• 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 Under Scrutiny

Fake evidence to get warrants is a piece of cake - and what they did was successful - not as much as they wanted but absolutely so. How? In addition to succeeding in their goal of trashing the reputation of the USA on behalf of Russia, China, N. Korea and Iran, trashing Trump's reputation, they correctly relied that millions of extremely stupid or gullible people would believe it - and once committed to that belief would continue to believe it even if proven 100% false by DEMOCRAT investigators - as it was. Basically, that is the majority of Democrats. They will believe ANY lie told by their partisan masters - no exceptions - like Jim Jone;s Kool Aid drinkers.

Trump's reputation?:lamo His reputation as a con-artist, debt welcher and a fraud was well known way before he ran; ask Deutsche Bank. As far as America's reputation is concerned Trump has managed to destroy all good will, trust in and affection for America in less than three years. He did that all on his own, and you seriously believe in some nefarious underhand dealings by Democrats? Have a word with yourself.
 
Last edited:
The hate-Trump attack investigators on Mueller's team failed to find anything to charge Trump with in spite of wasting years of time and tens of millions of dollars in the witch hunt. No, they did not find an innocent man innocent in spite of their efforts to find him guilty.

But you have claimed that Russia never hacked the DNC and never tried to help the Trump campaign. If “they” made up those stories, why not make up enough to have enough to charge him with?

And since a sitting President cannot be indicted, no matter how guilty, lack of charges doesn’t mean innocence.

The fact is that there were enough red flags to justify an investigation as whether anyone in the Trump campaign actively conspired with Russia. No useable evidence was found. That’s how investigations go. Personally, I didn’t think they would find enough evidence for active cooperation.
 
The investigation did not find Trump innocent. Mueller specifically pointed that ou as far as obstruction.

of the original conspiracy that was being investigated , it most certainly did. and the AG says no obstruction , either. I am not going to care that he ALMOST tried to fire Mueller, when he did not AND THERE WAS NO CONSPIRACY.
 
But you have claimed that Russia never hacked the DNC and never tried to help the Trump campaign. If “they” made up those stories, why not make up enough to have enough to charge him with?

And since a sitting President cannot be indicted, no matter how guilty, lack of charges doesn’t mean innocence.

The fact is that there were enough red flags to justify an investigation as whether anyone in the Trump campaign actively conspired with Russia. No useable evidence was found. That’s how investigations go. Personally, I didn’t think they would find enough evidence for active cooperation.
The Russian hacking lie was invented by democrats desperate to minimize the damage done to them by the exposure of their dirty dealings by the release of the emails Seth Rich gave to Assange.
 
The Russian hacking lie was invented by democrats desperate to minimize the damage done to them by the exposure of their dirty dealings by the release of the emails Seth Rich gave to Assange.

Except the only source claiming Seth Rich downloaded the emails recanted that claim. And the only one claiming evidence of an inside job is an anonymous person basing his/her claim on the slowness of household internet upload speeds. Corporate acccounts, cloud based, or air gapping between computers on different networks easily account for the upload speed.

The entire IC, plus every cyber security company that’s looked into it agrees it was Russian hacking. There is zero evidence to support an inside job.
 
It's different because you are lying.

It's different because you are lying.

It would appear that on this point at least, reality has diverged and two different ones exist.

How do you recombine two opposing realities?

We ask Hannity what he thinks, and Moderate Right reports back on it.

/sarc off

Trump surrounded himself with criminals with Russia ties and attempted to get bad stuff on Hillary from Russia, only failing because he was played. Or as Mueller put it,

The investigation also identified numerous links between the the Russian government and the Trump campaign. Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in it's election interference activities"



There was no explicit agreement. So he was cleared of the criminal charge. He was not cleared of obstruction. And why does an innocent man obstruct anyway?

Regardless of what one thinks should happen with Trump, there's really no point in bothering to argue with someone who insists that Trump not only is completely innocent but was in fact subject of an attempt to frame him in a "witch hunt" orchestrated by Obama via a "deep state" made up of political appointments which....

...which...

...exists after every President leaves office.

This, right here, is the true seed of democracy's failure (if it happens; there's always some hope in the next generation). If 37% or whatever of the voting population cannot admit that there was every reason to at least investigate Trump - if they have to claim it was all bogus despite all the convictions and thus openly demand that everyone who investigated must be investigated themselves - then this isn't a government based on consent of the governed. It's a government based on one faction trying to **** the other, the biggest worry of the most prolific framers.
 
Last edited:
Except the only source claiming Seth Rich downloaded the emails recanted that claim. And the only one claiming evidence of an inside job is an anonymous person basing his/her claim on the slowness of household internet upload speeds. Corporate acccounts, cloud based, or air gapping between computers on different networks easily account for the upload speed.

The entire IC, plus every cyber security company that’s looked into it agrees it was Russian hacking. There is zero evidence to support an inside job.

After much debate most heads of intelligence agencies accepted the DNC claim that it was the Russians who fed Assange the dirty DNC emails. No US governmental intelligence agency has proven that the Russians hacked the DNC server and that Seth Rich did not download the material someone gave to Assange. Even Mueller admitted some vaguely referenced American may have delivered Assange the DNC emails by hand.
 
It's not really under 'scrutiny'. Trump loyalists may be pretending to clean house or install more loyalists, but it's just a distraction for his base to look at while he financial misdeeds get dragged through the courts; a token gesture to make it look like he's 'fighting back'.
 
After much debate most heads of intelligence agencies accepted the DNC claim that it was the Russians who fed Assange the dirty DNC emails.
I’m sorry, but your claim is that no one at any intel agency had any information about the hacks and just took the DNC’s word without any investigation?

Besides the fact that the FBI independently did forensic testing on the copies of the servers, you don’t think NSA and Cybercom know anything about hacking and couldn’t do their own intel? And CIA has no sources? This is your claim, that no intel agency did anything and had no source other than the DNC? How on earth did you get that idea?


No US governmental intelligence agency has proven that the Russians hacked the DNC server and that Seth Rich did not download the material someone gave to Assange.
How do you know that? You have read the classified reports?
And there’s zero evidence to say that Rich had anything to do with it. All the intel agencies, all cyber security companies agree. One anonymous source claims otherwise.

Even Mueller admitted some vaguely referenced American may have delivered Assange the DNC emails by hand.
I have not heard this. Do you have a citation for that?
 
Back
Top Bottom