I like manufactured cops and dirty evidence! Debates don't impact elections, and 50mm have already voted.Originally Posted by LittleLebowski
I like manufactured cops and dirty evidence! Debates don't impact elections, and 50mm have already voted.
Serious question:
If we buy into the narrative that the FBI had Hunter's laptops under subpoena at the end of 2019 due to it being related to an open Federal money laundering case, just how could they have brought that forward for the impeachment hearings, without compromising the the ongoing criminal investigation?
"And for a regular dude I’m maybe okay...but what I learned is if there’s a door, I’m going out it not in it"-Duke
"Just because a girl sleeps with her brother doesn't mean she's easy..."-Blues
This is what the biggest problem with the left is. You don't care. The ends justify the means for you guys. This is exactly how the left has been for the last 100 years...
Ironically the same people want to take the higher moral ground and teach us democracy, values and compassion. The lack of self reflection is remarkable
Last edited by cheby; 10-23-2020 at 12:18 AM.
Do you think the world would be a better place had Clinton won?
How about if Biden wins?
I am not sure I agree. An impeachment trial is not a criminal trial with rules that require the prosecutors (Members of the House of Representatives) to share exculpatory evidence with the defendant. A conviction from an impeachment means the person impeached has lost the elected/appointed position held. It does not mean the convicted party is guilty of any criminal activity as it is not a criminal trial.
The FBI has limited involvement in impeachment proceedings and would not be suggesting to anyone that exculpatory evidence does or does not exist, especially since impeachment is political. Then there is the "ongoing investigation" aspect where the FBI has valid reasons to not opine on an investigation that is incomplete for the sake of impacting a political process like impeachment. The FBI would have to be dragged kicking and screaming into an impeachment, especially after Clinton and Comey in 2016.
From a practical standpoint, the FBI wants no part of any impeachment against POTUS. It is a pure disaster to get involved no matter the case. Can you imagine what would have happened if the FBI had provided information that one of the jurors (the Senate) family members was being investigated for being subject to foreign influence and for trading his father's elected position as VP for cash? And then said, "The investigation is ongoing, so there can be no discussion of criminal charges at this time." Nothing good for the FBI or the country as it would have just made partisan divides worse. One side would be saying, "He is the guilty one, not me" while the other side would be saying, "POTUS used the FBI for political purposes and to draw attention away from his own crimes."
Actually they do. Each and every one of them swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United State of America. They did not swear an oath to any president.
During the Obama or Clinton administrations did you ever complain that employees of the federal government should follow the Constitution, rather than merely take orders from the sitting president and AG?
Last edited by DMF13; 10-23-2020 at 08:12 AM.
_______________
"Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?" Then I said, "Here I am. Send me." - Isaiah 6:8
It actually makes a lot of sense to fire someone who is not accomplishing the intended mission.
...or who is writing "resistance" op-eds in the New York Times.
It's a better strategy than, say, keeping the crack squads responsible for such foreign policy successes as Lybia and the "Arab Spring" in charge. Or the economic wizards who managed just the right policies to keep the economy in the worst recovery since the Great Depression. Or keeping in officials responsible for illegal searches of NSA databases, running guns to Mexican cartels, abusing IRS authority to target political opponents, etc.
And it's not as if Trump has a completely free hand in who he chooses for these positions because the senate has to confirm them. And easily half of the Republicans in the senate hate Trump's guts. In the business world, managers don't have to get their subordinates approved by legislative body ate the fuck up with corrupt shitweasels who should be set adrift on an ice floe rather than hold political power.
One of the primary sources of our problems is that the DC club continues to recycle the same proven failures to higher positions of authority. The Clinton Cabal and the Bushies are a gangrenous presence. They specialize in propagation and regeneration. It's a cozy little system where they get to bounce back and forth from positions with significant government power where they fuck up whatever area of policy they are involved in for a while, then go serve on some board somewhere that profited from their ass-headed nonsense for a tidy sum, and then keep going until they score a super lucrative retirement gig on top of their accumulated millions...or decide to run for office themselves!
Jamie Gorelick is a perfect example of this. In the DOJ she was the author of a number of policies that were directly involved in preventing the intelligence sharing that might have had a chance at preventing 9/11. (I met FBI agents working national security and terrorism that complained about her and other Clinton DOJ alumni well before 9/11 for their ass-headed handling of those matters) Then she ends up on the 9/11 commission, which oddly enough whitewashes a whole bunch of that. She then goes on to a position in Fannie Mae right at the time they started bundling sub-prime loans. Not that doing so would turn out to be a problem or anything...
Then she goes on with 26 million from Fannie in her pocket to serve on the board of Amazon.
Top. Men.
It's been fantastic for the country for somebody like that to keep recirculating, right? I mean, here's a woman who had direct involvement in the two worst things to happen to the country in the last 40 years, and yet she's actually considering running for elective office. Based, of course, on her splendid record of "service".
Firing people who are either undermining the goals of the executive or who are such bumbling idiots that they allow the kind of downright criminal malfeasance seen out of some of these personalities is not a flaw. Appointing them in the first place is, but then when one remembers that to get someone into these offices one has to get them past the senate, it's understandable.
Even Reagan had the bad judgement to put H.W. Bush in as Veep.
3/15/2016
It's a valid point.
Unfortunately that depends on believing that the FBI was actually performing a proper investigation and not using "investigating" as a cover to play politics.
Which, given what has been learned in the last few years, is not a level of trust one can automatically extend to the FBI.
I know folks in the FBI. The kind who actually mean the oath they took...they're counting the minutes to their retirement.
They used to have faith in their organization.
Used to.
3/15/2016
I agree with your line of thinking here, sadly.
That's unfortunate, and I believe many conservatives feel the same about the organization at this point. I know I do, and I used to have great faith in the FBI as a whole. Now they're just another political tool, same as the rest.
One thing Trump did not do, as promised, is "drain the swamp". Pity. I wish the Center (yeah, I'm going to start calling the other 90% of us "the Center", no party affiliation, just Americans.), would just come together and put an end to our current two party political fiasco and throw all those jackasses out on their ears. Neither side is "in the right" when it comes to simply doing their jobs. Not getting it done? Get out. Being a social media twat? Get out. We put up with too much, IMO. I know what I'd like to see done, I'm just not smart enough to know how that would work. How do we right this ship?
Maybe that's the conversation that we put in our time and energy, not Trump, Biden, Right, or Left. All those options suck. Current House sucks, current Senate sucks, the whole damn thing seems to be plagued with people "playing the game". Seems like one big version of tyranny to me.
The last time I read the Constitution the President was the head of the executive branch. I don't think I missed any updates.
Are you trying to be imply that there is some constitutional reason for the FBI to go along with a bullshit sham of an impeachment when they have evidence in their possession that shows just how much bullshit it is?
Reply With Quote