Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Coach is Back! on December 04, 2017, 04:46:03 PM
-
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/04/fbi-agent-fired-from-russia-probe-oversaw-flynn-interviews-softened-comey-language-on-clinton-email-actions.html
This just keeps getting better...
-
By the time this is over the charge against Flynn is going to end up getting dropped.
-
By the time this is over the charge against Flynn is going to end up getting dropped.
He's already plead guilty....lol
-
He's already plead guilty....lol
He was coerced
-
By the time this is over the charge against Flynn is going to end up getting dropped.
Care to bet?
-
He was coerced
That's how plea bargaining works... We have this on you, you are looking at X amount of years if we get a conviction, however, if you plea to a lessor charge, we will guarantee you only do Y amount of time.... it's absolutely coercion but he could say no and take his chances in court if he is innocent. A lot of people do it every day
-
Care to bet?
Saved for posterity
-
That's how plea bargaining works... We have this on you, you are looking at X amount of years if we get a conviction, however, if you plea to a lessor charge, we will guarantee you only do Y amount of time.... it's absolutely coercion but he could say no and take his chances in court if he is innocent. A lot of people do it every day
At this point, after today I would say that Mueller and Comey have more to worry than Flynn with the exception that they financially ruined Flynn.
-
At this point, after today I would say that Mueller and Comey have more to worry than Flynn with the exception that they financially ruined Flynn.
Why would you say that. No link.. your own words
-
Care to bet?
Given what we’ve seen out of Washington, it’s not something I would wager hard earned money on. It would be akin to betting on professional wrestling. That said, I don’t see how anyone looking at this with even remote objectivity could not come to the conclusion that this investigation is tainted.
-
Why would you say that. No link.. your own words
Presidential pardon. after all the shit that has circulated around this investigation I wouldn't be surprised if Trump pardons Flynn... manafort, not so much.
-
Why would you say that. No link.. your own words
Link to what? It’s my opinion. But if you would bother to keep up I’ve posted a couple of links where Muellers credibility is really no better than the average dem.
-
Presidential pardon. after all the shit that has circulated around this investigation I wouldn't be surprised if Trump pardons Flynn... manafort, not so much.
I wouldn't be surprised if that happened. Trump has said Flynns life has been ruined, Hillary did worse, what he did was lawful etc.. The only reason I can think of that he wouldn't would be if Flynn's cooperation paints Trump in a bad light.. Trumps skin is too thin to overlook that.
-
Link to what? It’s my opinion. But if you would bother to keep up I’ve posted a couple of links where Muellers credibility is really no better than the average dem.
I shouldn't have asked you to respond in depth without a link, it's like asking a toddler to fly a plane :) I hope I didn't stress you out
-
I shouldn't have asked you to respond in depth without a link, it's like asking a toddler to fly a plane :) I hope I didn't stress you out
This is another day of the left getting their asses handed to them
-
By the time this is over the charge against Flynn is going to end up getting dropped.
Too late when he has already admitted guilt and been convicted. I think the more likely scenario is Trump pardons him when the Russia witch hunt is over.
-
Too late when he has already admitted guilt and been convicted. I think the more likely scenario is Trump pardons him when the Russia witch hunt is over.
This is from Mike Cernovich’s Twitter. Not an area of expertise for me so I can’t say the probability of this actually happening.
“Mueller failed to disclose exculpatory material about a corrupt federal agent investigating Flynn, the plea deal was obtained via fraud, and Flynn should seek to have it voided.”
-
Too late when he has already admitted guilt and been convicted. I think the more likely scenario is Trump pardons him when the Russia witch hunt is over.
Every federal criminal defendant is advised of the right to appeal at the time he or she pleads guilty and allocutes regardless of whether there is a cooperation agreement in effect. That being said, Flynn will not seek to overturn his guilty plea or rescind his cooperation agreement.He took the plea because he's broke and Mueller threatened to go after his son.
-
Every federal criminal defendant is advised of the right to appeal at the time he or she pleads guilty and allocutes regardless of whether there is a cooperation agreement in effect. That being said, Flynn will not seek to overturn his guilty plea or rescind his cooperation agreement.He took the plea because he's broke and Mueller threatened to go after his son.
Or..they had much more damaging charges that they withheld in order to obtain the plea. Is that NOT possible? It is how plea bargaining works.. asking for a friend
-
As I've been saying, the FBI is corrupt. It's full of anti-Trump zealots on a witch hunt to personally destroy him and undo the results of the 2016 election.
