• 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!

CNN Legal Analyst: "There's some really disturbing stuff here"

let's just throw this thread over into the Conspiracy Theory sub forum ...................... :lol: ............
 
cuban smokes said:
what exactly did the agent in question (that was removed by Mueller) do to, "fight against the democratic process?" He sent some distasteful text? I recall a certain candidate during the 2016 campaign that did some pretty distasteful stuff too & he is POTUS now.
Click to expand...

FBI agent's anti-Trump text messages released to Congress - CNNPolitics

"Later in a text from August 15, 2016, Strzok tells Page: "I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy's office" -- an apparent reference to Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe -- "that there's no way he gets elected -- but I'm afraid we can't take that risk. It's like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you're 40 . . . . " Page does not appear to have responded, according to records reviewed by CNN."

This is also the same person that was running the Clinton investigation and had Mueller change the verbiage away from "grossly negligent" to "extremely careless" because the former is actually right in the legal framework for illegal activity. So, you know...an agent helping a candidate get away with a crime that would disqualify her and also showing a willingness to do something to undermine Trump. Nothing to see there.
 
MrPeanut said:
Peter Strzok was fired by Mueller months ago after his text exchanges were discovered. What more can they do? The problem I'm having here is that people are using a few cases of bias to say something about the FBI generally, or the investigation specifically. If these people are removed when bias is found out doesn't that restore some faith in the process?
Click to expand...

Post #15 addresses your first question.

As for your second question, I would have agreed with you concerning Mueller reassigning Strzok, if it weren't for the fact that this wasn't disclosed until 4 months after it happened. Four months is a lot of time for the FBI and Mueller to come up with effective damage control, if they had discovered that Strzok and maybe others had in fact "cooked the books" with the Russia investigation and/or the Hillary investigation. Now I'm not saying that was the case here, but the lack of transparency opened the door for this type of speculation.

Keep in mind there are at least 2 others who were involved with these investigations that should have never been in the first place. There's the DOJ's associate attorney general during the Obama administration Bruce Ohr, who was involved in the Hillary investigation while his wife was employed by Fusion GPS, and FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe who was involved with both investigations, who's wife received more than $700K from the Virginia DNC and Virginia Governor, Clinton friend and campaign associate Terry McAuliffe while running on the democratic ticket for the Virginia state senate. Both those men should have never accepted any role in those investigations, or been forced by the Obama administration to recuse themselves.


.
 
cuban smokes said:
so, you believe an overreaction is needed to address the situation, or as some within the GOP are calling for, a "purge" of the FBI & DOJ, when there is little evidence of a broader issue within the agencies?

Stalin did a lot of purging & I'm not talking enemas ...............
Click to expand...

Sorry, but you need to address my post before I address yours.

.
 
Grim17 said:
Post #15 addresses your first question.

As for your second question, I would have agreed with you concerning Mueller reassigning Strzok, if it weren't for the fact that this wasn't disclosed until 4 months after it happened. Four months is a lot of time for the FBI and Mueller to come up with effective damage control, if they had discovered that Strzok and maybe others had in fact "cooked the books" with the Russia investigation and/or the Hillary investigation. Now I'm not saying that was the case here, but the lack of transparency opened the door for this type of speculation.

Keep in mind there are at least 2 others who were involved with these investigations that should have never been in the first place. There's the DOJ's associate attorney general during the Obama administration Bruce Ohr, who was involved in the Hillary investigation while his wife was employed by Fusion GPS, and FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe who was involved with both investigations, who's wife received more than $700K from the Virginia DNC and Virginia Governor, Clinton friend and campaign associate Terry McAuliffe while running on the democratic ticket for the Virginia state senate. Both those men should have never accepted any role in those investigations, or been forced by the Obama administration to recuse themselves.


.
Click to expand...

Every time someone openly shows bias in this investigation they are removed. If that isn't commitment to ensuring a strong level of integrity I don't know what is. Keep in mind that most of the accusations of bias are coming either from the people who are being investigated, or from the party and news outlets that most benefit from destroying the image of the investigators. I'm sure there is a lot of crap that we shouldn't trust about the FBI, but I think at least with this investigation they have shown a real intention of doing things the proper way. If these people that have shown bias were not removed I'd jump on the anti-FBI train with you, but that isn't the case here.
 
cuban smokes said:
let's just throw this thread over into the Conspiracy Theory sub forum ...................... :lol: ............
Click to expand...

Let's not.

I have a sneaky suspicion that Congress...after they get those 1.2 million pages of documents and evidence from the DOJ OIG on or about Jan 15...will be leaking some very startling information that will end any notion that this whole thing is a conspiracy.

The mods would be forced to remove this thread from the CT forum and bring it back here.
 
MrPeanut said:
Every time someone openly shows bias in this investigation they are removed. If that isn't commitment to ensuring a strong level of integrity I don't know what is.
Click to expand...

As I said, the thing that bothers me is the fact that his reassignment and the reasons behind it were not revealed until 4 months after it happened. For transparency purposes something like that needs to be revealed right away, but in this case wasn't.

Keep in mind that most of the accusations of bias are coming either from the people who are being investigated, or from the party and news outlets that most benefit from destroying the image of the investigators.
Click to expand...

Wait just a second...

This isn't a "he said, she said" kind of thing, or a case where baseless accusations are being tossed around by politicians to achieve political gain. This is documented and irrefutable political bias demonstrated by Strzok himself, not
"accusations" of bias being made by political operatives... Therefore, that entire sentence you wrote is totally irrelevant.



I'm sure there is a lot of crap that we shouldn't trust about the FBI, but I think at least with this investigation they have shown a real intention of doing things the proper way. If these people that have shown bias were not removed I'd jump on the anti-FBI train with you, but that isn't the case here.
Click to expand...

My question to you is, how can you or anyone else possibly know if that bias altered or tainted the current investigation, or the previous investigation into Hillary Clinton's emails, without the actions, reports and procedures followed by Strzok being independently examined? That also goes for McCabe and Ohr also.


.
 
Mycroft said:
Let's not.

I have a sneaky suspicion that Congress...after they get those 1.2 million pages of documents and evidence from the DOJ OIG on or about Jan 15...will be leaking some very startling information that will end any notion that this whole thing is a conspiracy.

The mods would be forced to remove this thread from the CT forum and bring it back here.
Click to expand...

we could make a friendly wager on that concept :2razz: ...........
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom