B-Man Posted December 10, 2019 Share Posted December 10, 2019 HE ISN’T WRONG: Trump on IG Report: ‘This Was an Attempted Overthrow… We Caught ‘em Red-Handed.’ “And a lot of people were in on it and they got caught. They got caught red-handed. And I look forward to the Durham report, which is coming out in the not-too-distant future. He’s got his own information, which is this information plus, plus, plus. It’s an incredible thing that happened and we’re lucky we caught them.” Also: AG Bill Barr Just Issued a Translation of the DOJ IG Report & It’s a Red-Hot Rebuke of ‘Intrusive’ Spying on Trump. . 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted December 10, 2019 Share Posted December 10, 2019 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Gal Posted December 10, 2019 Share Posted December 10, 2019 56 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said: What in the world is msm??? I read more news out there than the average Joe. Certainly more than 3 paragraph headlines. And I cross reference and triangulate between works. But I'm not reading 1100 pages of dryly written source material largely written in legal and political lingo. You guys are just better than me if that's what you enjoy doing. "msm" = main stream media... I've demoted them to small letters as they are not worth much more than that. I could call them American-Pravda, it would be a pretty fair description. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted December 10, 2019 Share Posted December 10, 2019 4 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said: "msm" = main stream media... I've demoted them to small letters as they are not worth much more than that. I could call them American-Pravda, it would be a pretty fair description. YJ, ie. Yellow Journalism might also fit the bill. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SugarCone Posted December 10, 2019 Share Posted December 10, 2019 Long time lurker, first time poster - it seems painfully obvious that the collective cannot honor @BillsFanNC's request to avoid link spamming, and to provide some original analysis or commentary of the document. I appreciate that other folks have insights - but if people wanted to put their mouths on the Twitter fire hose they could go directly to Twitter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Gal Posted December 10, 2019 Share Posted December 10, 2019 Just now, SugarCone said: Long time lurker, first time poster - it seems painfully obvious that the collective cannot honor @BillsFanNC's request to avoid link spamming, and to provide some original analysis or commentary of the document. I appreciate that other folks have insights - but if people wanted to put their mouths on the Twitter fire hose they could go directly to Twitter. This is an argument put forth from time to time down here. There are several reasons for dropping a twitter link: the article contained within the tweet (so basically crediting the found source) and the twitter threads (some of the people on twitter do not write for a site, but rather put together sourced commentary in the form of a twitter thread). Additionally, twitter posts can bring about additional comment from the posters in PPP on the subject. ? 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted December 10, 2019 Share Posted December 10, 2019 2 minutes ago, SugarCone said: Long time lurker, first time poster - it seems painfully obvious that the collective cannot honor @BillsFanNC's request to avoid link spamming, and to provide some original analysis or commentary of the document. I appreciate that other folks have insights - but if people wanted to put their mouths on the Twitter fire hose they could go directly to Twitter. Ah, so you're in favor of not posting research by anyone other than yourself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted December 10, 2019 Share Posted December 10, 2019 1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said: You're terrible at this. DRINK! DR is awake: Let the Tweetstorm begin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SugarCone Posted December 10, 2019 Share Posted December 10, 2019 I don't think its unfair to request the OP's original intent for the thread that he created. I happened to agree with the sentiment that a more fruitful discussion can be had if the thread is not bombarded by commentary at a rate that seems to discourage continuity of ideas and thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Gal Posted December 10, 2019 Share Posted December 10, 2019 (edited) 5 minutes ago, SugarCone said: I don't think its unfair to request the OP's original intent for the thread that he created. I happened to agree with the sentiment that a more fruitful discussion can be had if the thread is not bombarded by commentary at a rate that seems to discourage continuity of ideas and thoughts. That is a very nice sentiment. I think you are going to be disappointed, however. Edited December 10, 2019 by Buffalo_Gal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted December 10, 2019 Share Posted December 10, 2019 4 minutes ago, SugarCone said: I don't think its unfair to request the OP's original intent for the thread that he created. I happened to agree with the sentiment that a more fruitful discussion can be had if the thread is not bombarded by commentary at a rate that seems to discourage continuity of ideas and thoughts. Except even the OP recognized that asking this thread to remain pristine (for lack of a better word) to only thoughts elicited from 1st hand reading of the FISA report by members of this community would have been better had he waited until after the 400+ page report had been out long enough for people to have actually read it. This thread would be very empty at present as almost all of us have day jobs and at best nobody has made it past the executive summary at present. (With DR a potential notable exception to having only read that far.