• 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!

F.B.I. Opened Inquiry Into Whether Trump Was Secretly Working on Behalf of Russia

Atomic Kid said:
Did you just really say that nobody from the campaign had been charged with meeting or having contacts with Russians and then number of people from the campaign that had been charged with lying to federal officers about having just that? :roll: And just because Carter Page hasn't been charged with anything yet doesn't mean that he's innocent or in the clear. Many counter-intelligence investigations end or go on with no arrests. Especially when the primary objective of the counter-intelligence operation is to gather intel and information. And Steele's dossier was given serious consideration because the FBI having worked with Steele in the past held him in high regard as being a reliable trusted source and the dossier itself over time has actually held up rather well. And please let's just stop with the Trump has been harder on Russia than Obama was nonsense as whatever sanctions and limits that have been placed upon Russia since the election were done over the objections of the White House.
Click to expand...

PapaD, and Flynn and I guess Manafort were not charged with meeting with Russians, just lying about it. Which suggests no crime was committed in the discussion.

Counter-intelligence is indeed about information gathering, not criminal prosecution ( which is why Trump firing Comey was not obstruction of justice. His probe into Russia was not about seeking justice). However, FISA warrants on Americans do require evidence of a crime and Page has had at least four 4 FISA warrants issued on him in the past five years; no charges filed for anything.

The Trump Admin has sent lethal military aid to the Ukrainian government, which the Obama Admin had declined.

It's not so much whether the FBI trusted Steele, but rather the nature of that trust. FBI protocols require info they use for a FISA warrant to be vetted. And Comey and McCabe had both testified the dossier was NOT vetted.
 
Athanasius68 said:
PapaD, and Flynn and I guess Manafort were not charged with meeting with Russians, just lying about it. Which suggests no crime was committed in the discussion.

Counter-intelligence is indeed about information gathering, not criminal prosecution ( which is why Trump firing Comey was not obstruction of justice. His probe into Russia was not about seeking justice). However, FISA warrants on Americans do require evidence of a crime and Page has had at least four 4 FISA warrants issued on him in the past five years; no charges filed for anything.

The Trump Admin has sent lethal military aid to the Ukrainian government, which the Obama Admin had declined.

It's not so much whether the FBI trusted Steele, but rather the nature of that trust. FBI protocols require info they use for a FISA warrant to be vetted. And Comey and McCabe had both testified the dossier was NOT vetted.
Click to expand...

You know they weren’t charged because they agreed to cooperate, right?

And that’s what they are cooperating about, obviously.
 
Atomic Kid said:
........
Click to expand...


Ill Concede useful idiot LOL. Lets leave page at that?

I dont have the notion that its easy. BUT I have the notion that if its of NATIONAL security and the best interest of the NATION if you are a threat to the nation. Immediate action should be taken PERIOD, Regardless how long it would actually take to remove him. Congress has checks and balances on the executive wing of our nation. IF the POTUS is corrupt congress has the power 2/3rds to remove him. I would guess. that if there was in fact PROOF that Muller has, Audio, Video, Bank Transactions that showed TRUMP coordinated coherently and actively with RUSSIANS Congress would have ABSOLUTELY No Choice but to vote for an impeachment process No matter HOW strong of a support of Trump they are.

As for Trumps behavior while erratic and irrational at times NONE of which is ILLEGAL. Secondly I have stated I took out EMOTION and Personal Judgement for BOTH Candidates (HRC & TRUMP) as I felt BOTH lack Proper characteristics. I based my vote PURELY on

https://www.debatepolitics.com/brea...y-working-behalf-russia-8.html#post1069531594


Policies that the Said candidate could fulfill. The policies better fit my beliefs so thats who I voted for. With that, MOST of Trumps policies that he intended for us is in the works and has NOT back peddled. This is the person I voted for FOR policies. NOW if he is GUILT of being a foreign agent for Russia, Then I concede I made a BAD Vote and a BAD choice on the Individual. BUT I will NOT change my voting style because Just because Trump is a scumbag, Does not mean I would Vote for HRC whom I do NOT agree with ANY of her polices nor the independent party or the Green Party. So my Vote was purely on Policies. NOT Morales and past histories.


I will say it again. I do NOT disagree with the FBI's Investigation. I am all for it same with Mueller. His actions where questionable and his associations as well. BUT that is Par for the course when it comes to a PERSON like Trump.

The Next question would then be, Will all future Presidents face the exact same Scrutiny, BOTH Republicans and Democrats is this the Tone we want to set?


Finally. is the Rhetoric..... Opinions and assumptions are our RIGHT per the First amendment, But to also be fair.....dignity went out the window with Trump and the liberal media.

BOTH sides are guilty of building this crap storm the way it is. BUT and this my BIGGEST BUT....... the office of the President deserves the respect it "deserves" While Trump likely does NOT.... the Office of the President does.

Accusing a sitting President on National TV is disgusting. PERIOD.... From News Anchors to Prior Admins and Former employees...

With that your Caption Topic. ALL of them are opinions of interpretations. in which I can spin it in my favor. FINALLY With your 6 points. ARE ANY of them illegal did Trump commit a crime. NO because he has NEVER been charged for those 6 points.

STUPID and optics, DUMB yes.... Not illegal.

Cont.
 
Part 2

1) I took the "Hack HRC" as a joke/sarcastic/facetious, Because to me that his extremely outlandish and more so he was doing it during a campaign where he was trying to ignite his voter base... It was hell funny and probably worked. DID he actually HAVE provable intent top have Russia do so? IS it a crime to make a dumbass comment like that. If it was NOT just a comment, then do we have proof that he sanction the help of Russia to hack HRC?....


2) Steel Dossier.... Is oppo research, No different than what Jr Did @ Trump tower. Only difference is HRC did it in the most legal route possible. at this time I have not read its full contents and the FBI has been unable to verify it in its entirety. YET it was used in the FISA court... ODD to say the least both on Trump and the FBI/DOJ departments...

3) Yes Page was considered an acting foreign agent, CONSIDERED and at this time NOTHING has come out of it. I am sure there are MANY more Americans that are quietly investigated.... Here is the bigger concern. SOMEONE leaked his name and it was used as leverage? Should the leaker be punished? As again PAGE faces ZERO criminal charges.

4) Nothing Illegal with a Loyalty pledge and it was not an ORDER To drop the Flynn case, he asked. This is Trump Not Gandhi. he asked it was not illegal so what?

5) Trump can Fire the FBI Director Period..... Dems and Repubs were wanting him fired... Period.... the last straw was the Russian Investigation but ultimately again..... He has the Constitutional RIGHT to fire him... Doesnt look good BUT IS NOT illegal.

6) Yes, We all can accept that Comey Pissed Trump off with the Russia thing period. Proving though that it was obstruction is NOT my job but the prosecutors job as well as the courts job by opinion and assumptions it looks possible, Proving it in court as a chargeable offense... good luck!


See what spin I did there I can turn anything I want into something that fits....... MY point wait till the facts come out and we have credible evidence that he was or was NOT involved. Until then he is still the POTUS and his job is to set policies, Protect Americans, command our Military.....

If Trump is an agent for Russia.... what has Russia benefited in the last 2 years with Trump in office? They got more money? Territories? What about lifted Sanctions? what benefits?
 
Athanasius68 said:
PapaD, and Flynn and I guess Manafort were not charged with meeting with Russians, just lying about it. Which suggests no crime was committed in the discussion.

Counter-intelligence is indeed about information gathering, not criminal prosecution ( which is why Trump firing Comey was not obstruction of justice. His probe into Russia was not about seeking justice). However, FISA warrants on Americans do require evidence of a crime and Page has had at least four 4 FISA warrants issued on him in the past five years; no charges filed for anything.

The Trump Admin has sent lethal military aid to the Ukrainian government, which the Obama Admin had declined.

