• 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!

Gowdy: FBI acted properly with use of informant during 2016 campaign

RickJames3000 said:
No one ever said that there wasn't an "informant". They said he wasn't a "spy".
Do you understand the difference?

Why do you continue to make these unforced errors?
Click to expand...

No, I don't understand the difference at all. Can you explain it exactly?
 
LowDown said:
No, I don't understand the difference at all. Can you explain it exactly?
Click to expand...

Sure.
I'll explain it after you show me all the people that have denied that the FBI used informants in service of the investigation into Russian interference in the election.

Take all the time you need.
 
MTAtech said:
What Hillary lies do you recall?
Click to expand...

I cheated, looked it up on Poltifact. Best one:

"I actually started criticizing the war in Iraq before (Obama) did." — PolitiFact National on Wednesday, January 16th, 2008

But I'm mainly thinking of her having a private server to handle her official work. Some others had done it, but it seemed very Clintonian.
 
Lerxst said:
How long before the Trump loyalists proclaim Gowdy a disreputable, treasonous, socialist, godless, co-conspirator who is aiding Obama, the Clintons, and the FBI to bring down Dear Leader?
Click to expand...

How long before liberals love Gowdy?
 
RickJames3000 said:
Sure.
I'll explain it after you show me all the people that have denied that the FBI used informants in service of the investigation into Russian interference in the election.

Take all the time you need.
Click to expand...

So you can't explain the difference between a "spy" and an "investigator" at all.

All you guys are doing is doubling down on the defense of the FBI spy, having to admit now that there was one, as being for the benefit of Trump and his campaign, which I find impossible to believe.

Do you think even for a second that if the spy had found dirt on Trump that they wouldn't use it against him?

As for Gowdy, I give him a pass since he's a former prosecutor (and will return to that job no doubt) and appears to have a blind spot for bad prosecutors and law enforcement people. He just takes what the FBI tells him at face value even after Comey's lies and all the rest.
 
CletusWilbury said:
I cheated, looked it up on Poltifact. Best one:

"I actually started criticizing the war in Iraq before (Obama) did." — PolitiFact National on Wednesday, January 16th, 2008

But I'm mainly thinking of her having a private server to handle her official work. Some others had done it, but it seemed very Clintonian.
Click to expand...
If those are the best you have got, I am (and probably you are) a worse liar than Hillary. Put that up against the pathological lying of Trump and we all are in the Little League of liars while Trump is a Major Leaguer:
https://www.esquire.com/uk/latest-n...-lies-as-president-here-are-five-of-his-best/

And now, he's managed to hit 3,000 false or misleading public statements [to 2/5/18] in the 466 days since he took the oath of office! Congrats Donny. That faint popping sound you can hear is either congratulatory champagne corks or beleaguered political hacks' craniums exploding.

That figure includes untrue statements, claims that aren't backed up by facts and changes of position on events or policies which aren't acknowledged as such.
Click to expand...
 
LowDown said:
So you can't explain the difference between a "spy" and an "investigator" at all.

All you guys are doing is doubling down on the defense of the FBI spy, having to admit now that there was one, as being for the benefit of Trump and his campaign, which I find impossible to believe.

Do you think even for a second that if the spy had found dirt on Trump that they wouldn't use it against him?

As for Gowdy, I give him a pass since he's a former prosecutor (and will return to that job no doubt) and appears to have a blind spot for bad prosecutors and law enforcement people. He just takes what the FBI tells him at face value even after Comey's lies and all the rest.
Click to expand...

BLAH< BLAH< BLAH... why not just admit you are barking nonsense? Now you are talking about "investigators"?
Where'd you come up with that one? No wonder you have so many difficulties making a rational argument. You just make stuff up.

So apparently you can't substantiate your claim?

The answer to your conundrum is that NOBODY ever denied that there was an "informant" involved in this FBI investigation.
What people refuted is that the FBI employed a "spy" to infiltrate the Trump campaign in order to benefit HRC during the campaign.

But unless you are functionally retarded, you already understand this... and you are being willfully ignorant.
 
Last edited:
LowDown said:
So you can't explain the difference between a "spy" and an "investigator" at all.
All you guys are doing is doubling down on the defense of the FBI spy, having to admit now that there was one, as being for the benefit of Trump and his campaign, which I find impossible to believe.
Do you think even for a second that if the spy had found dirt on Trump that they wouldn't use it against him?
As for Gowdy, I give him a pass since he's a former prosecutor (and will return to that job no doubt) and appears to have a blind spot for bad prosecutors and law enforcement people. He just takes what the FBI tells him at face value even after Comey's lies and all the rest.
Click to expand...

Have we come upon the evidence that Obama sent Halper yet?

The whole idea that the Halper affair is somehow wrong rests on the idea that Obama sent him to cause trouble for Trumpco.

