Sam Lowry said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

riflebear said:

---

quash said:

---

riflebear said:

---

---

Nunes. What a $250 million snowflake.

You lose 10 credibility points every time you cut and paste this guy.

---

Nunes has been one of a handful of people in Washington who has been right all along and who took a lot of heat for it.

---

Nunes has been proven correct

---

In what way? His unmasking tantrum fell apart and has been seemingly discarded by even Nunes himself. His Carter Page memo fell apart too, after Schiff released a supplement showing that Nunes was deliberately misrepresenting passages stripped of context, and flat out ignoring others, to frame a narrative. All Nunes has done in this entire saga is run interference and throw up partisan smokescreens for Trump's unsophisticated supporters to consume and pretend like they understand what's going on. Nunes purposefully misrepresents legal conceps to an audience of people that doesn't know any better.

---

Wrong on all points.

---

You'll have to pardon me for being unmoved by your unsupported and conclusory proclamations, which conveniently confirm your biases. I could also set my watch by your consistent advocation of pro-Russian narratives, something I keep in mind when this subject comes up.

HuMcK said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

riflebear said:

---

quash said:

---

riflebear said:

---

---

Nunes. What a $250 million snowflake.

You lose 10 credibility points every time you cut and paste this guy.

---

Nunes has been one of a handful of people in Washington who has been right all along and who took a lot of heat for it.

---

Nunes has been proven correct

---

In what way? His unmasking tantrum fell apart and has been seemingly discarded by even Nunes himself. His Carter Page memo fell apart too, after Schiff released a supplement showing that Nunes was deliberately misrepresenting passages stripped of context, and flat out ignoring others, to frame a narrative. All Nunes has done in this entire saga is run interference and throw up partisan smokescreens for Trump's unsophisticated supporters to consume and pretend like they understand what's going on. Nunes purposefully misrepresents legal conceps to an audience of people that doesn't know any better.

---

You've been getting incorrect information. This is why it doesn't make sense to you.

You're going to have to look at both sides and .gov documents.

---

You say that over and over as if it's a mantra, but it doesn't change anything. I read Nunes memo, God help me I read just about everything that comes out of this snafu because I like to know where the narrative is going, even if you don't see me comment on it in this forum. Where we differ is what we consider wrongdoing. Republicans have decided that investigating Trump is biased in itself somehow, and y'all even call it a criminal act. The thing is, it's not biased to investigate Trump given all the suspicious activity in 2016, no matter how much you want it to be, especially with all the tips and corroboration that flooded into the LEO agencies late in 2016.

---

Trump lost the two most important years and was deprived of his full mandate to act on the priorities we VOTED for. Trump was just collateral damage.

They meant to deprive us of our right to self governance. Two YEARS!!!

I can't fathom how you're ok with this precedent. The suspicious activity is 100% BS.

This investigation had a major impact on midterms.This is an under reported fact. The Russian-collusion hoax SINGLEHANDEDLY colored the perspective of the electorate against POTUS in 2018. The outcome of the election was entirely based upon slander, libel, and outright lies. THIS is election fraud, This is TREASONOUS, it was an attempted coup and the people were never supposed to regain the power.

HuMcK said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

riflebear said:

---

quash said:

---

riflebear said:

---

Where we differ is what we consider wrongdoing. Republicans have decided that investigating Trump is biased in itself somehow, and y'all even call it a criminal act. The thing is, it's not biased to investigate Trump given all the suspicious activity in 2016, no matter how much you want it to be, especially with all the tips and corroboration that flooded into the LEO agencies late in 2016.

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

I don't think people are as upset about the presence of an investigation as much as the way it was done. This wasn't a process of looking at documents or cross-checking depositions to try to find a real story.

The emotion from the R's is because the WAY the investigation was managed was so incendiary. Witnesses were strong-armed by having prosecutors threaten them with unrelated crimes. They were brow beaten with fraud charges because they didn't answer the same question the same way the fourth and fifth time it was asked days later. Witnesses were subject to KGB-like raids using SWAT teams early in the morning with CNN cameras rolling. They were embarrassed with a complicit media. This was investigation that used heavy handed fear as a tactic to get answers.

I'm glad you note that you think the only difference is the presence of an investigation. Because, I think the vast majority of R's are on the same page with you. Only some vocal or politically motivated outliers disagree with you.

Frankly, I don't know why people wouldn't expect retribution. When you drive people to a base emotion like fear and then those people get some degree of power, you better expect them to use it so that they don't have to fear again. It may not be ethically right to use power that way. But, dang when you hit the fear button, people just don't care anymore.

ValhallaBear said:

---

contrario said:

---

quash said:

---

ValhallaBear said:

---

quash said:

---

riflebear said:

---

---

Nunes. What a $250 million snowflake.

You lose 10 credibility points every time you cut and paste this guy.

---

'As a libertarian I am totally opposed to intrusive government (unless they're intruding on someone I don't like)

Devin Nunes is a ****ing hero

You don't understand his lawsuit which is why you're confused again

---

It's a snowflake lawsuit. Waaaah, Nunes Cow, waaah.

---

What exactly qualifies as a snowflake lawsuit? You throw that term around a lot, so I just want to understand what qualifies this lawsuit as one that is snowflake.

Tia

---

It's all he's got

Trump has fried his brain

---

he can't pin the attackers in the trapezoid

can't win a puck battle to save his life

he's getting walked around like a pylon

his clearing attempts are weak as pond water

with zero breakouts

LOL

Doc Holliday said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

riflebear said:

---

quash said:

---

riflebear said:

---

---

Nunes. What a $250 million snowflake.

You lose 10 credibility points every time you cut and paste this guy.

---

Nunes has been one of a handful of people in Washington who has been right all along and who took a lot of heat for it.

---

Nunes has been proven correct

---

In what way? His unmasking tantrum fell apart and has been seemingly discarded by even Nunes himself. His Carter Page memo fell apart too, after Schiff released a supplement showing that Nunes was deliberately misrepresenting passages stripped of context, and flat out ignoring others, to frame a narrative. All Nunes has done in this entire saga is run interference and throw up partisan smokescreens for Trump's unsophisticated supporters to consume and pretend like they understand what's going on. Nunes purposefully misrepresents legal conceps to an audience of people that doesn't know any better.

---

You've been getting incorrect information. This is why it doesn't make sense to you.

You're going to have to look at both sides and .gov documents.

---

You say that over and over as if it's a mantra, but it doesn't change anything. I read Nunes memo, God help me I read just about everything that comes out of this snafu because I like to know where the narrative is going, even if you don't see me comment on it in this forum. Where we differ is what we consider wrongdoing. Republicans have decided that investigating Trump is biased in itself somehow, and y'all even call it a criminal act. The thing is, it's not biased to investigate Trump given all the suspicious activity in 2016, no matter how much you want it to be, especially with all the tips and corroboration that flooded into the LEO agencies late in 2016.

---

Trump lost the two most important years and was deprived of his full mandate to act on the priorities we VOTED for. Trump was just collateral damage.

They meant to deprive us of our right to self governance. Two YEARS!!!

I can't fathom how you're ok with this precedent. The suspicious activity is 100% BS.

This investigation had a major impact on midterms.This is an under reported fact. The Russian-collusion hoax SINGLEHANDEDLY colored the perspective of the electorate against POTUS in 2018. The outcome of the election was entirely based upon slander, libel, and outright lies. THIS is election fraud, This is TREASONOUS, it was an attempted coup and the people were never supposed to regain the power.

---

"The outcome of the election was entirely based upon slander, libel, and outright lies"

Cry me a fcking river. First of all, reporting facts about Trump campaign contacts with Russians is in no way libel or slander, or lies for that matter. The lies on that subject have come from Trump's people far as I can tell: lies about Trump Tower Moscow, lies about the Trump Tower NY meeting, lies about phoning the Russian ambassador to talk removing sanctions, etc. Second, the outcome of the 2016 election hinged on a Russian espionage operation that targeted Dems and supported Republicans. The most charitable interpretation of Trump's response to the Russian activities is that he knowingly used them to gain power, at best. Pizzagate, Hillary having Parkinson's and is going to die soon, phantom Benghazi stand-down orders, Hillary having witnesses killed...if you want to talk about lies and slander, lets start with those from the 2016 election.

HuMcK said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

riflebear said:

---

quash said:

---

riflebear said:

---

---

Nunes. What a $250 million snowflake.

You lose 10 credibility points every time you cut and paste this guy.

---

Nunes has been one of a handful of people in Washington who has been right all along and who took a lot of heat for it.

---

Nunes has been proven correct

---

In what way? His unmasking tantrum fell apart and has been seemingly discarded by even Nunes himself. His Carter Page memo fell apart too, after Schiff released a supplement showing that Nunes was deliberately misrepresenting passages stripped of context, and flat out ignoring others, to frame a narrative. All Nunes has done in this entire saga is run interference and throw up partisan smokescreens for Trump's unsophisticated supporters to consume and pretend like they understand what's going on. Nunes purposefully misrepresents legal conceps to an audience of people that doesn't know any better.