It's not so much whether the FBI trusted Steele, but rather the nature of that trust. FBI protocols require info they use for a FISA warrant to be vetted. And Comey and McCabe had both testified the dossier was NOT vetted.
Click to expand...

It suggests no such thing as there are laws against private citizens engaging in foreign policy and assisting in the distribution of stolen property. Since 9/11 the FBI has taken a integrated approach in their investigatory practices by combining their intelligence and criminal assets and capabilities so as they can augment one another by communicating and working more closely together rather than working as separate entities within the same organization. And the legal hurdle that has to be cleared is the establishment of reasonable suspicion that a citizen may be acting as an foreign power. Not proof beyond a reasonable doubt. I don't really what it is you're talking about. the FBI met all the standards and protocols necessary to obtain that FISA warrant. The Trump Administration sent arms to Ukraine in order buy off the Ukrainian government from continuing to cooperate with Mueller's investigation.
 
Exactice said:
Ill Concede useful idiot LOL. Lets leave page at that?

I dont have the notion that its easy. BUT I have the notion that if its of NATIONAL security and the best interest of the NATION if you are a threat to the nation. Immediate action should be taken PERIOD, Regardless how long it would actually take to remove him. Congress has checks and balances on the executive wing of our nation. IF the POTUS is corrupt congress has the power 2/3rds to remove him. I would guess. that if there was in fact PROOF that Muller has, Audio, Video, Bank Transactions that showed TRUMP coordinated coherently and actively with RUSSIANS Congress would have ABSOLUTELY No Choice but to vote for an impeachment process No matter HOW strong of a support of Trump they are.

As for Trumps behavior while erratic and irrational at times NONE of which is ILLEGAL. Secondly I have stated I took out EMOTION and Personal Judgement for BOTH Candidates (HRC & TRUMP) as I felt BOTH lack Proper characteristics. I based my vote PURELY on

https://www.debatepolitics.com/brea...y-working-behalf-russia-8.html#post1069531594


Policies that the Said candidate could fulfill. The policies better fit my beliefs so thats who I voted for. With that, MOST of Trumps policies that he intended for us is in the works and has NOT back peddled. This is the person I voted for FOR policies. NOW if he is GUILT of being a foreign agent for Russia, Then I concede I made a BAD Vote and a BAD choice on the Individual. BUT I will NOT change my voting style because Just because Trump is a scumbag, Does not mean I would Vote for HRC whom I do NOT agree with ANY of her polices nor the independent party or the Green Party. So my Vote was purely on Policies. NOT Morales and past histories.


I will say it again. I do NOT disagree with the FBI's Investigation. I am all for it same with Mueller. His actions where questionable and his associations as well. BUT that is Par for the course when it comes to a PERSON like Trump.

The Next question would then be, Will all future Presidents face the exact same Scrutiny, BOTH Republicans and Democrats is this the Tone we want to set?


Finally. is the Rhetoric..... Opinions and assumptions are our RIGHT per the First amendment, But to also be fair.....dignity went out the window with Trump and the liberal media.

BOTH sides are guilty of building this crap storm the way it is. BUT and this my BIGGEST BUT....... the office of the President deserves the respect it "deserves" While Trump likely does NOT.... the Office of the President does.

Accusing a sitting President on National TV is disgusting. PERIOD.... From News Anchors to Prior Admins and Former employees...

With that your Caption Topic. ALL of them are opinions of interpretations. in which I can spin it in my favor. FINALLY With your 6 points. ARE ANY of them illegal did Trump commit a crime. NO because he has NEVER been charged for those 6 points.

STUPID and optics, DUMB yes.... Not illegal.

Cont.
Click to expand...

That's all well and good except for the fact that Trump never outlined or articulated what any of policies were or how they would be implemented beyond simply stating that He knows this or that "better than anyone". So if you were basing your vote for Trump on policy I'm not sure what there was in the way of details on which base it on.
 
Athanasius68 said:
The Trump Admin has sent lethal military aid to the Ukrainian government, which the Obama Admin had declined.
Click to expand...

