The Wow I Can't Believe That News Story Thread

[Anteater]

Originally Posted by Chula Vista

Junior, you've already determined that the FBI will find nothing new.

Junior, you missed the fact that they don't investigate anyone's years prior to the age of 18.

Junior, what's your address? I want to send you a gift.

I didn't miss them. You just aren't making observations based on how people actually communicate in the real world, especially since he allegedly continued these behaviors well into his college years. People talk. Do you think the FBI just asked his former classmates back in 1993, 1997 and the early 00's what his favorite color was over and over again? Come on now.

To give you some perspective, Blasey Ford supposedly only mentioned to one or two friends that she sent a letter to Feinstein and then those friends ended up going straight to the media, which is allegedly how Ford's identity was exposed in the first place. When juicy stuff is floating around, that information tends to make it out into the greater conversation. In regards to sex parties and some of the stuff Avenatti has gone over in his clients' allegations, it just seems too far outside reality that nobody would have talked to someone in the media or the FBI prior to 2018, even if they only heard it secondhand. That all this stuff is only showing up now tells me something is off.

[The Batlord]

Originally Posted by Anteater

Ad hominem. I don't like the FBI, but I never disagreed with their findings about Russia (for example).

I've said it before and I'll say it again: if an investigation against Trump unearths legitimate (and not assumed) evidence of collusion, he should be impeached. It doesn't matter to me if he's President or not.

You'd never acknowledge it so this is a meaningless statement.

[Anteater]

Originally Posted by 66Sexy

You'd never acknowledge it so this is a meaningless statement.

Having a nuanced view of something means you have to acknowledge contradictory ideas within any given scenario. The world is a messy place and so are people. Everyone's a hypocrite to some degree as well, and responsibility tends to not be taken when it should. The question is, what are you comfortable living with versus what you won't tolerate? I can tolerate Trump and still be fine with him going down in flames if that's what ends up happening to him.

[rostasi]

I'm only gonna say just so much about this,
'cause my personal dealings aren't anyone's
business here, but the way it works is this:

If the agents visited the BK lounge for the first time back in 1993,
they would've asked him for personal friend references plus employers.
The friends would've certainly not been ones who would've said
"Yeah, he was a stinkin' mean-ass drunk all of the time."
No, you provide the people's names you trust will give you a good ref.
Other people will be checked - family, neighbors, and everything I said
in a previous post about professional connections.

Then, every five years afterwards, there's a followup - but only a followup.
Meaning that they are looking for any deviations from the initial review.
Did you suddenly come into a large amount of money during these years?
Are you suddenly taking more trips overseas than what matches your previous
years leading up to your initial review? ...and so on. The followups, if all
appears normal, take less than a half-hour - usually filled with happy chat
(usually done, I'm convinced, to see how you're doing mentally) that ends with
a handshake and a goodbye. So, all of this crap about 5 or 6 times of heavy
vetting is more than likely nonsense. If his original review was in 1993, then,
more than likely he had follow-ups in 1998, 2003, 2008, 2013, and now 2018.
There can be some bending of years, but the average time for review is 5 years.

What I'm curious about - and I'm sure the FBI would like to have enough time to investigate -
is what happened that led to BK being able to suddenly pay off, only recently,
some massive debts he accrued. This falls under one of the questions I
mentioned earlier that's a red flag for these agents on your 5-year.

[OccultHawk]

Originally Posted by Chula Vista

Junior, you've already determined that the FBI will find nothing new.

Junior, you missed the fact that they don't investigate anyone's years prior to the age of 18.

Junior, what's your address? I want to send you a gift.

Dafuq?

[Cuthbert]

Originally Posted by occulthawk

dafuq?

:d

[windsock]

Originally Posted by Chula Vista

Junior, you've already determined that the FBI will find nothing new.

Junior, you missed the fact that they don't investigate anyone's years prior to the age of 18.

Junior, what's your address? I want to send you a gift.

The condescension levels here have broken the Richter scale.

[rostasi]

[Lucem Ferre]

I've read the FBI's chapter on juggalos for the national gang assessment. I know how incompetent the FBI can be.

[[MERIT]]

Originally Posted by OccultHawk

Two cities were razed by a tsunami in Indonesia but how can that possibly compete for news time when a rich woman was dry humped 40 years ago?

#QuotedForTruth

Originally Posted by 66Sexy

Sexual assault is notoriously hard to prove unless the victim immediately goes to the police and gets a rape kit, so after nearly four decades it wouldn't be surprising if an unreported near rape didn't come up on the FBI's radar. TBH I'd be kinda surprised if they did uncover anything.

^ This.

Originally Posted by rostasi

I'm only gonna say just so much about this,
'cause my personal dealings aren't anyone's
business here, but the way it works is this:

If the agents visited the BK lounge for the first time back in 1993,
they would've asked him for personal friend references plus employers.
The friends would've certainly not been ones who would've said
"Yeah, he was a stinkin' mean-ass drunk all of the time."
No, you provide the people's names you trust will give you a good ref.
Other people will be checked - family, neighbors, and everything I said
in a previous post about professional connections.

Then, every five years afterwards, there's a followup - but only a followup.
Meaning that they are looking for any deviations from the initial review.
Did you suddenly come into a large amount of money during these years?
Are you suddenly taking more trips overseas than what matches your previous
years leading up to your initial review? ...and so on. The followups, if all
appears normal, take less than a half-hour - usually filled with happy chat
(usually done, I'm convinced, to see how you're doing mentally) that ends with
a handshake and a goodbye. So, all of this crap about 5 or 6 times of heavy
vetting is more than likely nonsense. If his original review was in 1993, then,
more than likely he had follow-ups in 1998, 2003, 2008, 2013, and now 2018.
There can be some bending of years, but the average time for review is 5 years.

What I'm curious about - and I'm sure the FBI would like to have enough time to investigate -
is what happened that led to BK being able to suddenly pay off, only recently,
some massive debts he accrued. This falls under one of the questions I
mentioned earlier that's a red flag for these agents on your 5-year.

Why do you format your posts to make them look like song lyrics?

Originally Posted by rostasi

This photo is actually a double entendre, because the "Richter" Scale was mentioned, and because Andy Richter says that his wife having an abortion is the best thing they ever did.