• 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!

Sources: FBI Agents Want Congress To Issue Them Subpoenas So They Can Reveal The Bureau’s Dirt

zimmer

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
24,380
Reaction score
7,805
Location
Worldwide
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Many agents in the FBI want Congress to subpoena them so they can reveal problems caused by former FBI Director James Comey and former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, three people in direct contact with active field agents tell TheDC.


“There are agents all over this country who love the bureau and are sickened by [James] Comey’s behavior and [Andrew] McCabe and [Eric] Holder and [Loretta] Lynch and the thugs like [John] Brennan–who despise the fact that the bureau was used as a tool of political intelligence by the Obama administration thugs,”...

These agents prefer to be subpoenaed to becoming an official government whistleblower, since they fear political and professional backlash...

FBI Agents Want Congress-Issued Subpoenas | The Daily Caller
Click to expand...

Sounds good to me.

Subpoena those in the know, and let Americans hear what they have to say.

For the good of the nation.
 
Those crazy anonymous sources again. I thought we decided they can't be trusted?
 
Ah. Sources say. Well, how could it not be true?
 
It's all falling apart.
 
What is stopping these people from getting their 15 minutes? They could probably get some time on Fox and tell their side of the story. Why wait to be subpoenaed?
 
rocket88 said:
What is stopping these people from getting their 15 minutes? They could probably get some time on Fox and tell their side of the story. Why wait to be subpoenaed?
Click to expand...

Read the article. Then you’d know.
 
zimmer said:
Read the article. Then you’d know.
Click to expand...
The "reasoning" sounds like BS:
These agents prefer to be subpoenaed to becoming an official government whistleblower, since they fear political and professional backlash, the former Trump administration official explained to TheDC.

The subpoena is preferred, he said, “because when you are subpoenaed, Congress then pays…for your legal counsel and the subpoena protects [the agent] from any organizational retaliation…. they are on their own as whistleblowers, they get no legal protection and there will be organizational retaliation against them.”
Click to expand...
What "organizational retaliation" are they afraid of, the Trump Admin?

It sure sounds like a made up story hatched by the guy mentioned by the Daily Caller, Joe DiGenova, a former Trump official. TheDC independently confirmed the veracity of the consultant’s position. What TheDC didn't do is verify that the consultant actually conducted an interview with an active special agent. Essentially, Joe DiGenova hired someone as a consultant who "said" that he spoke to an FBI agent and TheDC verified that the consultant actually said that he spoke to an FBI agent. TheDC didn't speak to the agent as verification. This is very carefully worded nonsense.
 
Who is this guy "Sources"? He seems to comment on a lot of different things. :shrug: ;)
 
tres borrachos said:
Those crazy anonymous sources again. I thought we decided they can't be trusted?
Click to expand...

One is an anonymous source with no way of verifying, the other is an anonymous source requesting to publicly verify.

The former you put your trust in explicitly without any further proof, the latter leaves me intrigued as to what they want to say on the record. There is a very big difference but I don't expect you to understand it.
 
jmotivator said:
One is an anonymous source with no way of verifying, the other is an anonymous source requesting to publicly verify.

The former you put your trust in explicitly without any further proof, the latter leaves me intrigued as to what they want to say on the record. There is a very big difference but I don't expect you to understand it.
Click to expand...

I haven't got the slightest clue what point you are trying to make here, or why.

I don't speak Trump Fan Nation babble, sorry.
 
zimmer said:
Sounds good to me.

Subpoena those in the know, and let Americans hear what they have to say.

For the good of the nation.
Click to expand...

The more sunlight...the better.
 
rocket88 said:
What is stopping these people from getting their 15 minutes? They could probably get some time on Fox and tell their side of the story. Why wait to be subpoenaed?
Click to expand...

Much better to tell Congress.

My guess is they've already told Horowitz.
 
The bitter angry hate filled mindless leftist is VERY concerned about "truth"...as long as its "TRRUUUUUUMMMMPPPP!!!!!!!"
 
Mycroft said:
Much better to tell Congress.

My guess is they've already told Horowitz.
Click to expand...

I think so too. If they are subpoenaed by Congress then the government has to foot the bill for their atty fees correct? And also if they did it in an open hearing then it would be hard for their supervisors who might be leftover Comey/ McCabe supporters or other unelected bureaucrats to cause them grief like whistleblowers in the past have faced.
 
tres borrachos said:
Those crazy anonymous sources again. I thought we decided they can't be trusted?
Click to expand...

It's tough being a whistleblower and speaking the truth. Binney, Drake, Kiriakou and others paid the price for telling the truth. Geoffrey Sterling still sits in jail.

This sounds like a good idea if it's true.
 
MTAtech said:
The "reasoning" sounds like BS:
What "organizational retaliation" are they afraid of, the Trump Admin?

It sure sounds like a made up story hatched by the guy mentioned by the Daily Caller, Joe DiGenova, a former Trump official. TheDC independently confirmed the veracity of the consultant’s position. What TheDC didn't do is verify that the consultant actually conducted an interview with an active special agent. Essentially, Joe DiGenova hired someone as a consultant who "said" that he spoke to an FBI agent and TheDC verified that the consultant actually said that he spoke to an FBI agent. TheDC didn't speak to the agent as verification. This is very carefully worded nonsense.
Click to expand...

A) Yeah, they’re eager to come out, and foot a massive legal bill, and be faced with legal jeopardy.

B) No, they’re eager to come forth, with protections afforded by the subpoena.

If you had option A or B, which would you want?

You think there aren’t folks in the FBI who want to scorch the Dept. of these turds? After what Comey, Strzok, Page, McCabe have done in conjunction with the DoJ?

Time will tell.
 
zimmer said:
A) Yeah, they’re eager to come out, and foot a massive legal bill, and be faced with legal jeopardy.

B) No, they’re eager to come forth, with protections afforded by the subpoena.

If you had option A or B, which would you want?

You think there aren’t folks in the FBI who want to scorch the Dept. of these turds? After what Comey, Strzok, Page, McCabe have done in conjunction with the DoJ?

Time will tell.
Click to expand...

The idea that these people would be in legal jeopardy is suspect. If they have a legitimate revelation they are covered by the federal Whistleblower Protection Act.
 
apdst said:
They might be concerned about their possible suicides. Look what happened to Seth Rich.
Click to expand...

What happened to him?
 
apdst said:
They might be concerned about their possible suicides. Look what happened to Seth Rich.
Click to expand...
When rational argument isn't possible, inject conspiracy theories.
 
Rexedgar said:
What happened to him?
Click to expand...

He was shot in the back, twice and the cops called it a robbery...but nothing was stolen.

If Jack Flashgate keeps blowing up, I expect we'll be seeing suicides on the reg. Quite a few people will shoot themselves multiple times in the back of the head.
 
MTAtech said:
The idea that these people would be in legal jeopardy is suspect. If they have a legitimate revelation they are covered by the federal Whistleblower Protection Act.
Click to expand...

I was part of the IC for 20 years. The WBA is a joke. Yeah, it will protect you from prosecution, but in practice it won’t save your career. It won’t protect you from being ostracized and all the other **** that goes along with being labeled a snitch. Trump can only protect them, to an extent, while he is in office. There are no assurances when it comes to the next administration. The folks don’t serve 4 year terms; they are career.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom