwise to give counterfeiters a look at a potential future note far in advance of a note going into circulation. Additionally, if the concept of a note that was made public by the government were to change during that lengthy amount of time, it would create confusion in the global marketplace, further aiding counterfeiters.”
“No Bureau or Department official has ‘scrapped’ anything; it is too early to develop an integrated concept or design until security features are finalized. The aesthetics or look of the note has always come after and been driven by the security features. Everything remains on the table.
Olijar added that the Times’ “sneak peek” of the Tubman $20 bill is not anything new. Rather, it is merely a “copy of an old Series note with the signatures of former officials, with a different image super-imposed on it.”
“It is not a new $20 note, as incorrectly stated by the New York Times, in any way, shape or form,” Olijar said. “The facsimile contained no security features or offset printing included on currency notes.”
“There is nothing about that illustration that even begins to meet technical requirements for the next family of notes,” he added.
Nonononono
PREMIER
Hüsker Dü
DA
Anyone who pays attention knows t will do everything he can to stop this change from ever happening . . . for more than one reason, all having to do with his racial bias.‘Completely Erroneous’: New York Times Busted for Fake News Story on Harriet Tubman $20 Bill
Harvey B. Lindsley/Library of Congress via AP
HANNAH BLEAU15 Jun 20191,371
5:08
The U.S. Treasury is denying a piece from the New York Times which accused the Trump administration of delaying the release of the $20 Harriet Tubman bill and doing so for political reasons.
The New York Times ran a piece Friday, wrought with speculation on Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin’s rationale for “delaying” the release of Harriet Tubman’s $20 bill.
Former Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew set the process in motion in 2016. Proponents of the bill change hoped that it would be completed by 2020, in conjunction with the 100th anniversary of the passage of the 19th Amendment. However, during an appearance before the House Financial Services Committee in May, Mnuchin noted that a 2020 rollout was improbable– if not impossible– due to daunting technical issues. Mnuchin indicated that the redesigned bill would make an emergence in 2028 with designs coming out two years prior.
However, the New York Times spoke to an anonymous employee of the bureau, who supposedly viewed a digital image of the redesigned bill.
The development of the note did not stop there. A current employee of the bureau, who asked not to be named because of the sensitivity of the matter, personally viewed a metal engraving plate and a digital image of a Tubman $20 bill while it was being reviewed by engravers and Secret Service officials as recently as May 2018. This person said that the design appeared to be far along in the process.
View image on Twitter
Alan Rappeport
✔@arappeport
Here’s an early design of the Harriet Tubman $20 bill created by the Bureau of Engraving and Printing. Steven Mnuchin said designs would be delayed until 2026 and a future Treasury secretary will decide who’s on the face of the note. https://nyti.ms/2XL7gCH
4,777
5:01 AM - Jun 14, 2019
2,413 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
That source fueled speculation from the New York Times, which pondered if Mnuchin “delayed” the release in order to avoid conflict from Trump, who is a fan of the Andrew Jackson $20 bill.
But the Treasury Department, which oversees the engraving bureau, decided that a new $20 bill would not be made public next year. Current and former department officials say Mr. Mnuchin chose the delay to avoid the possibility that Mr. Trump would cancel the plan outright and create even more controversy.
Mnuchin has denied that.
Further, by citing the anonymous employee, the Times implied that the design is much further along than the current administration is willing to admit.
The U.S. Treasury Department is denying the Times’ story altogether. Senior Adviser for Public Affairs to the Secretary of the Treasury Monica Crowley said the existing timetable is “consistent” with the previous administration’s, adding that Mnuchin is focused solely on “security features and anti-counterfeiting measures.”
“The scheduled release (printing) of the $20 bill is on a timetable consistent with the previous administration,” Crowley said in a statement.
“The Secretary at this point is focused on security features and anti-counterfeiting measures related to the currency,” the statement continued. “The suggestion that the process is being delayed is completely erroneous.”
View image on Twitter
Treasury Public Affairs
✔@TreasurySpox
Treasury spokesperson response to today’s misleading New York Times story:
57
1:38 PM - Jun 14, 2019
69 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
Bureau of Engraving and Printing Director Len Olijar also released a strong statement denying the existence of a potential 2020 release. That was never going to happen, he claimed, while adding that the focus lies squarely with implementing advanced security features. Because those take years to finalize, it would be impossible to make legitimate mock-ups of the bill public.
The statement reads in part:
“As technology has evolved, banknote production has vastly changed over the last three decades. The next family of notes require new, overt and covert security features for the public, the banknote equipment manufacturers, and the central bank, to keep our currency safe and secure. Security features also need to work in mass production. A design can change during testing. The overwhelming success of the redesigned $100 in thwarting counterfeiting, is greatly due to the effectiveness of the blue security thread which is a public feature (and which a design was integrated around afterwards). That development alone of that security feature took approximately 10 years to finalize.
“Moreover, BEP was never going to unveil a note design in 2020. To keep our currency safe and secure, it is unwise to give counterfeiters a look at a potential future note far in advance of a note going into circulation. Additionally, if the concept of a note that was made public by the government were to change during that lengthy amount of time, it would create confusion in the global marketplace, further aiding counterfeiters.”
“No Bureau or Department official has ‘scrapped’ anything; it is too early to develop an integrated concept or design until security features are finalized. The aesthetics or look of the note has always come after and been driven by the security features. Everything remains on the table.
Olijar added that the Times’ “sneak peek” of the Tubman $20 bill is not anything new. Rather, it is merely a “copy of an old Series note with the signatures of former officials, with a different image super-imposed on it.”
“It is not a new $20 note, as incorrectly stated by the New York Times, in any way, shape or form,” Olijar said. “The facsimile contained no security features or offset printing included on currency notes.”
“There is nothing about that illustration that even begins to meet technical requirements for the next family of notes,” he added.
Sheriff Joe
DA
JUNE 15, 2019
Stone defense team exposes the 'intelligence community's' betrayal of their responsibilities
By Thomas Lifson
As the Russia Hoax is being unwound, we are learning some deeply disturbing lessons about the level of corruption at the top levels of the agencies charged with protecting us from external threats. One jaw-dropping example has just been exposed by the legal team defending Roger Stone.
Foundational to the entire narrative that Russia "interfered" with our election and that President Trump "colluded" with this interference is the conclusion issued by the "intelligence community" that the DNC emails were hacked by Russia. According to this assertion, the exposure of those emails affected the election, and therefore Trump benefited from Russian interference, and colluded by joking that Russia should locate the 30,000 emails Hillary Clinton deleted and BleachBitted, making recovery impossible.
There has already been ample reason to dismiss this collective judgment from the Intelligence Community, primarily focusing on the fact that the download speed of the emails could only have been achieved by loading it on a device attached to the server itself. It was too fast to have been sent via the internet to a hacker. But now, the Department of Justice had made an admission in response to a filing by Manafort's defense team that reveals they did not carry out their basic responsibilities.
Sundance of Conservative Tree House explains:
Despite the Russian 'hacking' claim the DOJ previously admitted the DNC would not let FBI investigators review the DNC server. Instead the DNC provided the FBI with analysis of a technical review done through a cyber-security contract with Crowdstrike. (snip)
In a court filing (full pdf below) the scale of sketchy has increased exponentially.
Suspecting they could prove the Russian hacking claim was false, lawyers representing Roger Stone requested the full Crowdstrike report on the DNC hack. When the DOJ responded to the Stone motion they made a rather significant admission. Not only did the FBI not review the DNC server, the FBI/DOJ never even saw the Crowdstrike report.
A series of official pronouncements were based on the DNC's redacted summary of the original report. The intelligence community, on which the US taxpayers spend scores of billions of dollars annually, put its credibility behind the DNC's word, without even letting us know the basis for their "conclusion." (snip)
This means the FBI and DOJ, and all of the downstream claims by the intelligence apparatus; including the December 2016 Joint Analysis Report and January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment, all the way to the Weissmann/Mueller report and the continued claims therein; were based on the official intelligence agencies of the U.S. government and the U.S. Department of Justice taking the word of a hired contractor for the Democrat party….. despite their inability to examine the server and/or actually see an unredacted technical forensic report from the investigating contractor.
The entire apparatus of the U.S. government just took their word for it…
…and used the claim therein as an official position….
…which led to a subsequent government claim, in court, of absolute certainty that Russia hacked the DNC.
Why bother funding these agencies if they don't even check the basic data and then claim to have come to conclusions on their own?
John Durham plans to question the intelligence agencies. This should be part of the investigation.
Stone defense team exposes the 'intelligence community's' betrayal of their responsibilities
By Thomas Lifson
As the Russia Hoax is being unwound, we are learning some deeply disturbing lessons about the level of corruption at the top levels of the agencies charged with protecting us from external threats. One jaw-dropping example has just been exposed by the legal team defending Roger Stone.
Foundational to the entire narrative that Russia "interfered" with our election and that President Trump "colluded" with this interference is the conclusion issued by the "intelligence community" that the DNC emails were hacked by Russia. According to this assertion, the exposure of those emails affected the election, and therefore Trump benefited from Russian interference, and colluded by joking that Russia should locate the 30,000 emails Hillary Clinton deleted and BleachBitted, making recovery impossible.
There has already been ample reason to dismiss this collective judgment from the Intelligence Community, primarily focusing on the fact that the download speed of the emails could only have been achieved by loading it on a device attached to the server itself. It was too fast to have been sent via the internet to a hacker. But now, the Department of Justice had made an admission in response to a filing by Manafort's defense team that reveals they did not carry out their basic responsibilities.
Sundance of Conservative Tree House explains:
Despite the Russian 'hacking' claim the DOJ previously admitted the DNC would not let FBI investigators review the DNC server. Instead the DNC provided the FBI with analysis of a technical review done through a cyber-security contract with Crowdstrike. (snip)
In a court filing (full pdf below) the scale of sketchy has increased exponentially.
Suspecting they could prove the Russian hacking claim was false, lawyers representing Roger Stone requested the full Crowdstrike report on the DNC hack. When the DOJ responded to the Stone motion they made a rather significant admission. Not only did the FBI not review the DNC server, the FBI/DOJ never even saw the Crowdstrike report.
A series of official pronouncements were based on the DNC's redacted summary of the original report. The intelligence community, on which the US taxpayers spend scores of billions of dollars annually, put its credibility behind the DNC's word, without even letting us know the basis for their "conclusion." (snip)
This means the FBI and DOJ, and all of the downstream claims by the intelligence apparatus; including the December 2016 Joint Analysis Report and January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment, all the way to the Weissmann/Mueller report and the continued claims therein; were based on the official intelligence agencies of the U.S. government and the U.S. Department of Justice taking the word of a hired contractor for the Democrat party….. despite their inability to examine the server and/or actually see an unredacted technical forensic report from the investigating contractor.
The entire apparatus of the U.S. government just took their word for it…
…and used the claim therein as an official position….
…which led to a subsequent government claim, in court, of absolute certainty that Russia hacked the DNC.
Why bother funding these agencies if they don't even check the basic data and then claim to have come to conclusions on their own?
John Durham plans to question the intelligence agencies. This should be part of the investigation.
You sir are provoking a scandal where there is no scandal along with the NYT....
You sir are a FULL BLOWN RACIST....!
Nonononono
PREMIER
How would you know, since you were too lazy to read the report?
I read your report and it says you're pissed the Muller couldnt get the glove to fit.
If the glove doesn't fit, ...
That report has 10 fingers that fit just fine.
Really?
What is the President being charged with?
That's the question before the various House committees investigating. Obstruction of justice is obvious to anyone who is looking honestly at the findings.
Nonononono
PREMIER
You didn’t read it either. If you had, you’d know exactly the 10 articulated acts of obstruction of justice Trump committed, and exactly why Mueller declined to indict a sitting president.
Hüsker Dü
DA
The plumbers sources don't tell him the full story, and he's fine with that. Like t he doesn't even want to read the Readers Digest version, they like books with pictures.
You go with that.
Why was slick willie charged with real crimes when he got impeached?
I posted the impeachable offense. post #19213
Nonononono
PREMIER
Good luck with the “Bill Did Worse” defense when the FRCrP are applied.
Bruddah IZ
DA
Coocoo
Its not a "Bill did worse" defense.
Its just a fact. Bill was impeached for actual crimes.
Not some screaming leftist in a green jacket.
Dont let me dissuade you though.
I love the grassy knoll shit.