---

You've been getting incorrect information. This is why it doesn't make sense to you.

You're going to have to look at both sides and .gov documents.

---

You say that over and over as if it's a mantra, but it doesn't change anything. I read Nunes memo, God help me I read just about everything that comes out of this snafu because I like to know where the narrative is going, even if you don't see me comment on it in this forum. Where we differ is what we consider wrongdoing. Republicans have decided that investigating Trump is biased in itself somehow, and y'all even call it a criminal act. The thing is, it's not biased to investigate Trump given all the suspicious activity in 2016, no matter how much you want it to be, especially with all the tips and corroboration that flooded into the LEO agencies late in 2016.

---

Trump lost the two most important years and was deprived of his full mandate to act on the priorities we VOTED for. Trump was just collateral damage.

They meant to deprive us of our right to self governance. Two YEARS!!!

I can't fathom how you're ok with this precedent. The suspicious activity is 100% BS.

This investigation had a major impact on midterms.This is an under reported fact. The Russian-collusion hoax SINGLEHANDEDLY colored the perspective of the electorate against POTUS in 2018. The outcome of the election was entirely based upon slander, libel, and outright lies. THIS is election fraud, This is TREASONOUS, it was an attempted coup and the people were never supposed to regain the power.

---

"The outcome of the election was entirely based upon slander, libel, and outright lies"

Cry me a fcking river. First of all, reporting facts about Trump campaign contacts with Russians is in no way libel or slander, or lies for that matter. The lies on that subject have come from Trump's people far as I can tell: lies about Trump Tower Moscow, lies about the Trump Tower NY meeting, lies about phoning the Russian ambassador to talk removing sanctions, etc. Second, the outcome of the 2016 election hinged on a Russian espionage operation that targeted Dems and supported Republicans. The most charitable interpretation of Trump's response to the Russian activities is that he knowingly used them to gain power, at best. Pizzagate, Hillary having Parkinson's and is going to die soon, phantom Benghazi stand-down orders, Hillary having witnesses killed...if you want to talk about lies and slander, lets start with those from the 2016 election.

---

What you don't understand is they fabricated and created "evidence" to make it appear like collusion.

The Trump Tower meeting was a setup. It was setup by FusionGPS who the FBI relied on.

I simply don't think you want to believe this was possible, but it's exactly what happened.

Doc Holliday said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

riflebear said:

---

quash said:

---

riflebear said:

---

---

Nunes. What a $250 million snowflake.

You lose 10 credibility points every time you cut and paste this guy.

---

Nunes has been one of a handful of people in Washington who has been right all along and who took a lot of heat for it.

---

Nunes has been proven correct

---

In what way? His unmasking tantrum fell apart and has been seemingly discarded by even Nunes himself. His Carter Page memo fell apart too, after Schiff released a supplement showing that Nunes was deliberately misrepresenting passages stripped of context, and flat out ignoring others, to frame a narrative. All Nunes has done in this entire saga is run interference and throw up partisan smokescreens for Trump's unsophisticated supporters to consume and pretend like they understand what's going on. Nunes purposefully misrepresents legal conceps to an audience of people that doesn't know any better.

---

You've been getting incorrect information. This is why it doesn't make sense to you.

You're going to have to look at both sides and .gov documents.

---

You say that over and over as if it's a mantra, but it doesn't change anything. I read Nunes memo, God help me I read just about everything that comes out of this snafu because I like to know where the narrative is going, even if you don't see me comment on it in this forum. Where we differ is what we consider wrongdoing. Republicans have decided that investigating Trump is biased in itself somehow, and y'all even call it a criminal act. The thing is, it's not biased to investigate Trump given all the suspicious activity in 2016, no matter how much you want it to be, especially with all the tips and corroboration that flooded into the LEO agencies late in 2016.

---

Trump lost the two most important years and was deprived of his full mandate to act on the priorities we VOTED for. Trump was just collateral damage.

They meant to deprive us of our right to self governance. Two YEARS!!!

I can't fathom how you're ok with this precedent. The suspicious activity is 100% BS.

This investigation had a major impact on midterms.This is an under reported fact. The Russian-collusion hoax SINGLEHANDEDLY colored the perspective of the electorate against POTUS in 2018. The outcome of the election was entirely based upon slander, libel, and outright lies. THIS is election fraud, This is TREASONOUS, it was an attempted coup and the people were never supposed to regain the power.

---

"The outcome of the election was entirely based upon slander, libel, and outright lies"

Cry me a fcking river. First of all, reporting facts about Trump campaign contacts with Russians is in no way libel or slander, or lies for that matter. The lies on that subject have come from Trump's people far as I can tell: lies about Trump Tower Moscow, lies about the Trump Tower NY meeting, lies about phoning the Russian ambassador to talk removing sanctions, etc. Second, the outcome of the 2016 election hinged on a Russian espionage operation that targeted Dems and supported Republicans. The most charitable interpretation of Trump's response to the Russian activities is that he knowingly used them to gain power, at best. Pizzagate, Hillary having Parkinson's and is going to die soon, phantom Benghazi stand-down orders, Hillary having witnesses killed...if you want to talk about lies and slander, lets start with those from the 2016 election.

---

What you don't understand is they fabricated and created "evidence" to make it appear like collusion.

The Trump Tower meeting was a setup. It was setup by FusionGPS who the FBI relied on.

I simply don't think you want to believe this was possible, but it's exactly what happened.

---

IT WAS SET UP BY DON JR. AND DADDY TRUMP'S FRIEND ARAS AGALARVOV! we have the emails showing this, period. Orwell would be impressed by Trump's ability to get his followers to outright ignore such concrete evidence. You can argue about the result of the meeting, but not the setup, not when Don Jr. himself released the email chain that set it in motion.

HuMcK said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

riflebear said:

---

quash said:

---

riflebear said:

---

---

Nunes. What a $250 million snowflake.

You lose 10 credibility points every time you cut and paste this guy.

---

Nunes has been one of a handful of people in Washington who has been right all along and who took a lot of heat for it.

---

Nunes has been proven correct

---

In what way? His unmasking tantrum fell apart and has been seemingly discarded by even Nunes himself. His Carter Page memo fell apart too, after Schiff released a supplement showing that Nunes was deliberately misrepresenting passages stripped of context, and flat out ignoring others, to frame a narrative. All Nunes has done in this entire saga is run interference and throw up partisan smokescreens for Trump's unsophisticated supporters to consume and pretend like they understand what's going on. Nunes purposefully misrepresents legal conceps to an audience of people that doesn't know any better.

---

You've been getting incorrect information. This is why it doesn't make sense to you.

You're going to have to look at both sides and .gov documents.

---

You say that over and over as if it's a mantra, but it doesn't change anything. I read Nunes memo, God help me I read just about everything that comes out of this snafu because I like to know where the narrative is going, even if you don't see me comment on it in this forum. Where we differ is what we consider wrongdoing. Republicans have decided that investigating Trump is biased in itself somehow, and y'all even call it a criminal act. The thing is, it's not biased to investigate Trump given all the suspicious activity in 2016, no matter how much you want it to be, especially with all the tips and corroboration that flooded into the LEO agencies late in 2016.

---

Trump lost the two most important years and was deprived of his full mandate to act on the priorities we VOTED for. Trump was just collateral damage.

They meant to deprive us of our right to self governance. Two YEARS!!!

I can't fathom how you're ok with this precedent. The suspicious activity is 100% BS.

This investigation had a major impact on midterms.This is an under reported fact. The Russian-collusion hoax SINGLEHANDEDLY colored the perspective of the electorate against POTUS in 2018. The outcome of the election was entirely based upon slander, libel, and outright lies. THIS is election fraud, This is TREASONOUS, it was an attempted coup and the people were never supposed to regain the power.

---

"The outcome of the election was entirely based upon slander, libel, and outright lies"

Cry me a fcking river. First of all, reporting facts about Trump campaign contacts with Russians is in no way libel or slander, or lies for that matter. The lies on that subject have come from Trump's people far as I can tell: lies about Trump Tower Moscow, lies about the Trump Tower NY meeting, lies about phoning the Russian ambassador to talk removing sanctions, etc. Second, the outcome of the 2016 election hinged on a Russian espionage operation that targeted Dems and supported Republicans. The most charitable interpretation of Trump's response to the Russian activities is that he knowingly used them to gain power, at best. Pizzagate, Hillary having Parkinson's and is going to die soon, phantom Benghazi stand-down orders, Hillary having witnesses killed...if you want to talk about lies and slander, lets start with those from the 2016 election.

---

What you don't understand is they fabricated and created "evidence" to make it appear like collusion.

The Trump Tower meeting was a setup. It was setup by FusionGPS who the FBI relied on.

I simply don't think you want to believe this was possible, but it's exactly what happened.