They charge Trumps team with bullshit crimes and cover up for Hillary's actual crimes. Now the evidence is coming out and I hope they fucking burn.
This is bigger than one President. They are putting the entire country on a path for destruction. Without the rule of law we are finished. Without confidence in government we a finished. They are undermining both.
-
As I've been saying, the FBI is corrupt. It's full of anti-Trump zealots on a witch hunt to personally destroy him and undo the results of the 2016 election.
They charge Trumps team with bullshit crimes and cover up for Hillary's actual crimes. Now the evidence is coming out and I hope they fucking burn.
This is bigger than one President. They are putting the entire country on a path for destruction. Without the rule of law we are finished. Without confidence in government we a finished. They are undermining both.
Interesting perspective on the current events..
-
Or..they had much more damaging charges that they withheld in order to obtain the plea. Is that NOT possible? It is how plea bargaining works.. asking for a friend
Nope. You get the cooperator to plead guilty to one count of conspiracy. He signs the cooperation agreement in order to obtain a 5k letter. After the cooperator testifies against the primary target of the investigation, the prosecutor sends a letter to the judge advising that the testimony and intel extracted from the cooperator were critical to the investigation. At that point, the serious charges against the cooperator are dismissed upon motion of the government. The cooperator pleads guilty to one count of obstruction or making a false statement or whatever bullshit charge is up for grabs. As a result, the cooperator receives a suspended sentence or time served.
-
Nope. You get the cooperator to plead guilty to one count of conspiracy. He signs the cooperation agreement in order to obtain a 5k letter. After the cooperator testifies against the primary target of the investigation, the prosecutor sends a letter to the judge advising that the testimony and intel extracted from the cooperator were critical to the investigation. At that point, the serious charges against the cooperator are dismissed upon motion of the government. The cooperator pleads guilty to one count of obstruction or making a false statement or whatever bullshit charge is up for grabs. As a result, the cooperator receives a suspended sentence or time served.
pretty much what I said is it not?
-
pretty much what I said is it not?
Not even close.
-
Not even close.
Lets see how this plays out I assume you are a lawyer and have experience in plea deals. I have some experience from my career but I would defer to your expertise. Do you have any info that would exclude my perspective that they had more on him than he plead to?
-
Anything is possible. My only point is that your theory is improbable because it contravenes the process federal prosecutors typically use to extract guilty pleas from cooperators'.
-
Mark Levin called this Soviet style of corruption to the letter.
-
Mark Levin called this Soviet style of corruption to the letter.
-
Every federal criminal defendant is advised of the right to appeal at the time he or she pleads guilty and allocutes regardless of whether there is a cooperation agreement in effect. That being said, Flynn will not seek to overturn his guilty plea or rescind his cooperation agreement.He took the plea because he's broke and Mueller threatened to go after his son.
Yes, although then he'd be right back defending himself, which he cannot afford to do.
-
Or..they had much more damaging charges that they withheld in order to obtain the plea. Is that NOT possible? It is how plea bargaining works.. asking for a friend
Oh please. If they had a more serious charge than some Mickey Mouse false statement, they would have charged him. He's useless as a witness.
-
Oh please. If they had a more serious charge than some Mickey Mouse false statement, they would have charged him. He's useless as a witness.
Man, I'd love to have the documents you obviously possess to make these conclusive statements :)
-
Man, I'd love to have the documents you obviously possess to make these conclusive statements :)
The same treasure trove of documents you reviewed showing Trump colluded with Russia to get elected president. :)
You're smart enough to see that if they had any kind of charge showing any kind of treasonous behavior they would have charged him with it.
Dershowitz: Flynn Plea Is ‘A Show of Weakness’ for Mueller
by IAN HANCHETT
2 Dec 2017
Dershowitz said, “Well, the last thing any prosecutor wants to do is to have to indict his primary witness for lying. Because if you indict your witness for lying, it really means he’s not useful as a witness, he has no credibility. I’m sure the prosecutor was trying to indict him for some scheme or conspiracy that involved other people in the White House, but there is nothing there, and he had to, finally come down and indict him for lying, which makes him a useless witness. So, this is not a show of strength by the prosecutor. It’s a show of weakness. It’s a show that they really have nothing on anybody above of Flynn and that Flynn made the terrible mistake about lying about something he could have told truth about. Because the two things he lied about were perfectly lawful and perfectly proper for somebody to do during the transition. And so, I think it really reflects a weakness, not a strength in Mueller’s prosecution.”
