Jump to content


Comey, McCabe, Brennan, and Deep State Corruption


Recommended Posts

"We'll stop it."

 

 

Who is the we being referenced? Just him and her? The entire FBI? Maybe the entire investigative team? Maybe all of America? Maybe Democrats?

 

How do they say they'll stop it? Well, they don't. But you said they were discussing how they would prevent Trump from winning.

 

Is it clear whether the act of stopping will be done within the capacities of their jobs as government employees, vs just in their own personal lives as private citizens? No, it isn't.

 

Are we able to satisfactorily discern any amounts of humor, hyperbole, sarcasm, etc. that would change the context of the already entirely vague statement? Nope, not really.

 

This is why people can't take you seriously. You actually bring up really good points and topics of conversation, occasionally, but they're always in between these ridiculous allegations and conclusions that are based on virtually nothing in terms of actual evidence.

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment

You can read more about those messages here.

 

Not a good look for Strzok. But nonetheless the report found no evidence it influenced his work. In fact, the FBI handling of the investigation was carried out in such a way that it helped Trump & hurt Clinton:

 

Quote

But a nearly two-year investigation by the Justice Department's watchdog found no evidence that those private sentiments expressed by Strzok influenced his work.
 

"The report did not find any evidence of political bias or improper consideration actually impacting the investigation under review," Wray said.

 

What's more, Trump is completely ignoring the entire reason the Justice Department inspector general wrote this report: to look at whether the FBI mishandled the Clinton email investigation, not the Russia probe.
 

The inspector general report is pretty clear on that front. It found that former FBI director James B. Comey wasn't biased, but he made judgment calls during the campaign that negatively affected Clinton, such as announcing the end of the investigation but criticizing her without first going up the chain of command, and announcing that he was reopening the investigation days before the election.

"There's nothing in the report which says the FBI was biased in favor of Clinton," Cornell Law School Vice Dean Jens David Ohlin said. "If anything, it's the opposite. The FBI handled the investigation in a way that was very problematic for Clinton and complicated her life immensely."

Trump is factually stretching and even factually abusing a report to benefit himself politically: Personal partisanship does not automatically equal professional bias. And if anything, the FBI hurt Clinton's electoral chances, not his.


Strzok was also removed immediately from the Mueller investigation as soon as his private sentiments toward Trump became known. And he's offering to testify willingly for House Judiciary Committee.

 

But we also learned other new things recently. During the election, there were rumors swirling that the New York FBI field office, with deep ties to Rudy Giuliani, had a deep anti-Clinton bias. This led to worries they were going to improperly handle info, i.e., leak it to Rudy to help the Trump camp.

 

Devine Nunes admitted last night, apparently accidentally, that in late September of 2016 "good FBI agents" alerted him that they had found new emails pertinent to Clinton on Anthony Weiner's laptop. Adam Schiff, Nunes' Democratic counterpart on the House Intel Committee, was not made aware of this.

 

 

Here's Rudy himself on Fox News on October 26th, making a not so subtle reference to more Clinton news coming down the pipe. He's downright giddy.

 

 

When did the FBI (Comey) officially notify Congress they had found new emails on Weiner's laptop? October 28th, 2016.

 

Long before that time, both Nunes & Rudy knew and had apparently set their own machinations in motion. It's dirty campaigning using info they shouldn't have had, but it absolutely worked. It's not surprising, given this current crop of Republicans value power above everything else.

 

It's pretty easy to see who benefitted & who got hosed here. This all hurt Clinton & helped Trump. 

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment
23 minutes ago, Landlord said:

"We'll stop it."

 

 

Who is the we being referenced? Just him and her? The entire FBI? Maybe the entire investigative team? Maybe all of America? Maybe Democrats?

 

How do they say they'll stop it? Well, they don't. But you said they were discussing how they would prevent Trump from winning.

 

Is it clear whether the act of stopping will be done within the capacities of their jobs as government employees, vs just in their own personal lives as private citizens? No, it isn't.

