Never said he was. Unqualified? Yes. Incompetent? Yes. Crooked/corrupt? Jury is still out.madhatter wrote:so that's why you are sure trump is crooked?
Funny though, based on these facts I would argue that Trump looks bad, not the FBI. From what I read, it looks like Trump either directly fired many of these people or forced them to resign, or they resigned in protest or due to pressure from Trump's camp. That to me does not suggest malfeasance at the FBI, it suggests that Trump is trying to derail the investigation.madhatter wrote:meanhwile at least 8 FBI personel have had to retire or step down as a direct result of this investigation...
that's not bias, that's observation....
Let's not forget 4 people have been indicted by the special counsel.Kpdemello wrote:Funny though, based on these facts I would argue that Trump looks bad, not the FBI. From what I read, it looks like Trump either directly fired many of these people or forced them to resign, or they resigned in protest or due to pressure from Trump's camp. That to me does not suggest malfeasance at the FBI, it suggests that Trump is trying to derail the investigation.madhatter wrote:meanhwile at least 8 FBI personel have had to retire or step down as a direct result of this investigation...
that's not bias, that's observation....
Frankly I think it's weird to see it any other way - Trump praised Comey before this investigation started heating up, and did a very sudden about face. How is that anything but Trump attacking what he perceives as a threat? It looks damned suspicious - but I mostly chalk it up to Trump having a huge ego and seeing the investigation as some kind of threat and not necessarily as a cover up of something nefarious that he did. But again, I could be wrong.
P.S. a couple of these departures seem to have nothing at all to do with Trump or the investigation, like one guy who was on the verge of retirement, Rachel Brand who took a big time private sector job, etc.
Not only that, two of those four have plead guilty:Nikoli wrote:Let's not forget 4 people have been indicted by the special counsel.
Schiff Memo Blocked Because DOJ & FBI Under "Criminal Investigation" Says Former Federal ProsecutorFBI investigators who interviewed Michael Flynn last January - one of which was anti-Trumper Peter Strzok - thought Flynn was telling the truth about his conversations with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak, and that any inaccuracies in his answers were unintentional - according to accounts of a closed-door March 2017 briefing given to lawmakers by former FBI Director James Comey.
A former Federal prosecutor claims that the Democratic response to the House Intel Committee's GOP-authored "FISA memo" was blocked on the recommendation of the FBI and DOJ because the agencies are conducting internal investigations into politically motivated malfeasance by specific individuals which the Schiff memo could compromise if released without redactions.
DiGenova: “We’re going to see the [Democrat memo]. It will be heavily edited by the FBI and the Department of Justice and the CIA. The most important part of this story is that on Friday, February the 9th, Rod Rosenstein and Christopher Wray wrote a letter to the White House counsel Don McGahn that they could not agree to the publication of the Schiff memo because it contained national security and law enforcement concerns. It was actually the FBI and the Department of Justice says no [to releasing the memo]. The most important part of that letter is when it says… law enforcement concerns. What does that mean? It means, that there is a criminal investigation underway and release of some of the information in the memo by Mr. Schiff will affect that criminal investigation. I wonder who they are investigating? And the answer is pretty clear. They are investigating the people at the FBI and the DOJ who provided false information to the FISA court over a number of years, including, involving Carter Page.”
BuzzFeed has been paying a former top FBI and White House cybersecurity official to traverse the globe for the past six months on a secret mission to corroborate various claims in the Trump-Russia dossier assembled by ex-UK Spy Christopher Steele. Steele was commissioned by Fusion GPS, whose efforts were funded in large part by Hillary Clinton and the DNC - and then used by the FBI to obtain a FISA warrant to spy on a Trump campaign adviser and those he communicated with.
That said, if Ferrante is able to do what Christopher Steele couldn't for an extra $50,000 on top of the $168,000 he was paid by Fusion GPS, it would send the Mueller probe into hyperdrive:
The ramifications of FTI’s dossier investigation could be game-changing for Mueller’s probe, because it “would establish outside veracity of dossier allegations,” a source familiar with the work told Foreign Policy. Yet news of FTI’s involvement, including the critical role of a former top FBI official, would also be controversial because the dossier itself is “a political football,” the source said. -FP
Ferrante's investigation would also remove much of the egg from the face of the beleaguered FBI - which used the unverified Steele dossier to obtain a surveillance warrant on Trump campaign associate, Carter Page. Although the contents of the dossier were unable to be corroborated, the FBI told the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court that Steele's reputation was solid - and used a Yahoo News article written by Michael Isikoff to support the FISA application. The Isikoff article, however, contained information provided by Steele. In other words, the FBI made it appear to the FISA court that two separate sources supported their application, when in fact they both came from Steele.