---

IT WAS SET UP BY DON JR. AND DADDY TRUMP'S FRIEND ARAS AGALARVOV! we have the emails showing this, period. Orwell would be impressed by Trump's ability to get his followers to outright ignore such concrete evidence. You can argue about the result of the meeting, but not the setup, not when Don Jr. himself released the email chain that set it in motion.

---

Simple concept: Find out meeting is happening and infiltrate it.

The Russian Lawyer is associated with FusionGPS. You don't think that's strange?

riflebear said:

---

---

You ever notice how much of your social media consumption consists of anonymous partisan propaganda accounts? That's something worth reigning in. Also worth noting, Barr's letter contained the explicit phrase that "this report does not exonerate" POTUS...

Doc Holliday said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

riflebear said:

---

quash said:

---

riflebear said:

---

---

Nunes. What a $250 million snowflake.

You lose 10 credibility points every time you cut and paste this guy.

---

Nunes has been one of a handful of people in Washington who has been right all along and who took a lot of heat for it.

---

Nunes has been proven correct

---

In what way? His unmasking tantrum fell apart and has been seemingly discarded by even Nunes himself. His Carter Page memo fell apart too, after Schiff released a supplement showing that Nunes was deliberately misrepresenting passages stripped of context, and flat out ignoring others, to frame a narrative. All Nunes has done in this entire saga is run interference and throw up partisan smokescreens for Trump's unsophisticated supporters to consume and pretend like they understand what's going on. Nunes purposefully misrepresents legal conceps to an audience of people that doesn't know any better.

---

You've been getting incorrect information. This is why it doesn't make sense to you.

You're going to have to look at both sides and .gov documents.

---

You say that over and over as if it's a mantra, but it doesn't change anything. I read Nunes memo, God help me I read just about everything that comes out of this snafu because I like to know where the narrative is going, even if you don't see me comment on it in this forum. Where we differ is what we consider wrongdoing. Republicans have decided that investigating Trump is biased in itself somehow, and y'all even call it a criminal act. The thing is, it's not biased to investigate Trump given all the suspicious activity in 2016, no matter how much you want it to be, especially with all the tips and corroboration that flooded into the LEO agencies late in 2016.

---

Trump lost the two most important years and was deprived of his full mandate to act on the priorities we VOTED for. Trump was just collateral damage.

They meant to deprive us of our right to self governance. Two YEARS!!!

I can't fathom how you're ok with this precedent. The suspicious activity is 100% BS.

This investigation had a major impact on midterms.This is an under reported fact. The Russian-collusion hoax SINGLEHANDEDLY colored the perspective of the electorate against POTUS in 2018. The outcome of the election was entirely based upon slander, libel, and outright lies. THIS is election fraud, This is TREASONOUS, it was an attempted coup and the people were never supposed to regain the power.

---

"The outcome of the election was entirely based upon slander, libel, and outright lies"

Cry me a fcking river. First of all, reporting facts about Trump campaign contacts with Russians is in no way libel or slander, or lies for that matter. The lies on that subject have come from Trump's people far as I can tell: lies about Trump Tower Moscow, lies about the Trump Tower NY meeting, lies about phoning the Russian ambassador to talk removing sanctions, etc. Second, the outcome of the 2016 election hinged on a Russian espionage operation that targeted Dems and supported Republicans. The most charitable interpretation of Trump's response to the Russian activities is that he knowingly used them to gain power, at best. Pizzagate, Hillary having Parkinson's and is going to die soon, phantom Benghazi stand-down orders, Hillary having witnesses killed...if you want to talk about lies and slander, lets start with those from the 2016 election.

---

What you don't understand is they fabricated and created "evidence" to make it appear like collusion.

The Trump Tower meeting was a setup. It was setup by FusionGPS who the FBI relied on.

I simply don't think you want to believe this was possible, but it's exactly what happened.

---

IT WAS SET UP BY DON JR. AND DADDY TRUMP'S FRIEND ARAS AGALARVOV! we have the emails showing this, period. Orwell would be impressed by Trump's ability to get his followers to outright ignore such concrete evidence. You can argue about the result of the meeting, but not the setup, not when Don Jr. himself released the email chain that set it in motion.

---

Simple concept: Find out meeting is happening and infiltrate it.

The Russian Lawyer is associated with FusionGPS. You don't think that's strange?

---

So you acknowledge then that Don Jr. was informed that Trump had the "support of Russia and it's government" and responded by saying "I love it"? And now your theory is that Veselnitskaya was just a Dem tag-along with the other Russian principals in the meeting? She's affiliated with Fusion GPS, btw, because Fusion GPS is also involved in some litigation around the Magnitsy Act I believe, Fusion and Veselnitskaya both represent the same russian client, Denis Katsyv. Some people might call that day job her "diplomatic cover" to grant her more freedom of movement, she was in NY ostensibly to represent that client in a hearing, which is why she was granted permission to come to America at all in the first place iirc.

contrario said:

---

quash said:

---

ValhallaBear said:

---

quash said:

---

riflebear said:

---

---

Nunes. What a $250 million snowflake.

You lose 10 credibility points every time you cut and paste this guy.

---

'As a libertarian I am totally opposed to intrusive government (unless they're intruding on someone I don't like)

Devin Nunes is a ****ing hero

You don't understand his lawsuit which is why you're confused again

---

It's a snowflake lawsuit. Waaaah, Nunes Cow, waaah.

---

What exactly qualifies as a snowflake lawsuit? You throw that term around a lot, so I just want to understand what qualifies this lawsuit as one that is snowflake.

Tia

---

A lot? This is the first time I've ever used that term.

HuMcK said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

riflebear said:

---

quash said:

---

riflebear said:

---

---

Nunes. What a $250 million snowflake.

You lose 10 credibility points every time you cut and paste this guy.

---

Nunes has been one of a handful of people in Washington who has been right all along and who took a lot of heat for it.

---

Nunes has been proven correct

---

In what way? His unmasking tantrum fell apart and has been seemingly discarded by even Nunes himself. His Carter Page memo fell apart too, after Schiff released a supplement showing that Nunes was deliberately misrepresenting passages stripped of context, and flat out ignoring others, to frame a narrative. All Nunes has done in this entire saga is run interference and throw up partisan smokescreens for Trump's unsophisticated supporters to consume and pretend like they understand what's going on. Nunes purposefully misrepresents legal conceps to an audience of people that doesn't know any better.

---

Wrong on all points.

---

You'll have to pardon me for being unmoved by your unsupported and conclusory proclamations, which conveniently confirm your biases. I could also set my watch by your consistent advocation of pro-Russian narratives, something I keep in mind when this subject comes up.

---

I gave you a detailed explanation of the Nunes memo last time we talked about it. I just figured you'd forgotten and were repeating the same debunked arguments by mistake.

quash said:

---

contrario said:

---

quash said:

---

ValhallaBear said:

---

quash said:

---

riflebear said:

---

---

Nunes. What a $250 million snowflake.

You lose 10 credibility points every time you cut and paste this guy.

---

'As a libertarian I am totally opposed to intrusive government (unless they're intruding on someone I don't like)

Devin Nunes is a ****ing hero

You don't understand his lawsuit which is why you're confused again

---

It's a snowflake lawsuit. Waaaah, Nunes Cow, waaah.

---

What exactly qualifies as a snowflake lawsuit? You throw that term around a lot, so I just want to understand what qualifies this lawsuit as one that is snowflake.

Tia

---

A lot? This is the first time I've ever used that term.

---

You have used 'snowflake' in the last month more than Trump has used Twitter.

HuMcK said:

---

riflebear said:

---

---

You ever notice how much of your social media consumption consists of anonymous partisan propaganda accounts? That's something worth reigning in. Also worth noting, Barr's letter contained the explicit phrase that "this report does not exonerate" POTUS...

---

Those accounts are at least as reliable as the MSM.

riflebear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

riflebear said:

---

---

You ever notice how much of your social media consumption consists of anonymous partisan propaganda accounts? That's something worth reigning in. Also worth noting, Barr's letter contained the explicit phrase that "this report does not exonerate" POTUS...

---

Because the liberal media won't report on any facts that have to do with showing the GOP they are doing well w/ Trump in many areas.

Please tell me what he posted in the tweet that wasn't TRUE?

You might want to follow him since his name is "Education liberals" which is what he's clearly doing here.

---

HuMcK is another radical liberal tool. A useful idiot!

HuMcK is worthless and everything that comes from him is worthless

quash said:

---

contrario said:

---

quash said:

---

ValhallaBear said:

---

quash said:

---

riflebear said:

---

---

Nunes. What a $250 million snowflake.

You lose 10 credibility points every time you cut and paste this guy.

---

'As a libertarian I am totally opposed to intrusive government (unless they're intruding on someone I don't like)

Devin Nunes is a ****ing hero

You don't understand his lawsuit which is why you're confused again

---

It's a snowflake lawsuit. Waaaah, Nunes Cow, waaah.

---

What exactly qualifies as a snowflake lawsuit? You throw that term around a lot, so I just want to understand what qualifies this lawsuit as one that is snowflake.

Tia

---

A lot? This is the first time I've ever used that term.

---

You use the term snowflake in many of your posts. So again, what makes this lawsuit snowflake, as opposed to a normal lawsuit, or non-snowflake lawsuit?

riflebear said:

---

---

Barr made that decision before he was nominated for AG, he even wrote an op-ed about it. It's probably why he was nominated.

HuMcK said:

---

riflebear said:

---

---

Barr made that decision before he was nominated for AG, he even wrote an op-ed about it. It's probably why he was nominated.

---

Good.

contrario said:

---

quash said:

---

contrario said:

---

quash said:

---

ValhallaBear said:

---

quash said:

---

riflebear said:

---

---

Nunes. What a $250 million snowflake.

You lose 10 credibility points every time you cut and paste this guy.

---

'As a libertarian I am totally opposed to intrusive government (unless they're intruding on someone I don't like)

Devin Nunes is a ****ing hero

You don't understand his lawsuit which is why you're confused again

---

It's a snowflake lawsuit. Waaaah, Nunes Cow, waaah.

---

What exactly qualifies as a snowflake lawsuit? You throw that term around a lot, so I just want to understand what qualifies this lawsuit as one that is snowflake.

Tia

---

A lot? This is the first time I've ever used that term.

---

You use the term snowflake in many of your posts. So again, what makes this lawsuit snowflake, as opposed to a normal lawsuit, or non-snowflake lawsuit?

---

He's crying about his treatment in social media. Call the waaambulance.

quash said:

---

contrario said:

---

quash said:

---

contrario said:

---

quash said:

---

ValhallaBear said:

---

quash said:

---

riflebear said:

---

---

Nunes. What a $250 million snowflake.

You lose 10 credibility points every time you cut and paste this guy.

---

'As a libertarian I am totally opposed to intrusive government (unless they're intruding on someone I don't like)

Devin Nunes is a ****ing hero

You don't understand his lawsuit which is why you're confused again

---

It's a snowflake lawsuit. Waaaah, Nunes Cow, waaah.

---

What exactly qualifies as a snowflake lawsuit? You throw that term around a lot, so I just want to understand what qualifies this lawsuit as one that is snowflake.

Tia

---

A lot? This is the first time I've ever used that term.

---

You use the term snowflake in many of your posts. So again, what makes this lawsuit snowflake, as opposed to a normal lawsuit, or non-snowflake lawsuit?

---

He's crying about his treatment in social media. Call the waaambulance.

---

So complaining on social media makes one a snowflake? Sorry, just trying to nail down a definition of snowflake so I can apply it appropriately in the future.

HuMcK said:

---

riflebear said:

---

---

Barr made that decision before he was nominated for AG, he even wrote an op-ed about it. It's probably why he was nominated.

---

Link?

contrario said:

---

quash said:

---

contrario said:

---

quash said:

---

contrario said:

---

quash said:

---

ValhallaBear said:

---

quash said:

---

riflebear said:

---

---

Nunes. What a $250 million snowflake.

You lose 10 credibility points every time you cut and paste this guy.

---

'As a libertarian I am totally opposed to intrusive government (unless they're intruding on someone I don't like)

Devin Nunes is a ****ing hero

You don't understand his lawsuit which is why you're confused again

---

It's a snowflake lawsuit. Waaaah, Nunes Cow, waaah.

---

What exactly qualifies as a snowflake lawsuit? You throw that term around a lot, so I just want to understand what qualifies this lawsuit as one that is snowflake.

Tia

---

A lot? This is the first time I've ever used that term.

---

You use the term snowflake in many of your posts. So again, what makes this lawsuit snowflake, as opposed to a normal lawsuit, or non-snowflake lawsuit?

---

He's crying about his treatment in social media. Call the waaambulance.

---

So complaining on social media makes one a snowflake? Sorry, just trying to nail down a definition of snowflake so I can apply it appropriately in the future.

---

He is complaining about how he was treated BY social media.

And you don't need me to define words for you.

quash said:

---

contrario said:

---

quash said:

---

contrario said:

---

quash said:

---

contrario said:

---

quash said:

---

ValhallaBear said:

---

quash said:

---

riflebear said:

---

---

Nunes. What a $250 million snowflake.

You lose 10 credibility points every time you cut and paste this guy.

---

'As a libertarian I am totally opposed to intrusive government (unless they're intruding on someone I don't like)

Devin Nunes is a ****ing hero

You don't understand his lawsuit which is why you're confused again

---

It's a snowflake lawsuit. Waaaah, Nunes Cow, waaah.