He added, “Now, they still may be able to use him to lead to other witnesses or to get documentary evidence or to give them leads, but he’s no good as witness. Because he’s obviously sold himself to protect his own son, and he’s prepared not only to sing, but perhaps even to compose and [unintelligible] to exaggerate if he thinks that will get him a better deal from the prosecutor. So, if I’m a defense lawyer, I have no trouble destroying his credibility on the witness stand.”
Dershowitz concluded Mueller is “going on the domino theory, one domino at the time. You go for the lowest-hanging fruit. You indict people for lying to the FBI, failing to fill out the proper forms. These are forms of essentially political jaywalking, then you squeeze them and you hope that maybe they’ll give you information that would lead to somebody higher up. But in the end, it’s hope over reality. So, I would not say this is a day for celebrating for the prosecution in the Mueller office.”
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/12/02/dershowitz-flynn-plea-is-a-show-of-weakness-for-mueller/
-
The same treasure trove of documents you reviewed showing Trump colluded with Russia to get elected president. :)
You're smart enough to see that if they had any kind of charge showing any kind of treasonous behavior they would have charged him with it.
Dershowitz: Flynn Plea Is ‘A Show of Weakness’ for Mueller
by IAN HANCHETT
2 Dec 2017
Dershowitz said, “Well, the last thing any prosecutor wants to do is to have to indict his primary witness for lying. Because if you indict your witness for lying, it really means he’s not useful as a witness, he has no credibility. I’m sure the prosecutor was trying to indict him for some scheme or conspiracy that involved other people in the White House, but there is nothing there, and he had to, finally come down and indict him for lying, which makes him a useless witness. So, this is not a show of strength by the prosecutor. It’s a show of weakness. It’s a show that they really have nothing on anybody above of Flynn and that Flynn made the terrible mistake about lying about something he could have told truth about. Because the two things he lied about were perfectly lawful and perfectly proper for somebody to do during the transition. And so, I think it really reflects a weakness, not a strength in Mueller’s prosecution.”
He added, “Now, they still may be able to use him to lead to other witnesses or to get documentary evidence or to give them leads, but he’s no good as witness. Because he’s obviously sold himself to protect his own son, and he’s prepared not only to sing, but perhaps even to compose and [unintelligible] to exaggerate if he thinks that will get him a better deal from the prosecutor. So, if I’m a defense lawyer, I have no trouble destroying his credibility on the witness stand.”
Dershowitz concluded Mueller is “going on the domino theory, one domino at the time. You go for the lowest-hanging fruit. You indict people for lying to the FBI, failing to fill out the proper forms. These are forms of essentially political jaywalking, then you squeeze them and you hope that maybe they’ll give you information that would lead to somebody higher up. But in the end, it’s hope over reality. So, I would not say this is a day for celebrating for the prosecution in the Mueller office.”
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/12/02/dershowitz-flynn-plea-is-a-show-of-weakness-for-mueller/
Let’s begin with the basics: It is the unanimous conclusion of U.S. intelligence that Vladimir Putin personally directed the Russian government to try to alter our 2016 elections, and to take the side of Donald Trump.
How did that directive play out?
Based on a new guilty plea by Trump associate George Papadopoulus, we know that as far back as April of 2016, the Kremlin used backchannels to inform the Trump campaign that it had “dirt” on Clinton in the form of thousands of stolen emails. The Trump campaign that had said repeatedly, emphatically, that it had never had any contacts with Russian officials, that any such claim was “fake news,” was in fact informed by Russia about illegal hacking some two months before anybody else had a clue.
Ask yourself, because Mueller surely has: Why would Russia want the Trump campaign to know it had a trove of illegally obtained Clinton emails? And once informed, why didn’t the Trump campaign notify U.S. law enforcement? Top officials from every presidential campaign in the last quarter-century, Republican and Democratic, have all said they would have reported such a contact to the FBI immediately.
The Trump campaign stayed silent.
We also know that the Kremlin reached out a second time, again promising dirt on Clinton, and that the Trump campaign responded enthusiastically. On June 3, 2016, Donald Trump Jr. was sent an email telling him that Russia was offering “to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia.”
“This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.” the email read.
“… if it’s what you say, I love it, especially later in the summer,” Trump Jr. responded, which by itself is proof of an eagerness to collude. He quickly set up a meeting between someone described to him as “a Russian government lawyer” and top Trump campaign officials.
The meeting occurred on June 9, and not much seemed to come of it. But six days later, thousands of emails hacked from the Democratic National Committee were made public through Wikileaks.
According to U.S. intelligence, “we assess with high confidence” that Russia conducted the hacking. Yet Trump publicly defended Russia against such charges, and talked so often about his admiration for Putin that it began to seem bizarre. He also spoke dismissively of NATO, the alliance whose mission is to contain Putin. As president, he later fired FBI Director James Comey for not ending an investigation into Russian interference; the next day he bragged to top Russian officials about doing so. He also helped to fabricate a false explanation for the June 9 meeting at Trump Tower.
Again, such evidence, troubling as it is, doesn’t amount to conclusive proof. But it damn sure justifies strong support for the ongoing work of Mueller and his investigative team.
-
Let’s begin with the basics: It is the unanimous conclusion of U.S. intelligence that Vladimir Putin personally directed the Russian government to try to alter our 2016 elections, and to take the side of Donald Trump.
How did that directive play out?
Based on a new guilty plea by Trump associate George Papadopoulus, we know that as far back as April of 2016, the Kremlin used backchannels to inform the Trump campaign that it had “dirt” on Clinton in the form of thousands of stolen emails. The Trump campaign that had said repeatedly, emphatically, that it had never had any contacts with Russian officials, that any such claim was “fake news,” was in fact informed by Russia about illegal hacking some two months before anybody else had a clue.
Ask yourself, because Mueller surely has: Why would Russia want the Trump campaign to know it had a trove of illegally obtained Clinton emails? And once informed, why didn’t the Trump campaign notify U.S. law enforcement? Top officials from every presidential campaign in the last quarter-century, Republican and Democratic, have all said they would have reported such a contact to the FBI immediately.
The Trump campaign stayed silent.
We also know that the Kremlin reached out a second time, again promising dirt on Clinton, and that the Trump campaign responded enthusiastically. On June 3, 2016, Donald Trump Jr. was sent an email telling him that Russia was offering “to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia.”
“This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.” the email read.
“… if it’s what you say, I love it, especially later in the summer,” Trump Jr. responded, which by itself is proof of an eagerness to collude. He quickly set up a meeting between someone described to him as “a Russian government lawyer” and top Trump campaign officials.
The meeting occurred on June 9, and not much seemed to come of it. But six days later, thousands of emails hacked from the Democratic National Committee were made public through Wikileaks.
According to U.S. intelligence, “we assess with high confidence” that Russia conducted the hacking. Yet Trump publicly defended Russia against such charges, and talked so often about his admiration for Putin that it began to seem bizarre. He also spoke dismissively of NATO, the alliance whose mission is to contain Putin. As president, he later fired FBI Director James Comey for not ending an investigation into Russian interference; the next day he bragged to top Russian officials about doing so. He also helped to fabricate a false explanation for the June 9 meeting at Trump Tower.
Again, such evidence, troubling as it is, doesn’t amount to conclusive proof. But it damn sure justifies strong support for the ongoing work of Mueller and his investigative team.
What is this cut and paste (that you probably didn't read) supposed to establish?
-
What is this cut and paste (that you probably didn't read) supposed to establish?
He is attempting to give reasoning behind why the fake Russian investigation was started. Unfortunately, what he has posted has all been destroyed at this point and filled with fake news. They have nothing and had nothing that is clear. They've been trying for a year. He can say "our" sources are biased, etc. but the fact is with all of the leaks going on there has been no leak of anything remotely important, etc. I'm going to stick with my "biased" sources as they have been right in everything so far which is better then the 0% success rate of the other side.
My top source goes by the name "Common Sense". Very good at clearing up issues.
-
He is attempting to give reasoning behind why the fake Russian investigation was started. Unfortunately, what he has posted has all been destroyed at this point and filled with fake news. They have nothing and had nothing that is clear. They've been trying for a year. He can say "our" sources are biased, etc. but the fact is with all of the leaks going on there has been no leak of anything remotely important, etc. I'm going to stick with my "biased" sources as they have been right in everything so far which is better then the 0% success rate of the other side.
My top source goes by the name "Common Sense". Very good at clearing up issues.
Completely agree.
-
Listening now. from what I'm hearing so far one interesting thing stands out.
Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills (Hillary's top stooges) both lied to the FBI and said they didn't know about Hillary's private email server when email communications between them prove that they did know. Mills went so far as to pretend she didn't even know what a server was. They were both caught lying to the FBI. Proven lying, with hard evidence. No indictment, no coerced plea deals, nothing. They walk and Flynn gets hammered.
Still think the FBI is operating without bias or political agenda?
-
Listening now. from what I'm hearing so far one interesting thing stands out.
Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills (Hillary's top stooges) both lied to the FBI and said they didn't know about Hillary's private email server when email communications between them prove that they did know. Mills went so far as to pretend she didn't even know what a server was. They were both caught lying to the FBI. Proven lying, with hard evidence. No indictment, no coerced plea deals, nothing. They walk and Flynn gets hammered.
Still think the FBI is operating without bias or political agenda?
So where is sessions to be found? Doesn’t the FBI answer to the Justice Department of which he is the head?
-
So where is sessions to be found? Doesn’t the FBI answer to the Justice Department of which he is the head?
For the life of me I don't know.
I don't understand how this type of corruption is allowed to continue.
-
So where is sessions to be found? Doesn’t the FBI answer to the Justice Department of which he is the head?
He needs to go. He has been good in some areas but awful in others. I think it is because he is a supposed "gentleman" by all accounts/well respected and he doesn't want to give the appearance of politicizing it from his end. Unfortunately, it is politicized already obviously and it would actually be bringing law back into it by doing what he should.
That's the only explanation I can think of. He is too "proper" or something.
-
He needs to go. He has been good in some areas but awful in others. I think it is because he is a supposed "gentleman" by all accounts/well respected and he doesn't want to give the appearance of politicizing it from his end. Unfortunately, it is politicized already obviously and it would actually be bringing law back into it by doing what he should.
That's the only explanation I can think of. He is too "proper" or something.
This is war time, you can't have a pussy as Attorney General.
-
So where is sessions to be found? Doesn’t the FBI answer to the Justice Department of which he is the head?
I’m becoming very disappointed in Sessions.
-
I’m becoming very disappointed in Sessions.
You should have been disappointed after the first month he disappeared. What a weak POS. Levin's boy. Wrong again.
-
Levin's boy. Wrong again.
You do know that Trump picked Sessions? What a pointless thing to post.
-
You do know that Trump picked Sessions? What a pointless thing to post.
IMO, the biggest mistake he’s made so far.
-
You do know that Trump picked Sessions? What a pointless thing to post.
Really. That Levin was touting safe establishment "conservatives" like Eddie Munster and Sessions meanwhile Trump was motivating the base and those outside the base like never before? Not with a point?
Sessions has only covered his ass since put in place. The political version of Survivor TV show needs to end and some people need to stick their neck out to fix the country. Trump thought he had balls or was advised as such. Bad info.
-
Completely agree.
I'm shocked
-
Listening now. from what I'm hearing so far one interesting thing stands out.
Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills (Hillary's top stooges) both lied to the FBI and said they didn't know about Hillary's private email server when email communications between them prove that they did know. Mills went so far as to pretend she didn't even know what a server was. They were both caught lying to the FBI. Proven lying, with hard evidence. No indictment, no coerced plea deals, nothing. They walk and Flynn gets hammered.
Still think the FBI is operating without bias or political agenda?
Interesting that Getbig's liberal brigade doesn't have shit to say about this. They stuck on simpleton shit like "Flynn confessed". Dumb fucks.
-
Really. That Levin was touting safe establishment "conservatives" like Eddie Munster and Sessions meanwhile Trump was motivating the base and those outside the base like never before? Not with a point?
Sessions has only covered his ass since put in place. The political version of Survivor TV show needs to end and some people need to stick their neck out to fix the country. Trump thought he had balls or was advised as such. Bad info.
Yes, really.
We aren't arguing whether Sessions is doing a good job or not. You seem to think that Trump can do no wrong and blame others for when he had the ultimate choice. Levin is not Trumps advisor. Hold him to the same standard you are attempting to hold Levin to. No one likes a complete apologist/sheep. Trump can be wrong, Levin can be wrong, but that doesn't mean that Trump isn't doing an overall good job and that Levin is an idiot, etc.
You seem to be a "Never Leviner".....
-
Yes, really.
