|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On February 01 2018 12:33 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2018 12:24 Sermokala wrote:On February 01 2018 12:12 Doodsmack wrote:On February 01 2018 11:55 Danglars wrote:
We know the Clinton campaign funded something that was used to spy on the Trump campaign. We do not know whether this (overly broad) statement is true. We don't know what exactly the russians wanted for what they did but it doesn't stop people from saying that the russians bought the election and control the country. The bullshit that is being pulled right now by Nunes does not help. But we do know what they wanted. This is it. A basic distrust in our system and due process.
So they don't want to control our government and you're going to argue against people who are saying Trump was cooped by russia?
Or do you just want to fit the truth to whatever argument you're having at the time thats okay too.
|
On February 01 2018 13:46 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2018 12:33 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 12:24 Sermokala wrote:On February 01 2018 12:12 Doodsmack wrote:On February 01 2018 11:55 Danglars wrote:
We know the Clinton campaign funded something that was used to spy on the Trump campaign. We do not know whether this (overly broad) statement is true. We don't know what exactly the russians wanted for what they did but it doesn't stop people from saying that the russians bought the election and control the country. The bullshit that is being pulled right now by Nunes does not help. But we do know what they wanted. This is it. A basic distrust in our system and due process. So they don't want to control our government and you're going to argue against people who are saying Trump was cooped by russia? Or do you just want to fit the truth to whatever argument you're having at the time thats okay too.
It been well documented and reported they want to undermine demo active systems and make our government in effective. They have done it to other nations. Dysfunction is the goal. You know this, this shouldn’t be a debate about their goals.
Trump and his camp are just dumb enough to by in and accept the help. An undermined and dysfunctional presidency is enough.
|
5930 Posts
When people talking about a Manchurian Candidate situation with Trump (this is what you are referring to right?), they're generally referring to the sanction and Eastern Europe situation. With regards to the sanction situation, its clear that Trump's inner circle were open to quid pro quo and the current Trump Administration are resistant to the idea of additional sanctions despite having bipartisan support in Congress.
Generally speaking, Russian interference and funding/co-oping of far-right political groups in Europe has been about what Plansix is arguing and the elimination of sanctions. These things aren't exactly unknown, they've been doing this for a while.
|
On February 01 2018 14:11 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2018 13:46 Sermokala wrote:On February 01 2018 12:33 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 12:24 Sermokala wrote:On February 01 2018 12:12 Doodsmack wrote:On February 01 2018 11:55 Danglars wrote:
We know the Clinton campaign funded something that was used to spy on the Trump campaign. We do not know whether this (overly broad) statement is true. We don't know what exactly the russians wanted for what they did but it doesn't stop people from saying that the russians bought the election and control the country. The bullshit that is being pulled right now by Nunes does not help. But we do know what they wanted. This is it. A basic distrust in our system and due process. So they don't want to control our government and you're going to argue against people who are saying Trump was cooped by russia? Or do you just want to fit the truth to whatever argument you're having at the time thats okay too. It been well documented and reported they want to undermine demo active systems and make our government in effective. They have done it to other nations. Dysfunction is the goal. You know this, this shouldn’t be a debate about their goals. Trump and his camp are just dumb enough to by in and accept the help. An undermined and dysfunctional presidency is enough.
I'm not argueing about their goals. I'm argueing that the same standard of what we do and don't know about clinton in the campaign and the FBI in the campaign due to the memos isn't being applied to the russia investigation.
On February 01 2018 14:22 Womwomwom wrote:
When people talking about a Manchurian Candidate situation with Trump (this is what you are referring to right?), they're generally referring to the sanction and Eastern Europe situation. With regards to the sanction situation, its clear that Trump's inner circle were open to quid pro quo and the current Trump Administration are resistant to the idea of additional sanctions despite having bipartisan support in Congress.
Generally speaking, Russian interference and funding/co-oping of far-right political groups in Europe has been about what Plansix is arguing and the elimination of sanctions.
We do not know whether this (overly broad) statement is true, in regards that it being clear that trumps inner circle were open to quid pro quo. Theres evidence of it the same that theres evidence of a lot of conspiracy theories. (Not to inherently devalue the accusation by calling it a conspiracy theory but it is even if its a lot more plausible then Denver airport or something.)
|
On February 01 2018 12:45 TheTenthDoc wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2018 11:02 Danglars wrote:On February 01 2018 10:27 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 10:24 Danglars wrote:On February 01 2018 10:05 Plansix wrote:
Most of the violations people believe exist have to do with reporting the risks of assets or activities. There were loans handed out to people with no income. It is like tha a Wells Fargo opening all those accounts. People in executive positions knew it was happening, they just didn’t care.
