How Things Change

[ripmeister]

Its amazing how things change when they aren't running for reelection. Good for Gowdy.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/03/13/gowdy-russia-undermine-clinton-republicans-461612?lo=ap_d1

[Common]

Even if thats true, that is not collusion on the part of trump and that is the focus of all these investigations.

Lets critique, Obama KNEW the russians were meddling, clintons people were involved in the dossier trying to set up Trump.

The clintons Obama admin so far have been more involved and more criminal that Trump

[ripmeister]

Even if thats true, that is not collusion on the part of trump and that is the focus of all these investigations.

Lets critique, Obama KNEW the russians were meddling, clintons people were involved in the dossier trying to set up Trump.

The clintons Obama admin so far have been more involved and more criminal that Trump
Uh, ok but that has nothing to do with Gowdys refutation of Nunes' committees conclusions about the motive of the Russians. This committee has become totally political, on both sides but the R's, rather than addressing what happened and what that means in the future have chosen to provide cover for Trump. Gowdy see's that and disagrees with their conclusions. I just wonder what his position would have been were he not leaving Congress.

[Common]

Uh, ok but that has nothing to do with Gowdys refutation of Nunes' committees conclusions about the motive of the Russians. This committee has become totally political, on both sides but the R's, rather than addressing what happened and what that means in the future have chosen to provide cover for Trump. Gowdy see's that and disagrees with their conclusions. I just wonder what his position would have been were he not leaving Congress.

You mean like Adam Schiff and his lying ? or are you referring to the Mueller Witch hunt, that had FBI agents resigning and being fired over their malfeasance in the case.

You cant change fact ripmeister

[ripmeister]

You mean like Adam Schiff and his lying ? or are you referring to the Mueller Witch hunt, that had FBI agents resigning and being fired over their malfeasance in the case.

You cant change fact ripmeister
This is about the claim that the Russians meddled, were anti-Clinton and pro-Trump as stated by the IC and how Nunes' committee rejects that. Gowdy, disagrees.

[Safety]

Its amazing how things change when they aren't running for reelection. Good for Gowdy.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/03/13/gowdy-russia-undermine-clinton-republicans-461612?lo=ap_d1

That's because people eventually have to atone for their actions and words. I'm guessing his friends and family know he was full of shit, so he's trying to adjust going back to reality instead of up Trump's ass.

[Ravens Fan]

Uh, ok but that has nothing to do with Gowdys refutation of Nunes' committees conclusions about the motive of the Russians. This committee has become totally political, on both sides but the R's, rather than addressing what happened and what that means in the future have chosen to provide cover for Trump. Gowdy see's that and disagrees with their conclusions. I just wonder what his position would have been were he not leaving Congress.
The link talks about one (1) point of disagreement between Gowdy and the report. Gowdy feels that by being anti-Hillary, the Russians were therefore pro-Trump. The rest of the Republicans on the committee feel that there is not enough evidence to say for sure that the Russians were actually pro-Trump, just that they were anti-Hillary. It is semantics and non-consequential in that it does not change the ultimate result of the investigation, that there was ZERO collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians. There are also no other points of disagreement between Gowdy and the committee on the report, so your conclusion is a bit misinformed.

I disagree that the R's on the committee aren't looking into what happened and how to prevent it again, the R's are now looking at how such obvious lies were used to obtain FISA warrants, how all that info got released to the press, and the roles people at the highest levels of government played in creating this wild goose chase to begin with. And let's not forget, it was Nunes who first made President Obama aware of the danger the Russians presented... not that Obama cared or acted at the time.

[texan]

Uh, ok but that has nothing to do with Gowdys refutation of Nunes' committees conclusions about the motive of the Russians. This committee has become totally political, on both sides but the R's, rather than addressing what happened and what that means in the future have chosen to provide cover for Trump. Gowdy see's that and disagrees with their conclusions. I just wonder what his position would have been were he not leaving Congress.

Talk about a nuanced statement by you. Talk about taking liberties to explain what Gowdy said. Wow!

A big so what! Good lord. He sees one thing a little differently. It has nothing to do, just as common stated, with the price of tea in China. Your post and comments read like they are really far apart. Making some pointless point. Gowdy knows this special Prosecutor is BS. He also knows that we need to have the DOJ and FBI investigates. Those are the real points. Not some BS about what the definition of helping Trump means.

[MisterVeritis]

Uh, ok but that has nothing to do with Gowdys refutation of Nunes' committees conclusions about the motive of the Russians. This committee has become totally political, on both sides but the R's, rather than addressing what happened and what that means in the future have chosen to provide cover for Trump. Gowdy see's that and disagrees with their conclusions. I just wonder what his position would have been were he not leaving Congress.
What do you believe the article said?

The Russians were out to damage Crooked Hillary (because they believed she was going to win). The committee concluded there was no collusion between Team Trump and Russia. What do you believe Rep Gowdy said?

[ripmeister]

What do you believe the article said?

The Russians were out to damage Crooked Hillary (because they believed she was going to win). The committee concluded there was no collusion between Team Trump and Russia. What do you believe Rep Gowdy said?

To you and the rest. The committee said that the IC got it wrong. Gowdy disagrees with that. If I am against you I am by definition for your opponent. Gowdy agrees. That's all I'm saying. You seem to want to attribute things to me that I didn't say.

From the article,

"A source familiar with Gowdy's thinking said the congressman believes there's no difference between opposing Clinton and backing Trump in what had become, effectively, a two-person race. The source added that Gowdy "disagrees with the conclusion" that the intelligence agencies got it wrong. "

[texan]

I didn’t. I spelled it out Clear. Light beer.

[ripmeister]

I didn’t. I spelled it out Clear. Light beer.
Maybe I've misinterpreted you. You seemed to critique me for something I don't think I said. Light beer is fake beer. I prefer real beer.:grin:

[MisterVeritis]

To you and the rest. The committee said that the IC got it wrong. Gowdy disagrees with that. If I am against you I am by definition for your opponent. Gowdy agrees. That's all I'm saying. You seem to want to attribute things to me that I didn't say.

From the article,

"A source familiar with Gowdy's thinking said the congressman believes there's no difference between opposing Clinton and backing Trump in what had become, effectively, a two-person race. The source added that Gowdy "disagrees with the conclusion" that the intelligence agencies got it wrong. "
So you focused on a very minor point and not the main conclusion.

[ripmeister]

So you focused on a very minor point and not the main conclusion.
Perhaps you see it as minor. I think the committee's position that the IC got it wrong is pretty important. If you deny something happened then how do you ever address it. I don't see that as being minor. Apparently, Gowdy doesn't either and he was willing to break ranks to say so.