W/o regard to the semantics of the terminology of Helper's role, we all know that LEOs are allowed to speak to citizens.
The allegation is not simply that Halper talked to members of Trumpco.
The allegation is that Obama sent Halper for nefarious reasons.
That's the critical part with zero support.

...unless you have some evidence of Obama filled with nefarious intent, summoning his dedicated minion, Halper to send him skulking off to uncover Trump's "dirt".
Do you?

Feel free to share the evidence you used to make up your mind that Obama ordered Halper to go after Trump.
Shirley, you didn't just take the word of a famous guy on this matter.
You're not that sort of person at all.
Spill the deets — how did you determine that Obama sent Halper?
 
LowDown said:
So now they admit there was an FBI "informant".
Click to expand...

Under what rock have you been all this time? No one denied that there was an informant.
 
markjs said:
Naw now, I'm sure somehow "leftist fever" hs struck a once "fine patriot" down.... Poor Gowdy
Click to expand...

Yeah I'm sure it sucks that he had come out and publicly admit that the leader of his party, the President of the United States, either lied or is suffering from some sort of delusion.
 
LowDown said:
So now they admit there was an FBI "informant".
Click to expand...


WTF ....News flash that is how the FBI works.....they approach a good citizen and ask them to contact them if their is any funny business going on. Somehow if this was Hillary's campaign you guys would have a boner over it
 
Anthony60 said:
So, you are saying Trump is not being investigated, since they have no reason to investigate him. Now, all this impeachment talk by democrats, what exactly would they impeach him for, since no one even has a reason to investigate him?
Click to expand...

You might want to take a reading refresher course. That's not what Mr Gowdy is saying at all. He was simply commenting on the Trump's allegation that the FBI was illegally spying on his campaign.
 
LowDown said:
So now they admit there was an FBI "informant".
Click to expand...

Anthony60 said:
So, you are saying Trump is not being investigated, since they have no reason to investigate him. Now, all this impeachment talk by democrats, what exactly would they impeach him for, since no one even has a reason to investigate him?
Click to expand...

Sorry, this makes no sense. What are talking about? Nothing in the referenced article states that Trump is not being investigated nor it is making any claim that he should not be investigated. You run for POTUS and surround yourself with people that turn out to be foreign agents and those that have numerous ties to an adversarial government, you damn well need to be investigated.
 
argutator said:
We can all trust Rod Rosenstein...right? Mueller, Rosenstein, and Comey: The Three Amigos from the Deep State | BWCentral
I guess Trey Gowdy has a different view of good old Rod.
Click to expand...

No, they are from the FBI: career (and seasoned) law enforcement. Their job is to keep us safe from all enemies, foreign or domestic. Right now they are trying to determine if we have a knowing (or unknowing) domestic enemy under foreign influence.

Nice piece of political porn, BTW. You should have left it in your stash as showing the rest of us speaks volumes about how you spend your day fantasizing. I do note that its by Roger Stone, a man who very well may be facing criminal indictment by the very group he now mocks.
 
Last edited:
Atomic Kid said:
Yeah I'm sure it sucks that he had come out and publicly admit that the leader of his party, the President of the United States, either lied or is suffering from some sort of delusion.
Click to expand...
Trump is and always has been self-serving. He knows that the walls are closing in on him and his (and Rudy's) only chance is to try to discredit those investigating him -- even if it does damage to government institutions and the free press.
 
LowDown said:
So you can't explain the difference between a "spy" and an "investigator" at all.

All you guys are doing is doubling down on the defense of the FBI spy, having to admit now that there was one, as being for the benefit of Trump and his campaign, which I find impossible to believe.

Do you think even for a second that if the spy had found dirt on Trump that they wouldn't use it against him?

As for Gowdy, I give him a pass since he's a former prosecutor (and will return to that job no doubt) and appears to have a blind spot for bad prosecutors and law enforcement people. He just takes what the FBI tells him at face value even after Comey's lies and all the rest.
Click to expand...

If I think something's up, and I call the FBI to tell them something, I am an informant.

A spy is an agent actually inserted into a situation. I don't see how you can't see the monumental difference between the two. Maybe that's because you don't care.
 
MTAtech said:
Please define this "swamp" that you speak.

I suspect that I define the "swamp" very differently from the way Trump supporters do.

I had thought the "swamp" was about self-dealing insiders who profited from their connections in government by pulling strings for their own private benefit or profit. Under that definition, Trump and his cronies are the swamp squared. But I now realize that's not what they meant at all. They meant "government officials who help people I don't like.".
Click to expand...

That is the motivation of at least 85% of Trump supporters in a nutshell -- to simply be against people they don't like no matter what

It is a motivation and a support that is deeply based on fear and hate of the "other" -- insert liberals, feminists, brown people -- whoever it is they fear or despise.
 
Spartacus FPV said:
First its a denial that its happening, then its a good thing. Leftists are very predictable.
Click to expand...

So you think that it's Gowdy who is in denial? Interesting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom