Donald J. Trump: President of the USA Part II Covfefe

[Gingerbeardman]

Well, Gingerbeardman, why don't you tell us which organisation, and on which side of the political divide it falls, that initiated the opposition research into Trump; and, in your opinion, what eventually happened with that research?

Because I'm not you.

 

[scudsucker]

Because I'm not you.

Seems you can't actually answer my points substantively.

 

[Gingerbeardman]

Seems you can't actually answer my points substantively.

I already did when I said it was a red herring. The source that I quoted speaks to that fact.

 

[scudsucker]

I already did when I said it was a red herring. The source that I quoted speaks to that fact.

Or, you don't read your own sources, which, having actually read it, I am confident to say is correct.

 

[greg0205]

I already did when I said it was a red herring. The source that I quoted speaks to that fact.

Indeed. Your source says:

Rather, the conservative newsroom hired the same research firm that later created it, Fusion GPS, in 2016 to investigate Trump and other Republican candidates during the GOP primaries.

After Trump had won the nomination, the Free Beacon dropped the project. It was at that point that Democratic operatives swooped in

Which counters scudsucker's, "Well, Gingerbeardman, why don't you tell us which organisation, and on which side of the political divide it falls, it was that initiated the opposition research into Trump; and, in your opinion, what eventually happened with that research?" how exactly?

 

[Gingerbeardman]

Or, you don't read your own sources, which, having actually read it, I am confident to say is correct.

Correct or not, it's a red herring. You appear to be shifting responsibility for the Steele dossier away from the Democrats, but of course since you won't actually state what your position is, we can only guess.

Anyway, this was funny at first but it's getting tiresome. Have fun in fantasy land.

 

[Unhappy438]

Pretty sure it was also a Republican as well as the conservative newsroom that started with the dossier.

 

[Gingerbeardman]

Btw, for those who actually bother to keep score:

Hanlon's razor says never attribute malice to that which is adequately explained by stupidity, but given the revelations about the FBI over their investigation of Trump, it's no longer possible to attribute stupidity to the following things:

* The fact that the FBI used the unverified Steele Dossier as evidence in their application to the FISA court, which demands only verified evidence be presented to the court.

* The fact that a cursory check into Carter Page's history with the FBI would have revealed that he had in fact acted as an FBI informant against the Russians in the past.

The only reasonable explanation for this behaviour that remains is that the warrant against Carter Page was a bad faith pretext to get the legal authorisation to spy on Trump's campaign by listening in on everyone Page talked to and everyone that those who talked to Page talked to.

 

[scudsucker]

Btw, for those who actually bother to keep score:

Hanlon's razor says never attribute malice to that which is adequately explained by stupidity, but given the revelations about the FBI over their investigation of Trump, it's no longer possible to attribute stupidity to the following things:

* The fact that the FBI used the unverified Steele Dossier as evidence in their application to the FISA court, which demands only verified evidence be presented to the court.

* The fact that a cursory check into Carter Page's history with the FBI would have revealed that he had in fact acted as an FBI informant against the Russians in the past.

The only reasonable explanation for this behaviour that remains is that the warrant against Carter Page was a bad faith pretext to get the legal authorisation to spy on Trump's campaign by listening in on everyone Page talked to and everyone that those who talked to Page talked to.

OK, then. You seem to know everything. Just tell us all, please.

 

[greg0205]

Btw, for those who actually bother to keep score:

Hanlon's razor says never attribute malice to that which is adequately explained by stupidity, but given the revelations about the FBI over their investigation of Trump, it's no longer possible to attribute stupidity to the following things:

* The fact that the FBI used the unverified Steele Dossier as evidence in their application to the FISA court, which demands only verified evidence be presented to the court.

* The fact that a cursory check into Carter Page's history with the FBI would have revealed that he had in fact acted as an FBI informant against the Russians in the past.

The only reasonable explanation for this behaviour that remains is that the warrant against Carter Page was a bad faith pretext to get the legal authorisation to spy on Trump's campaign by listening in on everyone Page talked to and everyone that those who talked to Page talked to.

Just disappointed with this post from you Gingerbeardman. It reminds me of Jack Nicholson in As Good As It Gets when he says: "I think of a man, and I take away reason" (he adds "accountability", but that's not relevant here)

A FISA court requires probable cause, and they had that after drunk George's chat with Alexander Downer at the Kensington Wine Rooms.

Five Eyes. You should probably google that. And maybe Russia, 'cos that's who they spy on.

Also, I think you're crediting Page with way, way too much in the Podobnyy case. You might want to spend a moment considering that, if this was a movie, he'd be the dumbass character our good guys bust trying to pull a scam, who they then squeeze for info on the real bad guys... 60 Seconds of screen time, tops and credit way down the list.

You know, Mullet to Bullet Tooth Tony in Snatch.

Please enjoy Ewen Bremner as Carter Page and Vinnie Jones as Robert Mueller.

 

[Gingerbeardman]

OK, then. You seem to know everything. Just tell us all, please.

Why should I put any effort in when you can't be bothered to do the same?

 

[OrbitalDawn]

Argue that you should have a second referendum because you don't like the results of the first one and you are Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour party.

What?

But, on the other hand, we have this.

"Admitting there is no actual evidence "

I'm sorry, but can you show where they did this? Because it's flatly untrue. I realise it's an opinion piece in the Federalist, though, so that might be hard.

And the evidence to launch all of this was the outcome of the Democrats trying to find ways to discredit Trump in the run up to the 2016 elections.

Why do you have to go and say something so patently untrue, Emjay?

 

[Gingerbeardman]

https://republicans-oversight.house...1/2019-01-15-JDJ-MM-to-Durham-re-briefing.pdf

So it's not just McCabe that is under criminal investigation now.

 

[Gingerbeardman]

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/01/trumps_shutdown_trap.html

Has President Trump suckered Democrats and the Deep State into a trap that will enable a radical downsizing of the federal bureaucracy? In only five more days of the already "longest government shutdown in history" (25 days and counting, as of today), a heretofore obscure threshold will be reached, enabling permanent layoffs of bureaucrats furloughed 30 days or more.

Don't believe me that federal bureaucrats can be laid off? Well, in bureaucratese, a layoff is called a RIF – a Reduction in Force – and of course, it comes with a slew of civil service protections. But, if the guidelines are followed, bureaucrats can be laid off – as in no more job. It is all explained by Michael Roberts here (updated after the beginning of the partial shutdown):

A reduction in force is a thoughtful and systematic elimination of positions. For all practical purposes, a government RIF is the same thing as a layoff. ...
Organizations must stick to predetermined criteria when sorting out what happens to each employee. They must communicate with employees how and why decisions are made. ...
In deciding who stays and who goes, federal agencies must take four factors into account:
1. Tenure
2. Veteran status
3. Total federal civilian and military service
4. Performance
Agencies cannot use RIF procedures to fire bad employees.​

A lot of procedures must be followed, and merit ("performance") is the last consideration, but based on the criteria above, employees already furloughed can be laid off ("RIFed") once they have been furloughed for 30 days or 22 work days:

When agencies furlough employees for more than 30 calendar days or 22 discontinuous work days, they must use RIF procedures.
An employee can be terminated or moved into an available position[.]​

This seems to be what was referenced in this remarkable essay written by an "unidentified senior Trump official" published in the Daily Caller, which vouches for the authenticity of the author and explains that it is protecting him from adverse career consequences should the name become known. I strongly recommend reading the whole thing.

 

[greg0205]

^^ Okay, now I'm starting to wonder if you're a Xarog clone.

 

[Hamish McPanji]

^^ Okay, now I'm starting to wonder if you're a Xarog clone.

Stop being like that , hater! This is 300D chess, you're just not intelligent enough to recognise it

 

[greg0205]

Stop being like that , hater! This is 300D chess, you're just not intelligent enough to recognise it

True. I'm still struggling with the, how does a pigeon crap on a 4D chessboard question I asked here a while back.

 

[TysonRoux]

^^ Okay, now I'm starting to wonder if you're a Xarog troll clone.

You're joking aren't you?

 

[cerebus]

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/01/trumps_shutdown_trap.html

Didn't you just cite Hanlon's law?

 

[Aquila ka Hecate]

Didn't you just cite Hanlon's law?

I didn't know it had a name - I've been going by that for ages.
But to be fair, I think I probably first picked it up from Heinlein, not Hanlon.