General Discussion

Doodley

(9,048 posts)

82. I thought DT said CNN is fake news.

Reply to Honeycombe8 (Reply #67)

Sun May 14, 2017, 12:05 AM

May 2017

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

149 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Taylor and Mensch now report, based on separate sources, a sealed indictment against DT. [View all] pnwmom May 2017 OP

So, impeach him than throw his ass in the clink! pangaia May 2017 #1

You would need a shit ton of Repugnants in the House and Senate to agree to do that cstanleytech May 2017 #89

Civil Rights Lawyer Andrew C. Laufer's take womanofthehills May 2017 #132

Ya if they all voted to shield him but if the majority in the House vote to impeach all they need cstanleytech May 2017 #135

K&R Your thread was up just before mine, so I'm deleting it. MelissaB May 2017 #2

No getting my hopes up just yet. Have more faith in the financial subpoenas. Follow the money! Feathery Scout May 2017 #3

Preposterous melman May 2017 #4

so what, even if true, you still have to have the GOP caucus willing to start the process... Thomas Hurt May 2017 #5

if this is true.... chillfactor May 2017 #12

The Supremacy clause does not prohibit prosecution of a sitting president nt marylandblue May 2017 #6

I'll believe it when I see it. Agschmid May 2017 #7

Of course. It's not proven yet. n/t pnwmom May 2017 #22

As was pointed out in comments on this, moonscape May 2017 #8

I don't think the FISA court issues that kind of warrant ucrdem May 2017 #9

From my 'Worst Week Ever' file Comrade Donald May 2017 #10

Complete Bullshit jberryhill May 2017 #11

I would suggest you tread carefully with your comments. sheshe2 May 2017 #15

This is not some kind of mysterious question jberryhill May 2017 #16

Comrade, it's over Comrade Donald May 2017 #17

Unlike anonymous bullshit artists... jberryhill May 2017 #77

Why? I pay high price for shade. Comrade Donald May 2017 #91

He probably got the part about the FISA court wrong. But James Comey himself pnwmom May 2017 #20

Are you serious? A tweet is not that long jberryhill May 2017 #21

I had been focused on the statement in the Patribotics blog and just posted the tweets pnwmom May 2017 #23

The Patribotics blog is even dumber jberryhill May 2017 #28

And yet there was no attempt made to criminally indict President Nixon. pnwmom May 2017 #42

How is that relevant to the question? jberryhill May 2017 #55

What if it's a state (rather than federal) court issuing the indictment? thesquanderer May 2017 #72

Then what would the FISA court have to do with it? jberryhill May 2017 #74

One of the two sources said no court specified, so... thesquanderer May 2017 #79

That does not cure the bullshit in the blog post jberryhill May 2017 #81

I wonder if by "supremacy clause" he may have been (wrongly, I think) referring to... thesquanderer May 2017 #87

The Supremacy Clause has absolutely nothing to do with it jberryhill May 2017 #88

I do not believe or disbelieve. thesquanderer May 2017 #90

Did I say there were no sealed indictments anywhere? jberryhill May 2017 #111

I assume you've seen this...? thesquanderer May 2017 #114

That would be a safe assumption jberryhill May 2017 #115

Sorry, I don't read every response or note every author. thesquanderer May 2017 #117

Here's are some good DU threads... jberryhill May 2017 #120

Fitzmas is still coming! FBaggins May 2017 #144

He corrected it in second tweet. sharedvalues May 2017 #39

Let me know when he corrects the abject nonsense on the blog jberryhill May 2017 #40

And there's this: pnwmom May 2017 #48

Ah, another tweet jberryhill May 2017 #52

I'm wondering that as well. Louise did NOT say FISA court granted the indictment in the article. n/t MelissaB May 2017 #25