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted December 10, 2019 Share Posted December 10, 2019 22 minutes ago, SugarCone said: I appreciate that other folks have insights - but if people wanted to put their mouths on the Twitter fire hose they could go directly to Twitter. Good luck with this. They prefer someone else go to Twitter, filter their feed, and spit it out here. And as a new poster with 2 posts, you'll be predicted to be fake in 3....2... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 10, 2019 Share Posted December 10, 2019 1 minute ago, John Adams said: Good luck with this. They prefer someone else go to Twitter, filter their feed, and spit it out here. And as a new poster with 2 posts, you'll be predicted to be fake in 3....2... Why do you bother replying to yourself? You're really bad at this. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted December 10, 2019 Share Posted December 10, 2019 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted December 10, 2019 Share Posted December 10, 2019 14 minutes ago, SugarCone said: I don't think its unfair to request the OP's original intent for the thread that he created. I happened to agree with the sentiment that a more fruitful discussion can be had if the thread is not bombarded by commentary at a rate that seems to discourage continuity of ideas and thoughts. ummm... multiple, different trains of thought are what comprise a thread. bringing in information only helps that discourse to be not only informed but lively. i am going to assume you can follow more than one train of thought at a time due to your being, 'a long time lurker'. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted December 10, 2019 Author Share Posted December 10, 2019 9 minutes ago, SugarCone said: I don't think its unfair to request the OP's original intent for the thread that he created. I happened to agree with the sentiment that a more fruitful discussion can be had if the thread is not bombarded by commentary at a rate that seems to discourage continuity of ideas and thoughts. Intent was exactly as stated in OP. To have discussion of contents of report with opinions only being from board members who have read or are reading the report and not outsourced to media and twitterverse. I did not start the thread with the intent of making it an official business as usual PPP thread of the OIG FISA release, but that's what it turned into and that is where it shall stay. It's my fault for not stating that clear enough in OP and for starting it two days before release. Nevertheless, here we are and there is nothing stopping someone else from starting a book club style discussion thread dealing with the OIG FISA report. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted December 10, 2019 Share Posted December 10, 2019 4 minutes ago, John Adams said: Good luck with this. They prefer someone else go to Twitter, filter their feed, and spit it out here. And as a new poster with 2 posts, you'll be predicted to be fake in 3....2... must you always be an asshat? what do you have against the proliferation of information? because most of it is rational and makes sense that goes against your would have narrative? information only enhances the formation of opinions. it would appear that you would prefer uninformed opinions be developed, how sad is that. just piss off would you, you really add nothing here. if you could be genuine, you would contribute a much needed counter point, yet you can't do it so ... just piss off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transplantbillsfan Posted December 10, 2019 Share Posted December 10, 2019 1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said: And yet you can't give two sentences about who Joseph Mifsud is or why he matters... because you're so informed. Right. You're terrible at this. Can't? Not true. Won't? True. You clearly believe he's a smoking gun. Based off everything I know about him I think you're really reaching and making A LOT of assumptions. So I genuinely want to know what you know about him. Prove to me you aren't just trying to win an argument. Educate me and stop blatantly lying about things I say. Your anger is blinding you a bit. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted December 10, 2019 Share Posted December 10, 2019 Just now, transplantbillsfan said: Can't? Not true. Won't? True. Because you don't know dick. And you keep proving it Just now, transplantbillsfan said: You clearly believe he's a smoking gun. Proving I'm correct, you don't know dick. I didn't believe he was a smoking gun. The STEELE DOSSIER and CROSSFIRE HURRICANE teams did. And the media. For TWO YEARS. You're embarrassing yourself now. 1 minute ago, transplantbillsfan said: Based off everything I know about him Which is nothing, as you just proved above. 2 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said: I think you're really reaching and making A LOT of assumptions. The only thing I've said about him to you is asking YOU for your opinion on him after you posted an article a week ago littered with falsehoods. YOU'RE BAD AT THIS. Now, go run away and pretend like you're informed when you're just an NPC lemming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transplantbillsfan Posted December 10, 2019 Share Posted December 10, 2019 1 hour ago, Foxx said: be better than that. no comment on the gist of my post? My comment is that you're making a lot of assumptions and are now trying to twist the narrative on a nearly 500 page report that spanned a very very long time and was advertised over here as an ultimate presentation in objectivity. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts