[W:171]FBI chief Wray refutes Barr, says no 'spying' on Trump campaign

[Simon W. Moon]

Red:
I'm not aware of any illegal investigations' having been leaked to the media. Are you? If so, what illegal investigations have been leaked to the media, at any point in time, frankly?

It looks like Fenton has some information about that.
I'm hoping Fenton will share that info with the rest of us.
we'll see

 

[code1211]

Speaking of being contrived. The Russian Lawyer from the Trump Tower meeting met with the founder of Fusion GPS the day before the meeting and the day after the meeting. And he pleads the 5th when asked.

Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!

 

[code1211]

No, damage was not intended. That's right wing hyperbole. Fact-finding is always the intent of any investigation.

Please link to proof that evidence was created and/or that there was corrupt intent.

And please note that your snarky description of my posts as tripe is rude, but I'm refraining from responding in kind.

The obvious lack of a defensive briefing demonstrates the malicious intent.

The goal was NOT to uncover Russian mischief- it was to entrap Trump.

If the goal was to uncover Russian mischief, they would have performed the Defensive Briefing as they did in all similar cases involving Democrats.

 

[code1211]

It's ten pages. FFS, read the report for yourself, or if you have read it, go to those pages and read them again. I'm sick of doing righties' homework for them.

When you make the assertion, it is your obligation to support the assertion if it is questioned.

Your inability to do so reveals that your assertion is empty.

If you have something that backs up your conclusion, by all means, present it. However, if there are no means to do so at all, then it cannot be presented.

 

[code1211]

Trumpkins do what you mention all the time.

Yet another empty post.

 

[code1211]

Dozens of contacts between Trump's people and Russians. Again, read the report.

Were the contacts initiated by Trump or by the Russians?

I receive emails and phone calls from idiots trying to sell me stuff all the time. This means they want to sell me something, not that I want to buy it.

Why was there no defensive briefing provided to the Trump Campaign?

 

[Idiometer]

The money that came from HRC went to Steele and he got Russian dirt for her. Steele didn’t work for free and I doubt the Russians worked for free and the money that paid them came from HRC . No HRC no bogus Russian Dossier from Russian operatives.

Steele was paid his consulting fee. If you're saying he was also given money to pay his Russian contacts, you'll have to prove that. Otherwise, it's just wishful thinking from the right.

 

[code1211]

I do. I never take anything on faith. I do a lot of research before deciding whether I think something is true or not. I don't just go to an "echo chamber" to get talking points for "my side."

I find this site helpful:

Media Bias/Fact Check - Search and Learn the Bias of News Media

When in doubt, I go there and find a neutral source or three, then see what they have to say.

I always consider the source.

However, more important than that is this single question: "If this is true, what else must be true?"

In the case of the intent of the Spies from US and allied nations working against the Trump Campaign, we know with absolute certainty that our Spies NEVER provided a Defensive Briefing to the Trump Campaign.

Of all of the various notions, ideas and charges made, this is one thing on which EVERYONE agrees. We know with as much certainty as can be held in this circumstance, that this one thing is "true".

We know also that in a vary similar case with the Democrat, Diane Feinstein, in the same time frame, a Defensive Briefing was provided provided. Feinstein's case was potentially far more insidiously conspiratorial.

So, if this is true, what else must be true?

Graham Writes to FBI Director Expressing Concerns About 'Double Standard' Regarding President Trump - Press Releases - United States Senator Lindsey Graham

 

[Idiometer]

Pro tip: Tell the truth and you won’t be accused of lying.

I don't lie. You just don't agree with me is all. I don't agree with you, but unlike you, I give others the benefit of the doubt and assume that they are telling what they think is true. It's called civility. Look it up.

 

[Idiometer]

Prepare to be surprised then. Can you prove Trump insisted Barr launch an investigation into his political enemies? Link please

He said it out loud and proud in one of his impromptu pressers before boarding Marine Corps 1 to head to Mar-a-Lago on the taxpayer's dime. He said he had been totally exonerated, and now it was time to go after those who began the investigation. If that isn't threatening political enemies, what is?

 

[SLC]

Steele was paid his consulting fee. If you're saying he was also given money to pay his Russian contacts, you'll have to prove that. Otherwise, it's just wishful thinking from the right.

Why is the issue of if the Russians were paid for the dirt or they gave it out of the goodness of Putin’s heart important to you? If their motive was financial gain or the desire to damage Trump it still was Russian dirt that HRC paid for. Your hair splitting over if the Russian agents were paid or did it for free is interesting. You do know for them to do it acting as a Russian agent could get them 15 years in a Russian prison.

 

[Idiometer]

The meaning of "free" seems to escape your grasp. By definition there would be no payment. Let me know if any of the other big words are confusing you.

Don't be snarky.

Another users states that Clinton paid Russians through Christopher Steele. I was refuting that.

 

[code1211]

If you go to the FAQ section of the FBI's own website they use the word spying only in terms of counterintelligence operations but not domestic operations

This was a counter intelligence operation due to the FACT that no crime had been committed.

 

[Idiometer]

Red:
What exactly is the affirmative assertion(s) you'd pen to express the nature and extent of your incredulity borne of the assemblage of linked-to content and concomitant with the "red" rhetorical question?

Sorry, but you'll have to ask Fenton, who posted that remark in reply to my post.

 

[code1211]

Kindly read the blue then reflect on your post so you can see the error of your conclusion and of your invitation to an erroneously presumed possible mutual celebration. Because I haven't seen your own answer to your own question which is after all inherent to it. You know the answer you sought while I could only speculate on it. After you present your answer that you obviously have beforehand I can consider the possibility of a reply. I'm here to debate not to guess at the presumptions behind your questions, which is what you leave me with.

I'm having difficulty following you down this rabbit hole.

What do you want to know from me?

 

[SLC]

He said it out loud and proud in one of his impromptu pressers before boarding Marine Corps 1 to head to Mar-a-Lago on the taxpayer's dime. He said he had been totally exonerated, and now it was time to go after those who began the investigation. If that isn't threatening political enemies, what is?

Then it should not be hard for you to find it. Trump saying he thinks some of the people that set him up need to be investigated is hardly the same as Trump insisting that Barr investigating them. Trump still is has his 1st amendment right to say how he feels.

 

[Idiometer]

When you make the assertion, it is your obligation to support the assertion if it is questioned.

Your inability to do so reveals that your assertion is empty.

If you have something that backs up your conclusion, by all means, present it. However, if there are no means to do so at all, then it cannot be presented.

Going around in circles with righties who either can't or won't read the report is a waste of time.

 

[Idiometer]

Were the contacts initiated by Trump or by the Russians?

I receive emails and phone calls from idiots trying to sell me stuff all the time. This means they want to sell me something, not that I want to buy it.

Why was there no defensive briefing provided to the Trump Campaign?

Both.

Ask Comey.

 

[haymarket]

Yet another empty post.

Yes, that is what Trumpkins post.

 

[code1211]

I noted in my post there was plenty there for everyone.

I also pointed out there are two key points: legal and intent. The FBI investigation was a legal counter intelligence operation to determine Russian involvement in the 2016 campaign. We've been over this a million times. You're claiming the same rightwing stuff for the millionth time plus one. The predicate of your post "seems" is your own concoction. Your post is a fail.

The intent was to damage Trump.

There was no crime to investigate. Therefore this was a counter intelligence operation. Given these two obvious truths, what was happening was spying.

The facade of the counter intelligence is now said to have been to determine the extent of Russian involvement and yet no Defensive Briefing was provided to the Trump Campaign.

Obviously, lacking the Defensive Briefing, this was an operation AGAINST the Trump Campaign.

There is NO other way to view this. If there had been a Defensive Briefing provided AS WAS DONE WITH DIANE FEINSTEIN, A DEMOCRAT, there could be some wiggle room. There was not. This was spying with malice aforethought.

Proceeding forward from this obvious truth, we may properly assume the following:

The Obama Administration's Dirty Cops named Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Page, Brennan, Clapper and several others conspired to interfere in the Election of the US President and then conspired to undermine his authority and administration following the election.

 

[SLC]

I don't lie. You just don't agree with me is all. I don't agree with you, but unlike you, I give others the benefit of the doubt and assume that they are telling what they think is true. It's called civility. Look it up.

Did I call you a liar?

 

[SLC]

Both.

Ask Comey.

They did but he couldn’t remember.....240 Times. I suspect he will get the opportunity to explain it again at his trial.

 

[code1211]

Going around in circles with righties who either can't or won't read the report is a waste of time.

Interesting lack of foundation for your beliefs.

If you have a nugget you would like to present, NOBODY is stopping you except you.

 

[code1211]

Both.

Ask Comey.

Comey is one of the many Dirty Cops.

 

[SLC]

Yes, that is what Trumpkins post.

:lol: Such a weak come back on your part.