PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: Lucifer on December 27, 2017, 07:21:16 AM
-
Good read. This is IMO one of the biggest if not ugliest scandals in our lifetime. A federal law enforcement agency acting to promote a presidential candidate and fabricating evidence against a presidential opponent is staggering.
Mueller needs to be shut down and the FBI put under a Congressional Investigation. Everyone that has fingers on this needs to be discharged from the DOJ and FBI. Criminal charges need to be filed and a total restructuring of the FBI.
https://townhall.com/columnists/patbuchanan/2017/12/27/did-the-fbi-conspire-to-stop-trump-n2427205
-
More than any other President, Obama politicized the DOJ, FBI, CIA, NSA, IRS, EPA, NASA, NOAA, Interior, and many other agencies, and departments. I hope Trump is removing the leadership down to Bureau heads that display political hostility towards the current Administration, and thus hostility towards the American citizens.
-
The current crop of young adults are immune to anything that doesn’t cater to their politics and be,i eve that anything their side does to advance the agenda is justified and right.
-
More than any other President, Obama politicized the DOJ, FBI, CIA, NSA, IRS, EPA, NASA, NOAA, Interior, and many other agencies, and departments. I hope Trump is removing the leadership down to Bureau heads that display political hostility towards the current Administration, and thus hostility towards the American citizens.
You have McCabe sitting under the radar hoping to get to March 1st so he can get his retirement. He needs to be brought up on charges and fired from the FBI, he doesn't deserve his pension in light of what he and others have done.
It was a crime to let Lerner at the IRS retire with her six figure retirement after she conspired against opposition political groups.
-
There is nothing new in this article. It's just the same information that's already out there being repeated, again.
Good read. This is IMO one of the biggest if not ugliest scandals in our lifetime. A federal law enforcement agency acting to promote a presidential candidate and fabricating evidence against a presidential opponent is staggering.
You're indictment of the entire FBI is a bit of a stretch. No doubt there are issues and it goes to the top (Comey, McCabe).
Mueller needs to be shut down and the FBI put under a Congressional Investigation. Everyone that has fingers on this needs to be discharged from the DOJ and FBI. Criminal charges need to be filed and a total restructuring of the FBI.
Why shut down Mueller? It just makes Trump look like he's afraid of something when in fact, there is no evidence of collusion. Just let the investigation play out.
What would Mueller be investigated by Congress for? Exceeding his mandate? Criminal charges against whom, exactly, and for what? How would you restructure the FBI?
-
You have McCabe sitting under the radar hoping to get to March 1st so he can get his retirement. He needs to be brought up on charges and fired from the FBI, he doesn't deserve his pension in light of what he and others have done.
What statutes did he violate?
-
Indicting the entire FBI is a bit of a stretch. No doubt there are issues and it goes to the top (Comey, McCabe).
Where did I state indict the entire FBI?
Why shut down Mueller? It just makes Trump look like he's afraid of something when in fact, there is no evidence of collusion. Just let the investigation play out.
If you have bothered to keep up with all of these shenanigans you would see Mueller is up to his eyeballs in this fraud along with several others. This is an orchestrated attempt. There is no Russian Collusion. It's now evident the whole Mueller appointment and probe was a part of the "insurance policy".
What would Mueller be investigated by Congress for? Exceeding his mandate? Criminal charges against whom, exactly, and for what?
Mueller is involved in a conspiracy by his associates. Of course you will come back and try to deflect that, but so far everything out of the DOJ and FBI are pointing in that direction. Comey leaked a document in order to trigger a special prosecutor, and Rosenstien appoints Comey's best friend and confident, who then fills his investigation with hard line progressives and Clinton supporters ( even a Clinton attorney). We have text messages that have FBI personel referencing how to keep Trump out of office, and an "insurance policy" just in case he wins. We have other officials whose spouses are employed by Fusion GPS. We have a phony dossier that was used to obtain FISA warrants. We have Mueller obtaining emails illegally. We have Obama administration officials unmasking private citizens under false pretenses.
How would you restructure the FBI?
Start removing everyone involved with this scandal.
And you see nothing wrong here? Unbelievable.
-
What statutes did he violate?
