Freedom Convoy

[CrazyWorld]

What was funny about… it???


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Would take too long to explain.....try this one.

Two redneck guys were sitting on a dock in Georgia, drinking beer and fishing with their feet dangling in the water.​

One guy said, "Oh no. An alligator just bit one of my feet off." The other guy said, "Which one?" And the first guy said, "How should I know? All the alligators look alike."

 

[CrazyWorld]

Doing this helps a lot:
View attachment 125282

So does wearing blinders.......kiddee up little fella!

 

[HSKR R/T]

Lots of other info out there....same conclusion.....do some research if you please.

Well, since you refuse to do your own research when it is suggested after you ask questions, no need for me to. If you can provide other links I will look at them, but the research I have done has shown most of the accusations and claims in the dossier have been proven false or embellished. Not saying everything was fake, but three years of investigation returned a verdict of no collusion. But then again, this is the same group that determined that Hillary's, proven, blatant mishandling of classified information with her private email server didn't deserve any punishment. Even though many service members have their careers ruined and permanent loss of security clearance for far less.

 

[SnowBlaZR2]

Yea me too......but...we know how that goes.

Sure you do. Funny how I'm the only one who posted data to support their position.

 

[SnowBlaZR2]

I am a fiscal conservative and social liberal......I am pro gun as well and I support the 2nd amendment......I actually mean it as well.......I also like dogs..how bout you?

But you don't actually support the Second Amendment and you aren't actually pro-gun. You're just pro whatever firearms you think citizens should be able to have and you support the Second Amendment as far as it allows you to keep those particular firearms.

 

[CrazyWorld]

Well, since you refuse to do your own research when it is suggested after you ask questions, no need for me to. If you can provide other links I will look at them, but the research I have done has shown most of the accusations and claims in the dossier have been proven false or embellished. Not saying everything was fake, but three years of investigation returned a verdict of no collusion. But then again, this is the same group that determined that Hillary's, proven, blatant mishandling of classified information with her private email server didn't deserve any punishment. Even though many service members have their careers ruined and permanent loss of security clearance for far less.

Agreed....the dossier was misleading however......

Did investigators rely on the dossier for their findings?​

No. The Mueller report does not present claims from the dossier as evidence, and many of the issues focused on by investigators did not come up in the dossier.
The dossier makes no mention, for example, of a July 2016 meeting at Trump Tower between Russians and senior campaign officials including Donald Trump Jr., who eagerly accepted the request for a meeting after being told they were bringing dirt on Mrs. Clinton.

Nor does the dossier mention that in August 2016, Konstantin V. Kilimnik — described in the 2019 Mueller report as having “ties to Russian intelligence” and in a partly declassified, bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report in 2020 as a “Russian intelligence officer” with possible ties to Russia’s election interference operations — flew to the United States to meet with Mr. Trump’s campaign chairman, Paul Manafort.
Investigators established that the two had discussed whether Mr. Trump, if elected, would bless a peace plan effectively allowing Russia to control eastern Ukraine, and that Mr. Manafort had shared internal polling data and campaign strategy information with Mr. Kilimnik, which the Treasury Department later said he passed on to a Russian spy agency. (The government has not declassified evidence for its escalating accusations about Mr. Kilimnik.)
The Senate report said Mr. Manafort’s “willingness to share information with individuals closely affiliated with the Russian intelligence services” represented a “grave counterintelligence threat.”

Did Mueller rely on the dossier for any criminal charges?​

No. The special counsel investigation led to indictments of 34 people and three companies. Many of those indicted — like Mr. Kilimnik — reside abroad and have not faced trial. Mr. Mueller obtained nine guilty pleas or jury convictions, including half a dozen close Trump associates. None of those indictments cited the dossier as evidence.
The fact that Mr. Mueller did not obtain sufficient evidence to charge Trump associates with conspiracy is subject to disputed interpretations that overlap with the debate over the dossier’s significance. Trump supporters frame the lack of conspiracy charges as proof there was no collusion. By combining this with the false premise that there would not have been any Russia investigation without the Steele dossier, they portray Mr. Trump as a victim of a hoax.
Beyond pointing out that there is a range of cooperation and coordination that falls short of the legal definition of “conspiracy,” Trump skeptics argue that Mr. Mueller never definitively got to the bottom of what happened in part because of Mr. Trump’s efforts to impede the investigation — like dangling a pardon before Mr. Manafort to keep him from cooperating.

