T

[T @TimOM73]

@Lincoln_Osis @JasonJournoDC @chamath Why do you keep bring up the piss tapes!!!🤢🤮- what a fucking loser you are!

[T @TimOM73]

@Lincoln_Osis @JasonJournoDC @chamath How weak of a person are you? And why do you keep bring up a piss tape? it’s a gross- keep your fetishes to yourself 🤢

[T @TimOM73]

You’re pathetic….

No, the FBI did not use the Steele dossier to start its investigation into Donald Trump. [1]
Official government reviews have repeatedly confirmed that the FBI's counterintelligence investigation, codenamed Crossfire Hurricane, was opened weeks before the bureau ever received or reviewed the Steele dossier. [1, 2]

The Trigger for the Investigation
The FBI officially launched Crossfire Hurricane on July 31, 2016. The investigation was triggered by an official tip from the Australian government regarding Trump campaign foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos. In May 2016, Papadopoulos had bragged to an Australian diplomat that Russian officials possessed political "dirt" on Hillary Clinton in the form of thousands of emails. When those emails were leaked publicly via WikiLeaks in July, Australia passed the tip to U.S. authorities, prompting the immediate opening of the probe.[1, 2]

When the FBI Received the Dossier
The counterintelligence team investigating the Trump campaign did not receive Christopher Steele’s reports until September 19, 2016—nearly seven weeks after the investigation began. [1, 2]

How the FBI Did Use the Dossier
While the dossier did not start the investigation, the FBI heavily relied on it later. [1, 2, 3]
•Surveillance Warrants: The FBI used the raw, unverified claims from the dossier to secure and renew Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) wiretap warrants against former Trump campaign aide Carter Page. [1, 2, 3]
•Severe Criticism: A 2019 Department of Justice Inspector General report later found that the FBI committed "serious performance failures" by continuing to use the dossier to renew these warrants. This occurred even after the FBI interviewed Steele's primary sub-source, who admitted the information was based on unverified "hearsay" and gossip. [1, 2, 3]

[T @TimOM73]

@Lincoln_Osis @JasonJournoDC @chamath Once again total bull shit- can’t your read the Mueller Report or the Senate Investigation (which Rubio was part of)? Or just read the FBI warrant? MAGA believes everything except sworn testimony and verifiable evidence

[T @TimOM73]

@Lincoln_Osis @JasonJournoDC @chamath Are you joking🤣🤣

[T @TimOM73]

Why the Claim is False
•Data Lag, Not Fraud: Screenshots circulating online showed an update where two candidates received thousands of votes while another received zero. While a zero-vote batch for a major candidate would be unusual, the Associated Press (AP) confirmed this was an automated data feed lag. The electronic system split a single batch, showing parts of it at different times. [1, 2, 3]
•The Full Picture: The feed updated shortly after to include the rest of that same batch. When viewed together, the complete batch was within statistical expectations. [1, 2]
•Official Records: The Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder's Office and others reviewed official county records and confirmed that the candidate in question received votes in every official update. The anomaly appeared on some media graphics and was quickly corrected. [1, 2, 3, 4]

Why Other Interpretations are Incorrect
•❌ The "Rigged Ballot Drop" Theory: Claims that a sudden influx of ballots was engineered to manipulate the outcome are incorrect because late-counted mail-in ballots in California historically tend to favor Democratic candidates. [1, 2, 3, 4]
•❌ The "Late Counting Means Cheating" Theory: Claims that counting votes days after election night means the election is being "stolen" are incorrect because California state law allows mail-in ballots to be received after Election Day under certain conditions, making a prolonged count standard practice. [1, 2]

[T @TimOM73]

Why the Claim is False
•Data Lag, Not Fraud: Screenshots circulating online showed an update where two candidates received thousands of votes while another received zero. While a zero-vote batch for a major candidate would be unusual, the Associated Press (AP) confirmed this was an automated data feed lag. The electronic system split a single batch, showing parts of it at different times. [1, 2, 3]
•The Full Picture: The feed updated shortly after to include the rest of that same batch. When viewed together, the complete batch was within statistical expectations. [1, 2]
•Official Records: The Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder's Office and others reviewed official county records and confirmed that the candidate in question received votes in every official update. The anomaly appeared on some media graphics and was quickly corrected. [1, 2, 3, 4]

Why Other Interpretations are Incorrect
•❌ The "Rigged Ballot Drop" Theory: Claims that a sudden influx of ballots was engineered to manipulate the outcome are incorrect because late-counted mail-in ballots in California historically tend to favor Democratic candidates. [1, 2, 3, 4]
•❌ The "Late Counting Means Cheating" Theory: Claims that counting votes days after election night means the election is being "stolen" are incorrect because California state law allows mail-in ballots to be received after Election Day under certain conditions, making a prolonged count standard practice. [1, 2]

[T @TimOM73]

Why the Claim is False
•Data Lag, Not Fraud: Screenshots circulating online showed an update where two candidates received thousands of votes while another received zero. While a zero-vote batch for a major candidate would be unusual, the Associated Press (AP) confirmed this was an automated data feed lag. The electronic system split a single batch, showing parts of it at different times. [1, 2, 3]
•The Full Picture: The feed updated shortly after to include the rest of that same batch. When viewed together, the complete batch was within statistical expectations. [1, 2]
•Official Records: The Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder's Office and others reviewed official county records and confirmed that the candidate in question received votes in every official update. The anomaly appeared on some media graphics and was quickly corrected. [1, 2, 3, 4]

Why Other Interpretations are Incorrect
•❌ The "Rigged Ballot Drop" Theory: Claims that a sudden influx of ballots was engineered to manipulate the outcome are incorrect because late-counted mail-in ballots in California historically tend to favor Democratic candidates. [1, 2, 3, 4]
•❌ The "Late Counting Means Cheating" Theory: Claims that counting votes days after election night means the election is being "stolen" are incorrect because California state law allows mail-in ballots to be received after Election Day under certain conditions, making a prolonged count standard practice. [1, 2]

[T @TimOM73]

Why the Claim is False
•Data Lag, Not Fraud: Screenshots circulating online showed an update where two candidates received thousands of votes while another received zero. While a zero-vote batch for a major candidate would be unusual, the Associated Press (AP) confirmed this was an automated data feed lag. The electronic system split a single batch, showing parts of it at different times. [1, 2, 3]
•The Full Picture: The feed updated shortly after to include the rest of that same batch. When viewed together, the complete batch was within statistical expectations. [1, 2]
•Official Records: The Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder's Office and others reviewed official county records and confirmed that the candidate in question received votes in every official update. The anomaly appeared on some media graphics and was quickly corrected. [1, 2, 3, 4]

Why Other Interpretations are Incorrect
•❌ The "Rigged Ballot Drop" Theory: Claims that a sudden influx of ballots was engineered to manipulate the outcome are incorrect because late-counted mail-in ballots in California historically tend to favor Democratic candidates. [1, 2, 3, 4]
•❌ The "Late Counting Means Cheating" Theory: Claims that counting votes days after election night means the election is being "stolen" are incorrect because California state law allows mail-in ballots to be received after Election Day under certain conditions, making a prolonged count standard practice. [1, 2]

[T @TimOM73]

Why the Claim is False
•Data Lag, Not Fraud: Screenshots circulating online showed an update where two candidates received thousands of votes while another received zero. While a zero-vote batch for a major candidate would be unusual, the Associated Press (AP) confirmed this was an automated data feed lag. The electronic system split a single batch, showing parts of it at different times. [1, 2, 3]
•The Full Picture: The feed updated shortly after to include the rest of that same batch. When viewed together, the complete batch was within statistical expectations. [1, 2]
•Official Records: The Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder's Office and others reviewed official county records and confirmed that the candidate in question received votes in every official update. The anomaly appeared on some media graphics and was quickly corrected. [1, 2, 3, 4]

Why Other Interpretations are Incorrect
•❌ The "Rigged Ballot Drop" Theory: Claims that a sudden influx of ballots was engineered to manipulate the outcome are incorrect because late-counted mail-in ballots in California historically tend to favor Democratic candidates. [1, 2, 3, 4]
•❌ The "Late Counting Means Cheating" Theory: Claims that counting votes days after election night means the election is being "stolen" are incorrect because California state law allows mail-in ballots to be received after Election Day under certain conditions, making a prolonged count standard practice. [1, 2]

[T @TimOM73]

Why the Claim is False
•Data Lag, Not Fraud: Screenshots circulating online showed an update where two candidates received thousands of votes while another received zero. While a zero-vote batch for a major candidate would be unusual, the Associated Press (AP) confirmed this was an automated data feed lag. The electronic system split a single batch, showing parts of it at different times. [1, 2, 3]
•The Full Picture: The feed updated shortly after to include the rest of that same batch. When viewed together, the complete batch was within statistical expectations. [1, 2]
•Official Records: The Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder's Office and others reviewed official county records and confirmed that the candidate in question received votes in every official update. The anomaly appeared on some media graphics and was quickly corrected. [1, 2, 3, 4]

Why Other Interpretations are Incorrect
•❌ The "Rigged Ballot Drop" Theory: Claims that a sudden influx of ballots was engineered to manipulate the outcome are incorrect because late-counted mail-in ballots in California historically tend to favor Democratic candidates. [1, 2, 3, 4]
•❌ The "Late Counting Means Cheating" Theory: Claims that counting votes days after election night means the election is being "stolen" are incorrect because California state law allows mail-in ballots to be received after Election Day under certain conditions, making a prolonged count standard practice. [1, 2]

[T @TimOM73]

Why the Claim is False
•Data Lag, Not Fraud: Screenshots circulating online showed an update where two candidates received thousands of votes while another received zero. While a zero-vote batch for a major candidate would be unusual, the Associated Press (AP) confirmed this was an automated data feed lag. The electronic system split a single batch, showing parts of it at different times. [1, 2, 3]
•The Full Picture: The feed updated shortly after to include the rest of that same batch. When viewed together, the complete batch was within statistical expectations. [1, 2]
•Official Records: The Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder's Office and others reviewed official county records and confirmed that the candidate in question received votes in every official update. The anomaly appeared on some media graphics and was quickly corrected. [1, 2, 3, 4]

Why Other Interpretations are Incorrect
•❌ The "Rigged Ballot Drop" Theory: Claims that a sudden influx of ballots was engineered to manipulate the outcome are incorrect because late-counted mail-in ballots in California historically tend to favor Democratic candidates. [1, 2, 3, 4]
•❌ The "Late Counting Means Cheating" Theory: Claims that counting votes days after election night means the election is being "stolen" are incorrect because California state law allows mail-in ballots to be received after Election Day under certain conditions, making a prolonged count standard practice. [1, 2]

[T @TimOM73]

@JasonJournoDC @chamath MAGA is so pathetic- weak men who make shit up- this is the same bull shit (that is time and time again is proven to be outright lies) that you spoiled brats did in 2020-
Your Boos Mean Nothing, I’ve Seen What Makes You Cheer

[T @TimOM73]

@JasonJournoDC @chamath Liars- complete and utter bull shit.
You are little boys having a temper tantrum because you didn’t get what you want- zero integrity

[T @TimOM73]

@barstoolsports Why would they respond? I’m confused are the Knicks playing Brazil?

[T @TimOM73]

@A_kinola02 So?

[T @TimOM73]

@WhiteHouse @ufc Soo f-ing stupid

[T @TimOM73]

@Loutaphilliph Who cares?

[T @TimOM73]

@PaulGoldEagle Breaking: you’re full of shit

[T @TimOM73]

@GBarca_ I’d rather have health care