Why not allow an investigation of him to establish that? Or are you afraid his rights are being violated?
If he's innocent, so be it. But with all of the stonewalling by the FBI going on, they have something to hide.
-
There is nothing new in this article. It's just the same information that's already out there being repeated, again.
Then move on if you don't want to read it. Who are you, a self appointed moderator to come into this forum and pronounce what is valid (in your narrow minded opinion) and what is not?
-
There is nothing new in this article. It's just the same information that's already out there being repeated, again.
Funny thing is:
When the libs repeat the "same old thing" time after time, liberals believe it MUST be true.
But when Conservatives repeat the same old thing, libs say "nothing new here, let's move on"
-
Where did I state indict the entire FBI?
Here:
A federal law enforcement agency acting to promote a presidential candidate and fabricating evidence against a presidential opponent is staggering.
Also, I never claimed that you wanted to indict the entire FBI, I said that you're indictment of the entire FBI was a stretch.
Edit: After re-reading my post, I can see the confusion as to why you'd think I was suggesting indicting the entire FBI. Not what I meant, so I corrected the other post.
If you have bothered to keep up with all of these shenanigans you would see Mueller is up to his eyeballs in this fraud along with several others. This is an orchestrated attempt. There is no Russian Collusion. It's now evident the whole Mueller appointment and probe was a part of the "insurance policy".
I have yet to see any evidence that Mueller was willfully or knowingly part of the "insurance policy."
Mueller is involved in a conspiracy by his associates. Of course you will come back and try to deflect that, but so far everything out of the DOJ and FBI are pointing in that direction. Comey leaked a document in order to trigger a special prosecutor, and Rosenstien appoints Comey's best friend and confident, who then fills his investigation with hard line progressives and Clinton supporters ( even a Clinton attorney). We have text messages that have FBI personel referencing how to keep Trump out of office, and an "insurance policy" just in case he wins. We have other officials whose spouses are employed by Fusion GPS. We have a phony dossier that was used to obtain FISA warrants. We have Mueller obtaining emails illegally. We have Obama administration officials unmasking private citizens under false pretenses.
Start removing everyone involved with this scandal.
And you see nothing wrong here? Unbelievable.
There's a lot in this. Nobody is denying that there's a lot of odd, potentially illegal, highly unethical stuff going on. And despite all of the stuff that is happening that is wrong on many levels with this investigation, I haven't seen one thing that shows that Mueller is part of any "conspiracy." I'd also be curious where I posted that I see nothing wrong here.
The Republicans need to be careful with this. Shutting down Mueller when there's no evidence of collusion only hurts Trump, not helps him. It's also going to allow everyone on the left to say, "See! He shut it down because Mueller was close to the truth!" Between the Mueller investigation and the Congressional investigation, nothing has been found. This is an investigation in search of a crime.
-
Why not allow an investigation of him to establish that? Or are you afraid his rights are being violated?
If he's innocent, so be it. But with all of the stonewalling by the FBI going on, they have something to hide.
You said he should be charged, so I asked which statutes you think he violated. You didn't answer but instead tried to turn it around.
-
Then move on if you don't want to read it. Who are you, a self appointed moderator to come into this forum and pronounce what is valid (in your narrow minded opinion) and what is not?
I did read it and it's the same stuff that's already out there. I'm not pronouncing anything valid or invalid, I'm only saying there's nothing new in there.
You're reading too much into it.
-
Funny thing is:
When the libs repeat the "same old thing" time after time, liberals believe it MUST be true.
But when Conservatives repeat the same old thing, libs say "nothing new here, let's move on"
Liberals repeat the things they want to be true so often that it becomes true in their minds. In this case, the article is just restating information already out there.
-
This is an investigation in search of a crime.
Just the more reason to end it. It's a farce.
After exhaustive Congressional investigations, intelligence investigations and now this, there is not even the slightest shred of evidence of Russian collusion and the Trump campaign. None, zip, nada.
And millions of dollars wasted. But now we have an investigation in search of a crime. So is this the new norm? When an opposition party gets elected the DoJ and FBI will jump in and appoint a Special Counsel in order to find something of wrong doing, anything?