See my comments on the article jberryhill May 2017 #41

Settle down, Bevis. I've read your snarky comments. MelissaB May 2017 #45

I have all the answers snooper2 May 2017 #147

An attorney tweeted this: pnwmom May 2017 #54

Yes, so? jberryhill May 2017 #57

Oh boy, an attorney tweeted!! onenote May 2017 #70

What's amazing is... jberryhill May 2017 #78

James Comey said that he is working with 2 Federal prosecutors, including one pnwmom May 2017 #92

Well, why doesn't the blog and tweet identify the courts where these indictments are emanating from? onenote May 2017 #96

How dare you post facts! jberryhill May 2017 #100

And then deleted his account because he was so wrong: jberryhill May 2017 #99

The FISA courts have certified question jurisdiction sharedvalues May 2017 #37

On issues of probable cause relating to surveillance warrants jberryhill May 2017 #49

A little more broad than that sharedvalues May 2017 #62

So, please, explain this to me jberryhill May 2017 #64

And there was this: pnwmom May 2017 #50

Okay, so jberryhill May 2017 #59

Louise Mensch says no issuing court specified womanofthehills May 2017 #56

Claude and Louise ... HopeAgain May 2017 #13

Under clause Zo Zig May 2017 #14

Bill Palmer - the purpose of this indictment is to try to kickstart the impeachment process womanofthehills May 2017 #18

Palmer too? HopeAgain May 2017 #34

So is this why we had half a dozen threads today condemning Mensch and Taylor? Mr. Ected May 2017 #19

Why do people always focus on personalities jberryhill May 2017 #24

Taylor said that in his tweet, but it was not repeated in the post in Mensch's Patribotics, pnwmom May 2017 #27

And yet, the blog is equally, if not more, legally fucked up jberryhill May 2017 #30

I think that is just a layperson's way of acknowledging that the 3 branches are co-equal pnwmom May 2017 #33

Oh come on... jberryhill May 2017 #35

Taylor corrected. sharedvalues May 2017 #43

Do you understand what certified question jurisdiction is? jberryhill May 2017 #61

This is stupid. DefenseLawyer May 2017 #26

The report in Mensch's blog says nothing about a FISA court being involved. pnwmom May 2017 #29

Hey, Defenselawyer jberryhill May 2017 #32

The Supremacy Clause simple says federal law trumps state law. DefenseLawyer May 2017 #47

It's sad jberryhill May 2017 #63

I posted this a while ago: L. Coyote May 2017 #31

I think they're talking to pissed-off Federal agents ucrdem May 2017 #38

From an attorney: FISA court can convene a grand jury who can issue a true bill. MelissaB May 2017 #36

They rubberstamp eavesdropping warrants. ucrdem May 2017 #44

It can empanel a grand jury to find probable cause to issue a warrant jberryhill May 2017 #46

An attorney, on Twitter, that doesn't know what he's talking about DefenseLawyer May 2017 #69

lol Sorry, but this is pure fantasy. Oneironaut May 2017 #51

So we're to believe that Dana Boente is leading the charge against Trump onenote May 2017 #53

Even if untrue, it's spreading across the Internet and will make Trump freak out! Doodley May 2017 #58

For entertainment, I used to read the "birther" threads at FreeRepublic jberryhill May 2017 #65

Jesus Charlotte Little May 2017 #107

The initial claim, before it was changed in view of it being a howler jberryhill May 2017 #108

Forest, not the trees, jberryhill Charlotte Little May 2017 #110

Where did I say it was my business what you read? jberryhill May 2017 #112

weaksauce Charlotte Little May 2017 #113

I don't think I'm capable of screaming down anything jberryhill May 2017 #121

Serious Questions Charlotte Little May 2017 #136

simple jberryhill May 2017 #137

I'm baffled... Charlotte Little May 2017 #139

"But to flat out think that there could be no indictment for impeachment is naive" jberryhill May 2017 #140

Oh, so very sorry Charlotte Little May 2017 #141

I don't understand the tone jberryhill May 2017 #142

Like I wrote to you... Charlotte Little May 2017 #143

If I or anyone else wants to read Mensch and Taylor, it's really NOYDB. Madam45for2923 May 2017 #125

Why would you intentionally read BS? snooper2 May 2017 #148

Maybe that was the intent all along! Mr. Ected May 2017 #66

Spreading falsehoods is a poor tactic in service of the truth jberryhill May 2017 #71

Not to the intelligence community Mr. Ected May 2017 #73

Irony truly is dead jberryhill May 2017 #75

The accuser received threats and withdrew her case. n/t Qutzupalotl May 2017 #85

Riiiight.... jberryhill May 2017 #86

It my be happening now mehrrh May 2017 #60

If it's true, it'll be on a legit news site, like CNN. I don't know this Mensch. Honeycombe8 May 2017 #67

She's a former Tory MP and used to be a top Rupert Murdoch executive. QC May 2017 #76

Still works for News Corp melman May 2017 #83

I thought DT said CNN is fake news. Doodley May 2017 #82

It took 5 months for most of the American media to confirm her story about the October FISA pnwmom May 2017 #95

There was no October FISA warrant, that I can tell. Honeycombe8 May 2017 #102

Your googling leaves a great deal to be desired. nt pnwmom May 2017 #103

Oh, I found it. Comey & Clapper testimony. Honeycombe8 May 2017 #104

Ever hear of BBC, the Guardian, or McClatchy? They were the first. pnwmom May 2017 #105

This is the BBC. It is more meaningful. However... Honeycombe8 May 2017 #126

Of course they're unable to verify it! The info is classified. pnwmom May 2017 #127

The BBC report doesn't mention Mensch or use the same source(s). It doesn't mention Honeycombe8 May 2017 #131

You're right, the BBC report didn't mention Mensch. But it DID confirm the FISA pnwmom May 2017 #133

Here's a Guardian piece that summarizes the confirmations of Mensch's FISA story. pnwmom May 2017 #122

The Guardian story is just repeating that "Mensch says...." So it's not a verified direct news story Honeycombe8 May 2017 #123

Here, I'll make it easier for you. pnwmom May 2017 #124

So this means the Russians were also behind the Ferguson protests, right? jberryhill May 2017 #146

She didn't say they were "behind the Ferguson protests." pnwmom May 2017 #149

When do you expect they might confirm her claim that BLM is a Russian Front? jberryhill May 2017 #145

This is happening so fast now Blue_Roses May 2017 #68

Keeping my fingers and toes crossed! AgadorSparticus May 2017 #80

Will he share a cell with Spicey? flamingdem May 2017 #84

kick Dawson Leery May 2017 #93

Message auto-removed Name removed May 2017 #94

Definition of "sealed indictment" for anyone who doesn't understand (like me)... lamp_shade May 2017 #97

If this is true, we'll know in a very short time. Vinca May 2017 #98

It's beginning to look a lot like Fitzmas... Kahuna7 May 2017 #101

Always remember these are Tweets, not news. Kablooie May 2017 #106

Keith thinks there was something this and as he points out they were right about Demsrule86 May 2017 #109

In 24 business hours!!!! Foamfollower May 2017 #116

"BUSH AND CHENEY INDICTED" jberryhill May 2017 #118

Skepticism is always a good idea. Warren DeMontague May 2017 #134

Multiple sources are reporting that Bigfoot + the Loch Ness Monster killed JFK and were behind 9/11 YoungDemCA May 2017 #119

Would the FBI have the autonomy to perform an investigation on Trump..all the way to Feathery Scout May 2017 #128

Congress wouldn't disclose details of a classified investigation to the public. pnwmom May 2017 #129

Like how Chaffetz kept Hillary's secret when Comey notified him? Feathery Scout May 2017 #130

Left is catching up fast with it's own FAKE news ecosystem. Cattledog May 2017 #138