Spoiler Alert. More fake news you swallowed hook, line, and sinker

[gfejunkie]

Originally Posted by bamscram

Trump had his support till he fired him.

Disgruntled ex-employee, eh?

[bamscram]

Sounds like it. Have to wait till he speaks.

[Ex-CEO]

Hey Manmuncher!

Comprehension is not one of of your long suits, is it, moron?

Like here, for instance:

https://eccie.net/showthread.php?t=2026569&highlight=

Funny as hell!

Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

...One more time for the slow people...

OK, here goes:

As I said before, Comey's statement in the vid you linked neither bolsters nor counters your argument. A big, fat nothingbuger. As I said in another thread, you'd knock 'em dead in the Yale summer debate program!

Hey, it's getting late on a Friday afternoon. About time for you to go on another bender.

Hear that soft, sexy whisper?

It's a bottle of Thunderbird, enticingly cooing your name!

[IIFFOFRDB]

#ManasstonguerNUTJOB

[Munchmasterman]

Any time you see the transcript missing right before a quote or missing right after the quote, you should check for the handy work of the misrepresenters. They think that by altering the context from the original setting they can alter the original meaning of the subject. In this case a quote.
And many don't stop there. They will openly lie about content and will randomly add words to suit their big picture lie. When called out for being pieces of shit, they will proclaim the other side is worse. They won't have any evidence to back their rant. They will project their character flaws onto others and continue to display a "What, me worry?" attitude.

HIRONO: Yes thank you. Probably during the course of your investigation you might be able to ascertain when they became radicalized.

We -- I'm turning to the death threats against certain judges. We have an administration that challenges federal judges who disagree with President trump's views. We've seen this in the campaign and during his Presidency.

Following Judge Derrik Watson's ruling blocking the president's revised travel ban, judge Watson who sits on the Hawaii district court.

Judge Watson began receiving death threats. I understand the U.S. Marshals have primary responsibility for the protection of federal judges, but that the FBI is poised to step in if necessary. Is the FBI investigating the threats made against judge Watson?

COMEY: I believe we are. It was last week visited the Honolulu field office and got briefed on our work, again to assist the marshals in trying to understand the threats and protect the judge, so I believe we are.

HIRONO: And then in February the three 9th circuit judges who ruled against the presidents first travel ban also began receiving threats is the FBI investigating those threats?

COMEY: I don't know that one for sure. I bet we are, but I can't answer with confidence as I sit here. HIRONO: So can we say any time federal judges are threatened that the FBI would likely be involved in investigating those threats?

COMEY: Probably in most circumstances, the Marshals have the primary responsibility and in my experience they very very often ask us for assistance on our -- what information we may have some of our technical resources, they're pretty darn good but in most cases I think we offer assistance

HIRONO: And are the president's continued attacks on the judiciary emboldening individuals to make these sort of threats? We're in an environment where some people might think that it's OK to issue these kinds of threats against judges who disagree with the president.

COMEY: Yes, that's not something I think I can comment on. It concerning whenever people are directing threats at judges because their independence and insulation from influence whether fear or favor is at the core of the whole justice system, which is why we take them so seriously.

HIRONO: Yes. And so speaking of the independence of not just the judiciary but I'd like you to clarify the FBI's independence from the DOJ apparatus. Can the FBI conduct an investigation independent from the department of Justice. Or does the FBI have to disclose all it's investigations to the DOJ? And does it have to get the Attorney General's consent?

COMEY: Well we work with the Department of Justice, whether that's main justice or U.S. attorney's offices on all of our investigations.

And so we work with them and so in a legal sense we're not independent of the department of justice. We are spiritually, culturally pretty independent group and that's the way you would want tit. But yes, we work with the Department of Justice on all of our investigations.

HIRONO:So if the Attorney General or senior officials at the Department of Justice opposes a specific investigation, can they halt that FBI investigation?"

COMEY: In theory yes.

HIRONO: Has it happened?

COMEY: Not in my experience. Because it would be a big deal to tell the FBI to stop doing something that -- without an appropriate purpose. I mean where oftentimes they give us opinions that we don't see a case there and so you ought to stop investing resources in it. But I'm talking about a situation where we were told to stop something for a political reason, that would be a very big deal. It's not happened in my experience.

HIRONO: Well, a number of us have called for an independent investigator or a special prosecutor to investigate the -- the Russian efforts to undermine or to interfere with our elections, as well as the Trump team's relationships with these -- these Russian efforts.

And should the Department of Justice decide that there should be such a independent investigator or a special prosecutor? And you already have an ongoing FBI instigation into these matters. How and the attorney general has already recused himself, so how would -- how would this proceed, when you have the Department of Justice conducting or assigning an independent or special prosecutor and then you're already doing investigation? How would this work?

COMEY: Our investigative team would just coordinate with a different set of prosecutors. It's as if a case was moved from one U.S. attorney's office to another, the investigative team just starts working with a different set of assistant U.S. attorneys. You don't -- you don't...

HIRONO: So the two investigations could proceed, but you would talk to each other, is that what you're describing?

COMEY: Right, its one -- its one investigation and the strength of the justice system at the federal level of the United States is, the prosecutors and the agents work together on their investigations. And so the investigators would disengage from one prosecutor and hook up to another and just continue going.

HIRONO: So in the investigations that you're currently doing on the Russian interference and the Trump team's relationship, are you coordinating with any U.S. attorney's office in these investigations?

COMEY: Yes, well -- two sets of prosecutors, the Main Justice the National Security Division and the Eastern District of Virginia U.S. Attorney's Office.

HIRONO: So should the A.G. decide to go with this special prosecutor, then you would end your engagement with these other two entities and work with the DOJ special prosecutor?

COMEY: Well, I could -- yes, potentially or it could be that in some circumstances, an attorney general will appoint someone else to oversee it and you keep the career level prosecutive team. And so to the prosecutors and the agents, there's no change except the boss is different.

HIRONO: If I could just ask one more follow-up question, so does this -- has this happened before, where you're doing an investigation and the attorney general appoints a special prosecutor to conduct the same investigation?

COMEY: It happened to me when I was in what I thought was my last job ever in the government as Deputy Attorney General and I appointed Patrick Fitzgerald, then the U.S. attorney in Chicago to oversee a very sensitive investigation involving allegations that Bush administration officials outed a CIA operative.

And so what happened is, the team of agents that had been working for the upper (ph) chain that came to me was just moved over and worked up under Patrick Fitzgerald. HIRONO: OK, thank you so it happens.

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Munchie's "right" again ...Not only "right", but right. Plus this is the only thing in your post you got "right"

.. "Comey does not testify trump did not interfere or try to halt the investigation (of any type)" .... True statement

When asked the question;

"So if the Attorney General or senior officials at the Department of Justice opposes a specific investigation, can they halt that FBI investigation?" Comey said;
COMEY: In theory yes.

HIRONO: Has it happened?

COMEY: Not in my experience..... It's not happened in my experience.That means his answer is "In his experience, the AG or senior officials at the DOJ have not halted an investigation....for political reasons.
He didn't say "anyone". He was asked about a specific subject set of people (the AG and senior DOJ officials) if they, and only they, had halted an investigation.
So in fact, you lied again.
Then you doubled down and said,

In fact, Comey said it's NEVER happened at any time ... from anyone!!!!Another lie caused by the douche-bag's lack of reading and comprehensive skills. Of course he opines that he can do those simple things. But the facts don't back his opinions up. Again

COMEY: Well we work with the Department of Justice, whether that's main justice or U.S. attorney's offices on all of our investigations.

And so we work with them and so in a legal sense we're not independent of the department of justice. We are spiritually, culturally pretty independent group and that's the way you would want tit. But yes, we work with the Department of Justice on all of our investigations.

HIRONO: So if the Attorney General or senior officials at the Department of Justice opposes a specific investigation, can they halt that FBI investigation?

COMEY: In theory yes.

HIRONO: Has it happened?

COMEY: Not in my experience. Because it would be a big deal to tell the FBI to stop doing something that -- without an appropriate purpose. I mean where oftentimes they give us opinions that we don't see a case there and so you ought to stop investing resources in it. But I'm talking about a situation where we were told to stop something for a political reason, that would be a very big deal. It's not happened in my experience.


Rather than just appear to be stupid, you added,
Dear Munchie .... "anyone" = Trump et al!!!! Too bad the word "anyone" wasn't used or inferred. You're just making shit up because you're too fucking lazy to read what he said. You put down what you wished he said.
Misreading the stunned silence of the crowd, you forged onward with,
"NEVER" MEANS back to Comey's birth to the moment he speaks!
Actually, never means never. It goes back past when Comey was born. In this case, your lack of knowing the definition of a common word has shown how little you know about vocabulary.

For instance, Munchie, if I were to ask you if you had sucked LukeWarm's dick, and you replied by posting ..
Let's just leave it at you were just as "right" about this as the rest of your post.
you "NEVER sucked anyone's dick" .... does that mean you sucked LukeWarm's dick? According to you it does!

So for you stupid people,
when I say I've never sucked a dick, it means I've never sucked a dick.
When the lexusliar says he's never sucked a dick, being that he is a liar and he doesn't know what "never" means, you'll have to decide on your own.

Not content to be a mere ass, you strove for and attained becoming a pompous ass. In my experience I can't recall when a moron's refusal to spend 2 minutes educating themselves paid off this well in ridecule and scorn.
Well played douche-bag.

And now for extra credit.
Can you see why Comey can say nobody from DOJ told him to halt an investigation and say in a memo that trump told him to halt,
without perjuring himself?

[Munchmasterman]

There is a time and place for everything. The subject matter concerned the DOJ. Why didn't he change the subject or try to change the scope of the questions when being questioned by the Senate committee? You'll have to ask him. But he'll be testifying again soon. I'm pretty sure it will come up then.

Originally Posted by gfejunkie

Comey had every opportunity to say, "The DOJ never did, but the President did."

But, he didn't. Did he?

[Munchmasterman]

Like I've said. No one can fix your level of stupid. Show where I said it was anything other than what it is. Actually what it isn't.
It's not a statement that trump didn't ask him to drop the investigation of flynn.
You saying otherwise, without showing proof, shows you to be a liar. Which is accepted by your team.
As a final statement prior to being banned, you posted a link to a post that has nothing to do with this subject.
Your meltdown continues.

Can't say you'll be missed, douche-bag.

Originally Posted by Ex-CEO

Hey Manmuncher!

Comprehension is not one of of your long suits, is it, moron?

Like here, for instance:

https://eccie.net/showthread.php?t=2026569&highlight=

Funny as hell!



OK, here goes:

As I said before, Comey's statement in the vid you linked neither bolsters nor counters your argument. A big, fat nothingbuger. As I said in another thread, you'd knock 'em dead in the Yale summer debate program!

Hey, it's getting late on a Friday afternoon. About time for you to go on another bender.

Hear that soft, sexy whisper?

It's a bottle of Thunderbird, enticingly cooing your name!

[Munchmasterman]

You get what you wish for. You realize the level it sucks at is so high that even you have to feel everyone got fucked. You talked so much shit that your balls will never be up to the task of being part of a solution.

Typical douche-bag.

Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB

#ManasstonguerNUTJOB

[Ex-CEO]

Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

Like I've said. No one can fix your level of stupid. Show where I said it was anything other than what it is. Actually what it isn't.
It's not a statement that trump didn't ask him to drop the investigation of flynn.
You saying otherwise, without showing proof, shows you to be a liar. Which is accepted by your team.
As a final statement prior to being banned, you posted a link to a post that has nothing to do with this subject.
Your meltdown continues.

Can't say you'll be missed, douche-bag.

Banned? What the fuck are you talking about? Are you always that unaware of what's going on around you, or were you just in your usual drunken stupor when you posted that?

As for the rest of your nonsensical babble, the key point I made earlier was that the statement you were clinging to means nothing; it neither supports nor undermines in any effective way the point you apparently were trying to make. Further, you're not perspicacious enough to divine the level of anyone's intelligence under any set of circumstances, let alone while drinking heavily and trolling on an SHMB. And, of course, the reason I posted a link to that other thread was to remind you that you're incapable of understanding the simplest concepts and statements. Your level of stupidity is the one that's beyond repair.

You certainly are fortunate that your livelihood doesn't depend on the ability to argue your case before a court of law, or in any other significant venue. It would be sad to see you reduced to having to hold up a cardboard sign at a busy street intersection.

(On second thought, it really wouldn't. It would be pretty funny!)

[Rey Lengua]

Originally Posted by Ex-CEO

Hey Manmuncher!

Comprehension is not one of of your long suits, is it, moron?

Like here, for instance:

https://eccie.net/showthread.php?t=2026569&highlight=

Funny as hell!



OK, here goes:

As I said before, Comey's statement in the vid you linked neither bolsters nor counters your argument. A big, fat nothingbuger. As I said in another thread, you'd knock 'em dead in the Yale summer debate program!

Hey, it's getting late on a Friday afternoon. About time for you to go on another bender.

Hear that soft, sexy whisper?

It's a bottle of Thunderbird, enticingly cooing your name!

Does Manassmuncher " dispose " of his wine bottles the same way as shrilLIARy does when there's bad news ?