(07-24-2018 07:50 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  

(07-24-2018 07:47 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-24-2018 05:22 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  “There is no there, there”
You guys CAN’T possibly be this NAIVE!!!!!!
Give me any ANY possible explanation for Trump to only meet with Putin alone? Why wasn’t Pompeo or Bolton in the room? Why haven’t they been debriefed on the contents? Why the awkwardness of the Helsinki press conference? Why isn’t there any transcription of what was said.
Ohhhhhhhh. There is most definitely a there there. Did they cover their tracks enough is the ONLY question.

So, by the same token there is a there there for the Clinton-Lynch tarmac meeting.

OWL.......................................

Puhleaze............

take the whattabout the Clinton's out of your repertoire.

Derail the thread about something very unrelated but not clear of intentions and call out someone else on whataboutism... Mach it's good to see you.

(07-24-2018 07:50 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  

(07-24-2018 07:47 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-24-2018 05:22 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  “There is no there, there”
You guys CAN’T possibly be this NAIVE!!!!!!
Give me any ANY possible explanation for Trump to only meet with Putin alone? Why wasn’t Pompeo or Bolton in the room? Why haven’t they been debriefed on the contents? Why the awkwardness of the Helsinki press conference? Why isn’t there any transcription of what was said.
Ohhhhhhhh. There is most definitely a there there. Did they cover their tracks enough is the ONLY question.

So, by the same token there is a there there for the Clinton-Lynch tarmac meeting.

OWL.......................................
Puhleaze............
take the whattabout the Clinton's out of your repertoire.

BS, Mach. I'm pretty sure you told us that there was no there there about the Clintons, and now you're acting like this is the worst thing ever. Bottom line, you are turning from a reasonable left-leaning poster to a cheap leftist political hack.

I would say at this point there is much more credible evidence of a so-far unsuccessful attempt by our own US bureaucracy to subvert the democratic process than of any successful effort to do so by "the Russians," and more evidence of collusion between "the Russians" and democrats than republicans.

Bush went for a ride with him in his truck. Guess he was a Russian agent to.

The level of MSNBC ignorance on this board is concerning.

What has Mach ‘known to be fact’ in the past that has ever been proven as fact?
Manafort was going to spill the truth about collusion? Flynn? Gates?
Stormey Daniels? Cohen? Poppadopo? Gates? Page? Obstruction?

Give us a break Mach. You and the rest of the Hilldog lapdogs have left a trail of fail all over this board.

(07-24-2018 05:15 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  Bush went for a ride with him in his truck. Guess he was a Russian agent to.

The level of MSNBC ignorance on this board is concerning.

What has Mach ‘known to be fact’ in the past that has ever been proven as fact?
Manafort was going to spill the truth about collusion? Flynn? Gates?
Stormey Daniels? Cohen? Poppadopo? Gates? Page? Obstruction?

Give us a break Mach. You and the rest of the Hilldog lapdogs have left a trail of fail all over this board.

And at the end of the day, everyone is better off with Trump over Hillary thus far...

(07-23-2018 03:16 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(07-23-2018 03:11 PM)bobdizole Wrote:  This seems like a bad idea. Wouldn't if they were called to testify on classified information they would need their security clearance to do so? Or put differently, why do officials keep their security clearance in the first place once out of office?

I know that former president's are still given intelligence briefings in case their assistance is ever needed. GHW Bush wrote about loving still receiving them in his book. Maybe CIA/FBI directors are the same

#1 I highly doubt that anyone in this or any subsequent Republican administration would want advice from any of these seditious, partisan clowns.

#2 If their assistance is needed they can be granted a temporary clearance based upon what information they need to know regarding the subject they are advising on.

#3 Security clearances should end at the exact same moment that their government service ends. If you are no longer required to possess the clearance you do not need it.

I was told that my security clearance expired the minute I got my discharge papers. Why not them bastiges?

(07-23-2018 03:23 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  Since when do commie voters get top security clearances and become director of the CIA?

They do in OBlunder's world. Or as that jerkhead Perez tells us, "the New Democratic Party".