The "There's no Special Prosecutor thread?" thread

[Handyman]

Hmm...what would you call it IF (hypothetical) it turns out that the FBI used spurious source material to obtain FISA warrants to eavesdrop on Trump campaign operatives?

We don't know whether or not that happened. If it did, then your scenario has some plausibility.


What about the converse though? That the FBI cleared Hilliary before the investigation really got started, and even went so far as deliberately to soften the language in a memo written to clear her? None of that is a plot against Trump, and at the same time it sure did have the appearance of the FBI playing politics on her behalf.

You mean like when just days before the election they reopened the investigation and allowed Congress to discuss it publicly? Yeah sure did seem biased to Clinton.

Where is the proof they shut it down early. I want hard evidence.

Your bot needs rebooting.

 

[Handyman]

I’d call it terrifying because the judicial and executive branches of government both agreed there was enough evidence to think Trump’s campaign was colluding with or conspiring with foreign agents.

This crap is all bad. It isn't our fault the GOP sold out to Trump and he got them caught up in this. It isn't a witchhunt if you actually are a witch.

This would be true if it was Clinton as well. A criminal is a criminal and should be punished.

The fact that the GOP is acting like a Black Man wrongfully arrested is hilarious on many levels. Problem is they aren't random Black Guy being profiled (though they love that in real life ironically!) they are OJ using the race card to prove a conspiracy that never happened in hopes of disparaging the LAPD (FBI) enough to get the people on their side.

 

[alfablue]

Re: The "There's no Special Prosecutor thread?" thread

It’s terrifying to me that dumps guys are so dumb to not know that any phone conversations they have with Russians are going to be tapped.

Kind of disqalifies them to be capable leaders.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The "There's no Special Prosecutor thread?" thread

Just let me know when the Uranium One, Clinton Email, and Benghazi investigations are over and she's in jail. Other than that, forget it.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The "There's no Special Prosecutor thread?" thread

Just let me know when the Uranium One, Clinton Email, and Benghazi investigations are over and she's in jail. Other than that, forget it.

Don't forget Pizzagate. Or the IRS scandal. IALTO.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The "There's no Special Prosecutor thread?" thread

It’s terrifying to me that dumps guys are so dumb to not know that any phone conversations they have with Russians are going to be tapped.

Kind of disqalifies them to be capable leaders.

Its the old Republican Venn diagram: dumb, crazy, or evil.

 

[The Sicatoka]

Re: The "There's no Special Prosecutor thread?" thread

Mr. Mueller should follow the money, the objective truth, to wherever it leads. That's what good cops do. And he needs to do that. The question, "Did Trump do it?" must be answered. Mueller, manila envelope, it must be resolved.


However, there are other problems here that tarnish the FBI, the group that is supposed to be the gold standard for American law enforcement.

Set aside the Trump-Putin conspiracy theory momentarily, and consider ...

... while Comey said in his (July 2016) statement that Hillary had been “extremely careless” with security secrets, in his first draft, Clinton was declared guilty of “gross negligence” – the precise language in the statute to justify indictment.

Who talked Comey into softening the language to look less than criminal? One man was FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, whose wife, Jill, a Virginia state senate candidate, received a munificent PAC contribution of $474,000 from Clinton family friend and big bundler Terry McAuliffe.

Also urging Comey to soften the fatal phrase “gross negligence” was key FBI agent Peter Strzok. In text messages to his FBI lover Lisa Page, Strzok repeatedly vented his detestation of the “idiot” Trump.

After one meeting with “Andy” (McCabe), Strzok told Page an “insurance policy” was needed to keep Trump out of the White House.

Also, it appears Comey began drafting his exoneration statement of Hillary before the FBI had even interviewed her.

Read the whole Pat Buchanan spiel here.

If none of that gives you pause as to how law enforcement even remotely appears to be operating I'm afraid for democracy.


"Test everything; retain what is good." Mueller needs to keep testing, but so does the FBI's IG.

 

[alfablue]

Just let me know when the Uranium One, Clinton Email, and Benghazi investigations are over and she's in jail. Other than that, forget it.

It’s interesting that the very anti-American thing to put your political opponents in jail is somehow fine, but investigating a foreign power getting involved is a bad thing.

What country are we in, again? Should I put commrade in that question?

 

[alfablue]

Re: The "There's no Special Prosecutor thread?" thread

Sic,
On one hand, you claim to want the investigation, then you question it.

Which is it?

Make up you mind.

 

[The Sicatoka]

Re: The "There's no Special Prosecutor thread?" thread

Sic,
On one hand, you claim to want the investigation, then you question it.

Which is it?

Make up you mind.

It can be both.

Do it.
Do it right.

Objective truth must be determined; subjective truth, like someone's opinion of another, can not be allowed to subrogate objective truth.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The "There's no Special Prosecutor thread?" thread

Mr. Mueller should follow the money, the objective truth, to wherever it leads. That's what good cops do. And he needs to do that. The question, "Did Trump do it?" must be answered. Mueller, manila envelope, it must be resolved

We agree.

 

[GrinCDXX]

Re: The "There's no Special Prosecutor thread?" thread

It can be both.

Do it.
Do it right.

Mueller removed someone from the investigation that he had concerns about. He's doing it. Doing it right.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The "There's no Special Prosecutor thread?" thread

Mueller removed someone from the investigation that he had concerns about. He's doing it. Doing it right.

He's failing because Clinton isn't in jail. We need a second Special Prosecutor to investigate him, and a third to investigate Clinton.

 

[GrinCDXX]

Re: The "There's no Special Prosecutor thread?" thread

Mr. Mueller should follow the money, the objective truth, to wherever it leads. That's what good cops do. And he needs to do that. The question, "Did Trump do it?" must be answered. Mueller, manila envelope, it must be resolved.


However, there are other problems here that tarnish the FBI, the group that is supposed to be the gold standard for American law enforcement.



Read the whole Pat Buchanan spiel here.

If none of that gives you pause as to how law enforcement even remotely appears to be operating I'm afraid for democracy.


"Test everything; retain what is good." Mueller needs to keep testing, but so does the FBI's IG.

Once again, we don't know what the "insurance policy [to keep him out of office]" analogy was referring to, and neither does Pat Buchanan (bracketed portion refers to the part that is totally made up). But that doesn't stop him (and you) from pretending that you do.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: The "There's no Special Prosecutor thread?" thread

Sic,
On one hand, you claim to want the investigation, then you question it.

Which is it?

Make up you mind.

To be fair, it can be both. But not this time. Mueller is a lifelong republican appointed by a Republican after a Republican stepped aside all under a Republican administration. He’s already fired one (or was it two) people who may have had an improper bias. Though, it’s possible they just had more than two brain cells and knew Trump was going to be a disaster.

If that’s the standard, then we should fire everyone including Trey Gowdy, Devin Nunnes, Chaefetz (spelling, all), and everyone else investigating any Clinton scandal. They’re biased.

 

[The Sicatoka]

Re: The "There's no Special Prosecutor thread?" thread

Once again, we don't know what the "insurance policy [to keep him out of office]" analogy was referring to, ...

You tacitly accuse others of assuming, yet, you assume it is an analogy.

 

[The Sicatoka]

Re: The "There's no Special Prosecutor thread?" thread

If that’s the standard, then we should fire everyone including Trey Gowdy, Devin Nunnes, Chaefetz (spelling, all), and everyone else investigating any Clinton scandal. They’re biased.

No, those folks are elected. They wear their biases for all to pick and choose from and they won their seats.

Law enforcement is supposed to (yes, they are human) check their biases at the door. If they can't, they need to go (see: R Mueller's actions per Strzok).

 

[GrinCDXX]

Re: The "There's no Special Prosecutor thread?" thread

You tacitly accuse others of assuming, yet, you assume it is an analogy.

It's like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you're 40

a·nal·o·gy
əˈnaləjē
noun
a comparison between two things, typically for the purpose of explanation or clarification.
"an analogy between the workings of nature and those of human societies"
a correspondence or partial similarity.
"the syndrome is called deep dysgraphia because of its analogy to deep dyslexia"
a thing that is comparable to something else in significant respects.
"works of art were seen as an analogy for works of nature"

I'm not assuming anything. He used an analogy to explain something--that's literally all we know about that.

 

[trixR4kids]

Re: The "There's no Special Prosecutor thread?" thread

So you admit they are investigating Trump's illegal activities? If this were a black man gunned down in cold blood your response would be that he shouldn't have committed a crime...

Must give out more rep until...

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The "There's no Special Prosecutor thread?" thread

If that’s the standard, then we should fire everyone including Trey Gowdy, Devin Nunnes, Chaefetz (spelling, all), and everyone else investigating any Clinton scandal. They’re biased.

One wonders how in 10 hours of testimony ace prosecutor Gowdy couldn't catch Clinton in a lie? Boggles the mind. How long have we had Trump under oath?