EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 9768
| Forum Index > Closed |
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. | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
| ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On January 25 2018 00:05 Doodsmack wrote: The evidence from the Mueller/FBI investigation and their conclusions will speak for itself. The integrity of the investigation is not compromised. If there were leaks from Strzok and Page, that appears to be the worst of it. Highly unlikely that they fabricated evidence or something. So yes, deal with any actual misconduct (leaks) that occurred, but don't be a clown like Meadows and call for a second special counsel to investigate Mueller's team. That is a deliberate attempt by Republicans to undermine the Russia investigation. Just to investigate the events within the FBI leading up to Mueller’s appointment. If the Sessions investigation can turn up answers, it won’t be ultimately necessary. The biggest unknown is some kind of inside leaker to House investigators of misconduct within the FBI, to add to the rest. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22214 Posts
On January 25 2018 00:11 Danglars wrote: Just to investigate the events within the FBI leading up to Mueller’s appointment. If the Sessions investigation can turn up answers, it won’t be ultimately necessary. The biggest unknown is some kind of inside leaker to House investigators of misconduct within the FBI, to add to the rest. Mueller's appointment? That makes no sense since he was appointed because Trump fired Comey. I assume you mean events within the FBI leading up to Comey's investigation. And we have a glimps of that with people bringing evidence to the FBI with them saying "we already know this" which shows there was due cause for such an investigation. But whatever, go have another Benghazi. | ||
|
iamthedave
England2814 Posts
On January 24 2018 23:54 Danglars wrote: It’s the information contained in the actual texts. I actually quoted one for you, perhaps that would be a good start to understanding why people think his bias affected his work. “I don’t like him, he’s an idiot” is a huge leap away from a “see here, we’ve got this insurance policy at the FBI in case this idiot gets elected.” When oversight asks for the texts he got fired over, they turn up deleted and not backed up. Read the thread, turn off the partisanship for five minutes, and I think your bewilderment will end. There's a rather palpable irony there coming from you. You're not exactly an island of independent centrist political thought, after all. Why is Peter the issue here? Shouldn't there be investigation into this supposed 'insurance policy'? Where is the evidence that this was anything other than private texts between two lovers? Or do you personally believe the FBI is actually corrupt, and that there's significant evidence that points towards it being so? I mean, wouldn't he be fired outright if what you - and the thread - are implying, not just removed from the probe? I mean, of course there was pressure to wrap up the Clinton investigation. It was an ongoing investigation into a Presidential candidate that could have - and maybe did - have an enormous influence on the campaign. I see nothing there that says 'pressure to end the investigation in Clinton's favour'. And sure, Peter said Clinton wasn't guilty of a crime in the prior investigation. What evidence is there that he wasn't being professional in that instance? Are there a lot of legal experts who think the FBI were wrong in their investigation of the emails? Is there a consensus that this was a political job by the FBI to protect her? That thread you're linking to mentions an already debunked conspiracy theory as well (Fusion/GPS), if I'm not mistaken. He doesn't sound like a non-partisan, impartially analytical political actor. Or is there some other dimension to Fusion/GPS other than what I've heard, which is plenty of people (including Fox News' Shep Smith) brutally debunking it? | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
It was a bad move to do it and wrong, but it’s a pretty big leap to massive anti-Trump bias in the FBI. | ||
|
brian
United States9639 Posts
| ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On January 25 2018 00:18 Gorsameth wrote: Mueller's appointment? That makes no sense since he was appointed because Trump fired Comey. I assume you mean events within the FBI leading up to Comey's investigation. And we have a glimps of that with people bringing evidence to the FBI with them saying "we already know this" which shows there was due cause for such an investigation. But whatever, go have another Benghazi. He also leaked documents to a friend in efforts to compel a special prosecutor. That ended up not being the primary reason for the appointment, but it was Comey's plan. The deleted text message period ends the day Mueller was appointed, and goes back 6 months. That's what's special about it. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On January 25 2018 00:44 brian wrote: god bless the moment danglars tells someone to remove their partisanship over deleted There's really nothing bewildering about the investigation or scandal. On January 25 2018 00:27 Plansix wrote: Man, I can’t think of a reason in the world why someone would mass delete texts to their lover. No reason in the world, so it must mean that there is corruption in the FBI against a sitting president. It was a bad move to do it and wrong, but it’s a pretty big leap to massive anti-Trump bias in the FBI. And a glitch prevented their backup. Nixon should've used that excuse for missing section of tapes. | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
On January 25 2018 00:48 Danglars wrote: He also leaked documents to a friend in efforts to compel a special prosecutor. That ended up not being the primary reason for the appointment, but it was Comey's plan. The deleted text message period ends the day Mueller was appointed, and goes back 6 months. That's what's special about it. The argument that the Russia investigation is wholly Tainted by these texts fails miserably. Trump demanded loyalty from Comey the day George P lied to the FBI. | ||
|
brian
United States9639 Posts
On January 25 2018 00:50 Danglars wrote: There's really nothing bewildering about the investigation or scandal. And a glitch prevented their backup. Nixon should've used that excuse for missing section of tapes. what’s bewildering is the attempt to paint the entire FBI as complicit in the matter, surely. You can’t decry ‘guilty by association’ when it comes to russian collusion in the trump campaign immediately ending in ‘Trump’s Guilty!’ while simultaneously selling ‘guilty by association’ in this case. i won’t disagree that it deserves investigating. but anything further is just partisan b/s as per the norm. it’s the second coming of ‘But Hillary!’ | ||