Edit: Nunes ran to the White House with classified information about the investigation last year. The man is a shill and not to be trusted. He let the White House know breathtaking news about the prior administration surveiling his campaign using the foreign intelligence surveillance act. The ethics committee cleared him of any wrongdoing. And democrats plus allies have continued to act coy when Hillary-funded research was used to wiretap her presidential opponent. The real question is if this is more or less concerning than Democrats saying an unelected bureaucracy must not be held accountable to any elected body. FISA warrants are reviewed by the Judiciary and can be reviews by congress. And the White House helped draft that memo. Or won’t deny they helped. But hey, hang your hat on carter page to discredit the FBI and the renewal of a FISA warrant. Can’t make you look any more partisan, right? Nunes denied in official committee testimony that the White House had a hand. But who cares about fake news, right? Well, he said as far as he knew, no, and then clammed up and forced them to move onto other questions once Quigley asked if any staff were connected. It's not really clear which of Quigley's questions he was responding to. You can read it here on page 23.
So, he's on the record for not having any knowledge of White House influence. And some mice hold on to hope some staff acted without his knowledge to coordinate.
|
On February 01 2018 14:38 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2018 12:45 TheTenthDoc wrote:On February 01 2018 11:02 Danglars wrote:On February 01 2018 10:27 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 10:24 Danglars wrote:On February 01 2018 10:05 Plansix wrote:
Most of the violations people believe exist have to do with reporting the risks of assets or activities. There were loans handed out to people with no income. It is like tha a Wells Fargo opening all those accounts. People in executive positions knew it was happening, they just didn’t care.
Edit: Nunes ran to the White House with classified information about the investigation last year. The man is a shill and not to be trusted. He let the White House know breathtaking news about the prior administration surveiling his campaign using the foreign intelligence surveillance act. The ethics committee cleared him of any wrongdoing. And democrats plus allies have continued to act coy when Hillary-funded research was used to wiretap her presidential opponent. The real question is if this is more or less concerning than Democrats saying an unelected bureaucracy must not be held accountable to any elected body. FISA warrants are reviewed by the Judiciary and can be reviews by congress. And the White House helped draft that memo. Or won’t deny they helped. But hey, hang your hat on carter page to discredit the FBI and the renewal of a FISA warrant. Can’t make you look any more partisan, right? Nunes denied in official committee testimony that the White House had a hand. But who cares about fake news, right? Well, he said as far as he knew, no, and then clammed up and forced them to move onto other questions once Quigley asked if any staff were connected. It's not really clear which of Quigley's questions he was responding to. You can read it here on page 23. So, he's on the record for not having any knowledge of White House influence. And some mice hold on to hope some staff acted without his knowledge to coordinate.
That should be an easy “no”. Nunes won’t answer. Also should be a neat “nope.”
|
On February 01 2018 14:46 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2018 14:38 Danglars wrote:On February 01 2018 12:45 TheTenthDoc wrote:On February 01 2018 11:02 Danglars wrote:On February 01 2018 10:27 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 10:24 Danglars wrote:On February 01 2018 10:05 Plansix wrote:
Most of the violations people believe exist have to do with reporting the risks of assets or activities. There were loans handed out to people with no income. It is like tha a Wells Fargo opening all those accounts. People in executive positions knew it was happening, they just didn’t care.
Edit: Nunes ran to the White House with classified information about the investigation last year. The man is a shill and not to be trusted. He let the White House know breathtaking news about the prior administration surveiling his campaign using the foreign intelligence surveillance act. The ethics committee cleared him of any wrongdoing. And democrats plus allies have continued to act coy when Hillary-funded research was used to wiretap her presidential opponent. The real question is if this is more or less concerning than Democrats saying an unelected bureaucracy must not be held accountable to any elected body. FISA warrants are reviewed by the Judiciary and can be reviews by congress. And the White House helped draft that memo. Or won’t deny they helped. But hey, hang your hat on carter page to discredit the FBI and the renewal of a FISA warrant. Can’t make you look any more partisan, right? Nunes denied in official committee testimony that the White House had a hand. But who cares about fake news, right? Well, he said as far as he knew, no, and then clammed up and forced them to move onto other questions once Quigley asked if any staff were connected. It's not really clear which of Quigley's questions he was responding to. You can read it here on page 23. So, he's on the record for not having any knowledge of White House influence. And some mice hold on to hope some staff acted without his knowledge to coordinate. That should be an easy “no”. Nunes won’t answer. Also should be a neat “nope.”
Hilarious. He answers 'no' to any personal knowledge, and the conspiracy theorists hold out hope that he's still hiding something. I'm guessing you and others hope to find employment with Louise Mensch or others in her camp.
|
On February 01 2018 14:52 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2018 14:46 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 14:38 Danglars wrote:On February 01 2018 12:45 TheTenthDoc wrote:On February 01 2018 11:02 Danglars wrote:On February 01 2018 10:27 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 10:24 Danglars wrote:On February 01 2018 10:05 Plansix wrote:
Most of the violations people believe exist have to do with reporting the risks of assets or activities. There were loans handed out to people with no income. It is like tha a Wells Fargo opening all those accounts. People in executive positions knew it was happening, they just didn’t care.
