10 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

So what? Hearsay upon hearsay LOL

You're not the least bit interested in the facts. You're completely happy to make ill informed remarks on topics which you know nothing about.

Here is a description of FBI methods of documenting the results of an investigation:

In federal investigations, including those led by Special Counsel Jack Smith, interviews are typically documented in written summaries (often called "302s") prepared by the interviewing agents, and in some instances, may also be audio or video recorded, depending on Justice Department policy and state law. The specifics of the documentation process were not a primary focus of Jack Smith's congressional testimony, which concentrated on the evidence gathered and the justification for the indictments. 

The methods used by Smith's team included:

• Agent Notes and Summaries: FBI agents and prosecutors take detailed notes during interviews, which are then compiled into formal written summaries (Form 302s) for official case records. These records are discoverable by the defense during the legal process.

• Phone Records Analysis: Smith's team obtained and analyzed phone records (toll records) to establish the timing and participants of calls, which was "very important" for creating a timeline of events and showing intent, particularly around January 6, 2021. These records did not include the actual content of the conversations.

• Subpoenaed Records: Investigators gathered extensive hard evidence such as emails, text messages, and other documents from various sources, including Trump aides, which provided detailed accounts and corroborated witness testimony.

• Corroboration: Smith mentioned how interviews with different individuals, like Mark Meadows and a Secret Service officer, were used to corroborate or contrast with other accounts, such as Cassidy Hutchinson's secondhand testimony. 

While some interviews with key witnesses or in certain jurisdictions might be recorded, the standard federal practice has long relied heavily on contemporaneous agent notes and subsequent written summaries. Smith's public testimony did not dive into the specific methods of recording but emphasized the rigor and professionalism of his team's evidence-gathering process, adhering to the Principles of Federal Prosecution. 

12 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

So what? Hearsay upon hearsay LOL

Is that all you've got? "So what?"😆

3 minutes ago, gamb00ler said:

You're not the least bit interested in the facts. You're completely happy to make ill informed remarks on topics which you know nothing about.

Here is a description of FBI methods of documenting the results of an investigation:

In federal investigations, including those led by Special Counsel Jack Smith, interviews are typically documented in written summaries (often called "302s") prepared by the interviewing agents, and in some instances, may also be audio or video recorded, depending on Justice Department policy and state law. The specifics of the documentation process were not a primary focus of Jack Smith's congressional testimony, which concentrated on the evidence gathered and the justification for the indictments. 

The methods used by Smith's team included:

• Agent Notes and Summaries: FBI agents and prosecutors take detailed notes during interviews, which are then compiled into formal written summaries (Form 302s) for official case records. These records are discoverable by the defense during the legal process.

• Phone Records Analysis: Smith's team obtained and analyzed phone records (toll records) to establish the timing and participants of calls, which was "very important" for creating a timeline of events and showing intent, particularly around January 6, 2021. These records did not include the actual content of the conversations.

• Subpoenaed Records: Investigators gathered extensive hard evidence such as emails, text messages, and other documents from various sources, including Trump aides, which provided detailed accounts and corroborated witness testimony.

• Corroboration: Smith mentioned how interviews with different individuals, like Mark Meadows and a Secret Service officer, were used to corroborate or contrast with other accounts, such as Cassidy Hutchinson's secondhand testimony. 

While some interviews with key witnesses or in certain jurisdictions might be recorded, the standard federal practice has long relied heavily on contemporaneous agent notes and subsequent written summaries. Smith's public testimony did not dive into the specific methods of recording but emphasized the rigor and professionalism of his team's evidence-gathering process, adhering to the Principles of Federal Prosecution. 

And whats your point? Are FBI 302s evidence?

7 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

And whats your point? Are FBI 302s evidence?

too many big words for you? I don't think there is 'Evidence for Dummies' version for you.

2 minutes ago, gamb00ler said:

too many big words for you? I don't think there is 'Evidence for Dummies' version for you.

Guess you cant answer the question LOL.

15 hours ago, Yagoda said:

Guess you cant answer the question LOL.

It's your question, it's your responsibility. Despite the rumors, I don't know everything and almost always rely on acknowledged experts instead of social and politically biased media.

1 hour ago, gamb00ler said:

It's your question, it's your responsibility. Despite the rumors, I don't know everything and almost always rely on acknowledged experts instead of social and politically biased media.

Not my responsibility to teach you the evidentiary value of FBI 302s or DEA 6s or the like. You beleive everything the government says, anyway, right?

2 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Not my responsibility to teach you the evidentiary value of FBI 302s or DEA 6s or the like. You beleive everything the government says, anyway, right?

Once again your imagination is running away with your mind. I never asked you about that point. Please improve every AN member's experience by enrolling in a reading comprehension class.

1 minute ago, gamb00ler said:

Once again your imagination is running away with your mind. I never asked you about that point. Please improve every AN member's experience by enrolling in a reading comprehension class.

You post speaks for itself lol

On 1/1/2026 at 6:11 PM, Liverpool Lou said:

To peacefully protest, as has been shown, ad nauseum.

There’s devotion and then there’s blind devotion. How anyone could say Jan 6 was a “peaceful protest”’is literally denying what they can plainly see with their own eyes.

It’s this level of wilful ignorance and ability to only see and acknowledge events that suits your bias that truly marks out the most indoctrinated of the cult.

The GOP's decision to have Jack Smith testify before Congress will go down in the history books as a humongous self-own. It was boys against a man.

My favourite quote: “There is no historical analog for what President Trump did in this case."

'In Hearing Transcript, Jack Smith Defends Decision to Indict Trump'

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/31/us/politics/jack-smith-deposition-house-trump.html?unlocked_article_code=1.BVA._SsH.hQgfgprE68dl&smid=tw-share

https://archive.ph/D3kpK

"According to the transcript, Mr. Smith pushed back hardest when Republicans suggested Mr. Trump’s public statements after the 2020 election were protected under the First Amendment. “Fraud is not protected by the First Amendment,” he said in the interview.

Mr. Smith bristled when a Republican staff member, whose name was redacted in the transcript, pressed that point, citing a long list of disputed elections “where candidates believed they were wronged” and made allegations of voter fraud.

“There is no historical analog for what President Trump did in this case,” Mr. Smith responded."

1 hour ago, johnnybangkok said:

There’s devotion and then there’s blind devotion. How anyone could say Jan 6 was a “peaceful protest”’is literally denying what they can plainly see with their own eyes.

It’s this level of wilful ignorance and ability to only see and acknowledge events that suits your bias that truly marks out the most indoctrinated of the cult.

Because that's the party line and the echo chamber will repeat it endlessly! 😆

4 hours ago, johnnybangkok said:

There’s devotion and then there’s blind devotion. How anyone could say Jan 6 was a “peaceful protest”’is literally denying what they can plainly see with their own eyes.

It’s this level of wilful ignorance and ability to only see and acknowledge events that suits your bias that truly marks out the most indoctrinated of the cult.

That "blind devotion" (read stupidity) is evident here......

Behold the unyielding paragons of unwavering loyalty, these majestic Trump supporters who gaze upon their orange-tinted messiah with the kind of blind devotion that makes cult leaders everywhere nod in quiet approval, all while conveniently forgetting—or better yet, aggressively defending—the delightful little tidbits from the freshly unsealed Epstein files that paint their hero in the most fascinating light.

Picture this: while they're out there slapping on ear bandages in solidarity for a man who dodged a bullet like he dodges taxes, the Justice Department drops a bombshell of nearly 30,000 pages revealing that Donald Trump, the self-proclaimed outsider who bans elites from his clubs unless they're paying members, actually hopped aboard Jeffrey Epstein's infamous Lolita Express not just a casual once or twice, but a whopping eight times back in the '90s, sometimes with Ghislaine Maxwell riding shotgun, according to a prosecutor's email that somehow slipped through the redactions despite the Trump administration's valiant efforts to bury it all under a mountain of black Sharpie marks.