The basis of this "investigation is very troubling. A fake dossier to obtain a FISA warrant, unmasking of political opponents, leaking to the media to get a Special Counsel appointed (and a Special Counsel who is best friends of the leaker).
And it's bullshit to even assume that "Better let them investigate because if you don't it looks like you're hiding something".
The "investigation" has nothing to do with it's original intent.
-
You said he should be charged, so I asked which statutes you think he violated. You didn't answer but instead tried to turn it around.
Investigations will determine exactly what charges apply. Even several congressmen and senators have stated they are getting stonewalled on information from the DoJ and FBI.
Do you not find it a bit troubling that these agencies are preventing information from coming forward that potentially damages them?
-
Just the more reason to end it. It's a farce.
I disagree about ending it. The reality is that if Trump fires Mueller there's going to be bigger problems than if he just let's it continue, especially considering the way it's going is just proving that there's nothing there and it's very partisan.
After exhaustive Congressional investigations, intelligence investigations and now this, there is not even the slightest shred of evidence of Russian collusion and the Trump campaign. None, zip, nada.
No disagreement here.
And millions of dollars wasted. But now we have an investigation in search of a crime. So is this the new norm? When an opposition party gets elected the DoJ and FBI will jump in and appoint a Special Counsel in order to find something of wrong doing, anything?
The Scooter Libby investigation comes to mind.
The basis of this "investigation is very troubling. A fake dossier to obtain a FISA warrant, unmasking of political opponents, leaking to the media to get a Special Counsel appointed (and a Special Counsel who is best friends of the leaker).
Unless I missed something, I'm not sure that it's been proven that the fake dossier led to the FISA warrant. I know it's speculated that it has, but I don't recall seeing confirmation. It makes a difference, especially since Comey said that it was "salacious."
-
Investigations will determine exactly what charges apply. Even several congressmen and senators have stated they are getting stonewalled on information from the DoJ and FBI.
I understand that, but I was responding to the fact that you said he should be brought up on charges. That indicates that you think he committed a crime and I was asking which crime you think he committed.
Do you not find it a bit troubling that these agencies are preventing information from coming forward that potentially damages them?
Coming forward in what manner? This is still an on-going investigation and thus it makes sense that certain information isn't being released to the press, nor should it be.
-
Unless I missed something, I'm not sure that it's been proven that the fake dossier led to the FISA warrant. I know it's speculated that it has, but I don't recall seeing confirmation. It makes a difference, especially since Comey said that it was "salacious."
Since the FBI and DoJ are stonewalling Congress and not producing the application of the FISA Warrant, or the Warrant itself, it makes one ask "Why?". If either of these agencies have nothing to hide, then why not produce the application and warrant?
-
Coming forward in what manner? This is still an on-going investigation and thus it makes sense that certain information isn't being released to the press, nor should it be.
Fuck the press. Where the hell did you come up with that?
Congress has been trying to obtain the FISA Application and Warrant which the DoJ and FBI refuse to produce. Since the FISA Warrant is key to the unmasking and ultimate eavesdropping on private citizens, that trail would certainly begin to tell the actual story of what's going on. Odd how those agencies can't seem to produce a key piece of evidence.
-
Fuck the press. Where the hell did you come up with that?
Congress has been trying to obtain the FISA Application and Warrant which the DoJ and FBI refuse to produce. Since the FISA Warrant is key to the unmasking and ultimate eavesdropping on private citizens, that trail would certainly begin to tell the actual story of what's going on. Odd how those agencies can't seem to produce a key piece of evidence.
I'll reply to both of your posts by quoting this one.
First, the issue of the press. I wasn't sure when you mentioned information coming forward if you were referring to the public (which would be through the press) or through Congressional hearings. Since you're talking about Congressional hearings, I agree that when Congress asks for information, it should be provided.
Has anybody in Congress issued any subpoenas yet? If they haven't, they should. If they have and haven't received anything, this brings on another series of questions. Would the answers (be it written from subpoena requests or from hearings) be provided behind closed doors or would they be public hearings? How does this information not get leaked or released? These are rhetorical, but important, because Congress can have an influence on the investigation. If we want this, and all future investigations, to be impartial, what is the balance between letting the special counsel do his job and answering to Congress?