HAhaha, Trump pushed to weaken Republicans support for Ukraine, repeatedly! It was a Republican congress that got this through DESPITE Trump's opposition.
Just like sanctions and everything else.

Trump loves Putin/Russia, he'd never do anything to hinder them or speak poorly of them...ever. He took an oath! No one believes Trump is hard on Putin, and if they claim they do, they are full of **** or getting their news from phony sources.

https://www.npr.org/2017/12/04/5683...d-change-to-party-platform-on-ukraine-support
Diana Denman, a Republican delegate who supported arming U.S. allies in Ukraine, has told people that Trump aide J.D. Gordon said at the Republican Convention in 2016 that Trump directed him to support weakening that position in the official platform
Click to expand...
.

Gory details here:
How Diana Denman’s singular stand for Ukraine revealed the Trump campaign’s soft spot for Russia | First Reading
The Trump campaign worked behind the scenes last week to make sure the new Republican platform won’t call for giving weapons to Ukraine to fight Russian and rebel forces, contradicting the view of almost all Republican foreign policy leaders in Washington.

Throughout the campaign, Trump has been dismissive of calls for supporting the Ukraine government as it fights an ongoing Russian-led intervention. Trump’s campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, worked as a lobbyist for the Russian-backed former Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych for more than a decade.

Still, Republican delegates at last week’s national security committee platform meeting in Cleveland were surprised when the Trump campaign orchestrated a set of events to make sure that the GOP would not pledge to give Ukraine the weapons it has been asking for from the United States.
Click to expand...

Old boy tried and Republicans simply overrode him.
 
Atomic Kid said:
That's all well and good except for the fact that Trump never outlined or articulated what any of policies were or how they would be implemented beyond simply stating that He knows this or that "better than anyone". So if you were basing your vote for Trump on policy I'm not sure what there was in the way of details on which base it on.
Click to expand...

I am going to say that is the difference of opinions?

1) Taxes, He stated he wanted to lower taxes? He also stated that it was tied into the Repeal of the ACA. It was Meant to go HAND in hand. THe details I had assumed were being worked out with his teams. BUT the Intent from me watching and reading was ( back in 2016) Was that Once he repealed ACA. it would free up the cost burden, Once that cost burden was set, it would PAY itself back through the reduction in taxes. That was my interpretation back then

1a) It some what FAILED as ACA was never repealed FIRST like it was supposed too, But somehow the tax cuts got passed. Thus the increase in debt but the benefits were still applied of the Tax cut. IF and when ACA is repealed then it should "pay back" the lost of revenue due to the tax cuts.

2) Immigration. HE wanted MAJOR immigration reform PERIOD, He talked about, Visa's and asylum And of course the "Great Wall" (sarcasm) That would be paid by Mexico. Which I have state MANY times I am an idiot... But I had assumed it would entail tariffs, Taxes and possible a NAFTA renegotiation. Not just walking an invoice over to Mexico. I NEVER once took his words literal.

3) World Wide AID war. I understood him to look at our Money going out in foreign aid and NATO to include wars that we are involved in. I was in country 2004-2006 ( a little over one year, tail of 04 and beginning of 06) While I committed to my unit, my team and my subordinates. I was confused on our overall mission but I committed to bring back my TEAM to their families. MY understanding of Trump was if it didnt make sense bring em back and cut the aid and spending if it did NOT benefit the US.


I can go on and on.... IN all fairness. I will assume its because you were NOT interested in Trump to understand his policies. The same way if you asked about HRC.. I was NOT interested in her polices nor did I ever understand nor take the time to understand so it is somewhat BIAS. BUT I can say Owned my VOTE based on his policies that he spoke of as I did take some time to understand them.

is that Fair Atomic?
 
