This is from the WALL STREET JOURNAL you fuckin deluded autists.
Nothing is going to happen. Nothing was going on.
Good luck getting anyone with a brain onboard with this shit.
wsj.com
This is from the WALL STREET JOURNAL you fuckin deluded autists.
Nothing is going to happen. Nothing was going on.
Good luck getting anyone with a brain onboard with this shit.
wsj.com
Other urls found in this thread:
wsj.com
thegatewaypundit.com
youtu.be
usatoday.com
twitter.com
But wait, there's more!
Here's from the article that was linked in the original pic.
When the WSJ is calling out your conspiracy theory, you know you are all fucked.
There goes Trump's credibility.
Show me 'proof' of a conspiracy. I dare you. I absolutely DARE you.
Literally read the text exchanges that were just released you sperging mongoloid.
Welp, that settles it, we have to take those codes back now.
just keep watching buddy at this point we dont need to prove a thing
post one where there's actual evidence of them abusing their power and not just acting like facebook-tier retards
this isn't bait btw I actually want to see it
Oh shit lads time to pack up. Show is over now, Hillary won the election lads drumpf is literally finished.
I have. Its NOTHING. They are retards, sure, but there is no evidence of a conspiracy of any type.
You are such faggots.
Can you post something that supports your arguement or is it just memes?
checked
How about them texting about their untraceable phones that they were mandatory to discuss all things Hillary?
>WSF
>no OVERALL conspiracy
Note its not a uncategorical denial of a conspiracy just merely an OVERALL one.
Journalist scum.
it definitely raises questions no? Schiff not sticking to the scripts and Obama flat out lying
...
First of all, a quick Google search brings up nothing.
Second of all, they were having an affair - it could have easily been about that.
>overall conspiracy
>evidence that shows no "evidence" of a conspiracy
these are classic weasel words.
conspiracy is 2 or more people plotting something nefarious, just to use the most basic definition. since we don't know what extent Page and Strozk were able to go, or how far they did go (since the record is very incomplete), we can't really say if there really was a "conspiracy" because we have to understand their motives and intent.
The layman who reads a few of those choice text messages are going to get a very strong impression that there was a conspiracy against Trump, since they actually say that they are plotting against him. Was it nefarious? illegal? That's a good question. a question that the WSJ does not know the answer to.
It's most amazing that WSJ is willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt when they have no context to unequivocally say he was asking for information about "russia." He could have been asking about anything. The context is actually not in favor of "russia" investigation, but something else. It's hard to say b/c Page and Strozk were still talking about the Hillary emails. WSJ has turned into an insufferable rag that is just running interference for their democrat masters. This is an egregious breach of journalistic integrity.
What if they were having an (((affair))) specifically because of their affiliations and alignments?
>I READ THE TEXTS
>after a quick google search i found nothing
When he says "talk about hillary", what's he mean exactly? Like talk about how great she is?
>democrat propaganda outlets like the WSJ should be trusted
OP = Faggot
>investigative questions are dickish
>Refusing to feign ignorance is not following the script
Explain this for me shill.
What else would they be talking about? OPs crazy bias is stunning. Would love to guzzle down corruption instead of figuring out the truth. Has to hide and say the darndest shit to DENY DENY DENY... If you've learned any social cues or anything in your entire life, it isn't hard to understand what is going on here - especially given the bigger picture and track record.. Hillary denied having any knowledge of the dossier than 3 days later was defending paying for it herself lmao
>WSJ
>Dem propaganda
kys
>SAGE ALL SLIDE THREADS
There's so many more blatant texts I'd be happy to share, but if OP is this fucking dense we should just find a new thread.
Who even knows what they are referring to here. Who is Jason?
Show me then. All I see is people ranting on and on and no one posting actual evidence. Maybe a few cherry picked texts but thats it.
>whos Jason
LMFAO see, you just read shit like WSJ you don't actually watch the court proceedings and what's actually going on.
