DOJ Documents Dump On Clinton Lynch Meeting Prove Media Collusion; FBI Lied

Meanwhile back to the OP, President Trump has tweeted about
this story today, naming Wa Po and NYT, Lynch and Clinton.

a reply to: burntheships

link?

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: Grambler


Bill Clinton in 1992 came into the office with 43% of the popular vote.

Therefore, Bill Clinton was more unpopular coming into office than Trump.

Do you disagree with these facts?

1992
Bill Clinton received 43% of the popular vote
George Bush received 37%
Ross Perot Received 19%

He won the popular vote.
Trump did not.
Pres. Clinton was the most popular President in that contest.

2016
HRC received 48% of the popular vote
Trump received 46% of the popular vote
Independents received 6% of the popular vote

AGAIN...the MARGIN of LOSS in percentage by which Trump lost (2.10%) and still became President..

Is the 3rd greatest margin in history behind Hayes and JQA (almost 200 hundred years ago)...and Hayes was given the presidency in the compromise of 1877.

What you are trying to do is pretend Ross Perot did not exist.

You are ignoring all facts that prove you assertion wrong, and focusing on irrelevant details to spin facts to fit your preconceived notion.

Remember that scene in the movie Major League when the announcer (played by Bob Uecker) is trying to make his team not look as awful as they are. It goes something like this.

"Here he comes up to bat. You know, on Tuesdays on away games when he is batting second in the lineup after a home loss, he has the fourth highest on base percentage in the league"

Thats what you are doing. Tell me why losing the popular vote and then looking at the popular vote percentage is more important than just looking at the percentage of the popular vote.

Fact: When clinton came into office, 57% of those who voted didn't want him. Only 54% that voted didn't want Trump.

Therefore Clinton was more unpopular.

Why do you keep ignoring facts?

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: burntheships

link?

Donald J. Trump Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump E-mails show that the AmazonWashingtonPost and the FailingNewYorkTimes were reluctant to cover the Clinton/Lynch secret meeting in plane. 11:00 AM · Aug 8, 2017

mobile.twitter.com...

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: mkultra11
a reply to: Gryphon66

The only reality in our discussion is that Trump won the election. I obviously accept that therefore I accept reality. You say it's nonsense. Therefore you don't accept reality.

I would dearly love to see you quote my saying that it is nonsense that Trump won the election.

Would you quote my saying that, here or anywhere?

If not, you're being intentionally dishonest.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: mkultra11


If anyone can't "accept reality" friend, it's you and those that keep repeating the same nonsense.

a reply to: UKTruth

Further reality - the thread is about a set of emails that show the FBI lied about not having any documentation on the Lynch/Clinton meeting and collaboration between the media and the Obama administration to downplay the story. It is not another excuse for you to cry about the election 9 months ago.

Thank you, I kept having to scroll to the top of the page to see the thread title over the past few pages because I thought I had the wrong thread. There once was a time when there would be strings of off topic post removals...

With how often the FBI has shown to be in error, I just have to say that it's a good thing for them they aren't a private sector operation. There is no way in the world any company would be able to stay in business if they were that wrong that often.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: Grambler


Bill Clinton in 1992 came into the office with 43% of the popular vote.

Therefore, Bill Clinton was more unpopular coming into office than Trump.

Do you disagree with these facts?

1992
Bill Clinton received 43% of the popular vote
George Bush received 37%
Ross Perot Received 19%

He won the popular vote.
Trump did not.
Pres. Clinton was the most popular President in that contest.

2016
HRC received 48% of the popular vote
Trump received 46% of the popular vote
Independents received 6% of the popular vote

AGAIN...the MARGIN of LOSS in percentage by which Trump lost (2.10%) and still became President..

Is the 3rd greatest margin in history behind Hayes and JQA (almost 200 hundred years ago)...and Hayes was given the presidency in the compromise of 1877.

What you are trying to do is pretend Ross Perot did not exist.

You are ignoring all facts that prove you assertion wrong,

I have provided a multitude of different facts to support my assertion.

and focusing on irrelevant details to spin facts to fit your preconceived notion.

Ross Perot was not an "irrelevant detail" he was the most successful third party candidate in a national election in modern history. He is the reason that political parties fear people like Trump or Sanders going 3rd party...because of the volume of votes that can be vacuumed from Dem and GOP candidates.

Even then...Bill Clinton WON the popular vote in that election.

By your ignore-inconvenient-facts calculus, then Hillary Clinton was more "Popular" than not only Trump, but also her husband Bill Clinton, by a wide margin.

The evidence, math, polls that all say the same thing conservative or liberal?...you don't accept.

Trump at ONE MONTH



Trump at 6 MONTHS



RCP Average to date

a reply to: soberbacchus

Make a thread, I am done derailing.

Any comment on the OP?

originally posted by: UKTruth


Further reality - the thread is about a set of emails that show the FBI lied about not having any documentation on the Lynch/Clinton meeting

OK..I just assumed the thread had devolved into a BS fest since the OP could not be proved?

Please provide the evidence with citation that the FBI had documentation about the Clinton/Lynch Meeting ..
As well as a citation where they denied having those documents.

Cuz...all I saw in the OP was a whole lot of fast and loose with facts and spinning...people's "spin" as to what various emails showed?

Thanks for offering to clear it up and support your above claim with hard evidence..

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: soberbacchus

Make a thread, I am done derailing.

Any comment on the OP?

Sure..the OP hasn't supported it's purported claims with any literal evidence....Just spin on a spin article telling people what they should think about highly excerpted parts of some email chain?

Give me something to examine to support the BS?

a reply to: Grambler

THINK THIS!
A “chain of emails” between DOJ officials show their involvement in trying to spin the story in a favorable light to both Clinton and Lynch,

Followed by quotes that sound like objective commentary if not for the think this intro:

with one senior aide saying,
“I also talked to the ABC producer, who noted that they aren’t interested, even if Fox runs with it.”
“Looks like all or most [of the coverage] are FOX,” said another official.

Followed by more THINK THIS!!!
The newly released documents not only provide more evidence that the DOJ and Clinton campaign were working with the mainstream media to bury the story, but also show Comey’s FBI stonewalled investigators who were seeking information regarding the story

The quotes do not support the claims..

that is pretty simple.

Another aspect to this story that is widely unreported,
there was a Grand Jury in the Clinton email case.

Contrary to widespread reports, federal prosecutors issued grand jury subpoenas in connection with an investigation into Hillary Clinton's email server, an FBI official indicated in a court filing this week.

www.politico.com...

a reply to: soberbacchus

Claims that the media colluded with the DOJ in how to report this "meeting" to talk about grand kids that prompted redacted talking points and Lynch using her grandmother's name as an alias, while being addressed and signing as "AG"?

originally posted by: mkultra11
a reply to: soberbacchus

Claims that the media colluded with the DOJ in how to report this "meeting" to talk about grand kids that prompted redacted talking points and Lynch using her grandmother's name as an alias, while being addressed and signing as "AG"?

That reads like ideological propaganda yabber absent any citation of evidence?

a reply to: soberbacchus

To answer your question: No.

a reply to: mkultra11

I heard they had potty pics

ATS - Breaking: Hillary Clinton's Plea Bargain?

Now this is interesting!

Christopher Sign, the reporter who scooped this story has just
put up a piece on this, complete with a timeline and
deciphers the emails.

Loretta Lynch prepped with talking points about Phoenix tarmac meeting

Large portions of the hundreds of emails have been redacted, but what remains gives rare insight into the crisis-mode reaction by the DOJ. At least ten high-level staffers were involved in an e-mail chain discussing how to handle the situation, crafting talking points for the Attorney General.

www.abc15.com...

The flurry of emails were among the 413 pages of documents released by the Justice Department after a lawsuit from conservative Judicial Watch and the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ). Black squares cover the "talking points" prepared for Lynch. Judicial Watch and the ACLJ have indicated they'll continue working to uncover exactly what those talking points were, and whether more documents exist.

a reply to: burntheships

Can only imagine the heart attacks when reporters "interrupted" the secret and dirty meeting !!

a reply to: xuenchen



What did they need talking points for if the
1/2 hour was about non existent grandkids and golf?!