Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a huge story, and, from what I hear - only the tip of the iceberg.

To investigate if Trump colluded with Russia, the FBI relied on information, paid for by the Clinton campaign, based on a source suspected by the FBI of being a Russian agent. The FBI then hid from the FISA court who paid for the info and the fact the source might be a foreign agent.

And, I found this thread interesting:

I’m not sure what you find interesting about it since he doesn’t make a single substantiated factual claim, it’s wholly conclusory.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a huge story, and, from what I hear - only the tip of the iceberg.

To investigate if Trump colluded with Russia, the FBI relied on information, paid for by the Clinton campaign, based on a source suspected by the FBI of being a Russian agent. The FBI then hid from the FISA court who paid for the info and the fact the source might be a foreign agent.

And, I found this thread interesting:

The investigation started because Papadopolus spouted off about Russia and Hillary's emails. I mean, Roger Stone was convicted because he coordinated the released of emails from the Wiklileaks (ie GRU) hack of the DNC servers. Like, those are stipulated in his case. And yet, here you are promoting the tweet of some guy who no one has heard of and isn't even a blue check.

Conspiracy theory much?

Anonymous wrote:This is a huge story, and, from what I hear - only the tip of the iceberg.

To investigate if Trump colluded with Russia, the FBI relied on information, paid for by the Clinton campaign, based on a source suspected by the FBI of being a Russian agent. The FBI then hid from the FISA court who paid for the info and the fact the source might be a foreign agent.

And, I found this thread interesting:

Anonymous wrote:This is a huge story, and, from what I hear - only the tip of the iceberg.

To investigate if Trump colluded with Russia, the FBI relied on information, paid for by the Clinton campaign, based on a source suspected by the FBI of being a Russian agent. The FBI then hid from the FISA court who paid for the info and the fact the source might be a foreign agent.

And, I found this thread interesting:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Good points and questions here:


The same FBI said to be concerned about Russian interference in election, was using information from a suspected Russian spy to probe a presidential campaign. The same FBI claiming Carter Page a Russian agent, was making that case based on info from a suspected Russia agent.

The same FBI said to be concerned about Russian interference in election, was using information from a suspected Russian spy to probe a presidential campaign. The same FBI claiming Carter Page a Russian agent, was making that case based on info from a suspected Russia agent.

The name of this subsource, and the realization of the FBI's prior suspicions, should have ended the entire probe. Instead the FBI doubled down, hid things from the court, kept going. This again raises urgent need to know who knew what, and when.

And people wonder why #Durham is looking into all this?
Also, extra-credit question: Wasn't it Mueller's job to find sources of Russian disinformation? How do you miss the guy potentially feeding it directly to the FBI?

https://twitter.com/KimStrassel/status/1309272844661002241

And the same FBI investigated Hillary Clinton. No wonder people want a new investigation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You all are debunking this, but Putin just put out a release suggested Russia would stop interfering in US politics.

It's like all the dots are there, Trump has told you it happened, the GOP Senate told you it happened and now Putin is telling you it happened, and yet, you don't want to believe ANY of it.

LOL.
The fact that you believe anything Putin says is laughable.

Anonymous wrote:You all are debunking this, but Putin just put out a release suggested Russia would stop interfering in US politics.

It's like all the dots are there, Trump has told you it happened, the GOP Senate told you it happened and now Putin is telling you it happened, and yet, you don't want to believe ANY of it.

Anonymous wrote:I think this is a great idea. Go on and reinvestigate Clinton! Got for it!
Of course it’s all fair when democrats retake the senate, to impeach Barr, and dive back into the Mueller probe.
Let’s haul Ivanka in to answer some questions. Let’s finally look at Trump’s books and see what his involvement with Russia entails!
Great idea!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Good points and questions here:


The same FBI said to be concerned about Russian interference in election, was using information from a suspected Russian spy to probe a presidential campaign. The same FBI claiming Carter Page a Russian agent, was making that case based on info from a suspected Russia agent.

The same FBI said to be concerned about Russian interference in election, was using information from a suspected Russian spy to probe a presidential campaign. The same FBI claiming Carter Page a Russian agent, was making that case based on info from a suspected Russia agent.

The name of this subsource, and the realization of the FBI's prior suspicions, should have ended the entire probe. Instead the FBI doubled down, hid things from the court, kept going. This again raises urgent need to know who knew what, and when.

And people wonder why #Durham is looking into all this?
Also, extra-credit question: Wasn't it Mueller's job to find sources of Russian disinformation? How do you miss the guy potentially feeding it directly to the FBI?

https://twitter.com/KimStrassel/status/1309272844661002241

Anonymous wrote: