Mueller Investigation pt4 - Page 10

applecorped · 5th December 2018, 12:34 PM

Pavlov would be proud of his big dogs

Commenters here answer the bell every single time

plague311 · 5th December 2018, 12:48 PM

Originally Posted by smartcooky

Its hard not to misrepresent your position when you either change it willy-nilly or don't represent it at all. Your continual whataboutism makes it near impossible, but I guess that's the idea.

The reason I stopped arguing with 9/11 CTists is because the positions didn't need refuting. That can happen in other areas as well. There isn't much here that needs refutation.

Flynn committed crimes.
He got caught.
He confessed.
He worked diligently with Mueller to provide information to help his, personal, case.

Those are facts. Completely and entirely indisputable. Any argument claiming any of those facts are wrong is incorrect and would require extraordinary evidence. None of which has been provided here.

pgwenthold · 5th December 2018, 12:50 PM

Originally Posted by plague311

The reason I stopped arguing with 9/11 CTists is because the positions didn't need refuting. That can happen in other areas as well. There isn't much here that needs refutation.

Flynn committed crimes.
He got caught.
He confessed.
He worked diligently with Mueller to provide information to help his, personal, case.

Those are facts. Completely and entirely indisputable.

"These are the facts, and they are undisputed." - Jack from A Few Good Men

Dr. Keith · 5th December 2018, 12:54 PM

Originally Posted by plague311

The reason I stopped arguing with 9/11 CTists is because the positions didn't need refuting. That can happen in other areas as well. There isn't much here that needs refutation.

Flynn committed crimes.
He got caught.
He confessed.
He worked diligently with Mueller to provide information to help his, personal, case.

Those are facts. Completely and entirely indisputable. Any argument claiming any of those facts are wrong is incorrect and would require extraordinary evidence. None of which has been provided here.

Curious that you don't address how he got caught.

Even more curious that you don't address why he confessed.

Most curious that he only worked to help himself and not the president of the United States to which he owed a constitutional blood oath.

Don't you think?

No? Well OK, if you want to just look at pertinent facts and not be distracted by shiny balls . . . squirrel!

a_unique_person · 5th December 2018, 12:58 PM

Originally Posted by The Big Dog

One thing that is notable about the Mueller document is that it mentions that the FBI began investigating Flynn based on an article in the WaPo which in turn was based on the illegal leak of the Flynn call to the Russian Ambassador.

"Curious" that Mueller has not investigated that felony...

"curious" indeed.

Might explain another reason why Bobby recommended zero jail time.

Those illegal leaks. We might never have to endure Watergate without those dang leaks

The Big Dog · 5th December 2018, 01:05 PM

Say, what's going on International "Skeptics" Forum?

lack of any curiosity about the 302's and "fortuitous" leak to WaPo.... "completely and entirely indisputable"... "constitutional blood oath"...

Hoo boy, has this thread gone off the rails....

It is adorable that simply because has agreed to a plea bargain that they committed a crime. Poor Flynn got swallowed up in a perjury trap. Thanks Obama.

Paul2 · 5th December 2018, 01:09 PM

Originally Posted by The Big Dog

Say, what's going on International "Skeptics" Forum?

lack of any curiosity about the 304's and "fortuitous" leak to WaPo.... "completely and entirely indisputable"... "constitutional blood oath"...

No lack of lack of curiosity on my part:

Originally Posted by Paul2

1. Is the evidence sufficient to conclude that they falsified the 302s?

2. What is that evidence?

Belz... · 5th December 2018, 01:10 PM

Originally Posted by The Big Dog

Say, what's going on International "Skeptics" Forum?

I don't know. I've been asking you that for years.

acbytesla · 5th December 2018, 01:21 PM

Originally Posted by Dr. Keith

Curious that you don't address how he got caught.

Even more curious that you don't address why he confessed.

Most curious that he only worked to help himself and not the president of the United States to which he owed a constitutional blood oath.

Don't you think?

No? Well OK, if you want to just look at pertinent facts and not be distracted by shiny balls . . . squirrel!

Constitutional blood oath...to the President? I missed that one. What is that oath? I don't remember it from my civics class.

plague311 · 5th December 2018, 01:31 PM

Originally Posted by acbytesla

Constitutional blood oath...to the President? I missed that one. What is that oath? I don't remember it from my civics class.

I believe he was being facetious.

I always love the, "If you don't think like I do, then YOU aren't a skeptic." What's the name for that? Something about the Scottish? Lol

Show your evidence TBD, otherwise you know the way to the CT forum.

Dr. Keith · 5th December 2018, 01:38 PM

Originally Posted by plague311

I believe he was being facetious.

With Cain in the house, it is tough.

jimbob · 5th December 2018, 01:38 PM

Originally Posted by I Am The Scum

We are now in the "Why are you pulling me over for running a red light when there are murderers and rapists roaming the streets?" level of apologetics.

True, except it's more "Why are you charging the mule for running a red light when you found a suitcase full of drugs in their car and they're cooperating with the prosecution? "

Although to be fair to The Big Dog, they might actually be as competent at law as Trump's lawyers.

Elagabalus · 5th December 2018, 01:40 PM

Originally Posted by Paul2

No lack of lack of curiosity on my part:

So the falsified 304s went 404?

The Big Dog · 5th December 2018, 02:07 PM

Originally Posted by Elagabalus

So the falsified 304s went 404?

exactly.

/actually the 302's went 404... not sure why I had 304 on my mind

I Am The Scum · 5th December 2018, 02:08 PM

That's not a crime

acbytesla · 5th December 2018, 02:11 PM

Originally Posted by plague311

I believe he was being facetious.

I know he was. I just thought I'd jump on the bandwagon.

Originally Posted by plague311

I always love the, "If you don't think like I do, then YOU aren't a skeptic." What's the name for that? Something about the Scottish? Lol

Show your evidence TBD, otherwise you know the way to the CT forum.

I don't think the Big Dog knows actually what a skeptic is.

I Am The Scum · 5th December 2018, 02:13 PM

Originally Posted by acbytesla

I don't think the Big Dog knows actually what a skeptic is.

A skeptic is not someone who jumps to conclusions. Rather, a skeptic withholds judgment, considers all sides of the debate, and then, only when all the evidence has been considered, says, "Look over there!"

plague311 · 5th December 2018, 02:26 PM

Originally Posted by acbytesla

I know he was. I just thought I'd jump on the bandwagon.

As we say in North Dakota "ope!"

Originally Posted by acbytesla

I don't think the Big Dog knows actually what a skeptic is.

The word gets thrown around entirely too much. Not everyone here is a skeptic (I certainly don't consider my self one. Maybe an "in-training", but the word means something), and I don't think a lot of people understand what it means anymore.

The Big Dog · 5th December 2018, 02:31 PM

So who leaked the surveillance of the Flynn call to the ambassador to CIA lackey David Ignatius?

Comey (one of the few people he followed on twitter before his handle was exposed)?

Or John Brennan? (spittle soaked anti-Trump fanatic).

Hmmm....

why not both?

plague311 · 5th December 2018, 02:40 PM

Originally Posted by The Big Dog

So who leaked the surveillance of the Flynn call to the ambassador to CIA lackey David Ignatius?

Comey (one of the few people he followed on twitter before his handle was exposed)?

Or John Brennan? (spittle soaked anti-Trump fanatic).

Hmmm....

why not both?

I can't think of a reason. You should take your sleuthing to the authorities and get #JusticeForFlynn.

I'm positive you have enough to crack this case wide open.

acbytesla · 5th December 2018, 02:41 PM

Originally Posted by plague311

As we say in North Dakota "ope!"

The word gets thrown around entirely too much. Not everyone here is a skeptic (I certainly don't consider my self one. Maybe an "in-training", but the word means something), and I don't think a lot of people understand what it means anymore.

I consider myself a skeptic. But that doesn't mean I don't make up my mind. I am more than willing to reconsider when good evidence is provided on a subject. TBD has a tendency to toss conservative CT theories and then suggest that others are not really skeptics since we don't consider them.

Weird. I'm from Sioux City and I never heard that one.

plague311 · 5th December 2018, 02:56 PM

Originally Posted by acbytesla

I consider myself a skeptic. But that doesn't mean I don't make up my mind. I am more than willing to reconsider when good evidence is provided on a subject. TBD has a tendency to toss conservative CT theories and then suggest that others are not really skeptics since we don't consider them.

I can certainly agree there are skeptics here. There are people I love reading, and people I just gloss over when I see their names. It isn't politically motivated either. I roam over both sides LoL. As I'm sure many to do me as well.

Originally Posted by acbytesla

Weird. I'm from Sioux City and I never heard that one.

I bet I hear it 10-12 times a day.

a_unique_person · 5th December 2018, 03:15 PM

Originally Posted by The Big Dog

So who leaked the surveillance of the Flynn call to the ambassador to CIA lackey David Ignatius?

