Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Lexicus, Nov 13, 2018.
re your edit... see my edit
All this hand wringing and popcorn eating is going to be pretty depressing for you when these inspectors turn around and state that basically it was fine on its merit as a counter intelligence investigation. I mean if I have to go on Republican wishes to indict Obama and Clinton cabinet members its been almost 30 years a gnashing of teeth to no avail. So I'm not holding my breath J and Hippy. Whens all these reports coming out again? Next week?
:sigh: I doubt that happens. Comey has spoken many times of having missions. I would like to see whoever tasked him get at least grilled.
The investigation never had anything but the dossier. Still doesn't, see Mueller report.
So you said. Lying under oath would do it. The FISA application part is very straight forward and is much more troubling than the original Watergate break in. That appears to be the portion of the ice above water.
What reports? The IG report will come when it's ready. No one knowledgeable is even speculating. The US Attorney does not give reports except to the AG. That may become public, but more likely Grand Juries will be the tip off.
I suspect this is just the tip of the iceberg regarding FISA warrants. The only reason we're finding out about this is because the guy they were spying on became President. Imagine how many innocent people get 'investigated' and neither the politicians or their media outlets gives a rat's patootie. Albeit this case is much more important given the added political dimension. The Democrats used the FBI and the extra-judicial surveillance apparatus to go after Trump and Barr wants to look into what happened. But now the Democrats dont want to investigate to find out... shocking.
Edit: I'm watching Ali Velshi filling in for Rachel Maddow on MSNBC. He showed clips of Trump judicial nominees declining to answer if Brown v Education (my home town) was constitutional. Ali asks, do these people believe in separate but equal? If they answered wouldn't they be obliged to answer every other question on the constitutionality of prior decisions like Roe etc? Thats not journalism, Ali, its hypocritical propaganda. If these were Obama's nominees declining to answer Ali would be defending them.
soon if you kept in touch with faux news you would know that their are signs to look for...like and the fact that this week many senators have been discussing the process
if you are going to follow due procedure you have to gather all the documents together in a SCIF allow the gang of 8 to have input on the contents then when they have made comment
POTUS can declassify them or he could just do it at a whim for the LOLs
would really like to be a fly on the wall... cause Pelosi and Schumer are part of the gang of 8 my bet is its done before the IG report so it can be included in that report and made Public
I have to admit I enjoy watching the House Dems and Senate Repubs investigating each other, seems like the only way to slow the corruption in both parties.
I like seeing them come out with toy chickens as a counter...
did you see the Barr interview where he confirmed saying " did you bring your handcuffs" ... to pelosi as a ice breaker
I didn't see Barr, but I did see the guy (Cohen D-Tenn) eating KFC and then apologizing for his racial insensitivity...
I've read the Mueller report - the whole 400 pages. (Incidentally, it was a great way to spend my Easter weekend!) Mueller references the Steele allegations only in passing at the end in describing the narrative of relations between Comey and Trump. Mueller made it quite clear that the original investigation began as a counterintelligence investigation with the hacking of the DNC and emails being laundered through Wikileaks.
The original investigation supposedly began with Papadopoulus telling a foreign diplomat the Russians had dirt on Hillary. The FBI wanted to know why he knew that. The question Barr is looking into is how that investigation came to focus on Carter Page, what role the dossier had in obtaining a warrant to spy on him and whether or not Steele's partisan agenda was fully disclosed to the judge issuing the warrant. I'd like to know that too.
Moderator Action: There is a "Postmortem on Mueller" thread. Please use it if you want to discuss the Mueller report or investigation, as distinct from the 2020 election. Please keep the discussion in this thread more closely linked to the topic.
Watching Biden now, he needs to cut down on using "folks" to address the crowd. Otherwise the speech isn't bad. I thought he was going by memory until MSNBC showed a more distant shot and I could see the teleprompters. A few verbal stumbles, the occasional BS, but he just comes off more personable than Hillary and most of his competition for 2020. I dont think Bernie can beat him even if other people drop from the race, Biden's got strong support from black voters mostly because he was Obama's VP and Bernie doesn't. If someone's gonna challenge Biden from the left they need to win that key constituency.
Damn, just remembered the PGA Championship is on. Why am I wasting time watching Biden talk.
Moderator Action: <snip>
Moderator Action: Off-topic posts removed. If you want to discuss the details of the Mueller investigation or report, do so in the appropriate thread.
Obviously almost every political topic will have some tangential connection to the 2020 election, but that doesn't mean you should be using this thread to run down every possible rabbit hole. Please ensure that when you do bring up side topics, they are related back to the 2020 election.
For example, a post talking about how the Mueller report will impact upon the 2020 election is perfectly on topic (e.g. "I think the Mueller report will be detrimental to the Democratic/Republican chances in 2020"). But a post arguing about what the outcome of the Mueller investigation was (e.g. "Mueller found/didn't find Trump had committed obstruction of justice"), is more appropriate for another thread.
I was delightfully surprised by Buttigieg's town hall on Fox. He was articulate and intelligent. Following Inslee, he's the second of these guys I could vote for.
Mayor Pete is the one Democrat with the kind of charisma it takes to win. However, his obstacles are very significant. Not least is his age but his willingness to talk openly about faith is another big one among Democrats.
People on the right often over estimate this effect on the left. It's not as big a deal as your side fear mongers to each other. Believe it or not there are a lot of spiritual liberals.
Granted, but also the bulk of anti-faith and anti-church people.
Fear mongers are everywhere, so no distinction there, just different things to fear. For example, Democrats fear catastrophic global warming while Republicans fear losing the right to own guns or land. It was not long ago that Democrats feared being overrun by illegal immigrants.
Of course worst case scenario on loosing gun rights is we are subjected to government tyranny for a thousand years. Worst case scenario on run away global warming is earth turns into Venus. . .so perspective of nightmare tends to matter. Also yes dems and repubs swapped positions on immigration just like they swapped on practicing racist policies and rhetoric. . .I wonder if there is a correlation?. . .
Both are equally unlikely. That's a pretty solid correlation.
Your second sentence makes no sense. Republicans have been consistent while the Democrats did a 180° switch. Does your imoticon indicate you are trying to level an unjustified accusation?
Why? Do you think we have the potential to make the Earth resemble Mercury instead?
Separate names with a comma.