Nm
- Thread starter KNIGHTTIME^
- Start date
The core problem here is the American press and it's total bias. There isn't an intellectually honest one amongst the legacy media. This is massive corruption and makes Watergate look like child's play and they all parroted the same bull crap without any evidence at all. Their blind hate for Trump blinded them to the corrupt and illegal activities of their favorite people the Clintons .
The funny ,not so funny, thing is Hillary was a young staffer for the Democrats during Watergate. She clearly learned much back then. I don't expect her to be touched in this and kudos if Durham does charge her . The Clintons are what is wrong with American politics followed by the sycophants of the legacy and social media who continue to look the other way for their progressive buddies .
Side note, I was thinking how we have the legacy media and conservative media . Then it struck me the conservative media tends to defend the Constitution, the Bill of Rights where as the legacy media does everything they can to dump on the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. They are about party first not the Republic or the citizens. They are beholden to the Democrats and as such corruption goes unchecked in the Democrat party.
The funny ,not so funny, thing is Hillary was a young staffer for the Democrats during Watergate. She clearly learned much back then. I don't expect her to be touched in this and kudos if Durham does charge her . The Clintons are what is wrong with American politics followed by the sycophants of the legacy and social media who continue to look the other way for their progressive buddies .
Side note, I was thinking how we have the legacy media and conservative media . Then it struck me the conservative media tends to defend the Constitution, the Bill of Rights where as the legacy media does everything they can to dump on the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. They are about party first not the Republic or the citizens. They are beholden to the Democrats and as such corruption goes unchecked in the Democrat party.
The pen is mightier than the sword... And the reality is the personality types that are attracted to "journalism" in high school and college also align with many liberal philosophies. Just how it goes.
I'm open minded, but as best I can tell this is massively being blown out of proportion by right-wing media. Durham's investigation has gone on longer than Meuller's at this point without much to show.
Hillary and crew had every right to track down Trump/Russia ties as Trump/Rudy had the right to track down Biden/Hunter/Ukraine stuff. Similarly, none of us should have a problem with political operatives who believe they've uncovered something from taking it to the FBI/CIA or whoever. As gross as it is, funded political operatives doing real digging and passing finding to authorities is a valuable check in our system.
Per the DOJ IOG report "The FBI investigated whether there were cyber links between the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank, but had concluded by early February 2017 that there were no such links.”
So what exactly did the Government (Deep State) do wrong here? If the allegation is that one private campaign conducted oppo research on another - then yea. Durham hasn't exactly taken down FBI brass for "spying" on POTUS.
How is it that, with all of the resources the Mueller investigation had, it took another investigation to find out the origins of the dossier and subsequent hacking by the Clinton campaign? They certainly had a broad enough scope.
I was censored on a yahoo message board for their propaganda against ZeroHedge. 😂🤣
"No matter no one uses Yahoo anymore" while literally using Yahoo.I was censored on a yahoo message board for their propaganda against ZeroHedge. 😂🤣
All of a sudden that whole "if he wins we are all going to hang" seems a little bit more real.
Come on boosted. Are you still butt hurt that you were late to the party and looked like an idiot on the 99.5% pandemic of the unvaccinated psyOps campaign?
Come on it was kinda funny. A simple "lol touche" would have been the correct reply.
Normally I'd agree. But here are the facts ...
- BIG ONE: Trump was a private citizen
- Both Democratic (DNC+Clinton) and Republians (McCain+establishment) began private investigations using some of the same resources
- Republicans finally dropped the effort when it looked like Trump would win the primary, because the investigation proved little of reputable worth
- McCain was one of the biggest, and repeatedly lied about it -- and I'm one of those people who defended McCain, and said he wasn't involved (was wrong)
- Clinton then took that private information to public authorities
- Private lawyers provided false information to the FISA judges
- FISA judges have gone on-record about their dismay at the false information, stating specifically it undermines the system
Trump then pissed me off when he did nothing to change the FISA courts. He was just as corrupt as President. But until he was President, he had no such power. He was a private citizen. If they can do it to Trump, who has no public power, he can do it to any of us.
