I’m a little surprised they didn’t just leave only the answer they want.
Frankly, I suspect they’re going to fake the numbers anyway.
It’s a plague ship.
Now I want to see him nominated for something just so the first Democrat to ask him a question can start off with, “Thank you for joining us today, General. I’d also like to thank your probation officer for allowing you to travel for this occasion.”
… and some cold water poured on feverish fantasies of some:
"Flynn initially told investigators sanctions were not discussed. But FBI agents challenged him, asking if he was certain that was his answer. He said he didn’t remember.
The FBI interviewers believed Flynn was cooperative and provided truthful answers. Although Flynn didn’t remember all of what he talked about, they don’t believe he was intentionally misleading them, the officials say.
Further, then-acting Attorney General Sally Yates delayed notifying the White House until after Flynn was interviewed. At that point, FBI Director James Comey did not object to notifying the White House counsel."
“A senior intelligence official told ABC News last night that no evidence gathered by the FBI so far suggests Trump associates knew they were talking to Russian intelligence officers. Those contacts being scrutinized by the FBI were first reported by The New York Times on Wednesday.”
and three:
"Most of this stuff is completely uncorroborated. When my colleague Sean Illing asked an ex-CIA analyst, Aki Peritz, about the memo, Peritz was deeply skeptical.
“We’ve no idea if any of this is true,” Peritz said. “We don’t know who these sources are. It’s entirely likely that they’re feeding the author of this report garbage, as often happens.”
…
So far, they have only been able to corroborate insignificant parts of it, like whether one Russian official talked to another on the date listed in the memo. And there’s very little hard evidence to support the allegations — especially the more salacious ones — in the Steele dossier."
oh and some fake news from WSJ:
"The intrigue heightened late Wednesday when The Wall Street Journal picked up claims that U.S. intelligence officers were withholding intelligence from the 45th president over eroded trust because of his associates’ Russian contacts and the FBI scrutiny of the White House.
But numerous officials said that was absurd.
“Any suggestion that the U.S. intelligence community is withholding information and is not providing the best possible intelligence to the president and his national security team is not true," the director of national intelligence’s public affairs office said in a statement."
Only question 7 and 8 allows a ‘memo’ to the question now. I’m quite surprised they didn’t ask for a home address and a picture so they could get to know you better.
I see. When the FBI investigation doesn’t lead to charges against a Republican appointee, it means he’s innocent. When an FBI investigation into the Democrat nominee for President doesn’t lead to charges, it means she’s clearly guilty, but the FBI is covering for her.
The whole “we’re not evil, we’re just incredibly incompetent” from Dubya’s administration has really caught on with the right.
I see this too. Questionable intelligence that could damage a Republican is automatically untrustworthy and rejected out of hand. Questionable intelligence providing a reason for a Republican president to start a costly, unjustifiable war is just fine.
Man, you guys shift gears more than … a frequent gear shifting thing.
“My colleague asked an ex-analyst about something he’s not working in on (and is longer even involved with the agency), and he sez…”
Doesn’t have that “When EF Hutton speaks, people listen” quality to the source, does it?
As Sen. Rand Paul reminds us,“I just don’t think it’s useful to be doing investigation after investigation, particularly of your own party. We’ll never even get started with doing the things we need to do, like repealing Obamacare, if we’re spending our whole time having Republicans investigate Republicans. I think it makes no sense.”
So let’s just forget that Country First nonsense, relics of an earlier age.
Did you salute your cardboard Trump today? Dear Leader demands your genuflection.
Betsy DeVos steps into a public school for the first time in her life and promptly steps on her dick.
And the mouth breathing, inbred Deplorables will continue to vote that traitor back into Congress, won’t they. While they wave the fucking flag.
Fake tweets. So unfair. So sad 
Like how Trump suggested curbing the First Amendment?
Like when Trump ejected people from his rallies for holding up pocket-sized copies of the Constitution?
Cite? And how does that compare to the percentage of conservatives with severe mental issues? Using the same metrics as used to make this claim about liberals, of course. I would imagine that the numbers are pretty close to each other.
I don’t have anyone on ignore, either. Largely for the same reasons that you listed.
I don’t have anyone here on ignore, iirc.
But I put people on ignore when their contributions are not worth even skimming.
Why waste my time?
Why feed obvious trolls? The best thing is to ignore them, be it in fact or using the Ignore function, the latter of which option seems to be considered somehow dishonorable by some, although I’ve never understood that sentiment myself.
And yet, there are so many so called “patriots” that would be absolutely thrilled about it. They are the same ones who used to scream about Obama’s FEMA camps and Jade Helmet (that Army invading Texas nonsense).
Tyranny and dictatorship are GREAT, as long as they are the ones tyrannizing.
[I also liked the more substantive parts of your post…but this last line really cracked me up.]