We aren't arguing whether Sessions is doing a good job or not. You seem to think that Trump can do no wrong and blame others for when he had the ultimate choice. Levin is not Trumps advisor. Hold him to the same standard you are attempting to hold Levin to. No one likes a complete apologist/sheep. Trump can be wrong, Levin can be wrong, but that doesn't mean that Trump isn't doing an overall good job and that Levin is an idiot, etc.
You seem to be a "Never Leviner".....
This is what turned me off to Bill Mitchell’s radio show. The whole thing is his lips on Trump’s ass. It got tiresome after a while.
-
oh boy... text messages got leaked.
-
When you consider Hillary took like 92% of Washington DC it’s fair to conclude that you pretty much can’t have a politically motivated investigation without it being biased. You’re gonna have to bring in people from the outside.
-
‘We Can’t Take That Risk’ — FBI Officials Discussed ‘Insurance Policy’ Against Trump Presidency
The Daily Caller ^ | 12/13/2017 | Chuck Ross
Posted on 12/13/2017, 7:49:37 AM by EVO X
Two FBI officials who worked on Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation exchanged text messages last year in which they appear to have discussed ways to prevent Donald Trump from being elected president.
“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office — that there’s no way [Trump] gets elected — but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk,” FBI counterintelligence official Peter Strzok wrote in a cryptic text message to Lisa Page, an FBI lawyer and his mistress.
“It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40,” Strzok wrote in the text, dated Aug. 15, 2016.
Andy is likely Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
-
When you consider Hillary took like 92% of Washington DC it’s fair to conclude that you pretty much can’t have a politically motivated investigation without it being biased. You’re gonna have to bring in people from the outside.
There are investigations that occur every day that have people who feel one way or the other about the subjects and it gets done objectively. The fact I dislike rapists and child molesters doesn't translate into my not doing an objective investigation. I have had to investigate officers I didn't like, instead of going out of my way to find them guilty, I would go out of my way to be fair knowing the potential for bias. It's professionalism. Now I don't know if that agents personal opinion of Trump, which I share, tainted the investigation. Mueller removed him to take away any perception that it may have.. seems like the right thing to do
-
oh boy... text messages got leaked.
Pretty bad. I smell trouble.
-
FBI officials said Clinton 'has to win' race to White House: NYT
Reuters ^ | 12/12/2017 | Reuters Staff
Posted on 12/13/2017, 1:25:36 PM by simpson96
(Reuters) - Senior FBI officials who helped probe Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign told a colleague that Democratic Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton had to win the race to the White House, the New York Times reported on Tuesday.
Peter Strzok, a senior FBI agent, said Clinton “just has to win” in a text sent to FBI lawyer Lisa Page, the Times reported.
The messages showed concern from Strzok and Page that a Trump presidency could politicize the FBI, the report said, citing texts turned over to Congress and obtained by the newspaper.
Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz is investigating the texts in a probe into FBI’s handling of its investigation into Clinton’s use of a private email server for official correspondence when she was Secretary of State under former President Barack Obama, the report added.
Strzok was removed from working on the Russia probe after media reports earlier this month suggested he had exchanged text messages that disparaged Trump and supported Clinton.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
-
There are investigations that occur every day that have people who feel one way or the other about the subjects and it gets done objectively. The fact I dislike rapists and child molesters doesn't translate into my not doing an objective investigation. I have had to investigate officers I didn't like, instead of going out of my way to find them guilty, I would go out of my way to be fair knowing the potential for bias. It's professionalism. Now I don't know if that agents personal opinion of Trump, which I share, tainted the investigation. Mueller removed him to take away any perception that it may have.. seems like the right thing to do
Come on, there’s a big difference between a criminal investigation involving violent crimes and a politically motivated one involving nothing but bullshit.
-
This isn't some nonsensical tinfoil hat conspiracy theory. This is factual, well documented corruption in the Justice Department that is being exposed in the Congress.
Shut down this fucking investigation and appoint a special council to investigate the DOJ. NOW.
-
This isn't some nonsensical tinfoil hat conspiracy theory. This is factual, well documented corruption in the Justice Department that is being exposed in the Congress.
Shut down this fucking investigation and appoint a special council to investigate the DOJ. NOW.
Wow, they were both on fire. You could just feel the circumference of Rosenstein’s asshole increasing.
-
This isn't some nonsensical tinfoil hat conspiracy theory. This is factual, well documented corruption in the Justice Department that is being exposed in the Congress.
Shut down this fucking investigation and appoint a special council to investigate the DOJ. NOW.
Unbelievable. Can't make this stuff up.
-
Unbelievable. Can't make this stuff up.
But according to agnostic, these people are professionals and can be trusted to put their biases aside.
-
But according to agnostic, these people are professionals and can be trusted to put their biases aside.
Agnostic is alright. Just blinded by Trump hatred/Trump Derangement Syndrome. Nobody's perfect. :)
-
Nothing burger
-
Agnostic is alright. Just blinded by Trump hatred/Trump Derangement Syndrome. Nobody's perfect. :)
I know many people whose political believes are the exact opposite of mine and we get along fine. We just don’t talk about politics.
It makes you wonder sometimes. For example, I saw someone tweet on my running club website. Then I checked out his page and he turned out to be a Led Zeppelin fan much like myself. So, we had similar health and fitness activities, and music tastes, yet,as I scrolled down his page he had all these Bernie Sanders quotes. Turned out he was a big leftist.
-
This isn't some nonsensical tinfoil hat conspiracy theory. This is factual, well documented corruption in the Justice Department that is being exposed in the Congress.
Shut down this fucking investigation and appoint a special council to investigate the DOJ. NOW.
While both Gowdy and Jordan made some good points, I have a feeling it will be the same theatrical performance we've seen time and time again: the politicians trying to show an angry face, the [insert whimpering public official here] claiming to do everything properly, occasionally sweating, mumbling and lying (often all at once) and yet, despite all the egregious facts that come to light, nothing happens in the end. I hope this time it's different but I won't hold my breath. It will be a big farce unless the corrupt groups are dismantled, people actually go to prison and the tainted cases are re-evaluated.
-
Just having a political opinion doesn't mean you're going to be biased when you have a job to do, especially at the level of the FBI
BTW - I don't recall anyone on the right being the slightest bit concerned that the FBI was biased when it was being referred to as TrumpLand last year
At that time Trump and his Trumptards were smitten with Comey and the FBI
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/03/fbi-leaks-hillary-clinton-james-comey-donald-trump
-
While both Gowdy and Jordan made some good points, I have a feeling it will be the same theatrical performance we've seen time and time again: the politicians trying to show an angry face, the [insert whimpering public official here] claiming to do everything properly, occasionally sweating, mumbling and lying (often all at once) and yet, despite all the egregious facts that come to light, nothing happens in the end. I hope this time it's different but I won't hold my breath. It will be a big farce unless the corrupt groups are dismantled, people actually go to prison and the tainted cases are re-evaluated.
Agree. While it’s certainly entertaining nothing ever seems to come from it.
-
I know many people whose political believes are the exact opposite of mine and we get along fine. We just don’t talk about politics.
It makes you wonder sometimes. For example, I saw someone tweet on my running club website. Then I checked out his page and he turned out to be a Led Zeppelin fan much like myself. So, we had similar health and fitness activities, and music tastes, yet,as I scrolled down his page he had all these Bernie Sanders quotes. Turned out he was a big leftist.
I have friends who have polar opposite political opinions, and we still talk politics. It's never personal.
I also have friends who are off the rails when it comes politics, following things like "Occupy Democrats," which circulates some of the worst garbage on the internet.
-
I know many people whose political believes are the exact opposite of mine and we get along fine. We just don’t talk about politics.
It makes you wonder sometimes. For example, I saw someone tweet on my running club website. Then I checked out his page and he turned out to be a Led Zeppelin fan much like myself. So, we had similar health and fitness activities, and music tastes, yet,as I scrolled down his page he had all these Bernie Sanders quotes. Turned out he was a big leftist.
Same here, I have a ton of Trump supporter friends. We just don't talk politics and we survive. Have a ton of religious friends... we don't talk religion and we survive.
-
I have friends who have polar opposite political opinions, and we still talk politics. It's never personal.
I also have friends who are off the rails when it comes politics, following things like "Occupy Democrats," which circulates some of the worst garbage on the internet.
Out of say 20 friends with opposing views, I can discuss religion or politics with about 4 of them because it is difficult for many to not become defensive or insulting when discussing them. I can discuss either for hours without getting personal. Not everyone can and that's ok
-
Out of say 20 friends with opposing views, I can discuss religion or politics with about 4 of them because it is difficult for many to not become defensive or insulting when discussing them. I can discuss either for hours without getting personal. Not everyone can and that's ok
Yeah. Same here.