| 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. | ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
Remember, Trump had Manafort/Flynn/Page et al in his orbit at the time or before he won the primary (and modified the Republican platform on exactly one foreign policy issue, related to Russia). And at that point they were known to be corrupt stooges by civilians, let alone the FBI. If that were the case those are exactly the private text messages I would expect to see. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On January 25 2018 01:52 brian wrote: 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. Good progress. Now, from the scandal surrounding the deleted texts from a FBI member under investigation Today, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), and House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Ca.) released the following statement concerning the 384 pages of new text messages between top FBI officials: House oversight“This weekend we met to discuss the text messages and possible next steps in our oversight of these agencies. The contents of these text messages between top FBI officials are extremely troubling in terms of when certain key decisions were made by the Department of Justice and the FBI, by whom these decisions were made, and the evident bias exhibited by those in charge of the investigation. The omission of text messages between December 2016 and May 2017, a critical gap encompassing the FBI’s Russia investigation, is equally concerning. Rather than clearing up prior FBI and DOJ actions, these recently produced documents cause us to further question the credibility and objectivity of certain officials at the FBI.” So they're inquiring into whether the 'glitch' was widespread (accident), who else was involved, if they were preserved from other means, etc. Sessions responded to House committee congressmen notifying them of an inspector general investigation. The very nature of the elevated positions of both Strzok and McCabe within the organization makes it a scandal affecting the FBI and tarnishing its reputation. If it was a low level agent in some Cincinnati office, that would be a different matter and I'd agree. | ||
|
brian
United States9616 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
ChristianS
United States3187 Posts
Were the texts on a government or private phone? And was he actually under investigation such that they were supposed to be retained, or were there just a lot of right-leaning pundits accusing him of things, but no official investigation? | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On January 25 2018 02:14 brian wrote: do you not think that same committee is similarly tainted with Nunes at the helm? You're crossing your committees lol. I'm done without substance provided for this whataboutism. | ||
|
ShoCkeyy
7815 Posts
On January 25 2018 01:53 Danglars wrote: 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. Obvious lol, I'm actually happy they went through, and my game is you say you're open to future investigations if Trump did or did not, but that's also the point of the current investigation. What your posts read to me is "the current investigation is worthless because of these anti trump texts", I don't know how they both relate just cause it's the "FBI" which Trump is attacking since the beginning of his presidency. I wouldn't trust results that come out of the FBI if they wait to investigate the emails later. So there is some kind of double sided answers coming from you. I feel that Mueller is a smart guy, and would try to not get too many people involved. Especially if he knows you may be biased in your research. | ||
|
brian
United States9616 Posts
On January 25 2018 02:19 Danglars wrote: You're crossing your committees lol. I'm done without substance provided for this whataboutism. i’m trying to nail down how far you’re willing to hold inconsistent views on how an organization, and its leader, is/are culpable for his subordinates. what am i confusing? the statement you posted is directly from Chairman Nunes. my honest apology if i’ve misunderstood the committee. definite possibility. Is it that Nunes released the statement in coordination with the oversight committee but not on its behalf? in that case, like i said, my bad. i’ll withdraw the rest, as i wouldn’t honestly trust the answer provided regardless. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On January 25 2018 02:19 ChristianS wrote: I'll probably regret asking this, but what exactly is Strzok accused of/under investigation for? Nothing I saw of the stuff in those texts looked illegal to me, not that I'd necessarily know the ins and outs of relevant law. I get that the "need an insurance policy" stuff followed by deleting a bunch of texts is ideal fodder for Were the texts on a government or private phone? And was he actually under investigation such that they were supposed to be retained, or were there just a lot of right-leaning pundits accusing him of things, but no official investigation? It was a government issued phone. He was literally reassigned to a lower position because of this. All texts are preserved for government oversight (or should be). Blame Nixon. The texts show media contacts that make the pair under investigation for illegal classified leaks in the Flynn probe (see TheHill) The credibility and objectivity of Strzok's bosses, including Andrew McCabe, is called into question. Strzok's involvement in questioning key people in the Hillary email probe is called into question, given how he talked about Trump's primary win forcing speed in the Clinton probe. Strzok and his mistress talked about not keeping texts. Charges of obstruction of justice are exposed, into all investigations during Strzok's tenure. The deleted texts lie on a period of extraordinary leaks from the Mueller probe. The texts ask for a first meeting of a secret society ... right before Senate investigators reveal they have a whistleblower that will share information about secret off-site meetings. This all comes together to suggest compromising corruption and collusion within the FBI at the highest levels. The details require either a second special counsel or a conclusive inspector general's report (unlikely). It's all about trust in the FBI, both to investigate objectively and to submit to oversight from congressional committees. Americans know they couldn't delete 6 months of texts and tell the FBI that it was a glitch and doesn't call into question anything but an affair. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On January 25 2018 02:22 ShoCkeyy wrote: Obvious lol, I'm actually happy they went through, and my game is you say you're open to future investigations if Trump did or did not, but that's also the point of the current investigation. What your posts read to me is "the current investigation is worthless because of these anti trump texts", I don't know how they both relate just cause it's the "FBI" which Trump is attacking since the beginning of his presidency. I wouldn't trust results that come out of the FBI if they wait to investigate the emails later. So there is some kind of double sided answers coming from you. I feel that Mueller is a smart guy, and would try to not get too many people involved. Especially if he knows you may be biased in your research. Nope. Re-read. A major investigation needs to be started into the FBI's handling of oversight responsibilities and past investigations, including illegal classified leaks. It doesn't stop Mueller's investigation and only partially affects it. I want to see it concluded in due time. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
You see, once we lose faith in people and start asking for investigation, they never stop. We need an investigation into the House members calling for this investigation. And then an investigation into that investigation to assure that it is not biased. And all of this will receive major coverage on Fox News for months. And then we need an investigation into Fox News for the coverage. Ok, you know what, I’m on board now. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
I just find it so curious that a new furor pops up after every large announcement from Mueller and his team. Like clockwork. And yet they never stick around as long (sometimes even being contradicted within the administration *cough McMaster cough* at which point there's something convenient about how that person is also the evilest, supported by a cavalcade of Russian twitter bots) | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Leporello
United States2845 Posts
Reading the texts publicly available, these 2 FBI agents' major crime was not liking Trump. One can easily see that they do, however, take their jobs seriously. This stuff will never get released, as what has been released, reads like something out of a sitcom about a well-meaning couple who happen to work in the government. But as I've said before, this stuff isn't meant for transparency. They won't release anything more than talking-points, and I'm doubtful they'll do that, as the FBI will likely have to respond if it's half as accusatory as is being claimed. And accusatory seems to be all it is. That won't go well. This is about insinuation. This is about thousands of people and even more Russian bots "asking" for transparency over what is a 99%-manufactured conspiracy. One of Strzok's texts talks about preparing PDBs for Trump in the "worst case scenario", and conservatives took to reading it as a conspiracy to overthrow the government... That stuff about "insurance policy". He was talking about PDBs... not overthrowing the government. In fact, the opposite. He was saying he would need to prepare PDBs for Trump as "insurance" in case Trump wins. In other words, he was doing his job without partisanship, albeit reluctantly. How revealing, that Danglars et al chose to see "insurance policy" as evidence of criminal conspiracy. Does Danglars stop to reconsider what he's saying? That "insurance policy" bullshit was debunked weeks ago. All you're showing is you want to see something that isn't there. This is a time for some conservatives here to look for direction beyond Sean Hannity and Devin Nunes. This is the type of talking-point that separates simple "ditto-heads", who are following Trump into some dark and unknown territory, from principled conservatives. You're concerned about 2 FBI agents who, having their lives publicized, so far have shown nothing but a serviceman's attitude. But you're not concerned that the President actually asked the Deputy Director of the FBI how he voted. McCabe is not the problem, and anyone with a basic understanding of ethics can see that. Donald Trump, in just that one question alone, has done more to politicize and denigrate the FBI than any agent's text-messages. If you're concerned about the FBI being political, then you're not concerned about Stzok, you're concerned about the administration asking FBI for their voting-records. As further word of caution sure to ignored by those who don't seem to blink at denigrating honorable servicemen if Sean Hannity tells them to -- none of it, even in your wildest-scenario, denies the merit or integrity of Mueller's special counsel. Nothing Strzok wrote to his girlfriend (he doesn't like Trump, so shocking) denies Russia's hacking of the DNC -- the primary basis for the investigation. None of it denies any of the numerous Russian connections and meetings that have been revealed and lied-about by the White House. But I guess if ransacking two FBI agents because they don't belong to the cult -- I mean, the club -- makes you feel better. You might consider saving some of that tinfoil for later, after the special counsel investigation reveals more of its findings, because apparently two top campaign-officials being indicted within a year is normal. You also might want to look at a recent history of anti-FBI propaganda, from Russia, terrorists, and criminal organizations, before Trump was even a candidate. You might find it looks really, really, really familiar to the "deep-state" stuff you're currently eating. Play on, and good luck. Some of you are just going all-in with people who make Nixon look like an ethical-minded patriot. edit: I just noticed Kwark or Stealth already posted that tweet in the last page, sorry. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22990 Posts
