What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

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

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

GrinCDXX said:
You kind of dodged there. What were you suggesting when you said the menace must have been Putin, or someone other than Trump? I assumed you were being saracastic--as in, calling Trump a menace would have been proof of something sinister.
Click to expand...

It would show poor form for an investigator; and, it got her removed from Mueller's team.
 
Re: The "There's no Special Prosecutor thread?" thread

GrinCDXX said:
But, it could very well be nothing above bad optics in a hyper politicized situation, it's perfectly reasonable to think that would be enough for Mueller to show them the door.
Click to expand...

Indeed.
But in their zealous disliking of Mr. Trump they've tarnished the Bureau and Mr. Mueller's work. This incident will always be a footnote to the investigation.

As Kep says, this is no way to run a railroad.
 
Re: The "There's no Special Prosecutor thread?" thread

The Sicatoka said:
It would show poor form for an investigator; and, it got her removed from Mueller's team.
Click to expand...

I'm glad you recognize that doing something in poor form would be enough to get you removed in this environment--that it wouldn't necessarily have to be anything beyond that.
 
Re: The "There's no Special Prosecutor thread?" thread

The Sicatoka said:
Indeed.
But in their zealous disliking of Mr. Trump they've tarnished the Bureau and Mr. Mueller's work. This incident will always be a footnote to the investigation.

As Kep says, this is no way to run a railroad.
Click to expand...

Ok, but the thing is, they weren't running the railroad--Mueller is. And his response is indeed the way to run a railroad.

Hopefully, if anything does come of this investigation, it will be because of cold, hard facts and it won't particularly matter that a couple of investigators said mean things about him.
 
Last edited:
Re: The "There's no Special Prosecutor thread?" thread

GrinCDXX said:
Hopefully, if anything does come of this investigation, ...
Click to expand...

There's a nightmare scenario in this:
Mueller finds nothing* but the FBI retains the tarnish of Strzok's and his mistress' texts. Call it the "wrestle the pig**" scenario.


*beyond Flynn lying to the FBI about something that was legal, and Manafort et al doing illegal activities before joining the Trump campaign
**the FBI got dirty and the pig liked it
 
GrinCDXX said:
No, it doesn't show that staff to be careless, it shows those two people were careless. It's pretty obvious what you're trying to do.
Click to expand...

He has been doing this same game forever. Like when, even after it was proven Obama never tapped Trump he deflected...then questioned "but what if he DID!?!!". He wants to use innuendo and hypotheticals as proof. Basic clickbait style bs...create a rumor, get others to talk about it then use the fact that others are talking about it as proof there is something there.
 
The Sicatoka said:
There's a nightmare scenario in this:
Mueller finds nothing* but the FBI retains the tarnish of Strzok's and his mistress' texts. Call it the "wrestle the pig**" scenario.


*beyond Flynn lying to the FBI about something that was legal, and Manafort et al doing illegal activities before joining the Trump campaign
**the FBI got dirty and the pig liked it
Click to expand...

Sorry but the tarnish you speak of changes nothing. Hence why the DOJ said as much.

The only ones pushing that agenda are Faux, Trump and apparently someone at USA Today. No one with actual knowledge has disagreed
 
Re: The "There's no Special Prosecutor thread?" thread

The Sicatoka said:
It was enough to get two senior FBI officials removed by Mr. Mueller from his investigative team. I'll put that a notch above "nothing" for now.
Click to expand...

Yeah, we know. Less than that had you calling for Hillary's head. But Trump can blab classified info to the Russians right in the Oval office, and you're ok with that because "once the president says it, it's no longer classified". Despite that not being at all the way these things are supposed to be handled. And we all know how concerned you are about security and classification. Only for some people, though it seems.
 
Re: The "There's no Special Prosecutor thread?" thread

The Sicatoka said:
Kepler said:
It's a cautionary tale that intelligent people, if exposed to a steady diet of propaganda and the confirmation bias of being with people who think alike, start saying and worse believing really dumb stuff. This obviously applies to everyone regardless of partisanship.
Click to expand...

It bore repeating, and certain parts emphasis.
Click to expand...

In case folks won't believe Kep, or me, let's try someone else:

“One of the dangers of the Internet is that people can have entirely different realities, they can be just cocooned in information that reinforces their current biases.”

“It’s also by the way harder to be as obnoxious and cruel in person as people can be anonymously on the Internet,” he said.
Click to expand...

The "he" in question is Mr. Barack Obama.

So, folks, get out, get exposed to uncomfortable objective truths. And yes, it just may shake some subjective truths you hold dear.

Test everything; retain what is good.
 
Re: The "There's no Special Prosecutor thread?" thread

rufus said:
But Trump can blab classified info to the Russians right in the Oval office, and you're ok with that because "once the president says it, it's no longer classified".
Click to expand...

I wasn't "OK" with it, but it is the law.

Is it a good or smart law is a whole other question.
 
Re: The "There's no Special Prosecutor thread?" thread

Kepler said:
The thing about the Echo Chamber is if you're born into it how would you know you're even in it?

Ironically I have more hope for old than young conservatives. Old conservatives remember a time when they still had information that conflicted with their programming. Young conservatives, raised on Fox and home schooled by dolts, have literally spent their lives trapped underground. They have no idea there even is sunshine, let alone what it feels like.
Click to expand...
Even those people have access to the internet though, at least for the most part.

Older people might deserve more of a pass on some of this stuff than young people even if the young are more hopeless because they clearly have the means and just decide to not go outside it.
 
Re: The "There's no Special Prosecutor thread?" thread

This thread is pretty useless, basing speculation on accusations when there is really noting anyone can go on today.

If Scretary Clinton did something actually illegal, she will eventually go to jail. I very much doubt that, since the best of the best R could not find any chargeable offense.

The alternative is that she did and R lawyers and prosecutors are just that inept. Which means they are incapable of running this country.

The vitriol spewed onto a R leaning investigator suggests to me that he found something. But that is speculation.
 
Re: The "There's no Special Prosecutor thread?" thread

The Sicatoka said:
I wasn't "OK" with it, but it is the law.

Is it a good or smart law is a whole other question.
Click to expand...

No, it's not the law. Sure, the president can declassify, but there's a procedure that has to be followed in doing so. He can't just arbitrarily decide he wants to pass along this little tidbit of info he knows to whoever he's talking to just so he feels important.
 
rufus said:
No, it's not the law. Sure, the president can declassify, but there's a procedure that has to be followed in doing so. He can't just arbitrarily decide he wants to pass along this little tidbit of info he knows to whoever he's talking to just so he feels important.
Click to expand...

Let's not forget the intelligence was I believe Israeli...way to screw an ally.
 
Re: The "There's no Special Prosecutor thread?" thread

rufus said:
No, it's not the law. Sure, the president can declassify, but there's a procedure that has to be followed in doing so. He can't just arbitrarily decide he wants to pass along this little tidbit of info he knows to whoever he's talking to just so he feels important.
Click to expand...

He is unfamiliar with a president named Nixon, I guess: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HiHN3IJ_j8A
 
Re: The "There's no Special Prosecutor thread?" thread

Accidentally flipped on Faux and wouldn't you know it they are calling for further investigation into Clinton and implying the FBI was bussed. I am sure it will be random happenstance when Sicatoka says the same thing in a few days ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top