 

Are we able to satisfactorily discern any amounts of humor, hyperbole, sarcasm, etc. that would change the context of the already entirely vague statement? Nope, not really.

 

This is why people can't take you seriously. You actually bring up really good points and topics of conversation, occasionally, but they're always in between these ridiculous allegations and conclusions that are based on virtually nothing in terms of actual evidence.

 

Now you’re quibbling over who “we” is? 

 

Really? You don’t find that a little absurd? 

Link to comment
14 minutes ago, Clifford Franklin said:

You can read more about those messages here.

 

Not a good look for Strzok. But nonetheless the report found no evidence it influenced his work. In fact, the FBI handling of the investigation was carried out in such a way that it helped Trump & hurt Clinton:

 


Strzok was also removed immediately from the Mueller investigation as soon as his private sentiments toward Trump became known. And he's offering to testify willingly for House Judiciary Committee.

 

But we also learned other new things recently. During the election, there were rumors swirling that the New York FBI field office, with deep ties to Rudy Giuliani, had a deep anti-Clinton bias. This led to worries they were going to improperly handle info, i.e., leak it to Rudy to help the Trump camp.

 

Devine Nunes admitted last night, apparently accidentally, that in late September of 2016 "good FBI agents" alerted him that they had found new emails pertinent to Clinton on Anthony Weiner's laptop. Adam Schiff, Nunes' Democratic counterpart on the House Intel Committee, was not made aware of this.

 

 

Here's Rudy himself on Fox News on October 26th, making a not so subtle reference to more Clinton news coming down the pipe. He's downright giddy.

 

 

When did the FBI (Comey) officially notify Congress they had found new emails on Weiner's laptop? October 28th, 2016.

 

Long before that time, both Nunes & Rudy knew and had apparently set their own machinations in motion. It's dirty campaigning using info they shouldn't have had, but it absolutely worked. It's not surprising, given this current crop of Republicans value power above everything else.

 

It's pretty easy to see who benefitted & who got hosed here. This all hurt Clinton & helped Trump. 

 

It seems McCabe and others hid the Weiner emails, fearing what was there, and hoping to keep from revealing them until after the election.

 

Comey, assuming Hillary would win as it wasn’t really in doubt, feared that if the emails came out after a Hillary election, they would damage her legitimacy. He also had promised Comgress that he would notify them of any new news on that front. Sp when he got wind, he sprung into action to protect the FBI’s reputation and his own. Let’s be honest...Comey’s ‘higher loyalty’ has always been to himself.

 

So Hillary should have been charged and they did her a favor by excusing her crimes. McCabe should have revealed the Weiner emails immediately, thought he was helping Hillary, and inadvertently hurt her by delaying things until so close to the election. And Comey, who assumed Hillary’s election was a sure thing and wanted it to be legitimate, was trying to help her but ended up hurting her.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Ric Flair said:

 

It seems McCabe and others hid the Weiner emails, fearing what was there, and hoping to keep from revealing them until after the election.

 

Comey, assuming Hillary would win as it wasn’t really in doubt, feared that if the emails came out after a Hillary election, they would damage her legitimacy. He also had promised Comgress that he would notify them of any new news on that front. Sp when he got wind, he sprung into action to protect the FBI’s reputation and his own. Let’s be honest...Comey’s ‘higher loyalty’ has always been to himself.

 

So Hillary should have been charged and they did her a favor by excusing her crimes. McCabe should have revealed the Weiner emails immediately, thought he was helping Hillary, and inadvertently hurt her by delaying things until so close to the election. And Comey, who assumed Hillary’s election was a sure thing and wanted it to be legitimate, was trying to help her but ended up hurting her.

 

They didn't hide them because they were trying to help or protect anyone. They didn't disclose them because that FBI policy. That's how investigations are supposed to work.

Personally I think Comey erred badly in his judgment (the IG report said as much) but that he chose to disclose the new emails because A) he told Congress he would and B) he was afraid of what Congressional Republicans would do when Clinton won & found out he didn't disclose them prior to the election. I can already envision the claims that he threw the election to her now. It's not hard because many Dems (voters, not politicians) believe he threw the election to Trump by telling an obvious partisan hack like Chaffetz, who immediately leaked the news. And they may be right.

What charges should she have been brought up on? What crimes were they excusing? You're doing that thing again where you get a lot of the facts right but mix in unfounded, ridiculous claims as well.

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment

14 minutes ago, Clifford Franklin said:

 

They didn't hide them because they were trying to help or protect anyone. They didn't disclose them because that FBI policy. That's how investigations are supposed to work.

Personally I think Comey erred badly in his judgment (the IG report said as much) but that he chose to disclose the new emails because A) he told Congress he would and B) he was afraid of what Congressional Republicans would do when Clinton won & found out he didn't disclose them prior to the election. I can already envision the claims that he threw the election to her now. It's not hard because many Dems (voters, not politicians) believe he threw the election to Trump by telling an obvious partisan hack like Chaffetz, who immediately leaked the news. And they may be right.

What charges should she have been brought up on? What crimes were they excusing? You're doing that thing again where you get a lot of the facts right but mix in unfounded, ridiculous claims as well.

 

She intentionally moved classified and top secret documents and information from a secure email system to an unsecure email system. As a result, those national secrets were compromised. 

Link to comment
14 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

 

She intentionally moved classified and top secret documents and information from a secure email system to an unsecure email system. As a result, those national secrets were compromised. 

 

Trump shared classified info with Russians in the Oval. It mortified an ally and put intel sources at risk.

 

He continues to use an unsecured Android that likely exposes national security information as well.

 

At this point, the government has decided it's no BFD.

  • Plus1 4
Link to comment
2 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

 

Now you’re quibbling over who “we” is? 

 

Really? You don’t find that a little absurd? 

 

 

When you want to make claims as audacious as the ones you're making, then no, that's not even a little bit absurd.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

Guys, guys, guys. Why can't you just believe everyone is out to get Trump, and they were so out to get him that they forgot to stop him from getting elected and accidentally damaged Hillary Clinton's campaign? It's so logical! #deepstate

  • Plus1 3
Link to comment
2 hours ago, Landlord said:

 

 

When you want to make claims as audacious as the ones you're making, then no, that's not even a little bit absurd.

 

His girlfriend was concerned that Trump might get elected. He reassured her that they simply wouldn’t allow that happen. They would stop it from happening. And they were running the investigation.

 

And you see no issue there...amazing.

 

 

2 hours ago, ZRod said:

Guys, guys, guys. Why can't you just believe everyone is out to get Trump, and they were so out to get him that they forgot to stop him from getting elected and accidentally damaged Hillary Clinton's campaign? It's so logical! #deepstate

 

It actually is. Read the report.

Link to comment

2 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

His girlfriend was concerned that Trump might get elected. He reassured her that they simply wouldn’t allow that happen. They would stop it from happening. And they were running the investigation.

 

And you see no issue there...amazing.

 

 

I see hypothetical potential for the possible existence of an issue, which I would want to be further investigated. 

 

And, wouldn't you know it, it was, for over a year, and after that investigation, Trump's hand picked Director of the FBI said...

"The report did not find any evidence of political bias or improper consideration actually impacting the investigation under review,"

 

Amazing.

  • Plus1 8
Link to comment
14 hours ago, Landlord said:

 

 

I see hypothetical potential for the possible existence of an issue, which I would want to be further investigated. 

 

And, wouldn't you know it, it was, for over a year, and after that investigation, Trump's hand picked Director of the FBI said...

"The report did not find any evidence of political bias or improper consideration actually impacting the investigation under review,"

 

Amazing.

 

The didn't find any direct physical or testimonial evidence that the well documented biases affected the charging decisions. All that means is that no one was dumb enough to document they were clearing her because they preferred her to Trump. They didn't write it down.

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...