And oh, the irony thickens like overcooked gravy when you learn that these files include mentions of Epstein introducing a 14-year-old girl to Trump at Mar-a-Lago in 1994, with no wrongdoing alleged of course, because why would there be when your guy is just "terrific" as Trump himself once called Epstein, back when they were apparently the best of buddies chasing skirts and deals in the same sleazy social circles.

But wait, there's more—Trump's name pops up over 100 times in these documents, including flight records showing he jetted around on that plane way more than anyone previously admitted, even during the juicy periods tied to Maxwell's case, all while he tweets denials like "I was never on Epstein’s Plane, or at his ‘stupid’ Island," which is just chef's kiss levels of gaslighting for a crowd that eats it up like it's manna from Mar-a-Lago heaven.

These supporters, bless their grievance-fueled hearts, will twist themselves into pretzels explaining how this is all a deep-state witch hunt, how their fearless leader who signed the bill to release these files after initially fighting tooth and nail against it is somehow the victim here, never mind the photos of him grinning alongside Epstein and Maxwell that got temporarily yanked from the DOJ site amid victim concerns, only to be reinstated after the backlash because transparency is apparently optional when it involves your favorite felon.

It's almost poetic, really, how they rally around a guy whose Epstein ties include everything from shared jet jaunts to birthday book shoutouts, all while clutching their pearls over "saving the children" and decrying pedophiles, yet somehow overlooking the glaring fact that their idol was Epstein's "closest friend for 10 years" by the pedophile's own words, and even after banning him from Mar-a-Lago for allegedly hitting on an underage girl, Trump still wished Ghislaine well during her trial like she was an old bridge partner.

No, these aren't just fans; they're acrobats of cognitive dissonance, performing death-defying leaps over mountains of evidence to land squarely in the land of "fake news" and "alternative facts," where Epstein's "stupid" Little Saint James island— that infamous playground of the powerful where billionaires allegedly trafficked minors amid palm trees and private jets—becomes just another liberal hoax, even as the files drip out details of Trump's entanglements without a single visit to the island proven, but hey, who needs facts when you've got faith? It's not a movement; it's a masterclass in selective amnesia, where supporting a man mentioned in rape allegations from the files (again, no charges, just vibes) is somehow the height of patriotism, and the rest of us are left chuckling at the sheer audacity of it all, wondering if the ear bandages are there to block out the sound of reality crashing in.

Keep shining, you beautiful enablers of absurdity; without you, satire would be out of a job.

 

 

 

22 hours ago, Yagoda said:

And whats your point? Are FBI 302s evidence?

sometimes and sometimes not.... I'll leave it as a homework assignment for you.

Posts with derogatory nicknames, intentional misspellings, or personal remarks will be removed. Spell names correctly for all sides of the debate.

2 hours ago, xylophone said:

That "blind devotion" (read stupidity) is evident here......

Behold the unyielding paragons of unwavering loyalty, these majestic Trump supporters who gaze upon their orange-tinted messiah with the kind of blind devotion that makes cult leaders everywhere nod in quiet approval, all while conveniently forgetting—or better yet, aggressively defending—the delightful little tidbits from the freshly unsealed Epstein files that paint their hero in the most fascinating light.

Picture this: while they're out there slapping on ear bandages in solidarity for a man who dodged a bullet like he dodges taxes, the Justice Department drops a bombshell of nearly 30,000 pages revealing that Donald Trump, the self-proclaimed outsider who bans elites from his clubs unless they're paying members, actually hopped aboard Jeffrey Epstein's infamous Lolita Express not just a casual once or twice, but a whopping eight times back in the '90s, sometimes with Ghislaine Maxwell riding shotgun, according to a prosecutor's email that somehow slipped through the redactions despite the Trump administration's valiant efforts to bury it all under a mountain of black Sharpie marks.

And oh, the irony thickens like overcooked gravy when you learn that these files include mentions of Epstein introducing a 14-year-old girl to Trump at Mar-a-Lago in 1994, with no wrongdoing alleged of course, because why would there be when your guy is just "terrific" as Trump himself once called Epstein, back when they were apparently the best of buddies chasing skirts and deals in the same sleazy social circles.

But wait, there's more—Trump's name pops up over 100 times in these documents, including flight records showing he jetted around on that plane way more than anyone previously admitted, even during the juicy periods tied to Maxwell's case, all while he tweets denials like "I was never on Epstein’s Plane, or at his ‘stupid’ Island," which is just chef's kiss levels of gaslighting for a crowd that eats it up like it's manna from Mar-a-Lago heaven.

These supporters, bless their grievance-fueled hearts, will twist themselves into pretzels explaining how this is all a deep-state witch hunt, how their fearless leader who signed the bill to release these files after initially fighting tooth and nail against it is somehow the victim here, never mind the photos of him grinning alongside Epstein and Maxwell that got temporarily yanked from the DOJ site amid victim concerns, only to be reinstated after the backlash because transparency is apparently optional when it involves your favorite felon.

It's almost poetic, really, how they rally around a guy whose Epstein ties include everything from shared jet jaunts to birthday book shoutouts, all while clutching their pearls over "saving the children" and decrying pedophiles, yet somehow overlooking the glaring fact that their idol was Epstein's "closest friend for 10 years" by the pedophile's own words, and even after banning him from Mar-a-Lago for allegedly hitting on an underage girl, Trump still wished Ghislaine well during her trial like she was an old bridge partner.

No, these aren't just fans; they're acrobats of cognitive dissonance, performing death-defying leaps over mountains of evidence to land squarely in the land of "fake news" and "alternative facts," where Epstein's "stupid" Little Saint James island— that infamous playground of the powerful where billionaires allegedly trafficked minors amid palm trees and private jets—becomes just another liberal hoax, even as the files drip out details of Trump's entanglements without a single visit to the island proven, but hey, who needs facts when you've got faith? It's not a movement; it's a masterclass in selective amnesia, where supporting a man mentioned in rape allegations from the files (again, no charges, just vibes) is somehow the height of patriotism, and the rest of us are left chuckling at the sheer audacity of it all, wondering if the ear bandages are there to block out the sound of reality crashing in.

Keep shining, you beautiful enablers of absurdity; without you, satire would be out of a job.

 

 

 

Very well put.

They all posses a remarkable ability to self hypnotise that literally means they will not believe their own eyes. I mean it’s not like Jan 6th wasn’t well documented. We have minute by minute, documented footage of it all but somehow Trump sycophants are now calling it “peaceful” in a laughable attempt to rewrite history. And we are seeing this across the board with Trump and his devotees especially with the Epstein files - if we give him the benefit of the doubt (and please bear with me here as yea, I know - he did) that he himself didn’t “indulge”, he absolutely hung out with a pedo for years and absolutely knew exactly what Epstein was all about with his little “he likes them a bit young” quip.

But it’s the hypocrisy I can’t stand. They are aggressively indignant at the slightest of moral impropriety from the “lefts - liberals - whatever we are being called that week”, so anyone saying anything other than THEIR warped version of morality is instantly vilified. The pearl clutching around the death of Charlie Kirk’s was truly something to behold. If you weren’t making out this guy was the second coming of Christ you were IMMEDIATELY jumped upon in a dazzling display of virtue signalling. And all the while supporting a convict, a fraudster, a person guilty of sexual assault who is openly filling his pockets at the expense of the American people and who (with the help of the most under- qualified bunch of sycophants the WH has ever seen) is also trying to make the US into a fascist state. But they can see this but still blindly follow him so they are obviously just in agreement with EVERYTHING he does, which in my not so humble opinion makes them just horrible people.

He might be a con man but they are VERY willing victims and for that i have no patience with their nonsense any more. It’s time for the adults to get back in the room. He’s getting dangerous now.