Lisa Page Confirms - Mueller and Rosenstein Are Working To Take Down President Trump.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

Nor particularly accurate.

Wrong, as usual.





Less biased and more accurate than CNN or MSNBC.

a reply to: carewemust

And we even have a genuine source too!

Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-TX) told FOX and Friends on Tuesday that Lisa Page admitted her text messages with Peter Strzok meant “exactly what they say.”

Well bless her heart for admitting it... I guess...

I don't have a link right now, but I think I read recently -- after her no-show for testifying -- that she had not been informed by the proper parties (I believe the DOJ? FBI?). Indicating that someone(s) didn't want her to testify. Did she turn on Strzok? I haven't been able to pay enough attention to really have an opinion yet. Just wondering at this point....

a reply to: face23785


Good graphical comparison. Very accurate.

a reply to: Boadicea


Rod Rosenstein is attempting to take the public's focus OFF of the witch-hunt Trump aspect of Mueller's job, and keep him employed as S.C.. Proclaiming last night that Mueller is doing an impressive job of "deterring" Russian hackers and BOTS by indicting them..even though they will never be brought to trial.

www.usatoday.com...

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Boadicea


Rod Rosenstein is attempting to take the public's focus OFF of the witch-hunt Trump aspect of Mueller's job, and keep him employed as S.C.. Proclaiming last night that Mueller is doing an impressive job of "deterring" Russian hackers and BOTS by indicting them..even though they will never be brought to trial.

www.usatoday.com...

Yeah that's the most absurd thing I've heard on this subject in weeks. They're gonna be deterred by meaningless indictments where they know they'll never see the inside of a courtroom? He can't possibly believe that. That's a blatant attempt to mislead people.

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

Nor particularly accurate.

Wrong, as usual.

Less biased and more accurate than CNN or MSNBC.

Well, gosh darnit, Face. Why did you have to go and ruin such rigorous debate with quantifiable facts...

a reply to: face23785

For comparative purposes, how do they rate Fox?

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

The deep state is a fictitious group dreamed up by Steve Bannon.

Are you for reals? The idea of a deep state, or shadow government, was around loooong before Steve Bannon. Even JFK gave a speech on it before he was taken out. With the access to information we have these days, there's really no excuse to not see this unless you are willfully ignorant.

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
a reply to: face23785

For comparative purposes, how do they rate Fox?

Pretty much the same as CNN/MSNBC, just on the opposite end of the spectrum.

Fox

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

Nor particularly accurate.

Wrong, as usual.

Less biased and more accurate than CNN or MSNBC.

Hilarious.

Can you provide a source and link for those assessments?

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

Nor particularly accurate.

Wrong, as usual.

Less biased and more accurate than CNN or MSNBC.

Hilarious.

Can you provide a source and link for those assessments?

See the post above yours. Keep in mind that I also posted what they said about Fox. So if you think their assessment of any of your favorite sources is off, Fox must be quite reputable right? Because they don't rate Fox particularly well either. Should be interesting to see how you try to spin this.

a reply to: face23785

I'm glad they rated Fox as Right Bias. It shows that Media Bias Fact Check is pretty even-handed with their ratings.

I clicked on their "Least Bias" list. Didn't see any major news outlets I recognized.
:/

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
a reply to: face23785

I'm glad they rated Fox as Right Bias. It shows that Media Bias Fact Check is pretty even-handed with their ratings.

I clicked on their "Least Bias" list. Didn't see any major news outlets I recognized.
:/

Yeah it's a relatively short list

It's hard to be down the middle because the people you employ are inevitably going to have their own bias.

Probably the biggest name Americans would be familiar with on there is Associated Press (AP). C-SPAN is also on their "Least Bias" list. Even AP occasionally blows something though. It's just human nature.

I wonder will the Democrats publish the full testimony as they have before? Didn't Nancy Pelosi publish the entire transcript of the Fusion GPS hearing?
You'll know if what Lisa Page is saying is damaging to the Mueller witch hunt based upon how many Democrats are calling for the testimony to be public.

originally posted by: MisterSpock
a reply to: carewemust

Everything went down hill when we stopped hanging people in the town square.

Traitors deserve no better. Only the President can make sure that happens, however.

EOs, national defense declarations/orders, use of pardons, whatever it takes. The President has the power to end this charade.

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

Nor particularly accurate.

Wrong, as usual.

Less biased and more accurate than CNN or MSNBC.

Hilarious.

Can you provide a source and link for those assessments?

See the post above yours. Keep in mind that I also posted what they said about Fox. So if you think their assessment of any of your favorite sources is off, Fox must be quite reputable right? Because they don't rate Fox particularly well either. Should be interesting to see how you try to spin this.

And if anyone is interested, here's a link to their list of "least biased" news sites: List

Edit to add--Whoops! Posted that before I'd read to the end of the thread. Sorry!

Who do you want POTUS to pardon ?

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

Nor particularly accurate.

Wrong, as usual.

Less biased and more accurate than CNN or MSNBC.

Hilarious.

Can you provide a source and link for those assessments?

See the post above yours.

Google the owner of that website.
Hard to take a purported media-fact-checker site seriously when the owner of the site fictionalizes their own biography and methods.

If you fail in your research, I can get back to you with links. Let me know.

a reply to: Wookiep

I'm not sure what this qualifies as. I don't think we envisioned a country where the government would try to overthrow part of itself, which is what we have here. Treason requires levying war against the US. Sedition requires acts against the government, but if you are part of the government, corruptly performing your governmental duties, is that sedition? They're certainly guilty of corruption in their application of the law (RE: manafort vs podesta).

IDK, this is all weird and kind of uncharted territory.

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: neo96

The admission is deeply consequential. It means Rosenstein unleashed the most awesome powers of a special counsel to investigate an allegation that the key FBI officials, driving the investigation for 10 months beforehand, did not think was “there.”

More proof of COINTEL PRO.

More proof that Trump or Sessions needs to stop these political assassins.

He's giving everybody enough rope to hang themselves.

This is gonna be bigger than Neuremberg (Trials, The).