WSJ TELL ME WHAT THIS MEEEEEAAANNNSSS
But OP they are members of the SECRET SOCIETY
This motherfucker OP faggot
Reading the text messages is illegal. Only CNN and Washington Post are authorized to read them and tell you what they say
What court proceedings are you talking about?
You should probably wait until all of the evidence is out before you jump to conclusions. More is coming out every day.
Fusiongps was founded by seasoned journalists from wsj. They are establishment, they are not to be trusted. They are the paper of choice for neocons and centrist neolibs
Why do you even try? You will be btfo eternally. Democrats will be destroyed. Your idols will fall from grace. You will be an even more pathetic loser. You will take your own life or we will do it for you come day of the rope.
This was on the day Comey testified in court. Gowdy was "a dick" for asking questions that were investigative in nature and not softballs. Jason was not "sticking to the script" by backing off when Comey didn't want to answer a question.
This is clear evidence that they instructed the questioners on how to respond to certain lines Comey would say. We should go back and see what happens whenever Comey says "I'm not answering that."
He's not going to have an answer
>"Here is something that sounds kinda fucked up without any context!"
>"Can you provide context?"
>"HAHAHA WHY WOULD YOU NEED THAT RETARD HAHA"
By "Jason" they mean Jason Chaffetz, btw
What a tangled web we weave when we practice to deceive
Retard, there is a date on the text messages. Just Google the date and "Gowdy" to see the context.
Obamaleaf is back ? He really needs psychiatric help at this point.
Sage, hide and ignored.
Fucking congressional testimony you ape
Isn't he loved by the tea party?
Someone's bound to have the link handy, it's c-span stuff, these guys were being grilled publicly.
Not that brainwashed retards like ever watched any of them.
Jason Herring actually
youtu.be
No, they're talking about jason herring
#corruptdems #corruptmedia
Why would he be following anybody's script?
>giving shitposters (You)s
>Replying to a "LE DRUMF IS FINISHED" shitpost
>court proceedings
>congressional testimony
I swear to God this board is the dumbest place on the internet.
>The wall street journal has reported, citing itself, that there was definitely no treason
>according to the WSJ, which reviewed the documents extensively
>the WSJ suggests you go back to sleep now
>The WSJ referenced the WSJ's own reporters on the subject
how the fuck can they conclude that Obama wanted to be briefed on the Russia investigation? The info we have can go either way.
>cherry picked texts
You want to tell me how often the Justice Dept doesn't declines to rule a case? On top of that, how often do they decline to rule a case before the investigation has begun? NEVER, not until HIllary. So lets see here,
Strzok INTERVIEWS hillary off the record.
gives everyone who testifies immunity as well
Strzok removes the vocabulary of the documents that would literally INDICT Clinton
Strzok says he doesn't believe the russia nonsene is any there there
Strzok starts Russia investigation
You will also soon find out that Carter Page was planted literally to get a FISA warrant on Trump. Carter Page being a known FBI employee who helped to indict a russian energy bad guy for the US.
You won't even look at reality and what's right in front of you, I truly feel sorry for you.
I'm also mentioning nothing- not even the FBI agent whos been blocked from testifying about Russian bribes and gangs in the US, in regards to Uranium One.. Wellll, that mother fucker just spilled the beans on your poor Hillary. Be objective man, eating all this shit cant be good for you
D-do you mean. Drumpf is b-blown the fuck out?
Is it....o-over for him??
>Strzok says he doesn't believe the russia nonsene is any there there
Where has this ever come up?
In the text messages.
That you fucking said you read for the 3rd time
you dumb cunt can look at the texts on your own do you know this? Fucking moron
Hey look another moron to lazy to research the texts you yourself can look up but instead out of stupidity and laziness rather takes the word of some msm shitrag that lied the last two years on a consistent basis as long as it its anit trump at least lol.
