Owned by the bank? Nice. I called it.

I don't think I would know if I was. I don't really use it. I just have one to appease the sheeple.

In the UK, you get arrested for thought crime and non-violent expression.

In other words, they've got this huge Muslim issue. I'm sure you've heard about it.

If you complain about it, you get locked up. Complaining about your countries issues, to be faced with legal punishment, is much too close to a scary authoritarian dystopia for my taste. Many countries in Europe have similar laws to these.

Same goes for Canada.

If you can't complain about stuff you disagree with in your country, you essentially live in a crap country without free speech. I honestly can't believe you've never heard of any of this. These would be massive issues of concern in the USA. It's not just that these are free speech issues, but it shows the police in the UK are spending more of their resources and efforts policing the internet than arresting potential jihadis.

It would be like Trump locking you up for speaking out against his Muslim ban or saying Pro-Muslim speech. I know it's difficult to imagine it this way but it's truly the same thing. Scary stuff.

The evidence that it's fake is out in the open. Why is it all you can do is fling crap, but can't actually refute the evidence?

If you're not smart enough to figure it out, you can just come out and say it.

The FBI Director just outed himself as a leaker, a drama queen, and a liar all in one session. This didn't only vindicate Trump, but embarrassed the MSM and liberals to the point where they're living in a delusion.

What were you watching again?

Are you still crying about Obama's certificate, which was proven to be fake?

You still haven't come up with any evidence it wasn't faked?

Poor guy. Trying to be smart but lacking the effort it takes to go with it.

Today was glorious. Delusions of impeachment, shattered in one day. Not just that, but Comey really screwed up hard.

and

Now that this Russian-collusion charade is nearing it's end...

Senator Lindsey Graham: “I don’t know what caused the appointment. I haven’t seen any evidence of a crime yet. The bottom line is I respect the decision, but this pretty much shuts Congress down. Democrats, you got what you wanted. You got a special counsel. Now we’ll just move on. We’re not prosecutors.”

“There’s a new front opening here. I have reason to believe that there are emails between Clinton campaign officials, democratic operatives to the Department of Justice regarding the Clinton email investigation that happened on Obama’s watch. I have reason to believe those emails exist.

I’m on the Judiciary Committee. And I think it’s important that the Judiciary Committee be given any emails that were directed to the Department of Justice by Clinton campaign officials or operatives because we have jurisdiction over the Department of Justice.”

Time for the Hillary/Obama investigation.

Is this a serious question? What's so hard to wrap your mind around someone leaking fake information?

Do you think just because the info was fake - the part where it was leaked doesn't matter?

@n64dd said:

Gee wiz- it's almost as if every conservative already knew this and every liberal meanwhile has literally been living in a delusional reality created by corporate media.

Bad day for the sheeple. Instead of sitting back and reflecting what went wrong, they'll be look for the next fake sensationalist corporate media story to grip their claws into.

Yea, really funny. My favorite part is the part where you thought he was getting impeached but instead they flipped it around on Comey to focus on the Hillary/Obama collusion. It's almost too good to be true!

If anyone needs to be doing damage control right now, it's you.

Trump just rekt you hard today. Take a bow.

Back on May 9th, the White House released the letter that President Trump sent to former FBI Director James Comey informing him that he'd been relieved of his duties at the FBI. Within that letter, Trump awkwardly inserted a sentence thanking Comey for informing him "on three separate occasions, that I am not under investigation."

Not surprisingly, this statement set off alarm bells at CNN and other MSM outlets because, if true, it would put a real damper on their "Trump colluded with Russian hackers to stage a coup" narrative. Therefore, those outlets set out on a mission to 'prove' that Comey never made those statements and that, by definition, Trump clearly lied about his past interactions with the former FBI Director.

And not long after setting out on that mission, courtesy of those infamous 'anonymous sources', CNN and ABC struck gold when they confirmed that "FBI Director James Comey is reportedly set to testify he never told President Donald Trump that he was not under investigation."

And here is the original CNN reporting:

"Trump has made a blanket claim that Comey told him multiple times that he was not under investigation."

"But one source said Comey is expected to explain to senators that those were much more nuanced conversations from which Trump concluded that he was not under investigation. Another source hinted that the President may have misunderstood the exact meaning of Comey's words, especially regarding the FBI's ongoing counterintelligence investigation."

Unfortunately, CNN's 'anonymous sources' seem to have been 'mistaken' on this one. And while we have no doubts, generally, about the integrity of CNN and/or their anonymous sources, Comey's direct testimony released just a while ago seems to confirm exactly what Trump said in his original May 9th letter and exactly the opposite what CNN subsequently reported.

In fact, here are precisely three instances (ironic, right?), directly from Comey's testimony, in which he personally told President Trump he was not under investigation:

1. January 6th Meeting at Trump Tower:

"In that context, prior to the January 6 meeting, I discussed with the FBI’s leadership team whether I should be prepared to assure President-Elect Trump that we were not investigating him personally. That was true; we did not have an open counter-intelligence case on him. We agreed I should do so if circumstances warranted. During our one-on-one meeting at Trump Tower, based on President Elect Trump’s reaction to the briefing and without him directly asking the question, I offered that assurance."

2. January 27th Dinner at White House:

"During the dinner, the President returned to the salacious material I had briefed him about on January 6, and, as he had done previously, expressed his disgust for the allegations and strongly denied them. He said he was considering ordering me to investigate the alleged incident to prove it didn’t happen. I replied that he should give that careful thought because it might create a narrative that we were investigating him personally, which we weren’t, and because it was very difficult to prove a negative. He said he would think about it and asked me to think about it."

3. March 30 Phone Call:

"I explained that we had briefed the leadership of Congress on exactly which individuals we were investigating and that we had told those Congressional leaders that we were not personally investigating President Trump. I reminded him I had previously told him that."

Of course, we're 'absolutely positive' that everything else CNN has learned and reported from their anonymous sources, regarding Trump and his Russian collusion, is completely accurate and reflect nothing but the highest levels of journalistic integrity. As such, we are quite confident that CNN will promptly retract their erroneous reporting and offer an apology to their readers for the unfortunate mistake.

Zero Hedge

Looks now like CNN has changed their headline and issued a correction...

CORRECTION AND UPDATE: This article was published before Comey released his prepared opening statement. The article and headline have been corrected to reflect that Comey does not directly dispute that Trump was told multiple times he was not under investigation in his prepared testimony released after this story was published.

After getting caught stage-managing Islamic protestors, you'd think the good folks at CNN would put extra effort into making sure they accurately represent their stories. Unsurprisingly to most of us, CNN instead doubles down on their lack of regard for journalistic integrity - rightfully earning their infamous title: Fake News

What's it going to take for CNN to come back from this slump? Even with so much attention drawn to their lack of journalistic integrity, it doesn't appear to dissuade them from boldly publishing articles based entirely around completely anonymous sources (which offers absolutely zero credibility). CNN is going to have to really change things up if they want to shake their new tag.

The debate never ends when liberals are wrong. They just deflect and move onto something else. The fact you even have to ask if this was an obstruction of justice just goes to show you haven't spent more than 10 seconds researching the issue (or looking beyond CNN).

You have the ability of critical thought. You can actually go look up the definition of "obstruction of justice". Apply some critical thinking, a helping hand of common sense, and the answer becomes obvious.

But hey, when most of the news you read is fake every day (and you're not privileged with the ability to apply discerning skepticism), I'd be as confused as you too.