-
If we want this, and all future investigations, to be impartial, what is the balance between letting the special counsel do his job and answering to Congress?
This investigation reeks of political bias and those involved have not shown any interest in impartiality. The fact that the "investigation" that was suppose to be about Russian Collusion is nowhere near what was suppose to be investigated.
That's what is so troubling here. Anyone who is a ideologue will refuse to see what is actually going on and what the true intent of this fiasco is for.
-
You said he should be charged, so I asked which statutes you think he violated. You didn't answer but instead tried to turn it around.
Holding a 'secret' meeting with Comey might be enough to hang official misconduct and witness tampering on him, without a lot of trouble.
-
Here's my question, what crime is Trump being investigated for?
-
Here's my question, what crime is Trump being investigated for?
He's not named as the entity being investigated; here's Rosenstein's one page order:
https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/967231/download (https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/967231/download)
Note the mention of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a) - text of which can be found here:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/28/600.4 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/28/600.4)
Basically the special counsel is supposed to investigate the specific matters delineated in the Order (in paragraph (b)). So just:
(i) any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and
(ii) any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; and
(iii) any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a).
I think "arise directly" in point (ii) is particularly subject to subjective interpretation. And point (iii) is used to get people in trouble for obstruction of justice (lying, destroying evidence.)
As to what would be a crime with regard to findings of point (i) - I found only this (there are probably other relevant statutes I did not find):
"18 U.S. Code § 953 - Private correspondence with foreign governments
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/953 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/953)
The Order ends with this:
Sections 600.4 through 600.10 of Title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations are applicable to the Special Counsel.
They are found here:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/28/part-600 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/28/part-600)
-
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2017/12/29/doj-blows-past-deadline-to-turn-over-document-to-congress-on-dossier-n2427812
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes is blasting the Department of Justice and FBI after officials ignored congressional subpoenas and blew threw a deadline to turn over documents related to the infamous Fusion GPS dossier.
In a letter to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, Nunes points out that not only did DOJ mislead his Committee about the existense of documents, they also unlawfully failed to comply with congressional requests.
"Several weeks ago, DOJ informed the Committee that the basic investigatory documents demanded by the subpoenas, FBI Form FD-302 interview summaries, did not exist. However, shortly before my meeting with you in early December, DOJ subsequently located and produced numerous FD-302s pertaining to the Steele dossier, thereby rendering the initial response disingenuous at best," Nunes wrote.
-
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2017/12/29/yeah-the-trump-dossier-could-be-the-fbis-insurance-plan-n2427659
On top of these texts, you have a rather unseemly pattern of behavior from some top officials that feed into the bias narrative at the bureau. For starters, David Ohr met with the authors of the dossier. He was a top DOJ official, holding the title of deputy attorney general. He has since been demoted after this meeting was made public. To boot, his wife, Nellie, worked for Fusion in 2016. Andrew Weissmann, one of Muller’s top lieutenants, was spotted at Hillary Clinton’s election night party. Regardless of what their reporting staff has filed, the editorial board took a remarkably different take on the FBI’s actions since the Strzok’s texts were made public. They noted that there’s mounting evidence that the FBI tried to meddle in a presidential election. The image of the FBI is also made worse by their pervasive stonewalling. Kimberley Strassel of the Journal added that these antics were being done to save the FBI from embarrassment. They’re abusing secrecy powers if that’s the case. The FBI had until yesterday to turn over the unredacted transcripts of the interviews between former FBI Director James Comey’s two top aides—FBI chief of staff James Rybicki and FBI attorney Trisha Anderson—who might shed light into the activities of Strzok, Sally Yates, and former Attorney General Loretta Lynch. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI), chair of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, demanded these documents be turned over to congressional investigators. In typical fashion, the FBI failed to meet the deadline, or purposefully ignored it. Oh, I’m sorry—why were these two top FBI aides interviewed? Well, as it turns out, James Comey was being investigated for violated the Hatch Act with his October letter to Congress informing them the FBI would be reviewing more emails found on the laptop of Anthony Weiner, the ex-husband of top Clinton aide Huma Abedin.