I am confused as to the point of order. Would 2017 not be after the election in November of 2016? Yes, it was revealed before the inauguration during the new administration honeymoon/hangover, but it would have been much more damaging to have revealed it in late October of 2016. Imagine if the FBI was publicly testifying in late October about both Secretary Clinton's email practices and links between then-candidate President Trump and the Russians. What am I missing?Originally Posted by JHC
I think I understand your point of view now. This is where I think we differ. In my mind, the detective “leaning in” to keep a violent offender from hurting others by using exaggerated language is nothing like using National Security powers against an innocent citizen. I believe this should be handled seriously and with great deference. I don’t believe we will like where the loose version ultimately goes.
Even worse IMO, the FBI continued to renew the warrants (which require new evidence each time), launch a criminal investigation, and push for the appointment of a special counsel LONG after they had failed to corroborate or straight up discredited the “evidence “ They knew their was no “there there”. They told the judge they believed these people were “agents of a foreign power”. They were also required to demonstrate that agency was in commission of a CRIME.
Don’t know how that makes you feel but I think that’s terrifying.
I understand the urge to assign the “good guys” status for our military and law enforcement organizations. Most are. They should always get the benefit of the doubt. But in the end they are people in “service”. When it’s time to give the proverbial article 15 and separate a turd from service then so be it. No tears from me.
I appreciate your willingness to keep an open mind and look at these things thoughtfully. It’s obvious that you care about the country. Seems like people can’t disagree anymore and still get along generally.
Oh I just meant this investigation’s existence never leaked. It got announced.
“Remember, being healthy is basically just dying as slowly as possible,” Ricky Gervais
I think we can. Our survival as a nation will depend on it going forward.
Blame the lawyers for making "weasel wording" a cottage industry.
There's nothing civil about this war.
+1
The Steele dossier is available for a pittance on Amazon. It’s tips about Russian hacking of the DNC with Wikileaks as a distribution channel might have been useful. The FISA warrant on Page apparently a dry hole.
Last edited by JHC; 12-11-2019 at 06:18 PM.
“Remember, being healthy is basically just dying as slowly as possible,” Ricky Gervais
I’m very interested to see what Durhams investigation says, if anything, about this. It’s been reported that he is looking into that part of the dossier as well.
Last edited by EPF; 12-11-2019 at 07:05 PM.
Lately it seems the only person I trust, (somewhat), is Guy Lewis who is a former U.S. Attorney in the Southern District of FL and occasional talking head on FOX. I worked closely with Guy in years past, (though it's years since I've seen him), and he was always a straight shooter. (I'm a little troubled, however, with his involvement as a member of Epstein's dream team.)
Back to square one...
There's nothing civil about this war.
When no one is believable, the only recourse is to use the aggregate to make your own determination. Believe no one; believe everyone.
I'm not inclined to believe anything I can't verify personally...and frankly, I don't have the desire to dive too deeply into the reports. That's on me.
There's nothing civil about this war.
You're not alone.
Reply With Quote