But also keep in mind, the left-wing media is still interviewing Steele, and pushing the bullshit that it was factual. So it's hardly a right-wing only thing. Steele has quadrupled down on proven false information. And the people that lied (perjured themselves) to the FISA judges need to be prosecuted. It's really simple the judges can ... well ... judge them. The problem is ... the FISA courts have no accountability.
The lawyers that argue in FISA courts are above the law. Think about it!
That’s not the only problem. There are political appointees in all of these organizations that have become quite brazen in trying to achieve partisan political goals through their positions.
I don't know how being a private citizen is relevant here. Do you apply different standards to someone seeking office vs someone seeking office who is already in office? IMO, once someone chooses to seek political office, they sacrifice any expectation of privacy they have as it relates to their professional dealings and associations. We're not talking about being elected county dog-catcher either.
I look at like this - there's basically three different narratives you can subscribe to when it comes to how the government (not HRC's campaign) handled this.
1) Trump was a (possible) Russian asset and/or colluding directly with Moscow so of course the FBI are doing their job and protecting the country.
2) Russia was actively seeking to interfere in the Presidential election - possibly directly through people around Trump. The FBI is doing their job which includes protecting Trump himself from nefarious characters with ties to foreign intelligence seeking to influence him.
3) The FBI was politically motivated to harm Trump.
#1 is what many democrats believed was happening. #3 is what MAGA world believed was happening. The truth was in the middle somewhere closer to #2.
And to show how absurd #3 is, here's one paragraph from the bi-partisan Senate report. Trump did this to himself via association.
"The Committee found that Manafort's presence on the Campaign and proximity to Trump created opportunities for the Russian intelligence services to exert influence over, and acquire confidential information on, the Trump Campaign. The Committee assesses that Kilimnik likely served as a channel to Manafort for Russian intelligence services, and that those services sought to exploit Manafort's access to gain insight into the campaign. Taken as a whole, Manafort's high-level access and willingness to share information with individuals closely associated with Russian intelligence services, particularly Kilimnik, represented a grave counterintelligence threat."
This is true - but you have to be really careful not to fall into a trap where you assume political motivations.
To understand this, think of it in reverse. Look at Manafort's background and now imagine the FBI ignores a very real threat to national security. Manafort ends up with a job in the white house. Later, the news breaks with all Manafort's shady actions during the campaign and we find out the FBI knew about that all along.
Now democrats can argue that the FBI's failure to act during the campaign was politically motivated to protect Trump (Comey was a registered Republican afterall).
So it's lose-lose for the FBI. Any choice you make that results in political leverage for one side can be spun as politically motivated by the other.
BTW - I can't stand how Democrats bag on Comey over the Hillary thing. He was in a lose-lose because it was a tough call and either side would have legitimate grievance. The fact that his choices pissed of partisans on both sides is probably a good clue that he was acting in good faith.
Manafort, and others just like him, worked on many campaigns across both sides of the aisle. Every national campaign has someone that has ties to Russia and China in high positions. People on that committee have more troublesome entanglements than the Trump campaign.
That aside, the premise for this investigation was fabricated out of whole cloth by the Clinton campaign. The campaign then sold the dossier to Obama-Biden’s FBI to open an investigation, specifically taking it to people who were friendly to the cause of the Clinton campaign. The Clinton campaign then hired a third party to hack into Trump campaign servers with the consent and possible assistance of Obama-Biden’s FBI and NSA. And when Trump told everyone that he was being spied on, the media (and the same Senators from the committee you referenced) jumped right in to laugh at him, call him a liar, and even directly cut him off in national interviews.
So please tell us all how this isn’t worse than Watergate.
That aside, the premise for this investigation was fabricated out of whole cloth by the Clinton campaign. The campaign then sold the dossier to Obama-Biden’s FBI to open an investigation, specifically taking it to people who were friendly to the cause of the Clinton campaign. The Clinton campaign then hired a third party to hack into Trump campaign servers with the consent and possible assistance of Obama-Biden’s FBI and NSA. And when Trump told everyone that he was being spied on, the media (and the same Senators from the committee you referenced) jumped right in to laugh at him, call him a liar, and even directly cut him off in national interviews.