---

What exactly qualifies as a snowflake lawsuit? You throw that term around a lot, so I just want to understand what qualifies this lawsuit as one that is snowflake.

Tia

---

A lot? This is the first time I've ever used that term.

---

You use the term snowflake in many of your posts. So again, what makes this lawsuit snowflake, as opposed to a normal lawsuit, or non-snowflake lawsuit?

---

He's crying about his treatment in social media. Call the waaambulance.

---

So complaining on social media makes one a snowflake? Sorry, just trying to nail down a definition of snowflake so I can apply it appropriately in the future.

---

He is complaining about how he was treated BY social media.

And you don't need me to define words for you.

---

The lawsuit is not very solidly presented and doesn't make the point

Of course you're swallowing the NYT spin because you're soft and weak

Twitter and big social need to be classified as publishers

Osodecentx said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

riflebear said:

---

---

Barr made that decision before he was nominated for AG, he even wrote an op-ed about it. It's probably why he was nominated.

---

Link?

---

I actually conflated two things, but his writings do indicate his mind was made up on Obstruction before becoming AG (for the 2nd time).

Barr wrote this WaPo op-ed in 2017 where he backs the Comey firing.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/former-attorney-general-trump-made-the-right-call-on-comey/2017/05/12/0e858436-372d-11e7-b4ee-434b6d506b37_story.html?utm_term=.ad1e31d003bf

And in June 2018 he sent this unsolicited memo to the DoJ laying out why he believes Mueller is using an incorrect definition of Obstruction and Trump should not he compelled to answer questions.
https://www.scribd.com/document/396090342/June-2018-Barr-Memo-to-DOJ-Muellers-Obstruction-Theory-1

HuMcK said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

riflebear said:

---

---

Barr made that decision before he was nominated for AG, he even wrote an op-ed about it. It's probably why he was nominated.

---

Link?

---

I actually conflated two things, but his writings do indicate his mind was made up on Obstruction before becoming AG (for the 2nd time).

Barr wrote this WaPo op-ed in 2017 where he backs the Comey firing.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/former-attorney-general-trump-made-the-right-call-on-comey/2017/05/12/0e858436-372d-11e7-b4ee-434b6d506b37_story.html?utm_term=.ad1e31d003bf

And in June 2018 he sent this unsolicited memo to the DoJ laying out why he believes Mueller is using an incorrect definition of Obstruction and Trump should not he compelled to answer questions.
https://www.scribd.com/document/396090342/June-2018-Barr-Memo-to-DOJ-Muellers-Obstruction-Theory-1

---

So basically, KuMcK lied but hoped no one would catch it.

Oldbear83 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

riflebear said:

---

---

Barr made that decision before he was nominated for AG, he even wrote an op-ed about it. It's probably why he was nominated.

---

Link?

---

I actually conflated two things, but his writings do indicate his mind was made up on Obstruction before becoming AG (for the 2nd time).

Barr wrote this WaPo op-ed in 2017 where he backs the Comey firing.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/former-attorney-general-trump-made-the-right-call-on-comey/2017/05/12/0e858436-372d-11e7-b4ee-434b6d506b37_story.html?utm_term=.ad1e31d003bf

And in June 2018 he sent this unsolicited memo to the DoJ laying out why he believes Mueller is using an incorrect definition of Obstruction and Trump should not he compelled to answer questions.
https://www.scribd.com/document/396090342/June-2018-Barr-Memo-to-DOJ-Muellers-Obstruction-Theory-1

---

So basically, KuMcK lied but hoped no one would catch it.

---

That's what democrats do!

Oldbear83 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

riflebear said:

---

---

Barr made that decision before he was nominated for AG, he even wrote an op-ed about it. It's probably why he was nominated.

---

Link?

---

I actually conflated two things, but his writings do indicate his mind was made up on Obstruction before becoming AG (for the 2nd time).

Barr wrote this WaPo op-ed in 2017 where he backs the Comey firing.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/former-attorney-general-trump-made-the-right-call-on-comey/2017/05/12/0e858436-372d-11e7-b4ee-434b6d506b37_story.html?utm_term=.ad1e31d003bf

And in June 2018 he sent this unsolicited memo to the DoJ laying out why he believes Mueller is using an incorrect definition of Obstruction and Trump should not he compelled to answer questions.
https://www.scribd.com/document/396090342/June-2018-Barr-Memo-to-DOJ-Muellers-Obstruction-Theory-1

---

So basically, KuMcK lied but hoped no one would catch it.

---

Mistaken doesn't mean Huck lied.