On January 25 2018 02:52 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Capitalism. I'm also guessing this won't make it in the press release. https://twitter.com/jamieson/status/956189226261012480 In addition to announcing job cuts on Tuesday, Kimberly-Clark said it would raise its quarterly dividend by 3.1 percent this year. Last year, the company spent about $900 million repurchasing its own shares. She said the tax savings would also be used to make capital investments and to “allocate significant capital to shareholders.” Couldn't they have "paid" for the restructuring with the money they are giving to themselves (shareholders)? It blows my mind that educated people allow themselves to buy into this garbage. I have a hard time believing any top execs at KC think that the tax cuts are paying for restructuring and not for more money in their pockets. Particularly when The job and factory cuts — which are expected to save up to $550 million by the end of 2021 ...The company is also aiming to save more than $1.5 billion from its so-called Force program through efforts like improved productivity at its factories and more efficient distribution. As an aside I find what's happened to the stock market since it's creation to be incredibly fascinating. One company is struggling because they only grow profits 1-2% but another is highly valued while losing money year after year. I'd love to have a stock broker from the 20's take a look at how the stock market works now and just listen to his bewilderment. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
IN THE WAKE of the 2016 election, a group of despairing Democrats in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, formed a new political group to ensure that they would never be out-organized locally again. Faith leaders, small-business owners, social workers, nonprofit leaders, teachers, and students joined together as part of the historic dusting-off that was taking place all across the country. The group, which came to call itself Lancaster Stands Up, put its energy toward defending the Affordable Care Act from its multiple assaults in Washington and fending off the tea party-dominated state legislature in Harrisburg. The group’s town halls and protests began to draw eye-popping numbers of people and even attracted national attention. With their newfound confidence, Lancaster progressives looked toward local and federal elections. The national press was captivated by the upsets across the state of Virginia in November, but that same night in Pennsylvania, Democrats across the state in local elections knocked Republicans out of seats they’d owned forever. The surge suggested that capturing the congressional seat covering Lancaster and Reading, which Democrats lost by 11 points in 2016, was well within reach. In June, one of their own, Jess King, who heads a nonprofit that helps struggling women start and run small businesses in the area, announced that she would be running to take out Republican Rep. Lloyd Smucker in Pennsylvania’s 16th District. Nick Martin, her field director and another co-founder of Lancaster Stands Up, was a leading activist in the popular and robust local anti-pipeline movement, an organized network King was able to tap into. She planned to focus a populist-progressive campaign on canvassing and harnessing grassroots enthusiasm. If suburban Republicans came along, attracted by the promise of Medicare For All or tuition-free public college, then great, but they would not be King’s target. Lancaster Stands Up voted to endorse King, as did a local immigrant rights group with a broad grassroots network, Make the Road PA. Justice Democrats, a small-dollar operation that was backing leftist Democrats, got behind her as well. (The primary is set for May 15, with the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling on Monday that the GOP had illegally gerrymandered the state’s congressional districts, insisting they be redrawn before the primary. The decision could cut either way for King, depending on the shape of the new map.) King then sought to secure the endorsement of the major players in Democratic Party circles. Her campaign reached out to EMILY’s List, which was founded to elect pro-choice women to Congress. EMILY’s List sent King a questionnaire, which she filled out and returned, affirming her strong support for reproductive freedom. That was October, by which point her campaign had broken the $100,000 mark, a sign of viability she had hoped would show EMILY’s List that she was serious. “We followed up a few times after and did not hear back,” said King’s spokesperson, Guido Girgenti. It turned out the Democratic Party had other ideas — or, at least, it had an old idea. As is happening in races across the country, party leaders in Washington and in the Pennsylvania district rallied, instead, around a candidate who, in 2016, had raised more money than a Democrat ever had in the district and suffered a humiliating loss anyway. Source | ||
KwarK
United States42254 Posts
On January 25 2018 03:25 GreenHorizons wrote: Couldn't they have "paid" for the restructuring with the money they are giving to themselves (shareholders)? It blows my mind that educated people allow themselves to buy into this garbage. I have a hard time believing any top execs at KC think that the tax cuts are paying for restructuring and not for more money in their pockets. Particularly when As an aside I find what's happened to the stock market since it's creation to be incredibly fascinating. One company is struggling because they only grow profits 1-2% but another is highly valued while losing money year after year. I'd love to have a stock broker from the 20's take a look at how the stock market works now and just listen to his bewilderment. I mean they said that this was what they were going to do before the tax bill passed. We all knew it wasn't going to American jobs or investment. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15468 Posts
On January 25 2018 04:11 Plansix wrote: That video will never get old. All that money is going to line the pockets of share holders, who will not create jobs with it. They will pack it away That and "please clap". | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
Afreeca Starleague
Snow vs Soulkey
WardiTV Invitational
PiGosaur Monday
GSL Code S
ByuN vs Rogue
herO vs Cure
Replay Cast
GSL Code S
Classic vs Reynor
GuMiho vs Maru
The PondCast
RSL Revival
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