Seriously dumb fucking cunt.
“I hesitate in part because of my gut sense and concern (that) there’s no big there there,” Strzok said in the May 19 message, before he joined Mueller's staff.
If you were trolling, I figure you'd be better at it. I'm really trying to help you. You aren't even concerned. What makes you think that we're more civilized than what's been happening for literally forever?
Well then there should be no issue releasing them all. Right?
I don't understand why demodicks even come here. They're not gonna try and prove any one wrong here of all places. Majority of people who aren't shills are clued up on what's going on.
>obvious bait
>blows the rape whistle
STOP RIGHT THERE
>WALL STREET JOURNAL
So a Fake News source.
you are right memeflag, i think I will just go to sleep
Go back to indoctrinating Redit. Your bullshit doesn't work here.
Time line of events posted and then deleted by Forbes yesterday.
>using using your own opinion article as a source for journalism
>credible
...
Wow this is actually a pretty damning layout.
You said they deleted this? Is there an archived version?
Somebody didn’t read the texts, then. Or, you read them left to right, like you would your fucking Koran. Try reading from right to left, you’ll see what the texts meant, not dictated from media. Think for yourself, fucktard.
>the only argument against the texts that ive seen is circular reasoning articles by the wsj
wow epic
Lol you mad bro?
hi pete! did you like the pic of your girlfriend i made?
They covered for Hillary and tried to make her look innocent
why are you so concerned about an archive of the page when you can literally verify it for yourself by reading the texts themselves? why are you so reliant on Approved Website Confirmation for your opinions you pitstain?
...
i literally hate this stupid whore. Just look at her dumb retard face, nothing but gums and hysterics. Disgusting.
>the WSJ is citing the WSJ as a source
>liberals think this is authoritative journalism
The absolute state of leftists.
Indeed. It’s called pilpul. I suggest everybody familiarize themselves with this trick
...so the cianigger who uses a fraudulent identity turned out to be a lying nigger. shocking.
You haven't supported your argument though, just a typical appeal to fake authority that you shit libs always do. Your sources have been discredited and you STILL think it's going to convince the average suburban retard that didn't vote for Hillary.
Get new talking points, the old ones don't work.
Are those 2 merchants memed into there or is this some new timeline?
Shills need to die. Your side is the one playing catch-up with the truth, ours has been consistent.
Congressional testimony is under oath.
I want you to choke me gently, OP!
>WSJ
>Not a globalist shill outlet
Anyway, what's up with (((WSJ)))? It's true that it's owned by zionist shill Rupert Murdoch, but Fox is now actively covering Obamagate and Memogate.
Does this have anything to do with the Disney acquisition of all FOX assets other than Fox News? Some kind of undercover deal? I doubt Murdoch would allow Fox to report on FISAgate after all the memo bullshit, unless he's betting it all on Fox and left WSJ to someone else who has dirt on him.
Idiot. Those texts are full of instances where they leaked disinfo to the press. Go back to huffing your farts.
Nice cap Krautbro.
Hmmm... if true it might explain why Chafetz recently decided to leave COngress and “do something else.”
No, it's Jason Herring you fucking idiot
WSJ news section has been quite mainstream, which is to mean, conforming with Democratic party bias, for some time.
>let me cite myself as an authority on why I am right
I mean, come on. Apply yourselves, shills, this is just lazy.
This, I think its time to wake up now
Glowing x 10
bumping
Someone had posted one yesterday as this was happening but I failed to save the archive link.
Are you too stupid to read the messages yourself. Or do you need someone to tell you what to think. You are a prime example of why our Democratic Party is doomed. At the current rate, it will not survive the next 7 years.
>Someone wrote an article!
>It must be 100% true and devoid of bias!
>I don't need to read these texts for myself!
>The wall street journal did it for me!
Good goy.
STOP REPLYING TO SHILLS NEWFAGS!
Remember to SAGE and post a redpill