What was the main impact of the dossier?​

Beyond its narrow role in facilitating the F.B.I.’s wiretap of Mr. Page, the dossier’s publication had the broader consequence of amplifying an atmosphere of suspicion about Mr. Trump.

Still, the dossier did not create this atmosphere of suspicion. Mr. Trump’s relationship with Russia had been a topic of significant discussion dating back to the campaign, including before the first report that Russia had hacked Democrats and before Mr. Steele drafted his reports and gave some to reporters.
Among the reasons: Mr. Trump had said flattering things about Russian President Vladimir V. Putin, kept bringing on advisers with ties to Russia, had financial ties to Russia, publicly encouraged Russia to hack Mrs. Clinton, and at his nominating convention, the party dropped a plank that called for arming Ukraine against Russian-backed rebels. In March 2017, the F.B.I. publicly acknowledged that it was investigating links between Russia and Trump campaign associates.

 

[CrazyWorld]

Sure you do. Funny how I'm the only one who posted data to support their position.

You're awesome.......and special.

 

[SnowBlaZR2]

You're awesome.......and special.

You're an interesting person for 72 years old.

 

[CrazyWorld]

But you don't actually support the Second Amendment and you aren't actually pro-gun. You're just pro whatever firearms you think citizens should be able to have and you support the Second Amendment as far as it allows you to keep those particular firearms.

Not true.....I support the 2nd amendment and I believe that restrictions can/should be applied based on current society, current technologies and current problems. Unlike you.......I don't live in the 18th century.

 

[CrazyWorld]

You're an interesting person for 72 years old.

I got a pair of shoes almost that old.

 

[SnowBlaZR2]

Not true.....I support the 2nd amendment and I believe that restrictions can/should be applied based on current society, current technologies and current problems. Unlike you.......I don't live in the 18th century.

That's because you don't really support, or even understand the Second Amendment. If you did, you wouldn't make ignorant comments about period-specific restrictions. Some things, like the right to self-defense are something we call a natural right. The year it happens to be doesn't change that.

 

[HSKR R/T]

Agreed....the dossier was misleading however......

Did investigators rely on the dossier for their findings?​

No. The Mueller report does not present claims from the dossier as evidence, and many of the issues focused on by investigators did not come up in the dossier.
The dossier makes no mention, for example, of a July 2016 meeting at Trump Tower between Russians and senior campaign officials including Donald Trump Jr., who eagerly accepted the request for a meeting after being told they were bringing dirt on Mrs. Clinton.

Nor does the dossier mention that in August 2016, Konstantin V. Kilimnik — described in the 2019 Mueller report as having “ties to Russian intelligence” and in a partly declassified, bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report in 2020 as a “Russian intelligence officer” with possible ties to Russia’s election interference operations — flew to the United States to meet with Mr. Trump’s campaign chairman, Paul Manafort.
Investigators established that the two had discussed whether Mr. Trump, if elected, would bless a peace plan effectively allowing Russia to control eastern Ukraine, and that Mr. Manafort had shared internal polling data and campaign strategy information with Mr. Kilimnik, which the Treasury Department later said he passed on to a Russian spy agency. (The government has not declassified evidence for its escalating accusations about Mr. Kilimnik.)
The Senate report said Mr. Manafort’s “willingness to share information with individuals closely affiliated with the Russian intelligence services” represented a “grave counterintelligence threat.”

Did Mueller rely on the dossier for any criminal charges?​

No. The special counsel investigation led to indictments of 34 people and three companies. Many of those indicted — like Mr. Kilimnik — reside abroad and have not faced trial. Mr. Mueller obtained nine guilty pleas or jury convictions, including half a dozen close Trump associates. None of those indictments cited the dossier as evidence.
The fact that Mr. Mueller did not obtain sufficient evidence to charge Trump associates with conspiracy is subject to disputed interpretations that overlap with the debate over the dossier’s significance. Trump supporters frame the lack of conspiracy charges as proof there was no collusion. By combining this with the false premise that there would not have been any Russia investigation without the Steele dossier, they portray Mr. Trump as a victim of a hoax.
Beyond pointing out that there is a range of cooperation and coordination that falls short of the legal definition of “conspiracy,” Trump skeptics argue that Mr. Mueller never definitively got to the bottom of what happened in part because of Mr. Trump’s efforts to impede the investigation — like dangling a pardon before Mr. Manafort to keep him from cooperating.

What was the main impact of the dossier?​

Beyond its narrow role in facilitating the F.B.I.’s wiretap of Mr. Page, the dossier’s publication had the broader consequence of amplifying an atmosphere of suspicion about Mr. Trump.

Still, the dossier did not create this atmosphere of suspicion. Mr. Trump’s relationship with Russia had been a topic of significant discussion dating back to the campaign, including before the first report that Russia had hacked Democrats and before Mr. Steele drafted his reports and gave some to reporters.
Among the reasons: Mr. Trump had said flattering things about Russian President Vladimir V. Putin, kept bringing on advisers with ties to Russia, had financial ties to Russia, publicly encouraged Russia to hack Mrs. Clinton, and at his nominating convention, the party dropped a plank that called for arming Ukraine against Russian-backed rebels. In March 2017, the F.B.I. publicly acknowledged that it was investigating links between Russia and Trump campaign associates.

Without the dossier wrongly being used as a basis for the illegal wiretap, there would have been no Russian Collusion investigation.

The rest of your links are political bias

 

[ferraiolo1]

Would take too long to explain.....try this one.

Two redneck guys were sitting on a dock in Georgia, drinking beer and fishing with their feet dangling in the water.​

One guy said, "Oh no. An alligator just bit one of my feet off." The other guy said, "Which one?" And the first guy said, "How should I know? All the alligators look alike."

So now you’re saying all genders look alike?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[56 Pontiac]

I long ago 'ignored' jerrybob, his rants are ridiculous, I don't understand why y'all continue to respond to him since clearly he will never get the message, why don't you just completely ignore him and don't look at this thread (I kept looking in hopes of seeing more on the purported topic "Freedom Convoy" but doesn't look like that will ever be happening now)?

Let jb wallow in his own ignorance, don't egg him on, he's incapable of learning, eh?

Dave

 

[SnowBlaZR2]

I long ago 'ignored' jerrybob, his rants are ridiculous, I don't understand why y'all continue to respond to him since clearly he will never get the message, why don't you just completely ignore him and don't look at this thread (I kept looking in hopes of seeing more on the purported topic "Freedom Convoy" but doesn't look like that will ever be happening now)?

Let jb wallow in his own ignorance, don't egg him on, he's incapable of learning, eh?

Dave

Ignoring people is boring.

 

[theblet]

This is great news for free speech! Twitter is one of the worst for not upholding the 1st amendment. They would just pick and choose who can speak, and alot of times, ban the truth if it doesn’t fit their agenda. Go Elon!

https://techcrunch.com/2022/04/04/musk-twitter-shares-trolled-again/amp/

 

[ferraiolo1]

I(I kept looking in hopes of seeing more on the purported topic "Freedom Convoy" but doesn't look like that will ever be happening now)?

Dave

The freedom convoy accomplished about as much as JBs comments.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TNRamGuy]

Jb is a 70 some year old toddler attempting to get a cookie. His narrow minded, racist, sophomoric comments are at best amusing . I actually thought he was a teenager until I looked at his profile, not totally convinced that we are not being punked. Jb I know that your witty reply is something like "no you are" or "fox news". Just stop....for the love of high capacity mags........you are out of your element.....

 

[CrazyWorld]

That's because you don't really support, or even understand the Second Amendment. If you did, you wouldn't make ignorant comments about period-specific restrictions. Some things, like the right to self-defense are something we call a natural right. The year it happens to be doesn't change that.

Total BS.....wonder why those natural rights didn't apply to all people when written....things change over time......come out of your cave.

 

[CrazyWorld]

Without the dossier wrongly being used as a basis for the illegal wiretap, there would have been no Russian Collusion investigation.

The rest of your links are political bias

Not true.....read the Mueller report.......your love of Trump is in the way.