Comey (one of the few people he followed on twitter before his handle was exposed)?

Or John Brennan? (spittle soaked anti-Trump fanatic).

Hmmm....

why not both?

It's like asking who Deep Throat was and why hasn't he been jailed yet.

The Big Dog · 5th December 2018, 03:25 PM

Originally Posted by a_unique_person

It's like asking who Deep Throat was and why hasn't he been jailed yet.

But... people did ask who Deep Throat was... for years, it was a big deal.

I think it is more like asking did the CIA deliberately leak surveillance audio of a perfectly legal transaction involving a US Citizen for purely political purposes, and if so, why haven't the people responsible been put in ******* jail?

Squeegee Beckenheim · 5th December 2018, 03:25 PM

Originally Posted by The Big Dog

Hmm, the in-curiosity of who in the Obama administration leaked the surveillance tapes to WaPo.

What "surveillance tapes"? The article in question makes no reference to any surveillance tapes. What it says is:

Quote:

Retired Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn, Trump’s choice for national security adviser, cultivates close Russian contacts. He has appeared on Russia Today and received a speaking fee from the cable network, which was described in last week’s unclassified intelligence briefing on Russian hacking as “the Kremlin’s principal international propaganda outlet.”

According to a senior U.S. government official, Flynn phoned Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak several times on Dec. 29, the day the Obama administration announced the expulsion of 35 Russian officials as well as other measures in retaliation for the hacking. What did Flynn say, and did it undercut the U.S. sanctions? The Logan Act (though never enforced) bars U.S. citizens from correspondence intending to influence a foreign government about “disputes” with the United States. Was its spirit violated? The Trump campaign didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

[...]

UPDATE: The Trump transition team did not respond Thursday night to a request for comment. But two team members called with information Friday morning. A first Trump official confirmed that Flynn had spoken with Kislyak by phone, but said the calls were before sanctions were announced and didn’t cover that topic. This official later added that Flynn’s initial call was to express condolences to Kislyak after the terrorist killing of the Russian ambassador to Ankara Dec. 19, and that Flynn made a second call Dec. 28 to express condolences for the shoot-down of a Russian plane carrying a choir to Syria. In that second call, Flynn also discussed plans for a Trump-Putin conversation sometime after the inauguration. In addition, a second Trump official said the Dec. 28 call included an invitation from Kislyak for a Trump administration official to visit Kazakhstan for a conference in late January.

Flynn has since confessed that he did indeed discuss sanctions with Kislyak, asking the Russian government to hold off on retaliation for Obama's sanctions as things would be different once Trump was in office.

There was a later leak which revealed that Flynn had lied and that there were tapes of his conversation, but still no reference to the tapes being leaked. So what are you talking about?

The Big Dog · 5th December 2018, 03:31 PM

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim

What "surveillance tapes"? The article in question makes no reference to any surveillance tapes. What it says is:

Flynn has since confessed that he did indeed discuss sanctions with Kislyak, asking the Russian government to hold off on retaliation for Obama's sanctions as things would be different once Trump was in office.

no way, the CIA errand boy did not admit that he got the info about the call through CIA surveillance of the Russian Ambassador?

He is very clever!

oy vey...

plague311 · 5th December 2018, 03:32 PM

Originally Posted by The Big Dog

no way, the CIA errand boy did not admit that he got the info about the call through CIA surveillance of the Russian Ambassador?

He is very clever!

oy vey...

Can we get a split over to the CT section?

a_unique_person · 5th December 2018, 03:36 PM

These molehills just keep getting smaller and harder to find.

Squeegee Beckenheim · 5th December 2018, 03:42 PM

Originally Posted by The Big Dog

So who leaked the surveillance of the Flynn call to the ambassador to CIA lackey David Ignatius?

Comey (one of the few people he followed on twitter before his handle was exposed)?

Or John Brennan? (spittle soaked anti-Trump fanatic).

Hmmm....

why not both?

The article says there were 9 sources for the information, so it could be both of them who made the leak. But none of them appear to have leaked the tapes, as you allege.

The Big Dog · 5th December 2018, 03:43 PM

Originally Posted by a_unique_person

These molehills just keep getting smaller and harder to find.

Damn right, another good post by you!

molehill: hey this guy maybe told not fully consistent things about this perfectly legal thing he did. Prosecute him to the fullest extent of the law!

0 to 14 days in jail.

Mountain: Hey what about the CIA leaks? Hello? Anyone home?

Crickets.

Squeegee Beckenheim · 5th December 2018, 03:44 PM

Originally Posted by The Big Dog

no way, the CIA errand boy did not admit that he got the info about the call through CIA surveillance of the Russian Ambassador?

He is very clever!

oy vey...

If you want to convince people that the tapes themselves have been leaked, then you'll have to provide a better argument than that there is no evidence that the tapes themselves have been leaked.

The Big Dog · 5th December 2018, 03:46 PM

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim

If you want to convince people that the tapes themselves have been leaked, then you'll have to provide a better argument than that there is no evidence that the tapes themselves have been leaked.

You did see the part where he said there was a phone call, right?

Where do you think he got the info about that?

I wonder if it was from the fact that the CIA was listening in on the calls of the Russian Ambassador?

What do you think?

acbytesla · 5th December 2018, 03:46 PM

Originally Posted by plague311

I bet I hear it 10-12 times a day.

It's been 20 years since I've been there, so maybe that explains it.

Squeegee Beckenheim · 5th December 2018, 03:51 PM

Originally Posted by The Big Dog

You did see the part where he said there was a phone call, right?

Where do you think he got the info about that?

I wonder if it was from the fact that the CIA was listening in on the calls of the Russian Ambassador?

What do you think?

Where did you get the information about the contents of the phonecalls from? Have you heard the tapes? Or is it possible to acquire information in a different way?

If you want to convince people that the tapes themselves have been leaked, then you'll have to provide a better argument than that there is no evidence that the tapes themselves have been leaked. Denying that people have the ability to convey information to other people is not a better argument.

The Big Dog · 5th December 2018, 03:57 PM

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim

Where did you get the information about the contents of the phonecalls from? Have you heard the tapes? Or is it possible to acquire information in a different way?

If you want to convince people that the tapes themselves have been leaked, then you'll have to provide a better argument than that there is no evidence that the tapes themselves have been leaked. Denying that people have the ability to convey information to other people is not a better argument.

Wait are you quibbling that the physical tapes were not leaked just the information on them?

oof, if so, that is just some next level quibbling I had not expected...

Squeegee Beckenheim · 5th December 2018, 04:04 PM

Originally Posted by The Big Dog

Wait are you quibbling that the physical tapes were not leaked just the information on them?

oof, if so, that is just some next level quibbling I had not expected...

That's a gracious way to admit that you were wrong. I'd call that progress. Well done.

The Big Dog · 5th December 2018, 04:07 PM

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim

That's a gracious way to admit that you were wrong. I'd call that progress. Well done.

Golly, wait until you hear that:

it
wasn't
even
on
tape!

It was "digital."

Banner day for The Resistance! They caught TBD using easily understood colloquial terms, and declared victory when they found out it wasn't even on "tape."

Banner day, take a bow.

Squeegee Beckenheim · 5th December 2018, 04:15 PM

Originally Posted by The Big Dog

Golly, wait until you hear that:

it
wasn't
even
on
tape!

It was "digital."

Banner day for The Resistance! They caught TBD using easily understood colloquial terms, and declared victory when they found out it wasn't even on "tape."

Banner day, take a bow.

Well done. You'll get there. Just keep trying, that's the important thing.

The Big Dog · 5th December 2018, 04:20 PM

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim

Well done. You'll get there. Just keep trying, that's the important thing.

educating folks on what a specious nit picking objection you have raised?

Yeah, pretty much there.

TBD is launching dingers, and y'all are bragging that you got a first down.

Touchdown TBD!

tyr_13 · 5th December 2018, 04:29 PM

Originally Posted by timhau

"Curious" as to why sensible people don't use the ignore function on trolls.

Because we have a troll president, supported by other trolls, and we have even non-trolls supporting them with the same troll arguments.

Their arguments and views are those we have to deal with. I understand there is the balance of giving them credence by addressing them at all, and not allowing bad/stupid/irrational/hateful/utterly craven ideas to go unchallenged, but the former ship has sailed with them gaining political power.

Do you see any Trump defender making any arguments substantially better? The only ones I can find are those that address only the accusations against Trump that are not supported or have evidence against them, and even then those people tend to then lump all accusations against Trump in with the weak ones.

5th December 2018, 12:34 PM	#361
applecorped Rotten to the Core Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 19,295	Pavlov would be proud of his big dogs Commenters here answer the bell every single time
	__________________ All You Need Is Love.

5th December 2018, 12:48 PM	#362
plague311 Great minds think... Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: North Dakota Posts: 5,017	Originally Posted by smartcooky Its hard not to misrepresent your position when you either change it willy-nilly or don't represent it at all. Your continual whataboutism makes it near impossible, but I guess that's the idea. The reason I stopped arguing with 9/11 CTists is because the positions didn't need refuting. That can happen in other areas as well. There isn't much here that needs refutation. Flynn committed crimes. He got caught. He confessed. He worked diligently with Mueller to provide information to help his, personal, case. Those are facts. Completely and entirely indisputable. Any argument claiming any of those facts are wrong is incorrect and would require extraordinary evidence. None of which has been provided here.
	__________________ "All acts performed in the world begin in the imagination."--Barbara Grizzuti Harrison “There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss

5th December 2018, 12:50 PM	#363
pgwenthold Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 17,952	Originally Posted by plague311 The reason I stopped arguing with 9/11 CTists is because the positions didn't need refuting. That can happen in other areas as well. There isn't much here that needs refutation. Flynn committed crimes. He got caught. He confessed. He worked diligently with Mueller to provide information to help his, personal, case. Those are facts. Completely and entirely indisputable. "These are the facts, and they are undisputed." - Jack from A Few Good Men
	__________________ "As your friend, I have to be honest with you: I don't care about you or your problems" - Chloe, Secret Life of Pets

5th December 2018, 12:54 PM	#364
Dr. Keith Not a doctor. Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Texas Posts: 18,285	Originally Posted by plague311 The reason I stopped arguing with 9/11 CTists is because the positions didn't need refuting. That can happen in other areas as well. There isn't much here that needs refutation. Flynn committed crimes. He got caught. He confessed. He worked diligently with Mueller to provide information to help his, personal, case. Those are facts. Completely and entirely indisputable. Any argument claiming any of those facts are wrong is incorrect and would require extraordinary evidence. None of which has been provided here. Curious that you don't address how he got caught. Even more curious that you don't address why he confessed. Most curious that he only worked to help himself and not the president of the United States to which he owed a constitutional blood oath. Don't you think? No? Well OK, if you want to just look at pertinent facts and not be distracted by shiny balls . . . squirrel!
	__________________ Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God. He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.

5th December 2018, 12:58 PM	#365
a_unique_person Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Waiting for the pod bay door to open. Posts: 40,100	Originally Posted by The Big Dog One thing that is notable about the Mueller document is that it mentions that the FBI began investigating Flynn based on an article in the WaPo which in turn was based on the illegal leak of the Flynn call to the Russian Ambassador. "Curious" that Mueller has not investigated that felony... "curious" indeed. Might explain another reason why Bobby recommended zero jail time. Those illegal leaks. We might never have to endure Watergate without those dang leaks
	__________________ *Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.* Everything is possible, but not everything is probable. For if a man pretend to me that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce to oblige me to believe it. Hobbes

5th December 2018, 01:05 PM	#366
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742	Say, what's going on International "Skeptics" Forum? lack of any curiosity about the 302's and "fortuitous" leak to WaPo.... "completely and entirely indisputable"... "constitutional blood oath"... Hoo boy, has this thread gone off the rails.... It is adorable that simply because has agreed to a plea bargain that they committed a crime. Poor Flynn got swallowed up in a perjury trap. Thanks Obama.
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742	Last edited by The Big Dog; 5th December 2018 at 01:16 PM.

5th December 2018, 01:09 PM	#367
Paul2 Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 5,090	Originally Posted by The Big Dog Say, what's going on International "Skeptics" Forum? lack of any curiosity about the 304's and "fortuitous" leak to WaPo.... "completely and entirely indisputable"... "constitutional blood oath"... No lack of lack of curiosity on my part: Originally Posted by Paul2 1. Is the evidence sufficient to conclude that they falsified the 302s? 2. What is that evidence?
Paul2 Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 5,090	__________________ It's nice to be nice to the nice. Aristotle, so far as I know, was the first man to proclaim explicitly that man is a rational animal. His reason for this view was one which does not now seem very impressive: it was, that some people can do sums. - Bertrand Russell

5th December 2018, 01:10 PM	#368
Belz... Fiend God Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: In the details Posts: 81,515	Originally Posted by The Big Dog Say, what's going on International "Skeptics" Forum? I don't know. I've been asking you that for years.
	__________________ Master of the Shining Darkness "My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward

5th December 2018, 01:21 PM	#369
acbytesla Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 21,317	Originally Posted by Dr. Keith Curious that you don't address how he got caught. Even more curious that you don't address why he confessed. Most curious that he only worked to help himself and not the president of the United States to which he owed a constitutional blood oath. Don't you think? No? Well OK, if you want to just look at pertinent facts and not be distracted by shiny balls . . . squirrel! Constitutional blood oath...to the President? I missed that one. What is that oath? I don't remember it from my civics class.
	__________________ “ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ” ― David Hume

5th December 2018, 01:31 PM	#370
plague311 Great minds think... Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: North Dakota Posts: 5,017	Originally Posted by acbytesla Constitutional blood oath...to the President? I missed that one. What is that oath? I don't remember it from my civics class. I believe he was being facetious. I always love the, "If you don't think like I do, then YOU aren't a skeptic." What's the name for that? Something about the Scottish? Lol Show your evidence TBD, otherwise you know the way to the CT forum.
	__________________ "All acts performed in the world begin in the imagination."--Barbara Grizzuti Harrison “There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss

5th December 2018, 01:38 PM	#371
Dr. Keith Not a doctor. Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Texas Posts: 18,285	Originally Posted by plague311 I believe he was being facetious. With Cain in the house, it is tough.
	__________________ Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God. He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.

5th December 2018, 01:38 PM	#372
jimbob Uncritical "thinker" Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: UK Posts: 20,541	Originally Posted by I Am The Scum We are now in the "Why are you pulling me over for running a red light when there are murderers and rapists roaming the streets?" level of apologetics. True, except it's more "Why are you charging the mule for running a red light when you found a suitcase full of drugs in their car and they're cooperating with the prosecution? " Although to be fair to The Big Dog, they might actually be as competent at law as Trump's lawyers.
	__________________ OECD healthcare spending Expenditure on healthcare http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm link is 2015 data (2013 Data below): UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending

5th December 2018, 01:40 PM	#373
Elagabalus Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2013 Posts: 4,226	Originally Posted by Paul2 No lack of lack of curiosity on my part: So the falsified 304s went 404?
Elagabalus Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2013 Posts: 4,226

5th December 2018, 02:07 PM	#374
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742	Originally Posted by Elagabalus So the falsified 304s went 404? exactly. /actually the 302's went 404... not sure why I had 304 on my mind
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742	Last edited by The Big Dog; 5th December 2018 at 02:19 PM.

5th December 2018, 02:08 PM	#375
I Am The Scum Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 3,813	That's not a crime

5th December 2018, 02:11 PM	#376
acbytesla Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 21,317	Originally Posted by plague311 I believe he was being facetious. I know he was. I just thought I'd jump on the bandwagon. Originally Posted by plague311 I always love the, "If you don't think like I do, then YOU aren't a skeptic." What's the name for that? Something about the Scottish? Lol Show your evidence TBD, otherwise you know the way to the CT forum. I don't think the Big Dog knows actually what a skeptic is.
	__________________ “ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ” ― David Hume

5th December 2018, 02:13 PM	#377
I Am The Scum Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 3,813	Originally Posted by acbytesla I don't think the Big Dog knows actually what a skeptic is. A skeptic is not someone who jumps to conclusions. Rather, a skeptic withholds judgment, considers all sides of the debate, and then, only when all the evidence has been considered, says, "Look over there!"

5th December 2018, 02:26 PM	#378
plague311 Great minds think... Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: North Dakota Posts: 5,017	Originally Posted by acbytesla I know he was. I just thought I'd jump on the bandwagon. As we say in North Dakota "ope!" Originally Posted by acbytesla I don't think the Big Dog knows actually what a skeptic is. The word gets thrown around entirely too much. Not everyone here is a skeptic (I certainly don't consider my self one. Maybe an "in-training", but the word means something), and I don't think a lot of people understand what it means anymore.
	__________________ "All acts performed in the world begin in the imagination."--Barbara Grizzuti Harrison “There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss

5th December 2018, 02:31 PM	#379
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742	So who leaked the surveillance of the Flynn call to the ambassador to CIA lackey David Ignatius? Comey (one of the few people he followed on twitter before his handle was exposed)? Or John Brennan? (spittle soaked anti-Trump fanatic). Hmmm.... why not both?
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742

5th December 2018, 02:40 PM	#380
plague311 Great minds think... Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: North Dakota Posts: 5,017	Originally Posted by The Big Dog So who leaked the surveillance of the Flynn call to the ambassador to CIA lackey David Ignatius? Comey (one of the few people he followed on twitter before his handle was exposed)? Or John Brennan? (spittle soaked anti-Trump fanatic). Hmmm.... why not both? I can't think of a reason. You should take your sleuthing to the authorities and get #JusticeForFlynn. I'm positive you have enough to crack this case wide open.
	__________________ "All acts performed in the world begin in the imagination."--Barbara Grizzuti Harrison “There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss

5th December 2018, 02:41 PM	#381
acbytesla Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 21,317	Originally Posted by plague311 As we say in North Dakota "ope!" The word gets thrown around entirely too much. Not everyone here is a skeptic (I certainly don't consider my self one. Maybe an "in-training", but the word means something), and I don't think a lot of people understand what it means anymore. I consider myself a skeptic. But that doesn't mean I don't make up my mind. I am more than willing to reconsider when good evidence is provided on a subject. TBD has a tendency to toss conservative CT theories and then suggest that others are not really skeptics since we don't consider them. Weird. I'm from Sioux City and I never heard that one.
	__________________ “ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ” ― David Hume Last edited by acbytesla; 5th December 2018 at 02:43 PM.

5th December 2018, 02:56 PM	#382
plague311 Great minds think... Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: North Dakota Posts: 5,017	Originally Posted by acbytesla I consider myself a skeptic. But that doesn't mean I don't make up my mind. I am more than willing to reconsider when good evidence is provided on a subject. TBD has a tendency to toss conservative CT theories and then suggest that others are not really skeptics since we don't consider them. I can certainly agree there are skeptics here. There are people I love reading, and people I just gloss over when I see their names. It isn't politically motivated either. I roam over both sides LoL. As I'm sure many to do me as well. Originally Posted by acbytesla Weird. I'm from Sioux City and I never heard that one. I bet I hear it 10-12 times a day.
	__________________ "All acts performed in the world begin in the imagination."--Barbara Grizzuti Harrison “There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss

5th December 2018, 03:15 PM	#383
a_unique_person Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Waiting for the pod bay door to open. Posts: 40,100	Originally Posted by The Big Dog So who leaked the surveillance of the Flynn call to the ambassador to CIA lackey David Ignatius? Comey (one of the few people he followed on twitter before his handle was exposed)? Or John Brennan? (spittle soaked anti-Trump fanatic). Hmmm.... why not both? It's like asking who Deep Throat was and why hasn't he been jailed yet.
	__________________ *Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.* Everything is possible, but not everything is probable. For if a man pretend to me that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce to oblige me to believe it. Hobbes

5th December 2018, 03:25 PM	#384
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742	Originally Posted by a_unique_person It's like asking who Deep Throat was and why hasn't he been jailed yet. But... people did ask who Deep Throat was... for years, it was a big deal. I think it is more like asking did the CIA deliberately leak surveillance audio of a perfectly legal transaction involving a US Citizen for purely political purposes, and if so, why haven't the people responsible been put in ******* jail?
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742

5th December 2018, 03:25 PM	#385
Squeegee Beckenheim Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 24,149	Originally Posted by The Big Dog Hmm, the in-curiosity of who in the Obama administration leaked the surveillance tapes to WaPo. What "surveillance tapes"? The article in question makes no reference to any surveillance tapes. What it says is: Quote: Retired Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn, Trump’s choice for national security adviser, cultivates close Russian contacts. He has appeared on Russia Today and received a speaking fee from the cable network, which was described in last week’s unclassified intelligence briefing on Russian hacking as “the Kremlin’s principal international propaganda outlet.” According to a senior U.S. government official, Flynn phoned Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak several times on Dec. 29, the day the Obama administration announced the expulsion of 35 Russian officials as well as other measures in retaliation for the hacking. What did Flynn say, and did it undercut the U.S. sanctions? The Logan Act (though never enforced) bars U.S. citizens from correspondence intending to influence a foreign government about “disputes” with the United States. Was its spirit violated? The Trump campaign didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. [...] UPDATE: The Trump transition team did not respond Thursday night to a request for comment. But two team members called with information Friday morning. A first Trump official confirmed that Flynn had spoken with Kislyak by phone, but said the calls were before sanctions were announced and didn’t cover that topic. This official later added that Flynn’s initial call was to express condolences to Kislyak after the terrorist killing of the Russian ambassador to Ankara Dec. 19, and that Flynn made a second call Dec. 28 to express condolences for the shoot-down of a Russian plane carrying a choir to Syria. In that second call, Flynn also discussed plans for a Trump-Putin conversation sometime after the inauguration. In addition, a second Trump official said the Dec. 28 call included an invitation from Kislyak for a Trump administration official to visit Kazakhstan for a conference in late January. Flynn has since confessed that he did indeed discuss sanctions with Kislyak, asking the Russian government to hold off on retaliation for Obama's sanctions as things would be different once Trump was in office. There was a later leak which revealed that Flynn had lied and that there were tapes of his conversation, but still no reference to the tapes being leaked. So what are you talking about?
	__________________ I don't trust atoms. They make up everything. Last edited by Squeegee Beckenheim; 5th December 2018 at 03:33 PM.

5th December 2018, 03:31 PM	#386
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742	Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim What "surveillance tapes"? The article in question makes no reference to any surveillance tapes. What it says is: Flynn has since confessed that he did indeed discuss sanctions with Kislyak, asking the Russian government to hold off on retaliation for Obama's sanctions as things would be different once Trump was in office. no way, the CIA errand boy did not admit that he got the info about the call through CIA surveillance of the Russian Ambassador? He is very clever! oy vey...
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742

5th December 2018, 03:32 PM	#387
plague311 Great minds think... Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: North Dakota Posts: 5,017	Originally Posted by The Big Dog no way, the CIA errand boy did not admit that he got the info about the call through CIA surveillance of the Russian Ambassador? He is very clever! oy vey... Can we get a split over to the CT section?
	__________________ "All acts performed in the world begin in the imagination."--Barbara Grizzuti Harrison “There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss

5th December 2018, 03:36 PM	#388
a_unique_person Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Waiting for the pod bay door to open. Posts: 40,100	These molehills just keep getting smaller and harder to find.
	__________________ *Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.* Everything is possible, but not everything is probable. For if a man pretend to me that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce to oblige me to believe it. Hobbes

5th December 2018, 03:42 PM	#389
Squeegee Beckenheim Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 24,149	Originally Posted by The Big Dog So who leaked the surveillance of the Flynn call to the ambassador to CIA lackey David Ignatius? Comey (one of the few people he followed on twitter before his handle was exposed)? Or John Brennan? (spittle soaked anti-Trump fanatic). Hmmm.... why not both? The article says there were 9 sources for the information, so it could be both of them who made the leak. But none of them appear to have leaked the tapes, as you allege.
	__________________ I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.

5th December 2018, 03:43 PM	#390
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742	Originally Posted by a_unique_person These molehills just keep getting smaller and harder to find. Damn right, another good post by you! molehill: hey this guy maybe told not fully consistent things about this perfectly legal thing he did. Prosecute him to the fullest extent of the law! 0 to 14 days in jail. Mountain: Hey what about the CIA leaks? Hello? Anyone home? Crickets.
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742

5th December 2018, 03:44 PM	#391
Squeegee Beckenheim Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 24,149	Originally Posted by The Big Dog no way, the CIA errand boy did not admit that he got the info about the call through CIA surveillance of the Russian Ambassador? He is very clever! oy vey... If you want to convince people that the tapes themselves have been leaked, then you'll have to provide a better argument than that there is no evidence that the tapes themselves have been leaked.
	__________________ I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.

5th December 2018, 03:46 PM	#392
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742	Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim If you want to convince people that the tapes themselves have been leaked, then you'll have to provide a better argument than that there is no evidence that the tapes themselves have been leaked. You did see the part where he said there was a phone call, right? Where do you think he got the info about that? I wonder if it was from the fact that the CIA was listening in on the calls of the Russian Ambassador? What do you think?
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742

5th December 2018, 03:46 PM	#393
acbytesla Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 21,317	Originally Posted by plague311 I bet I hear it 10-12 times a day. It's been 20 years since I've been there, so maybe that explains it.
	__________________ “ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ” ― David Hume

5th December 2018, 03:51 PM	#394
Squeegee Beckenheim Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 24,149	Originally Posted by The Big Dog You did see the part where he said there was a phone call, right? Where do you think he got the info about that? I wonder if it was from the fact that the CIA was listening in on the calls of the Russian Ambassador? What do you think? Where did you get the information about the contents of the phonecalls from? Have you heard the tapes? Or is it possible to acquire information in a different way? If you want to convince people that the tapes themselves have been leaked, then you'll have to provide a better argument than that there is no evidence that the tapes themselves have been leaked. Denying that people have the ability to convey information to other people is not a better argument.
	__________________ I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.

5th December 2018, 03:57 PM	#395
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742	Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim Where did you get the information about the contents of the phonecalls from? Have you heard the tapes? Or is it possible to acquire information in a different way? If you want to convince people that the tapes themselves have been leaked, then you'll have to provide a better argument than that there is no evidence that the tapes themselves have been leaked. Denying that people have the ability to convey information to other people is not a better argument. Wait are you quibbling that the physical tapes were not leaked just the information on them? oof, if so, that is just some next level quibbling I had not expected...
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742