Mueller Investigation pt4

Status
Not open for further replies.
plague311 said:
I'm claiming that the letter in the ******** article is ********. It's backed by absolutely no factual information at all. Including that "metadata" nonsense.
Click to expand...

This.

The letter claims that they have documents that are not stamped, and therefore not official court documents, proving that CNN were given copies of the indictment and arrest documents before that indictment was unsealed.

OK, since they claim that, where are the scans or photographs of the actual unstamped documents that should have been attached to the letter as documentary proof of the claim?

Oh dear, they haven't attached them... why is that?
 
The Big Dog said:
The credible evidence? you mean the actual letter that is in the actual link that you actually read already?

Listen, we get that you are going to hand wave away the actual letter, but don't blow smoke up our skirts pretending that you are interested in evidence.

Now, as for the rest of us? I think i can speak for everyone here when i said we are thirsty for those "very interesting things to show him."

tick tock
Click to expand...

You're dodging and equivocating... again. You know exactly what plague311 is asking you to provide and you're repeating the same falsehood when you answer.

The letter is not evidence, its a claim. A claim with no supporting documentation.

Anyone can write a letter and claim stuff, but without supporting evidence, that letter ain't worth squat.

If I were to have my lawyer write a letter claiming I have documents and photographs proving that the moon landings were faked, and did not provide copies of those documents and photos with it, then that letter would have as much value as the one from Stone's lawyers.... zip!
 
Last edited:
smartcooky said:
This.

The letter claims that they have documents that are not stamped, and therefore not official court documents, proving that CNN were given copies of the indictment and arrest documents before that indictment was unsealed.

OK, since they claim that, where are the scans or photographs of the actual unstamped documents that should have been attached to the letter as documentary proof of the claim?

Oh dear, they haven't attached them... why is that?
Click to expand...

I think we are just supposed to rely on the attorney's letter. You know, like how we always believe the first account of any event, whether it be a by a defense attorney or a guy eating subway at 2 am in Chicago. Skepticism 101, bitches.
 
Dr. Keith said:
I think we are just supposed to rely on the attorney's letter. You know, like how we always believe the first account of any event, whether it be a by a defense attorney or a guy eating subway at 2 am in Chicago. Skepticism 101, bitches.
Click to expand...

I like the way you think! Here we have a lawyer's letter written to the majority and minority leaders of the Senate judiciary Committee, and the copy of the actual letter which we actually have says that the attachment is enclosed to the letter, but the copy we have been provided does not as of yet.

Damn that is one clever and totally fiendish plot that Stone's lawyer must have come up with, trying to pull a fast one on "skeptics" like the next level "skeptics" we have here!

Can a brother get a laughing dog? I'm dying over by here, absolutely fantastic!

wait wait wait wait, it gets even more fiendish with its intricacies, skeptics! Here the letter sent to Congress makes representations about what CNN sent to him! Surely he is being super sneaky here because surely Sara Murray would never be in a position to contradict that claim! Amiright? Right skeptics??????
 
Last edited:
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
It's being reported that a Russian-born lobbyist who attended the Trump Tower meeting received a large number of suspicious payments, including from Russian nationals invested in overturning the Magnitsky Act and an American with close ties to the Trump campaign
Click to expand...

After being burned on that "Trump broke the law" story a couple of weeks ago on Buzzfeed, I am going to wait for confirmation from different sources before buying into that.
If true, it is a biggie, though.
 
The Big Dog said:
I like the way you think! Here we have a lawyer's letter written to the majority and minority leaders of the Senate judiciary Committee, and the copy of the actual letter which we actually have says that the attachment is enclosed to the letter, but the copy we have been provided does not as of yet.
Damn that is one clever and totally fiendish plot that Stone's lawyer must have come up with, trying to pull a fast one on "skeptics" like the next level "skeptics" we have here!

Can a brother get a laughing dog? I'm dying over by here, absolutely fantastic!

wait wait wait wait, it gets even more fiendish with its intricacies, skeptics! Here the letter sent to Congress makes representations about what CNN sent to him! Surely he is being super sneaky here because surely Sara Murray would never be in a position to contradict that claim! Amiright? Right skeptics??????
Click to expand...

Cool. I'll take a look at it when the claimed evidence is available. As you say, it isn't yet.
 
The Big Dog said:
I like the way you think! Here we have a lawyer's letter written to the majority and minority leaders of the Senate judiciary Committee, and the copy of the actual letter which we actually have says that the attachment is enclosed to the letter, but the copy we have been provided does not as of yet.

<snip>
Click to expand...


Have either the majority or minority leader of the Senate Judiciary Committee made any public statement acknowledging that they have received this letter AND have personally seen the attached document which lacks this stamp you are so wrought up about?
 
quadraginta said:
Have either the majority or minority leader of the Senate Judiciary Committee made any public statement acknowledging that they have received this letter AND have personally seen the attached document which lacks this stamp you are so wrought up about?
Click to expand...

That is not something I would expect. What I would expect that if the story was not true, the mopes at CNN would be howling about it.

Curiously, that has not happened.
 
The Big Dog said:
I like the way you think! Here
Click to expand...
What's this "here"?

We have reports about a letter that have appeared on various conspiracy sites, like infowars and gateway pundit. Not sure why anyone would trust those sources.

I think the proper skeptical thing to do is to wait for such information to appear in mainstream sources.
we have a lawyer's letter
Click to expand...
Correction... you have the lawyer for an individual who regularly brags about engaging in "dirty tricks", who is attempting to defend his client. Not sure why anyone would automatically assume that any lawyer is going to be completely forthright, but people should be especially wary when there is an individual involved who was associated with Nixon.

written to the majority and minority leaders of the Senate judiciary Committee, and the copy of the actual letter which we actually have says that the attachment is enclosed to the letter, but the copy we have been provided does not as of yet.
Click to expand...
And the copies that we have could have easily been manipulated (either accidentally or on purpose) by anyone in the chain of custody.
Damn that is one clever and totally fiendish plot that Stone's lawyer must have come up with...
Click to expand...
Errr... not really all that clever. His 'plot' was not to fool actual intelligent people and skeptics, but to just cast doubt in the minds of the gullible. (You know, like the ones who read infowars and quote gateway pundit). You don't really have to be all that clever to do so.

Doesn't even matter if everything the lawyer and/or the gateway pundit claims is found to be completely fraudulent within a minute... the fact that it was out there is enough for the feeble-minded to cling to and claim "Oh, look! he's being mistreated!"
 
Mmm, I enjoy skeptics fallaciously arguing, man the ad hominems, ahoy!

Although there is no evidence contradicting the claim in the letter, and in fact that timeline in the letter matches precisely with what and who we know the timeline was.

the person who was going to regale us with information about the metadata has curiously dropped it.

The story has not been rebutted by CNN.

Yet the skeptics are firing on all cylinders that it is simply a stunt for the "feeble minded" to cling to!

That is amazing! Now turn on CNN and let them tell y'all what else to think.

Brilliant!
 
The Big Dog said:
Mmm, I enjoy skeptics fallaciously arguing, man the ad hominems, ahoy!

Although there is no evidence contradicting the claim in the letter, and in fact that timeline in the letter matches precisely with what and who we know the timeline was.
Click to expand...
The timeline is irrelevant if data that points to that timeline can be faked. (For example from a lawyer for a particularly shady client who alters computer files.)
The story has not been rebutted by CNN.
Click to expand...
I suspect they also didn't rebut the story that appeared on Infowars about the secret plot to turn frogs gay.

Maybe they think the story is so silly and full of bunk that its not worth addressing. (Kind of like the mentally ill homeless guy who shouts nonsense on the street corner.)
 
The Big Dog said:
That is not something I would expect.
Click to expand...

On the contrary, that is exactly what I would expect.

The Big Dog said:
What I would expect that if the story was not true, the mopes at CNN would be howling about it.
Click to expand...

Well, it has been since day one....

https://ntknetwork.com/cnn-doubles-down-on-claim-they-werent-tipped-off-about-fbis-roger-stone-raid/

Curiously, the only sources I can find for this slant on the story about the letter to the USSCJ are right-wing media echo-chambers - those bastions of reliable reporting :rolleyes:

Infowars
Gateway Pundit
One America News Network
American Thinker
The Bulwark

As well as RT (Oh god, really? Yes, really!)

Nope, this whole faux outrage over details of Stone's arrest is just another red herring generated by The Great Right Wing Distraction Machine.... and you are conning yourself into swallowing their crap, wholesale!
 
No wai! the deep state media is not reporting on the fact that CNN had the indictment within minutes of the arrest at 6 am?
 
I do enjoy that the skeptics have hand waved away the metadata.

Anyhow, if one were to have into possession of the attachment, how would one post it here?

Asking for 16.5
 
The Big Dog said:
I do enjoy that the skeptics have hand waved away the metadata.
Click to expand...
We are handwaving away the 'metadata' in the same way that we handwave away evidence like plaster casts proving the existence of bigfoot.

Namely, without actual reputable sources to go on (i.e. not a conspiracy web site, reporting on findings by reputable individuals), there is simply not enough to actually comment on.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom