Mueller investigation

[barbos]

By whom? ...By 17 agenicies?

The CIA, FBI!

Don't bother.
This is his go-to response at any time the investigation moves forward. Just hit replay.

No, I just have no trust in FBI after IPs they put in their "report" turned out to be a list of Tor and general proxy servers located in Russia.
Not after Alfa Bank fiasko. Not after Hillary refused to give her servers to FBI and used a documented liar and russo-phobe to "inspect" them instead.

 

[barbos]

--

 

[RavenSky]

That "high confidence" is all based on the same biased "research" democrats ordered and paid for.

I love how it just gets repeated over and over that the Steele dossier was "democrats ordered and paid for". Barbos and everyone else desperate to deflect Trump's collusion always conveniently pretend that the research wasn't actually ordered and partially paid for by Marco Rubio... a REPUBLICAN!

 

[barbos]

That "high confidence" is all based on the same biased "research" democrats ordered and paid for.

I love how it just gets repeated over and over that the Steele dossier was "democrats ordered and paid for". Barbos and everyone else desperate to deflect Trump's collusion always conveniently pretend that the research wasn't actually ordered and partially paid for by Marco Rubio... a REPUBLICAN!

I am not a fan of republicans either.If anything I prefer democrats.
In any case it does not change the fact that people who made that "research"t were interested in selling their shit.

 

[Arctish]

That "high confidence" is all based on the same biased "research" democrats ordered and paid for.

I love how it just gets repeated over and over that the Steele dossier was "democrats ordered and paid for". Barbos and everyone else desperate to deflect Trump's collusion always conveniently pretend that the research wasn't actually ordered and partially paid for by Marco Rubio... a REPUBLICAN!

I am not a fan of republicans either.If anything I prefer democrats.
In any case it does not change the fact that people who made that "research"t were interested in selling their shit.

Which has little to do with whether the dossier is high quality, carefully researched, true and accurate intel.

If anything, their business model encourages them to be accurate.

 

[Ford]

That "high confidence" is all based on the same biased "research" democrats ordered and paid for.

I love how it just gets repeated over and over that the Steele dossier was "democrats ordered and paid for". Barbos and everyone else desperate to deflect Trump's collusion always conveniently pretend that the research wasn't actually ordered and partially paid for by Marco Rubio... a REPUBLICAN!

Weird how everyone forgets that it wasn't just Democrats who didn't want Trump in the White House.

 

[barbos]

I am not a fan of republicans either.If anything I prefer democrats.
In any case it does not change the fact that people who made that "research"t were interested in selling their shit.

Which has little to do with whether the dossier is high quality, carefully researched, true and accurate intel.

Since it was initially ordered by Rubio we know it's crap

If anything, their business model encourages them to be accurate.

I don't see how.

 

[Arctish]

Since it was initially ordered by Rubio we know it's crap

If anything, their business model encourages them to be accurate.

I don't see how.

No one's going to pay for shitty intel work. If Fusion GPS' reputation for gathering accurate, useful, and reliable information takes a hit, so does their revenue stream.

 

[barbos]

Since it was initially ordered by Rubio we know it's crap

If anything, their business model encourages them to be accurate.

I don't see how.

No one's going to pay for shitty intel work.

Define shitty

If Fusion GPS' reputation for gathering accurate, useful, and reliable information takes a hit, so does their revenue stream.

I have a question for you. Is Alfa Bank information accurate useful and reliable? or is shitty?

 

[Arctish]

No one's going to pay for shitty intel work.

Define shitty

shitty

shit·ty (shĭt′ē)
adj. shit·ti·er, shit·ti·est Vulgar Slang

1. Of very poor quality; highly inferior.

https://www.thefreedictionary.com/shitty

If Fusion GPS' reputation for gathering accurate, useful, and reliable information takes a hit, so does their revenue stream.

I have a question for you. Is Alfa Bank information accurate useful and reliable? or is shitty?

I don't know. I don't have that information and I don't have access to the source documents. Ask the FBI. I'm pretty sure they have both.

 

[barbos]

shitty

shit·ty (shĭt′ē)
adj. shit·ti·er, shit·ti·est Vulgar Slang

1. Of very poor quality; highly inferior.

https://www.thefreedictionary.com/shitty

poor quality? What does that mean?

If Fusion GPS' reputation for gathering accurate, useful, and reliable information takes a hit, so does their revenue stream.

I have a question for you. Is Alfa Bank information accurate useful and reliable? or is shitty?

I don't know. I don't have that information and I don't have access to the source documents. Ask the FBI. I'm pretty sure they have both.

Of coure you don't know. But it was very poor quality, highly inferior.

 

[Arctish]

poor quality? What does that mean?

If Fusion GPS' reputation for gathering accurate, useful, and reliable information takes a hit, so does their revenue stream.

I have a question for you. Is Alfa Bank information accurate useful and reliable? or is shitty?

I don't know. I don't have that information and I don't have access to the source documents. Ask the FBI. I'm pretty sure they have both.

Of coure you don't know. But it was very poor quality, highly inferior.

First you question what the phrase 'poor quality' means and then you use it like you already know.

You aren't arguing in good faith and I'm not interested in stupid Russian Troll tricks.

 

[barbos]

poor quality? What does that mean?

I have a question for you. Is Alfa Bank information accurate useful and reliable? or is shitty?

I don't know. I don't have that information and I don't have access to the source documents. Ask the FBI. I'm pretty sure they have both.

Of coure you don't know. But it was very poor quality, highly inferior.

First you question what the phrase 'poor quality' means and then you use it like you already know.

You aren't arguing in good faith and I'm not interested in stupid Russian Troll tricks.

Yes, I asked it what it means to you and used the meaning accepted by me.
I have no idea what definition you or Hillary for example use. But I suspect it's different from what good people use. I mean, she did hire a known liar and a hack to conduct "inspection" of her servers after all.

In short, you are incredibly naive if you think that their business model depends on being honest and fair researchers. Their clients are politicians for fuck's sake.

 

[Elixir]

In short, you are incredibly naive if you think that their business model depends on being honest and fair researchers. Their clients are politicians for fuck's sake.

The fact that Putin is successful at peddling his lies to the Russian public does not mean that a business in the US can thrive for long by selling falsehoods as useful facts.
As Arctish points out, you don't argue in good faith.

 

[Malintent]

By whom? ...By 17 agenicies?

The CIA, FBI!

Don't bother.
This is his go-to response at any time the investigation moves forward. Just hit replay.

I've hit ignore on the two useless people that the non-useless people are responding to here. Unfortunately, I do see their posts as the useless people (or bots) are quoted... and it reminds me why I had them on ignore... they are here to preach their narrative, not to discuss. They just go quiet when someone takes the time to evidence out some fundamental claim of theirs is bogus, and they just reuse it elsewhere over and over again. That makes them useless people... Like actors in a commercial. It should also, in my opinion, be grounds for suspension of access to the board... but whatever.. it's not my shit show to clean up... I'm not the one looking for donations.

 

[Malintent]

That "high confidence" is all based on the same biased "research" democrats ordered and paid for.

I love how it just gets repeated over and over that the Steele dossier was "democrats ordered and paid for". Barbos and everyone else desperate to deflect Trump's collusion always conveniently pretend that the research wasn't actually ordered and partially paid for by Marco Rubio... a REPUBLICAN!

.. and presented to Republican judges by Republican agents... and only some of the data was paid for by Democrats. The original report and majority of data came when Republicans were funding the Dossier..

.. none of which matters, because a mountain of evidence was presented to the judge for the THIRD CONTINUATION of the warrant, the Dossier representing a tiny fraction.

Trump is running with the OJ defense... get off by accusing everyone around you of "being out to get you because you are black republican"

 

[barbos]

In short, you are incredibly naive if you think that their business model depends on being honest and fair researchers. Their clients are politicians for fuck's sake.

The fact that Putin is successful at peddling his lies to the Russian public does not mean that a business in the US can thrive for long by selling falsehoods as useful facts.
As Arctish points out, you don't argue in good faith.

We are not talking about Putin. His being good or not good at anything has nothing to do with quality of Russia investigation.
In fact, he did not say anything about Alfa Bank.

 

[barbos]

Don't bother.
This is his go-to response at any time the investigation moves forward. Just hit replay.

I've hit ignore on the two useless people that the non-useless people are responding to here. Unfortunately, I do see their posts as the useless people (or bots) are quoted... and it reminds me why I had them on ignore... they are here to preach their narrative, not to discuss. They just go quiet when someone takes the time to evidence out some fundamental claim of theirs is bogus, and they just reuse it elsewhere over and over again. That makes them useless people... Like actors in a commercial. It should also, in my opinion, be grounds for suspension of access to the board... but whatever.. it's not my shit show to clean up... I'm not the one looking for donations.

What a load of ironic bullshit.

 

[Elixir]

In short, you are incredibly naive if you think that their business model depends on being honest and fair researchers. Their clients are politicians for fuck's sake.

The fact that Putin is successful at peddling his lies to the Russian public does not mean that a business in the US can thrive for long by selling falsehoods as useful facts.
As Arctish points out, you don't argue in good faith.

We are not talking about Putin. His being good or not good at anything has nothing to do with quality of Russia investigation.
In fact, he did not say anything about Alfa Bank.

Nonetheless, as a for-profit business they have to deliver actual goods to stay in business. After seven years in business, Fusion GPS has a good reputation for delivering useful, reliable information. The fact that you don't like it has nothing to do with their level of honesty or competence.
You are a dishonest broker barbie.
Buh-bye now.

 

[barbos]

We are not talking about Putin. His being good or not good at anything has nothing to do with quality of Russia investigation.
In fact, he did not say anything about Alfa Bank.

Nonetheless, as a for-profit business they have to deliver actual goods to stay in business.

Depends on definition of goods. In this particular case republicans and then democrats requested dirt on Trump, and dirt was delivered.

After seven years in business, Fusion GPS has a good reputation for delivering useful, reliable information. The fact that you don't like it has nothing to do with their level of honesty or competence.

I neither like nor dislike their information. I don't care if Putin actually has or does not have tapes on Trump.
What I care is actually quality of their information. There is a pattern of using low quality shit and outright lies for propaganda purposes by US media and intelligence. Russians are doing it too with lesser success simply because their media resources are limited, and I hold them to lesser standards than US anyway.
If you cared about honesty and/or competence you would have been mad at Alfa Bank story, and the fact that Hillary's "go to" security expert have been caught lying and being biased. You would have been mad at CIA/FBI report with a list of russian IPs.

You are a dishonest broker barbie.

No, it's opposite and it is you who is dishonest.