12 sealed indictments now.....

a reply to: Vasa Croe

Nothing...

a reply to: butcherguy

And she would be indicted for_________________.

¿¿¿

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

That's a different thing entirely.


In espionage there's a very very different scale used to judge accuracy and validity.

50% is confident.

70-90% is highly confident.

Your comparison doesn't even make sense.

But I understand why. This is bad for trump.

Steele says he knows he will be validated completely.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: butcherguy

And she would be indicted for_________________.

¿¿¿

-Taking money from a list of countries in a pay to play scheme.
-Bribery in the Uranium One scandal.
-Improper handling of a lot of classified materials.
-Destruction of evidence and subpoenaed materials.
-Lying to Congress.

Sorry.... That's Hillary!

Who knows about Ayala.... but if she worked for Obama... there's a chance she was crooked.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

25589234556 sealed indictments ....
Lol

Funny how the only thing that really goes up is the mounting evidence surrounding trump and his gangsters.

What's Jared hiding . They keep on finding out he's withholding documents.
Chew on some real news for a while. It's much more nourishing..

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk...

a reply to: Sillyolme

Could you post the link to the real news you mention - I only saw a link to the Huffington Post.
Many thanks

a reply to: Vasa Croe

Feel free to prove a single indictment you're listing has to do with Robert Muellers investigation of the trump administration.
New ones are coming I am sure of that. Mike Flynn for sure . Very likely Jared Kushner.
Oh add Rudy Giuliani to that possible list. Saw something last night that suggests he may.

But in your Mandela world Mueller has dropped the trump investigation and is now focusing full time on Hillary Clinton.

a reply to: Sillyolme

In espionage there's a very very different scale used to judge accuracy and validity. 50% is confident. 70-90% is highly confident.

You will kindly post your source for this?

originally posted by: Sillyolme
In espionage there's a very very different scale used to judge accuracy and validity.

50% is confident.

70-90% is highly confident.

This doesn't even make sense.

Steele said that he believes 70-90% of the info in the dossier is accurate, not that he is 70-90% confident that 100% of it was accurate. Link

a reply to: MotherMayEye

I'm sorry it doesn't make sense ...to you...
That's the way it is.

a reply to: Sillyolme

In espionage there's a very very different scale used to judge accuracy and validity. 50% is confident. 70-90% is highly confident.

You didn't just make this up did you?
I have been unable to find a source for your claim.
Please kindly post the source for your posted information.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Sillyolme

In espionage there's a very very different scale used to judge accuracy and validity. 50% is confident. 70-90% is highly confident.

You didn't just make this up did you?
I have been unable to find a source for your claim.
Please kindly post the source for your posted information.

D'uh it's on page 5!

a reply to: shooterbrody

No
en.m.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Couldn't find page five? It's right after four and just before six. Use your fingers if you have to.

sourcesandmethods.blogspot.com...

www.cia.gov...

a reply to: Sillyolme

There are no percentages attached to what you sourced.
You did make it up.

Where oh where are all those arrests?

a reply to: shooterbrody

No I didn't.

Grow up you child.

a reply to: Sillyolme

Where is the source for the statistics you posted?
None of what you listed as sources includes the info you posted.

In espionage there's a very very different scale used to judge accuracy and validity. 50% is confident. 70-90% is highly confident.

Nothing you sourced says this.
Why come here and make things up?