Atomic Kid said:
It suggests no such thing as there are laws against private citizens engaging in foreign policy and assisting in the distribution of stolen property. Since 9/11 the FBI has taken a integrated approach in their investigatory practices by combining their intelligence and criminal assets and capabilities so as they can augment one another by communicating and working more closely together rather than working as separate entities within the same organization. And the legal hurdle that has to be cleared is the establishment of reasonable suspicion that a citizen may be acting as an foreign power. Not proof beyond a reasonable doubt. I don't really what it is you're talking about. the FBI met all the standards and protocols necessary to obtain that FISA warrant. The Trump Administration sent arms to Ukraine in order buy off the Ukrainian government from continuing to cooperate with Mueller's investigation.
Click to expand...


Laws which Mueller evidently determined were not in violation.

The standard for a FISA warrant to be issued on an American citizen isn't reasonable suspicion, but rather evidence that the person has committed a crime while knowingly in service of a foreign country.

I doubt the FBI trucks much with conspiracy theories 're: Ukraine.

The overall point is that it was thin gruel to have the suspicions in 2017, and tough to maintain the suspicions in 2019.
 
Mach said:
HAhaha, Trump pushed to weaken Republicans support for Ukraine, repeatedly! It was a Republican congress that got this through DESPITE Trump's opposition.
Just like sanctions and everything else.

Trump loves Putin/Russia, he'd never do anything to hinder them or speak poorly of them...ever. He took an oath! No one believes Trump is hard on Putin, and if they claim they do, they are full of **** or getting their news from phony sources.

https://www.npr.org/2017/12/04/5683...d-change-to-party-platform-on-ukraine-support
.

Gory details here:
How Diana Denman’s singular stand for Ukraine revealed the Trump campaign’s soft spot for Russia | First Reading


Old boy tried and Republicans simply overrode him.
Click to expand...

Even Denman agreed the GOP plank on the Ukraine was stronger after the Trump campaign revised it-- just not as strong as perhaps Denman wished.
In the end, the Trump Admin sent lethal aid to Ukraine.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...BRAB&usg=AOvVaw1Lgcku3N5NSGUfV7IQDo45&ampcf=1
 
Threegoofs said:
You know they weren’t charged because they agreed to cooperate, right?

And that’s what they are cooperating about, obviously.
Click to expand...

Agreed to cooperate about what? Nothing was established in the plea deals. Mueller is going to bring a bunch of perjurers into court who will suddenly start taking about conspiracies and emails and clandestine meetings? Heck, Mueller just a week or so again said Manafort is a liar.
There is no there, there.
 
Athanasius68 said:
Agreed to cooperate about what? Nothing was established in the plea deals. Mueller is going to bring a bunch of perjurers into court who will suddenly start taking about conspiracies and emails and clandestine meetings? Heck, Mueller just a week or so again said Manafort is a liar.
There is no there, there.
Click to expand...

Right. Cooperate to what?

Sure sounds like cooperation to the main charge that Muller has...Russian collusion.

The cooperation is not limited to testimony. The FBI raided both Manaforts and Cohens office and carried out a lot of computers and phones.

But hold on to your delusions. I’m sure it makes you sleep better.
 
Threegoofs said:
Right. Cooperate to what?

Sure sounds like cooperation to the main charge that Muller has...Russian collusion.

The cooperation is not limited to testimony. The FBI raided both Manaforts and Cohens office and carried out a lot of computers and phones.

But hold on to your delusions. I’m sure it makes you sleep better.
Click to expand...

These guys have already been to court-- charged/pled guilty. Nothing to do with collusion. You think there will be a Round 2? Who has the delusions here?
 
Athanasius68 said:
These guys have already been to court-- charged/pled guilty. Nothing to do with collusion. You think there will be a Round 2? Who has the delusions here?
Click to expand...

Funny you bring it up that way, COULD they do that? I mean hit them with a round of course for Financial crimes...... then years later hit them with Collusion crimes if there actually is something I mean they MUST Know enough to charge them with financial crimes if there was collusion why would the not charge them the same time? Round 2 is it coming LOL.

I have read about so many "Smoking Guns" this is the Nail in the Coffin...blah blah... I just want to see the report and be done with it.....
 
Athanasius68 said:
These guys have already been to court-- charged/pled guilty. Nothing to do with collusion. You think there will be a Round 2? Who has the delusions here?
Click to expand...

Right. They plead guilty because they got a deal to give other info which has not been revealed yet.

Round 2 isn’t a possibility, it’s a certainty.

You might want to keep up with the news.
 
Exactice said:
If Trump is an agent for Russia.... what has Russia benefited in the last 2 years with Trump in office? They got more money? Territories? What about lifted Sanctions? what benefits?
Click to expand...

1) The Russians didn't take it as a joke. They acted almost immediately to effectuate it by attempting to hack into emails accounts on computers in Hillary's personal office. And why ask Russia to find them instead of China or some 400 lb person sitting on a bed somewhere in New Jersey as he had been saying throughout his campaign whenever the subject of hacking came up?

2) oh it's very different from what Trump jr did. Trump jr gladly accepted an offer from a foreign adversary to provide dirt on his father's political opponent. And since you want to say that this would be akin to opposition research that would imply that you look upon such oppo research as being a thing of value to a campaign and there are expressed federal laws against political parties accepting contributions or anything of value from foreign nationals and or governments. The Steele dossier is in reality raw intel gathered by a trusted former friendly foreign intelligence service agent which I'm sure lent more weight to it for consideration by the FISA court than most other evidence of that type and it was a part of the warrant application. Not the entire application.

3) This wasn't the first time Mr Page came across the FBI's radar screen as he got inadvertently caught up in FBI counter-intelligence sting operation and was given the benefit of the doubt that time. When a poltical campaign takes somebody with his previous history making the statements he was making and then traveling to Russia to meet with Russian nationals/operatives of course something like that is going get the attention of the FBI. So I don't know from where you are getting this idea that Carter Page's name was 'leaked' to anyone.

4) It may not illegal but it's unethical as there always existed expectation the there is should exist a 'firewall' of some type between the head people of DOJ and the FBI and the Executive to ensure to mitigate the possibility of these investigatory entities being politically influenced. The Attorney General and FBI Director should never be allowed to be looked upon by the Executive as being it's own personal protectors and a vehicle for him or her to use to punish his or hers political enemies and protect his or her political friends.

5) Under Article 2 he does have the power to fire. But distinguishing whether the firing was legal or constitutional would depend upon the reasons why he fired him.

6) It could very well be obstruction and obstruction is very chargeable and impeachable offense and one that has been cited in previous impeachment proceedings. And what has Russia benefited from this? Just look the division it has sown among all us. I'm sure that at this point Putin is feeling quite satisfied with all the damage this has caused to our democratic institutions and election. Which is the cornerstone of our democracy. And Putin has seen already seen some geopolitical gains from it as well in our withdrawal from Syria, the distancing of our NATO and traditional allies along with the slow roll out and the easing of sanctions despite all the noise.
 
Athanasius68 said:
Agreed to cooperate about what? Nothing was established in the plea deals. Mueller is going to bring a bunch of perjurers into court who will suddenly start taking about conspiracies and emails and clandestine meetings? Heck, Mueller just a week or so again said Manafort is a liar.
There is no there, there.
Click to expand...

Excuse me, but just whose campaign were all these "perjurers" all working for? You don't see a problem there?
 
Threegoofs said:
Right. They plead guilty because they got a deal to give other info which has not been revealed yet.

Round 2 isn’t a possibility, it’s a certainty.

You might want to keep up with the news.
Click to expand...

Yes. They had a deal. The details were revealed in the filings. Pleas accepted. Punishments detailed out. It's over with them. Why do you think this Klimmick guy is the man of the hour now?
 
Atomic Kid said:
Excuse me, but just whose campaign were all these "perjurers" all working for? You don't see a problem there?
Click to expand...

Of course it's a problem. For Trump, it's a massive political problem.
But the basis for the FBI to have the concern it had? It's bs. And those concerns have not stood the test of time.
 
Atomic Kid said:
1) The Russians didn't take it as a joke. They acted almost immediately to effectuate it by attempting to hack into emails accounts on computers in Hillary's personal office. And why ask Russia to find them instead of China or some 400 lb person sitting on a bed somewhere in New Jersey as he had been saying throughout his campaign whenever the subject of hacking came up?

2) oh it's very different from what Trump jr did. Trump jr gladly accepted an offer from a foreign adversary to provide dirt on his father's political opponent. And since you want to say that this would be akin to opposition research that would imply that you look upon such oppo research as being a thing of value to a campaign and there are expressed federal laws against political parties accepting contributions or anything of value from foreign nationals and or governments. The Steele dossier is in reality raw intel gathered by a trusted former friendly foreign intelligence service agent which I'm sure lent more weight to it for consideration by the FISA court than most other evidence of that type and it was a part of the warrant application. Not the entire application.

3) This wasn't the first time Mr Page came across the FBI's radar screen as he got inadvertently caught up in FBI counter-intelligence sting operation and was given the benefit of the doubt that time. When a poltical campaign takes somebody with his previous history making the statements he was making and then traveling to Russia to meet with Russian nationals/operatives of course something like that is going get the attention of the FBI. So I don't know from where you are getting this idea that Carter Page's name was 'leaked' to anyone.

4) It may not illegal but it's unethical as there always existed expectation the there is should exist a 'firewall' of some type between the head people of DOJ and the FBI and the Executive to ensure to mitigate the possibility of these investigatory entities being politically influenced. The Attorney General and FBI Director should never be allowed to be looked upon by the Executive as being it's own personal protectors and a vehicle for him or her to use to punish his or hers political enemies and protect his or her political friends.

5) Under Article 2 he does have the power to fire. But distinguishing whether the firing was legal or constitutional would depend upon the reasons why he fired him.

6) It could very well be obstruction and obstruction is very chargeable and impeachable offense and one that has been cited in previous impeachment proceedings. And what has Russia benefited from this? Just look the division it has sown among all us. I'm sure that at this point Putin is feeling quite satisfied with all the damage this has caused to our democratic institutions and election. Which is the cornerstone of our democracy. And Putin has seen already seen some geopolitical gains from it as well in our withdrawal from Syria, the distancing of our NATO and traditional allies along with the slow roll out and the easing of sanctions despite all the noise.
Click to expand...

1. At the time, there was talk of Russia messing with the election.

2. Manafort was at the tower meeting and was not charged. Neither will Trump Jr. No laws were broken since the law requires knowing the electoral law and still breaking it.

3. As Trump said last year, all the FBI had to do was tell him their concerns and Trump would have fired him earlier than he was.

4. Politics will always influence judicial decisions. And they should as this is a check on prosecutors.

5. No. That would imply the judiciary can overrule the operations of another department.

6.
 
Athanasius68 said:
Yes. They had a deal. The details were revealed in the filings. Pleas accepted. Punishments detailed out. It's over with them. Why do you think this Klimmick guy is the man of the hour now?
Click to expand...

Yes, and the main part of the deal was to cooperate w muller.

And we haven’t seen that piece yet, because it’s obviously around Russia (and undoubtedly general corruption).
 
Atomic Kid said:
Page was a useful idiot and it seems quite apparent that reinsurance was a value to the FBI that's for sure. I don't know where you are getting this notion that the removal of elected President is something that can be easily effectuated by the DOJ. And let's be honest here Trump's behavior and fawning statements about Putin and Russia were being played out right there in front of you during the campaign and you still voted for him anyway and now you're surprised by all this? Given everything that happened then and after the election how could the FBI not investigate this President? When smoke starts filling the room it probably time to get up to see if there is a fire.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/why-fbis-investigation-president-was-unavoidable

"Why the FBI’s Investigation Into the President Was Unavoidable"
Click to expand...
That's a decision for the electorate, or maybe 50% of the House + 1 and 2/3 of the Senate. Not for the FBI.
 
Threegoofs said:
Yes, and the main part of the deal was to cooperate w muller.

And we haven’t seen that piece yet, because it’s obviously around Russia (and undoubtedly general corruption).
Click to expand...
It's called "sing and compose" for a reason.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom