4 Dead In Capitol Attack, Same as Benghazi. How Many GOP Hearings?

LV426 said:
It's not an exhaustive report, it's a random report by people who didn't even work in any IC community at the time
Click to expand...
THE IC lies for it's own agenda -get that in your head first.
secondly look at the footnotes of the report, and look at the numbers on interview -
how in the FUCk can you say it's not "exhaustive
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmfaff/119/11905.htm

I can get you more but all you have is "nyah nyah" and im done wasting more time with you
 
dukkha said:
this is NOT cherry picked and NOT Raw intel!!.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is for all you know. And it is for all we know because you didn't tell the truth!

You didn't the truth about that report. You lied. Multiple times. Like lying about how MI-6 "backed it". They didn't back it. People who used to work at MI-6, but who didn't for the report, "backed it", but you didn't say that. You tried to represent it as something MI-6 officially backed. BUT THEY DIDN'T.

SO. YOU. LIED ABOUT IT.

You have trouble with honesty and accountability.
 
LV426 said:
Why did Paul Manafort, while campaign manager for Trump, give Kilmnik confidential GOP polling data to share with Deripaska?

Answer that question, and you answer the Russian collusion question for good.
Click to expand...
ROFL..stuck on stupid.
I refer you to the Mueller conclusions of no US conspiring with da Russians by any member of the Trump election peeps
 
dukkha said:
..the UK report is EXHAUSTIVE and damning to Cameron /Hillary /Rice /Sarkozy
Click to expand...

It's bullshit.

That's why you had to lie about it.

That's why you had to lie and say "MI-6 backed it".

That's why you had to lie and not say that the people who produced the report weren't even working in the IC at the time.

You are a liar.
 
Hoosier Daddy said:
A woman was shot by the police, 3 others died due to medical complications connected to this attack, the same as the number of Americans killed in a late night attack in a small town at a foreign mission station in Libya.

Republicans' $7 Million Benghazi Report Is Another Dud ...www.vanityfair.com › news › 2016/06 › house-select-c...
Jun 28, 2016 — After a more than two-year investigation, encompassing 33 hearings held in congressional investigations and four public hearings, at an .

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/06/house-select-committee-benghazi-report
Click to expand...

your comparing the 2 what a moron a complete idiot. they are not even close to being related incidents except in your mind the mind of a complete and other mental midget.
You must be one of the dumbest sob to ever walk the earth .
 
LV426 said:
Yes, it is for all you know. And it is for all we know because you didn't tell the truth!

You didn't the truth about that report. You lied. Multiple times. Like lying about how MI-6 "backed it". They didn't back it. People who used to work at MI-6, but who didn't for the report, "backed it", but you didn't say that. You tried to represent it as something MI-6 officially backed. BUT THEY DIDN'T.

SO. YOU. LIED ABOUT IT.

You have trouble with honesty and accountability.
Click to expand...
all you have to do is clik on the report ( i gave you the link) and see it;s level of details and CONCLUSION
(we call them assessments) and you can see it's nether "raw" or inexhaustive
 
Hoosier Daddy said:
what does benghazi or the attack on our Capitol have to do with BLM? do you think repubs will have even half as many investigations into this attack as they did on Benghazi? if what you do can be called thinking.
Click to expand...

what do protest in dc have to do with benghazi you moron thats like comparing a head of lettuce ( your small mind ) to a apple your a complete idiot taco fag how PATHETIC
 
dukkha said:
THE IC lies for it's own agenda
Click to expand...

Wait - hold up.

So if the IC lies for their own agenda, and these people whose report you used were/are a part of the IC, then doesn't that mean THEY lied for their agenda with this "report" you said "MI-6 backed" but actually didn't back, you just lied about it?

You lied about it. You lied. You said it was "exhaustive" (I've read this before...it's not). You said it was "backed by MI-6" (It wasn't). And then you accused the IC of "lying for their agenda" while holding up a report from people who worked in IC.

What this all boils down to is that you're a fucking liar.
 
dukkha said:
horseshit
were you on DCJ 1? BAC did original research, I did the same,,we would compare and extrapolate at time
We were the first to come up with the term " war of convenience"- meaning over oil
BAC goes one step further and says it was because the gold dinar was a threat to Rothschild banks

I wish it were still around so I could rub your ignorant race hustling nose in it.
But here is what your Obama heros did

https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/whitewashing-wests-disastrous-war-libya
Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and key advisers such as Susan Rice and Samantha Power still refuse to acknowledge their blunders or apologize to the suffering Libyan people. It is time for the media to stop aiding and abetting such an evasion of responsibility. Stories about the current turmoil in Libya need to provide a clear picture of the shameful historical context.
Click to expand...


my view hasnt changed. its STILL a racist white man lie.its why yall have dump as president.........RACIST WHITE MEN Lying on PRESIDENT OBAMA and CLINTON and white america believing them.
 
LV426 said:
Wait - hold up.

So if the IC lies for their own agenda, and these people whose report you used were/are a part of the IC, then doesn't that mean THEY lied for their agenda with this "report" you said "MI-6 backed" but actually didn't back, you just lied about it?

You lied about it. You lied. You said it was "exhaustive" (I've read this before...it's not). You said it was "backed by MI-6" (It wasn't). And then you accused the IC of "lying for their agenda" while holding up a report from people who worked in IC.

What this all boils down to is that you're a fucking liar.
Click to expand...
no you havent read it. you fail to make any critique -you lie as usual.

The report wasn't an INTELLIGENCE REPORT - it was by House of Commons.
there are IC references in there that "back it up"

quit wasting my time while feeding your delusions
 
dukkha said:
I refer you to the Mueller conclusions of no US conspiring with da Russians by any member of the Trump election peeps
Click to expand...

Mueller didn't conclude that at all.

Barr lied about Mueller saying that, just like how you lied about that Libya report, or about getting the unsolicited mail-in ballot.

And how would you even know what Mueller said? YOU REFUSE TO READ HIS REPORT.

Hard to see how voluntary ignorance helps you case.

I read everything. You don't. That's one thing that separates us; you're lazy and I'm not.
 
dukkha said:
no you havent read it.s
Click to expand...

Unlike you, I read reports when they come out.

Unlike you, when I cite those reports, I do my homework to know what I'm talking about.

I don't believe YOU read the report. Instead, I think you did a quick Google search for something and this turned up, you didn't read it, didn't do any of the research into who wrote it, and then you came on JPP and just lied about it.

You lied about how "MI-6 backed it". They didn't back it. That was a lie.

You lied about how it's "exhaustive". I've read it. It's not exhaustive. So that was also a lie.

You lied about how the IC "lies to advance their agenda" while holding up a report from people in the IC. And then, if you say "well it's not an IC report", I say "then who fucking cares?"

You're such a sloppy liar that it makes it so fucking easy for me to tear your shit apart.


The report wasn't an INTELLIGENCE REPORT - it was by House of Commons.
there are IC references in there that "back it up"
Click to expand...

So these goalposts have now shifted three times.

First, you said this was a valid Intel report.

Then, you said that MI-6 "backs it up".

Then, you said it is not even an Intel report at all.

Then, you said "there are IC references in there that 'back it up;"

So that's you changing your story three times now.

You're a liar. All you do on here is lie. This thread is yet more proof of how much of a pathological liar you are.

You never, ever, ever tell the full truth here. Never. Not once. You lie, you distort, you manipulate, you cherry pick. That's why I don't buy your fiction that you opposed Iraq. It is totally incongruous with what you are saying and doing today.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top