• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

FBI Texts Reveal Anti-Trump, Pro-Clinton Comments

Marco Montana said:
I didn't believe someones spin I watched the interview myself! Scroll to 3:20

Click to expand...


He's talking about legal citizens with undocumented family members.
 
NonoBadDog said:
Not so fast:
Mueller, FBI face crisis in public confidence
Mueller, FBI face crisis in public confidence | TheHill
Things are changing fast as we learn more.
Click to expand...

If I were to give you the benefit of the doubt, I'd guess that you took the article at its word rather than looked into it yourself.
http://harvardharrispoll.com/wp-con...HHP-December_Registered-Voters_Cross-Tabs.pdf

This question which was featured in the Hill piece asks:
"Do you think that the part of the justice department responsible for the Hillary Clinton email investigations, and that is supervising the Mueller investigation, is resisting providing Congressional investigators information on payments for the Fusion GPS dossier, unmasking of officials and other issues, or is it cooperating fully with Congress?"

Unless we're to assume that the Mueller investigation is supervising itself, the question is not actually about Mueller and his investigation.

Whereas the WaPoABC survey asked
"A special counsel at the U.S. Justice Department, Robert Mueller, has been investigating possible ties between Trump's campaign and the Russian government. Do you approve or disapprove of the way Mueller is handling this investigation?"

Those are not both apples. One seems to be an orange.
ymmv
 
Fenton said:
Of-course the Obama FBI took the Steele dossier at face value. They built a huge investigation on its unproven allegations, and used it to obtain FISA warrants. The idea that it was " independently investigated " is laughable beyond belief.
Click to expand...
The idea that the FBI would just take the dossier at face value without checking the contents is laughable beyond belief and stupid.

You're willing to believe that the FBI is so corrupt that they wouldn't do their job.
That's a conspiracy theory.


:shrug:
 
Simon W. Moon said:
The idea that the FBI would just take the dossier at face value without checking the contents is laughable beyond belief and stupid.

You're willing to believe that the FBI is so corrupt that they wouldn't do their job.
That's a conspiracy theory.


:shrug:
Click to expand...

They took obvious conspiracy theory, so obvious that even the so-called journalists would not bite, as important leads.....this is clear evidence that the FBI sucks now.

And we have a lot more of that, this is not a one off.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
They took obvious conspiracy theory, so obvious that even the so-called journalists would not bite, as important leads.....this is clear evidence that the FBI sucks now.
And we have a lot more of that, this is not a one off.
Click to expand...
Do you have any evidence that those conspiratorial ****ers at the FBI are lying about having verified what they claim they verified?
 
Simon W. Moon said:
The idea that the FBI would just take the dossier at face value without checking the contents is laughable beyond belief and stupid.

You're willing to believe that the FBI is so corrupt that they wouldn't do their job.
That's a conspiracy theory.


:shrug:
Click to expand...

Prior to these reveltions it would have been hard to believe.
The idea that the Obama DOJ would conspire with the Hillary campaign, the DNC, Fusion GPS and Christopher Steele to conduct anti-Trump opposition research was beyond believable, even for the Obama adminstration

But it happened....

Fusion GPS admits demoted Obama DOJ senior officials wife hired to conduct anti-Trump research
https://www.google.com/amp/www.foxn...ife-nellie-ohr-hired-to-probe-trump.amp.htmch

The Left wants everyone else to believe that this Democrat funded, unsusbtantiated list of anti-Trump allegations was worthy of FBI and FISA court consideration, but no one's buying it.
It shows how desperate they really are and how damaging these new revelations are.
Like I said, your refusal to acknowledge this growing scandal isnt going to make it go away
 
Simon W. Moon said:
Do you have any evidence that those conspiratorial ****ers at the FBI are lying about having verified what they claim they verified?
Click to expand...

If it was " verified " why havent they found ANY evidence of collusion in over a years worth of investigations ?
 
Fenton said:
If it was " verified " why havent they found ANY evidence of collusion in over a years worth of investigations ?
Click to expand...

What was Manafort indicted for?

How about the other three?

Why is everyone lying about Russia?
 
Simon W. Moon said:
Do you have any evidence that those conspiratorial ****ers at the FBI are lying about having verified what they claim they verified?
Click to expand...
I have seen no reports claiming that anything other than well known conventional wisdom has been "verified.
 
Moot said:
The Daily Baller isn't a credible source. But you knew that already, right?
Click to expand...

Just curious, why not? (Please be substantiative and cite a source, if possible)
 
Moot said:
The Daily Baller isn't a credible source. But you knew that already, right?
Click to expand...

They included evidence in the article. But, you are going to ignore anything that doesn't match your narrative.
 
Thorgasm said:
What was Manafort indicted for?

How about the other three?

Why is everyone lying about Russia?
Click to expand...

Manaforts indictment was made public as was Flynns and niether had anything to do with Trump / Russia collusion.
 
iliveonramen said:
Bias - prejudice in favor of or against one thing, person, or group compared with another.
Conflict of Interest - a situation in which a person is in a position to derive personal benefit from actions or decisions made in their official capacity.

What are your definitions of the two? Do you see how those two definitions are different?
Click to expand...

They are the same as mine , do you not see that bias is a conflict of interest? If a person desires, or sees benefit in, a given political outcome then they see a gain in promoting that outcome. In this case the agents in question were full on Hillary supporters and at least a few of the agents appears in direct coordination with the Hillary campaign in building oppo research against Trump that they then used in a FISA warrant to bug the Trump campaign, the content of which was then unmasked by the Obama administration and disseminated widely to the intelligence community after the Obama administration made last minute changes to the classification of such material allowing it to be distributed... and the intelligence community then leaked it to the press in the lead up and following the election. This is all established fact. If you can't see the conflict of interest in those actions, or see why these revelations are so damning then I have no clue how to pull you back in to reality.


He's was relieved from the investigation because Mueller doesn't want the findings to be questioned or the story to get sidetracked from the evidence due to texts from one person. This case is political in nature therefore have to bend over backwards for the sake of appearing impartial.
Click to expand...

You are so close to figuring this out. :roll: :lol:

And Mueller fired him to avoid the appearance of a _____________ within the investigation. Come on, you can say it.

The texts weren't illegal. There's nothing wrong with texting someone that Trump is a ****ing idiot and you wish he wasn't President then going to your job and doing what you are paid to do. Unless you can point out to something he did that was illegal...maybe something that shows he acted in an impartial manner...? Do you have any examples?
Click to expand...

Nobody said they were illegal. What the idiot did to further his hatred of the president very well might be, though, and either way his conflict of interest should have kept him far away from an investigation of Trump or Hillary, and that goes for numerous other members of the Special Counsel.

Another question: Why do you suppose the DOJ IG released those text messages? What has the IG been investigating?
 
Last edited:
Simon W. Moon said:
I can't decide if I should ask for a citation about special counsel's "entire purpose" being about biases or if I should point out that Rosenstein has said that Mueller et al are doing fine—as opposed to your fraught assessment of Mueller.

Do you have a preference?
Click to expand...


28 C.F.R. 600.1 Requires an Special Counsel to be impartial, and Mueller's appointments to the Special Counsel appear to be anything but.

Also, interestingly, in the process of Mueller being appointed to as the head of the Special Counsel investigation he was granted a conflict of interest waiver during his appointment process.

So, Rosenstein appointed the Special Counsel and then exempted him from conflict of interest considerations.... and you are OK with that?
 
apdst said:
No, I'm saying the FBI used false evidence (the Steele Dossier) to launch an investigation. Not only did they use false evidence, they got it from an un-registered foreign agent. Is that the crime that President Trump is being accused of?
Click to expand...

Ahh, so you think every last bit of information in the dossier is false.

That's cute.
 
Deuce said:
Ahh, so you think every last bit of information in the dossier is false.

That's cute.
Click to expand...

Since it's been debunked, yes. However, you're more than welcome to support the dossier's varacity (I won't hold my breath).
 
haymarket said:
Jordan is an angry bufoon disguised as a killer clown wearing the costume of a mad court jester. His statement that "the public trust in this whole thing is gone" was straight from a mental institutions stand up comedy night put on by the inmates.

And then he revealed what he wants from all this anger - DISBAND MUELLER.

Shakespeare said it well in MACBETH



Jim Jordan to a tee.
Click to expand...

I have to hand it to you liberals....Even when you guys are caught dead to rights, you continue the arrogant bravado act to the very end. Then when the shoe drops, and what everyone knows is going to happen, happens, you all just disappear til the next phony outrage, and pretend that you never said what you did....
 
Simon W. Moon said:
Did you know that he was spot off in re the public's perception of Mueller and his work?

Most Americans believe Mueller is doing just fine and that there's no reason to stop his work.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/page...al-Politics/Polling/release_500.xml?tid=a_inl

Jordan may have been speaking only of his own experience from inside of his bubble.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you'll excuse me if I don't take the word of a liberal hack rag like WaPo....Believing them is kind of like believing that the anti Trumpers in here that still display the "Conservative" lean are actually Conservative.
 
jmotivator said:
They are the same as mine , do you not see that bias is a conflict of interest?
Click to expand...

Not at all. A person with a conflict of interest has a tendency to make biased decisions but someone with a bias doesn't necessarily have a conflict of interest. They are two different things.

In this case the agents in question were full on Hillary supporters
Click to expand...
As some of the investigators are probably Trump supporters or vote Republican? If party affiliation is a basis for not being able to serve on this special council...where exactly do you find people with no voting history, no preference for who should be President, and works for the FBI. The idea that a Dem by default would do bad things to hurt Trump, well the same baseless claim that a Rep would do bad things to help Trump.


And Mueller fired him to avoid the appearance of a _____________ within the investigation. Come on, you can say it.
Click to expand...
Appearance of bias...

Nobody said they were illegal. What the idiot did to further his hatred of the president very well might be, though, and either way his conflict of interest should have kept him far away from an investigation of Trump or Hillary, and that goes for numerous other members of the Special Counsel.
Click to expand...
Then come back when you have evidence the guy did something illegal. Him not liking Trump and being a Democrat isn't illegal and it doesn't mean he is unfit to serve in the FBI.
 
eohrnberger said:
And did so on questionable evidence, the source of which I'm pretty sure they knew all along.

Didn't come up in the texts in reference to a discussion in 'Andy's office', as in an insurance policy of some sort?

I stand by my signature more than ever now.
Click to expand...

That particular text is of real concern for any American, or should be....But, everyone seems to be focusing on the part of that text that talks about "we can't take that risk".... which is a shocking level of corruption to be had in the #2 office in the DoJ, but I want to know what "path" they were discussing.
 
iliveonramen said:
Then come back when you have evidence the guy did something illegal. Him not liking Trump and being a Democrat isn't illegal and it doesn't mean he is unfit to serve in the FBI.
Click to expand...

It is when highly placed politicians are being investigated, and we can clearly see a different approach to his methods from one party affiliated target to another based on their affiliation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom