• 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!

Durham, would Trump and Barr choose someone who was not totally loyal?

I

independentusa

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 10, 2016
Messages
14,607
Reaction score
9,303
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
There was an investigation by the DOJ IG a nonpartisan position, but someone who was not totally loyal to Trump and Barr, so Trump and Barr decided to start a second investigation. My question is when they decided to do so would they have chosen someone who they believed was also nonpartisan, or would they chose someone they knew would be loyal to them as Trump required of everyone around him? I would believe that even coming out without finishing his investigation and questioning the opinion of the DOJ IG gives us an answer to that question. Durham will end up giving Trump and Barr the answer that they wanted and as ordered to do so.
I find one thing interesting abut this whole question of the FBI nd Comey "spying" on Trump to dig up dirt on him to hurt his election chances. What I find interesting is that the only one that the FBI and especially Comey hurt during the election was Hillary and not Trump. If the FBI were spying on Trump, why not use the information they had to kill his chances for election to the presidency. The idea that the FBI and Comey were doing such spying to hurt Trump is not born out by what happened during the election.
 
independentusa said:
There was an investigation by the DOJ IG a nonpartisan position, but someone who was not totally loyal to Trump and Barr, so Trump and Barr decided to start a second investigation. My question is when they decided to do so would they have chosen someone who they believed was also nonpartisan, or would they chose someone they knew would be loyal to them as Trump required of everyone around him? I would believe that even coming out without finishing his investigation and questioning the opinion of the DOJ IG gives us an answer to that question. Durham will end up giving Trump and Barr the answer that they wanted and as ordered to do so.
I find one thing interesting abut this whole question of the FBI nd Comey "spying" on Trump to dig up dirt on him to hurt his election chances. What I find interesting is that the only one that the FBI and especially Comey hurt during the election was Hillary and not Trump. If the FBI were spying on Trump, why not use the information they had to kill his chances for election to the presidency. The idea that the FBI and Comey were doing such spying to hurt Trump is not born out by what happened during the election.
Click to expand...

Great point. From what I've learned after listening to the trump administrations' spin on how the world works:

When anyone looks into potential wrongdoing on trump it's called, "Spying", or a "Witch Hunt".

When anyone looks into potential wrongdoing of anyone else, it's called "Investigating".
 
lurchadams said:
Great point. From what I've learned after listening to the trump administrations' spin on how the world works:

When anyone looks into potential wrongdoing on trump it's called, "Spying", or a "Witch Hunt".

When anyone looks into potential wrongdoing of anyone else, it's called "Investigating".
Click to expand...

Democrats who had no problem with all 17 of Mueller's assistants in his investigation being former supporters, colleagues and staff members of Hillary Clinton's do not have much room for accusing Barr or Durham of being biased.
 
Smear campaign continues.....total McCarthyism
 
marke said:
Democrats who had no problem with all 17 of Mueller's assistants in his investigation being former supporters, colleagues and staff members of Hillary Clinton's do not have much room for accusing Barr or Durham of being biased.
Click to expand...

Yep, that's delusional, tin-hat spin that trump puts on everyone who investigates him.

In the real world, however the facts are: Comey and Mueller are both life-long republicans.

I pity you guys.
 
lurchadams said:
Yep, that's delusional, tin-hat spin that trump puts on everyone who investigates him.

In the real world, however the facts are: Comey and Mueller are both life-long republicans.

I pity you guys.
Click to expand...

I am not a lifelong registered republican and I don't care what label someone puts on himself, if he breaks the law he should be made to give an account.
 
independentusa said:
There was an investigation by the DOJ IG a nonpartisan position, but someone who was not totally loyal to Trump and Barr, so Trump and Barr decided to start a second investigation. My question is when they decided to do so would they have chosen someone who they believed was also nonpartisan, or would they chose someone they knew would be loyal to them as Trump required of everyone around him? I would believe that even coming out without finishing his investigation and questioning the opinion of the DOJ IG gives us an answer to that question. Durham will end up giving Trump and Barr the answer that they wanted and as ordered to do so.
I find one thing interesting abut this whole question of the FBI nd Comey "spying" on Trump to dig up dirt on him to hurt his election chances. What I find interesting is that the only one that the FBI and especially Comey hurt during the election was Hillary and not Trump. If the FBI were spying on Trump, why not use the information they had to kill his chances for election to the presidency. The idea that the FBI and Comey were doing such spying to hurt Trump is not born out by what happened during the election.
Click to expand...

The IG seeks to see that rules and regulations are followed. He only deals with current employees. He does not get into illegal vs illegal. The DoJ and FBI Dunham, deal with crimes. There is enough probable cause to warrant an investigation. Durham has a reputation as a straight shooter, strictly by the book prosecutor.

You loved Mueller until you hated him. Why aren’t you showing Durham the love?
 
marke said:
I am not a lifelong registered republican and I don't care what label someone puts on himself, if he breaks the law he should be made to give an account.
Click to expand...