So please tell us all how this isn’t worse than Watergate.
I’ve spent enough time working in Washington to understand that everything there is political. Everything.
Something being "political" is not the same though as assuming that everything has partisan, agenda-driven motivations.
If you're in the FBI working a politically sensitive case, you're doing it with full knowledge that you are probably going to end up testifying before congress and that any screw up you make will be amplified and may cost you your career. So yes - there are always political considerations - that doesn't mean there are partisan motivations.
In my experience, there are enough people in the DC institutions driving things from an agenda-driven standpoint that it’s pretty much all political. I get what you’re trying to say but that’s not the experience with the federal government that I’ve had.
Then I've already lost you from the get-go, and nothing I will say will make sense. Ergo ...
This has zilch to do with privacy, but everything to do with those of the state, using the state, to abuse a private citizen, an innocent, private citizen (at the time), as a 'scapegoat' for their own transgressions!
As I always say (related) ...
People talk about 'stopping lobbyists,' but then support the state in 'targetting' Mr. Smith goes to Washington, because he is, technically, a lobbyist. Just what the **** is wrong with Trump at this point, late 2015 and early 2016, compared to those already in power in our entire, existing government, their lobbyists and their complicit involvement in undermining Ukranian democracy as lapdogs of Russia, had been doing!
Same concept here ...
Clinton, McCain, others ... they literally not only abused their power, but criminally used the system against a private citizen, with many committing purjury. Even more so ... again ... both parties had lobbyists and lawyers in the Ukraine, representing Russian interests. The Russians paid very well.
Trump had nothing to do with any of that!
Biden? Yes! Clinton? Yes! Even some in the GOP too!
It sickens me that they tried to pin all the wrongs of our own, existing politicians, on Mr. Smith going to Washington. Was Trump like Mr. Smith? No. But many of his voters saw him as that, because he was pissed at the establishment, like them. That's also why Trump was pissed off, especially at McCain (early on) as much as Clinton, and when it all came out about McCain being utterly involved, and ...
Even I now spit on McCain's grave for it.
And there is a special place in hell for Clinton, Hillary far more than Bill.
That said ... Trump did abuse his power when he came to power too ... but that was later, and we will find out more over the coming years. But what they did to him, and totally 'pivoted' the 'narrative' away from themselves to Trump, is just laughable to everyone in the community. They were the problem, not Trump! And that's why the Ukranian government hates the US, it's Congress, the Clintons, the Bidens, and even some in the GOP! They helped Russia, not Trump!
They dumped it on a private citizen, and their sole 'link' was that one of Trump's lawyers, who wasn't even Trump's lawyer until later, after he was done, was one of the lobbysts working on-behalf of Turkey, not even Russia! Such a ****ing joke.
Last edited:
When a member of congress gets indicted for insider trading, it may well be their political enemies snooping around that uncover the issue that send it to house ethics or eventually DOJ. That doesn't mean the indictment is "politically motivated" just because the information was discovered through political means. You hope everyone is treated equally at DOJ. Obviously, that's not how humans work. But having the right friends will matter far more than R or D in that case.
Explain how "private citizen" is relevant in this context. If the government behavior was improper it would still be improper even if he was already an elected official.
And Trump, a private citizen, had both parties hating him at the time these 'efforts' were not only funded, but the complete lies pushed through the FISA courts.
Whether you like or hate Trump, everyone who was a part of that should have been voted out. But nope, people will 'defend the state.' This is a huge deal!
That's why many Federalist Society -- a powerful, Libertarian, not conservative, oriented group of lawyers -- members are utterly pissed off, even the ones who hate Trump, and say he was just as abusive.
Several of the judges in the FISA courts have spoken to the Federlist Society about it too. That are utterly pissed off too.
Sure but this hoax was all about having the right friends. They just happened to be D. But it was absolutely about friends of the Clintons and those that owed their positions/careers to such.