Edit: Nunes ran to the White House with classified information about the investigation last year. The man is a shill and not to be trusted. He let the White House know breathtaking news about the prior administration surveiling his campaign using the foreign intelligence surveillance act. The ethics committee cleared him of any wrongdoing. And democrats plus allies have continued to act coy when Hillary-funded research was used to wiretap her presidential opponent. The real question is if this is more or less concerning than Democrats saying an unelected bureaucracy must not be held accountable to any elected body. FISA warrants are reviewed by the Judiciary and can be reviews by congress. And the White House helped draft that memo. Or won’t deny they helped. But hey, hang your hat on carter page to discredit the FBI and the renewal of a FISA warrant. Can’t make you look any more partisan, right? Nunes denied in official committee testimony that the White House had a hand. But who cares about fake news, right? Well, he said as far as he knew, no, and then clammed up and forced them to move onto other questions once Quigley asked if any staff were connected. It's not really clear which of Quigley's questions he was responding to. You can read it here on page 23. So, he's on the record for not having any knowledge of White House influence. And some mice hold on to hope some staff acted without his knowledge to coordinate. That should be an easy “no”. Nunes won’t answer. Also should be a neat “nope.” Hilarious. He answers 'no' to any personal knowledge, and the conspiracy theorists hold out hope that he's still hiding something. I'm guessing you and others hope to find employment with Louise Mensch or others in her camp.
pretty sure the "no" you're speaking of was "I have no clue" wasn't it?
|
On February 01 2018 12:08 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
This CANNOT be legal, right? Right?
This alone must surely, in any sane and reasonable country, be criminal negligence at the bare minimum?
Other than just being simply f***ing pathetic of course.
|
On February 01 2018 11:55 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2018 11:53 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 11:46 Danglars wrote:On February 01 2018 11:16 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 11:10 Danglars wrote:On February 01 2018 10:34 Plansix wrote:
What mythical source documents are you talking about? You’re better than this. The actual FISA application, attachments, opinion, other supporting materials, with any necessary redactions. Unless you’re the stupidest man on the planet, you know the memo was sourced to government documents and official supporting submissions, no matter what your view is on the partisan presentation. Put another way, the reason the FBI alleged there were omissions but not fictions. I work in law. You can make some amazing fictions by omitting facts. Don’t claims I’m dumb and make silly statements like that. I expect you show greater intelligence in your job than wondering what primary source materials one could have after composing a memorandum drawing conclusions from primary source materials. Or maybe it's common to assert they're mythical where you're from in law? I don't know. Why are we releasing classified documents at the whim of a single house representative to draft up a memo? Is that how this works now, one house member makes some shit up and then FBI has to release documents from an active investigation? Why should we trust government to investigate if house members get to cherry pick what evidence should be released and in what context? You are so invested in this narrative you don’t realize how bullshit and dangerous this is. How easy this would be to abuse and why it’s not done. We don’t declassify things because a couple Congress members have an ax to grind. That's some of the conclusions of a nearly year-long investigation that has exposed how uncooperative the FBI & Justice Dept have been with oversight. We know the Clinton campaign funded something that was used to spy on the Trump campaign. That should be enough to render idiotic any noob's "makes some shit up" and "get to cherry pick what evidence should be released." They done fucked up. Time for a comeuppance.
Your ignoring that a whole lot of foreign intelligence agencies warning the FBI about the Trumps campaigns contacts with Russia
You ignore varies statements that the FBI was already aware of the facts in the Steele dossier.
You ignore that members of the Trump campaign were already under surveillance before the Steele dossier.
I would go as far to say that nothing in the FBI investigation would have changed if the Steele dossier had never existed.
|
This memo is very worrying,how can people in any way defend the actions that are described?
|
|
|
Unsurprisingly he's lying about numbers again
Oh look this article from 2010
President Barack Obama’s State of the Union address on Wednesday, January 27, 2010 was viewed by slightly more than 48 million people, according to figures from The Nielsen Company. Viewership of President Obama’s first State of the Union was down 7% from the 51.7 million people who watched President Bush’s first official State of the Union address on January 29, 2002, but up 5% from the 45.8 million people who watched President Clinton’s first official address on January 25, 1994.
So all 3 previous presidents had higher ratings o_O
the ratings table quoted in the article
http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/news/2018/viewers-watch-president-trump-s-state-of-the-union-2018.html
'Highest number in history!' *
*excluding actual history
I'm not sure whether this is him lying flat out because his base will eat up anything he says, or his aides lying to him because they were scared to tell Obama, Bush and Clinton had more. Or can he simply not count? Stuff like this really baffles me...
|
On February 01 2018 18:29 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:This CANNOT be legal, right? Right? This alone must surely, in any sane and reasonable country, be criminal negligence at the bare minimum? Other than just being simply f***ing pathetic of course.
Apparently Nunes' spokesman is saying it was just edits and grammar fixes requested by the FBI. Which is convenient for both sides because no matter what happens the public will presumably never be able to see the two versions of the memo side by side.
|
On February 01 2018 19:56 pmh wrote:
This memo is very worrying,how can people in any way defend the actions that are described?
If you're referring to the Nunes memo, I disregarded it as trash based on nunes prior history plus the way the republicans have been handling it (which demonstrates it's a partisan hatchet job) and haven't read it.
if you're referring to some other memo you'll have to specify which.
also your post is quite vague, and as i'm not highly familiar with the issue myself, I can't tell what exactly you're referring to.
|
We are a nation of laws, unless the court says you can’t pick your voters.
|
On February 01 2018 14:52 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2018 14:46 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 14:38 Danglars wrote:On February 01 2018 12:45 TheTenthDoc wrote:On February 01 2018 11:02 Danglars wrote:On February 01 2018 10:27 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 10:24 Danglars wrote:On February 01 2018 10:05 Plansix wrote:
Most of the violations people believe exist have to do with reporting the risks of assets or activities. There were loans handed out to people with no income. It is like tha a Wells Fargo opening all those accounts. People in executive positions knew it was happening, they just didn’t care.
Edit: Nunes ran to the White House with classified information about the investigation last year. The man is a shill and not to be trusted. He let the White House know breathtaking news about the prior administration surveiling his campaign using the foreign intelligence surveillance act. The ethics committee cleared him of any wrongdoing. And democrats plus allies have continued to act coy when Hillary-funded research was used to wiretap her presidential opponent. The real question is if this is more or less concerning than Democrats saying an unelected bureaucracy must not be held accountable to any elected body. FISA warrants are reviewed by the Judiciary and can be reviews by congress. And the White House helped draft that memo. Or won’t deny they helped. But hey, hang your hat on carter page to discredit the FBI and the renewal of a FISA warrant. Can’t make you look any more partisan, right? Nunes denied in official committee testimony that the White House had a hand. But who cares about fake news, right? Well, he said as far as he knew, no, and then clammed up and forced them to move onto other questions once Quigley asked if any staff were connected. It's not really clear which of Quigley's questions he was responding to. You can read it here on page 23. So, he's on the record for not having any knowledge of White House influence. And some mice hold on to hope some staff acted without his knowledge to coordinate. That should be an easy “no”. Nunes won’t answer. Also should be a neat “nope.” Hilarious. He answers 'no' to any personal knowledge, and the conspiracy theorists hold out hope that he's still hiding something. I'm guessing you and others hope to find employment with Louise Mensch or others in her camp.
So you consider Nunes to be a highly creditable, above reproach source of information on this matter? And you see nothing at all dubious about the whole 'substantial edits' to the memo after it had been reviewed, as linked by Claus up above?
Don't get me wrong, if the memo is as big a deal as Nunes is making it out to be then it needs to be out there, but his pattern of behaviour strikes me as highly suspect. If a Democrat was pulling these shadow games would you consider them trustworthy at this point?
As a general question; how big a deal is this memo likely to be? I'm not quite clear on what's supposed to be in it, other than it's supposedly way bigger than Watergate? I hear a generic 'list of abuses by the FBI and Justice Department'. Do we have a time frame on that, or is it going back a long way?
|
It says a lot that Nunes ran to the White House back in early 2017. Not to the speaker or the senate, but to the white house. He left his branch of government and went to the group that was being investigated to provide them with information. The claims of stonewalling are not being echoed by the Senate or speaker of the house. The Justice Department and FBI likely realized that Nunes was more than willing to leak information an ongoing investigation. Thus Nunes cultivated the adversarial relationship with the FBI and Justice he is currently whining about. Oversight does not mean that Nunes gets to use whatever information he finds for political gain. I’m surprised there are not called to remove him from the committee.
|
you’re asking someone who sincerely believed there’s a secret society in the FBI and that the fact that employees of the FBI can support one candidate over another taints the entire organization. despite all evidence to the contrary. (and common sense)
that devin nunes of all people uses his own word, worth nothing, to further discredit the FBI (whose credibility wrt all things trump is above par thus far) goes complete over the head of all GOP supporters.
that we know Nunes isn’t above leaking information, but isn’t leaking this and instead uses this as a media spin tool and wants to declassify it should tell us a few things.
yea P6 beat me to it.
|
This reads like complete insanity
Are they trying to say that the state government does not have a map with district borders?
How can you hold an election like that.
Why is the map they drew last time not on record.
what the fuck.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
