I had no idea what you were talking about! So I watched about 5 videos of 
it and really think he was just telling them to stop clapping for him. I'm 
sure he's no fan of Trump's but I don't think he was that far gone (to do 
that); jmo. 

Jeez he looked bad that night; right before he went to the hospital I 
think. I really don't want to live to 90, lol.

On Monday, March 20, 2017 at 10:15:38 PM UTC-4, gtheist957 wrote:
>
> Way back during the campaign remember when poppa bush made the throat 
> slashing gesture to Trump?well this is all part ofit
>
> On Mar 20, 2017 8:37 PM, "'Perplexed' via PoliticalForum" <
> [email protected] <javascript:>> wrote:
>
>>
>> Oh I agree he wouldn't admit to an investigation about the leaks nor 
>> promise one would come. But I do think Gowdy have him a deadline for an 
>> indictment at the very least.
>>
>> How does him disputing falsehoods in the media automatically indicate 
>> they are involved or abusing their powers? We don't know what things he's 
>> talking about, but I'm guessing the back-to-back hit pieces by the NYT on 
>> 1/19 and 1/20 about wiretaps are two of them.
>>
>> I also think they should have come out LONG before now and chastised the 
>> democrats who continue to claim that the Trump campaign colluded with the 
>> Russians. And why in the hell didn't one of those republicans ask him about 
>> Russian attempts to break into the RNC today? Or how that dumbass John 
>> Podesta replying to an obvious phishing scam with his password "password" 
>> was more to blame than anything?
>>
>> On Monday, March 20, 2017 at 9:16:21 PM UTC-4, btdt100 wrote:
>>>
>>> I don't think he said there was an on going investigation on the leaks.  
>>> He said he couldn't talk about it, more specifically when asked by Gowdy, 
>>> that 'he couldn't assure the public there will be an investigation on the 
>>> leaks in the future.  
>>>
>>> Disputing press reports opens the can of worms to the fact that they are 
>>> abusing their wiretapping powers and more importantly, they are involved in 
>>> the leaks.  
>>>
>>>
>>> On Monday, March 20, 2017 at 7:52:31 PM UTC-5, Perplexed wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Wow, very good question, Keith.
>>>>
>>>> I was watching some of it and as always, Tray Goudy asked the most 
>>>> pertinent questions. I loved how he pretty much told Comey that if someone 
>>>> wasn't in prison by the time that law comes up for review this summer that 
>>>> it won't be renewed. Nicely played.
>>>>
>>>> Personally I thought the republicans were overly cautious in the 
>>>> questions they asked. They didn't grandstand like the dems did, and 
>>>> because 
>>>> the dems were doing it non-stop, the republicans probably should have 
>>>> gotten a little bit more in the record than they did. I'd also like to 
>>>> know 
>>>> why there is no mechanism for the FBI to immediately dispute falsehoods 
>>>> when published or repeated by the mainstream media. I mean, wtf? What are 
>>>> they afraid of? Especially now, since he said today that there is an 
>>>> ongoing investigation; if that's the case, then everyone knows it and it's 
>>>> a matter of public record. I think they now have a OBLIGATION to correct 
>>>> shit put out there in the public sphere that is fake news.
>>>>
>>>> On Monday, March 20, 2017 at 7:52:22 PM UTC-4, KeithInTampa wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> (Yet not a single congressional intelligence committee member would 
>>>>> ask Rogers or Comey -under oath- if they were the source of: A) “The 
>>>>> Unmasking”, and/or B) “The Leaking”.  Stop for a moment and think 
>>>>> about that glaring and I surmise the intentional non inquiry against the 
>>>>> expressed intention of the purpose of this committee....)
>>>>>
>>>>> And Brine calls it paranoia.....
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 7:48 PM, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Today, FBI Director Comey stated that the FBI is “investigating”; and 
>>>>>> DNI (NSA Chief) Admiral Mike Rogers answered that approximately 20 
>>>>>> people 
>>>>>> within his NSA organization had the potential to "Un-Mask" and/or leak 
>>>>>> to 
>>>>>> the media; who the American was that was caught talking on a wiretapped 
>>>>>> conversation with the Russian Ambassador....Comey concurred with Rogers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How can a congressional committee conduct an investigation if they 
>>>>>> don’t know if the primary witness, the lead investigator, is the source 
>>>>>> of 
>>>>>> the leaks?  Wouldn’t the very first step, the actual basis of the 
>>>>>> foundation for the investigation itself, be to ensure the person 
>>>>>> conducting 
>>>>>> the investigation did not participate in the illegality of the conduct 
>>>>>> being investigated?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Comey: Obama Political Appointees Had Ability To “Unmask” American 
>>>>>> Citizens*
>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eI8Eag_9LJ8
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> -- 
>> -- 
>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>  
>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ 
>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>> --- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "PoliticalForum" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to [email protected] <javascript:>.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>

-- 
-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to