(interestingly, Isikoff also wrote a hit piece to discredit an undercover FBI informant who testified to Congress last week about millions of dollars in bribes routed to the Clinton Foundation by Russian nuclear officials. Small world!)
“They can hire Nancy Drew, Encyclopedia Brown, or Sherlock Holmes – you can’t find what doesn’t exist,” Fray-Witzer wrote to FP. “There is a simple reason why Buzzfeed hasn’t found any evidence to support the allegations in the Dossier against Mr. Gubarev: the allegations are false.”
Sens. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., are calling on former national security adviser Susan Rice to explain an email she wrote to herself on the day of Donald Trump’s inauguration that insisted Obama wanted to make sure the probe into Russia's election meddling was done "by the book."
On Jan. 20, 2017 — moments before Trump took the oath of office to become president — Rice emailed herself about a briefing that took place that month with the intelligence community about Russian hacking during the 2016 presidential election.
Then-President Barack Obama had a meeting on Jan. 5, 2017 with then-FBI Director James Comey and then-Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates. Rice and then-Vice President Joe Biden were also present at the Oval Office meeting.
At the end of her email describing the meeting, Rice wrote that from a national security perspective, Obama “said he wants to be sure that, as we engage with the incoming team, we are mindful to ascertain if there is any reason that we cannot share information fully as it relates to Russia.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... s-jdlqv62n" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Russia is probably the most capable and aggressive of all the countries capable of such operations, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats said in prepared remarks for a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on Tuesday. In a review of the intelligence community’s annual assessment of global threats, he was to appear alongside officials, including Central Intelligence Agency Director Mike Pompeo and FBI Director Christopher Wray.
“Moscow seeks to create wedges that reduce trust and confidence in democratic processes,” Coats said. “We assess that the Russian intelligence services will continue their efforts to disseminate false information via Russian state-controlled media and covert online personas about U.S. activities to encourage anti-U.S. political views
wilful ignorance reigns supreme on the left...let go of yoru rampant anti trump hate...Kpdemello wrote:See this is what I'm talking about when I say we can't even agree on facts. Flynn pleads guilty... i.e., he ADMITTED he was GUILTY. Yet you are still trying to say that he did nothing wrong and was actually telling the truth and the FBI thought so too. So why did he plead guilty?we don't know, perhaps because it was bankrupting him?
Most of the rest of your post seems to be based on supposition. Is the Steele dossier unverified? thus far none of it has been proven to be verified...whihc is the point...there has been ZERO verification...I have no idea. Maybe we should wait until the FBI/special prosecutor actually reports the findings of their investigation instead of basing our opinions on information leaked (or not leaked) to the media.
It also seems perfectly appropriate that Obama's administration was highly concerned about the Russia investigation.obama himself said he wasn;t involved at all in any way... If it is true that Russia interfered in an ongoing election, I would expect the President of the United States to be highly concerned and deeply involved in investigating and exposing it. Isn't that part of his job? Now if this is a politically motivated witch hunt and there's no real evidence of Russian interference, then sure Obama did a bad thing. But if there is evidence of Russian interference, than Obama was doing his job. fair enough on the if/if...then/then
So how about we wait and see what the special prosecutor comes up with? Based on what little evidence has been released, it does seem that there was at least grounds to start an investigation. The Papadopoulos business alone seems like a solid reason to at least look into things in my opinion.
As to release of the democrats memo, yes I understand the Justice Department/FBI recommended not releasing it. They also recommended not releasing the Republican memo, yet Trump ignored them. he sent it back once, then disagreed that names should be redacted and released it...You seemed okay with him ignoring that recommendation then, yet suddenly when the Democrats release their memo Trump is highly concerned about justice department/FBI objections. That seems fishy to me, but whatever.becasue you refuse to follwo along...trump is forcing D's DOJ FBI to make the redactions to avoid making them himself ( at the whitehouse)... the same thing was done w the nunes memo... Lets see if and when the Democrat memo actually gets released. I'm guessing it's not going to make much of an impact,it won;t just like the Republican memo made very little impact.if that had zero impact on you , you have zero ability to think critically and objectively...the evidence of collusion, crime and cover up is rampant in multitudes...your only defense of any of it is that it's not been verified as true...despite material evidence provingit so, though not yet by a court of law...meanwhile we have the exact oppostie w the "dossier",zero evidence to back up any of the asserions and plenty of reason to find it suspect if not complete fabrication....
if you can justify any of those as "above the board" then you really have no place in any political conversation other than as a propagandist pawn...aka ( barely) useful idiot...get the transcripts candy
I heard about it on the news ( at least 8 different times)
not a smidgen of corruption
i can guarantee no political influence...
are you REALLY this stupid? I can hardly imagine you are...we KNOW russia and others interfere in elections the US does it all the time as well...Kpdemello wrote:Here's a funny one:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... s-jdlqv62n" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Russia is probably the most capable and aggressive of all the countries capable of such operations, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats said in prepared remarks for a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on Tuesday. In a review of the intelligence community’s annual assessment of global threats, he was to appear alongside officials, including Central Intelligence Agency Director Mike Pompeo and FBI Director Christopher Wray.
“Moscow seeks to create wedges that reduce trust and confidence in democratic processes,” Coats said. “We assess that the Russian intelligence services will continue their efforts to disseminate false information via Russian state-controlled media and covert online personas about U.S. activities to encourage anti-U.S. political views
So the Director of National Intelligence, appointed by Trump, thinks we should be concerned about Russian meddling in mid-term elections. Yet of course we should just ignore any potential meddling that happened during the last election, right? That whole investigation was obviously just a politically motivated witch hunt... sure.
Maybe because they are all completely irrelevant to the subject of this thread? Trying to defend a point by raising completely unrelated issues isn't logical.madhatter wrote:also why is it NO ONE will touch any of these?
if you can justify any of those as "above the board" then you really have no place in any political conversation other than as a propagandist pawn...aka ( barely) useful idiot...get the transcripts candy
I heard about it on the news ( at least 8 different times)
not a smidgen of corruption
i can guarantee no political influence...
Possibly.madhatter wrote:are you REALLY this stupid?
Agreed that there is a difference. But the special prosecutor and the FBI are investigating Russian influence, not just Trump. That's kind an important thing to investigate. Also read the article. Trump is the one who said we should ignore evidence of Russian meddling in the last election because it's nothing but a political witch hunt. The article also highlights that he has no plan to deal with it and is completely ignoring the problem.madhatter wrote:I can hardly imagine you are...we KNOW russia and others interfere in elections the US does it all the time as well...
that is COMPLETELY different than trump or any other US candidate colluding with them to win an election...
Who's you guys? Which group are you lumping me into so you can label me and ignore my opinions? When did I say voting against Hillary was mysogynistic? I voted against her in the last election. (I voted third party).madhatter wrote:but that's the argument from you guys, disjointed false equivalancies that have no bearing on reality...the same reason a wall is racist, tax cuts are armegeddon plus crumbs and voting against hillary is mysogynistic...
my point is you and others are willing to ignore OBVIOUS improprieties...and if you are willing to do so, your input here is just worthless propaganda...Kpdemello wrote:Most of my response is just basically, I'm skeptical of the President but we'll have to wait and see. There's really not enough to draw any conclusions yet on the Russia investigation.
As to the Republican memo, when I say it had little impact, I mean not just on me but on the public at large. The memo was greeted largely with a "Okay, that's it?" type of reaction from just about anyone who is not completely in the tank for one side or the other. At least, that's my observation, and I include myself in the group that isn't really in the lefty or the righty camp.
Maybe because they are all completely irrelevant to the subject of this thread? Trying to defend a point by raising completely unrelated issues isn't logical.madhatter wrote:also why is it NO ONE will touch any of these?
if you can justify any of those as "above the board" then you really have no place in any political conversation other than as a propagandist pawn...aka ( barely) useful idiot...get the transcripts candy
I heard about it on the news ( at least 8 different times)
not a smidgen of corruption
i can guarantee no political influence...