KwarK
United States43869 Posts
On January 25 2018 00:51 Doodsmack wrote: The argument that the Russia investigation is wholly Tainted by these texts fails miserably. Trump demanded loyalty from Comey the day George P lied to the FBI. Trump was tweeting information that came from the Russian government hours after Trump Jr met with Russian agents. The man collaborated. That much is known. The question is whether he conspired. | ||
|
ShoCkeyy
7815 Posts
We can get into this or not, but I can also go ahead and post many many resources talking about how the Trump team uses private emails to do official US business, or how the Trump team deleting thousands of emails before court orders. The list can go on. | ||
|
Kyadytim
United States886 Posts
Shortly after President Trump fired his FBI director in May, he summoned to the Oval Office the bureau’s acting director for a get-to-know-you meeting. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-asked-the-acting-fbi-director-whom-he-voted-for-during-oval-office-meeting/2018/01/23/2cb50818-0073-11e8-8acf-ad2991367d9d_story.htmlThe two men exchanged pleasantries, but before long, Trump, according to several current and former U.S. officials, asked Andrew McCabe a pointed question: Whom did he vote for in the 2016 election? McCabe said he didn’t vote, according to the officials, who, like others interviewed for this article, spoke on the condition of anonymity to talk candidly about a sensitive matter. This looks like more loyalty seeking behavior from Trump. | ||
|
hunts
United States2113 Posts
On January 25 2018 01:23 Kyadytim wrote: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-asked-the-acting-fbi-director-whom-he-voted-for-during-oval-office-meeting/2018/01/23/2cb50818-0073-11e8-8acf-ad2991367d9d_story.html This looks like more loyalty seeking behavior from Trump. but trump totally wouldn't do that! he's an honest guy! a straight shooter! And even if he would it doesn't matter because one guy in the fbi sent some text messages to someone! Really trump knew about the text messages and just wanted to make sure that he could trust the new fbi director with texting him the latest racist memes trump finds on 4chan and making sure the amazing memes don't accidentally get deleted, it's all part of his 7d chess plan! | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On January 25 2018 00:51 Doodsmack wrote: The argument that the Russia investigation is wholly Tainted by these texts fails miserably. Trump demanded loyalty from Comey the day George P lied to the FBI. Yeah, and if you haven't notice, I never said it was "wholly tainted." Good try. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On January 25 2018 00:55 brian wrote: what’s bewildering is the attempt to paint the entire FBI as complicit in the matter, surely. You can’t decry ‘guilty by association’ when it comes to russian collusion in the trump campaign immediately ending in ‘Trump’s Guilty!’ while simultaneously selling ‘guilty by association’ in this case. i won’t disagree that it deserves investigating. but anything further is just partisan b/s as per the norm. it’s the second coming of ‘But Hillary!’ He was the chief of the counter espionage unit, later the deputy assistant director of the counterintelligence division. His texts mention Andy, such as Andrew McCabe, in plans made in the wake of Trump's primary win. Scandals of this size tarnish the reputation of the department. If you believed otherwise, then why are you interested in scandals affecting only some members of Trump's campaign? | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
brian
United States9639 Posts
On January 25 2018 01:44 Danglars wrote: He was the chief of the counter espionage unit, later the deputy assistant director of the counterintelligence division. His texts mention Andy, such as Andrew McCabe, in plans made in the wake of Trump's primary win. Scandals of this size tarnish the reputation of the department. If you believed otherwise, then why are you interested in scandals affecting only some members of Trump's campaign? there’s a softball, i’m not. just as his campaign staff’s guilt doesn’t immediately make Trump guilty, this ambiguous investigation without any conclusions of guilt certainly doesn’t reflect on the organization as a whole. i’ve speculated in the past a reasonable level of guilt on Trumps behalf, and expect the investigation to show it. but that’s speculation. if you want to speculate the FBI is a grand conspiracy against Trump, i can understand that. but it’s speculation. nothing but crossing your fingers. there’s an old adage about going around smelling shit everywhere though. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On January 25 2018 01:16 ShoCkeyy wrote: Danglars, We can get into this or not, but I can also go ahead and post many many resources talking about how the Trump team uses private emails to do official US business, or how the Trump team deleting thousands of emails before court orders. The list can go on. I take it you wish those investigations had never occurred. At least, maybe comment on the current matter. I'm open to future investigations if Trump or WH aides sent classified emails to private servers. Or did not forward private emails regarding official business to their work accounts for preservation. What I'm seeing here is (1) who cares about FBI agents deleting texts after talking about insurance policies against Trump's election and (2) if there's any guilt, Trump's done worse and (3) what texts, wait I don't have to see or comment on the texts to assume it's a small matter. It's pretty obvious what your game is. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On January 25 2018 01:44 Danglars wrote: He was the chief of the counter espionage unit, later the deputy assistant director of the counterintelligence division. His texts mention Andy, such as Andrew McCabe, in plans made in the wake of Trump's primary win. Scandals of this size tarnish the reputation of the department. If you believed otherwise, then why are you interested in scandals affecting only some members of Trump's campaign? And he was fired the instant it was discovered and the FBI took efforts to preserve the texts where they could. I don’t think it is shocking that the FBI doesn’t require agents to keep logs/texts of discussions with their lovers backed up on site. If he deleted the texts, he likely committed a crime and can be charged. We can harp on this issue all day, but you and the House Republicans have no proof the FBI is “tainted” beyond pure speculation. | ||
| ||