That's why the DoJ installed Mueller to investigate trump in the first place and why trump's being impeached right now. I'm glad you agree trump should be held to account.
 
independentusa said:
There was an investigation by the DOJ IG a nonpartisan position, but someone who was not totally loyal to Trump and Barr, so Trump and Barr decided to start a second investigation. My question is when they decided to do so would they have chosen someone who they believed was also nonpartisan, or would they chose someone they knew would be loyal to them as Trump required of everyone around him? I would believe that even coming out without finishing his investigation and questioning the opinion of the DOJ IG gives us an answer to that question. Durham will end up giving Trump and Barr the answer that they wanted and as ordered to do so.
I find one thing interesting abut this whole question of the FBI nd Comey "spying" on Trump to dig up dirt on him to hurt his election chances. What I find interesting is that the only one that the FBI and especially Comey hurt during the election was Hillary and not Trump. If the FBI were spying on Trump, why not use the information they had to kill his chances for election to the presidency. The idea that the FBI and Comey were doing such spying to hurt Trump is not born out by what happened during the election.
Click to expand...

If they were investigating the same thing you might have a point. Horowitz just looked at internal procedures and could only talk to current employees. He invited some former employees to talk to him, but at least some refused.

Durham’s investigation is much broader than the IG and he will be looking at potential illegality.

It’s weird, when Durham was first assigned, it seemed a pretty universal assessment that he was thorough and fair. When did he become so biased as to be untrustworthy?
 
lurchadams said:
That's why the DoJ installed Mueller to investigate trump in the first place and why trump's being impeached right now. I'm glad you agree trump should be held to account.
Click to expand...

Democrats have been calling for Trump to be held to account and impeached over a variety of bogus charges for the last 3 years. They finally got some charges to stick by suspending the rule of law and banning defense witnesses and testimony from the room.

ye old impeachment.jpg
 
So now Durham must also be a Russian asset. Where's Rod Serling?:2razz:
 
Try not to forget that the reason given for firing Comey is because of his bad treatment of Hillary.

I know, but try.
 
marke said:
Democrats have been calling for Trump to be held to account and impeached over a variety of bogus charges for the last 3 years. They finally got some charges to stick by suspending the rule of law and banning defense witnesses and testimony from the room.

Its not complicated.

View attachment 67269937
Click to expand...
20191212_180316.jpg
 
j brown's body said:
Try not to forget that the reason given for firing Comey is because of his bad treatment of Hillary.

I know, but try.
Click to expand...

Or maybe it was that letter from Rosenstein recommending his removal. Yea, that sounds more likely.
 
veritas1 said:
Or maybe it was that letter from Rosenstein recommending his removal. Yea, that sounds more likely.
Click to expand...

Because of his treatment of Hillary.
 
veritas1 said:
Sort of like "Fire the prosecutor or you don't get the billion.". Oh wait, no, not like that at all.
Click to expand...

So your defense is that it's okay because other people did it. That's not a defense, it's a rationale.
 
j brown's body said:
Because of his treatment of Hillary.
Click to expand...

If you say so. Comey had no business deciding whether or not charges should be filed. That's not his job. His job was to pass on information to those with that responsibility. If Lynch hadn't compromised herself with Bill Clinton, Comey never would have become the center of attention. Blame yourselves.
 
j brown's body said:
So your defense is that it's okay because other people did it. That's not a defense, it's a rationale.
Click to expand...

No, my defense is that there was no quid pro quo, as both Ukraine and the parade of witnesses to Capitol Hill have established.
 
chuckiechan said:
The IG seeks to see that rules and regulations are followed. He only deals with current employees. He does not get into illegal vs illegal. The DoJ and FBI Dunham, deal with crimes. There is enough probable cause to warrant an investigation. Durham has a reputation as a straight shooter, strictly by the book prosecutor.

You loved Mueller until you hated him. Why aren’t you showing Durham the love?
Click to expand...

Because he was hand picked by the worst ever AG this country has ever had. If Trump said to Barr, go and jump off that bridge, Barr would do it. He is not in anyway independent and should be recused from everything Trump.
 
marke said:
Democrats have been calling for Trump to be held to account and impeached over a variety of bogus charges for the last 3 years. They finally got some charges to stick by suspending the rule of law and banning defense witnesses and testimony from the room.
Click to expand...

Your repeating right-wing talking points is not going to convince anyone but the extremely hateful and weak-minded.
 
j brown's body said:
View attachment 67269939
Click to expand...

Trump may be misunderstood and maligned by those leftists who hate him for everything and for nothing, but at least now sufficient attention is focused on the Biden's pay to play corruption that investigators may at least do something to address that issue in spite of what happens to Trump.
 
lurchadams said:
Your repeating right-wing talking points is not going to convince anyone but the extremely hateful and weak-minded.
Click to expand...

I hope the Senate calls witnesses to exonerate Trump and not just throw the thing out because of its lack of proper due process.
 
marke said:
I hope the Senate calls witnesses to exonerate Trump and not just throw the thing out because of its lack of proper due process.
Click to expand...

I know I'm going to regret asking this - who do you think the Republicans should call who would "exonerate" trump. Remember, he and Mickey Mouse Mulvaney, and Rudy "the Undead" Giuliani have already confessed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom