Clown Car III: Who's Laughing Now

[Gori the Grey]

It was a stretch to think that the FBI had reason for surveillance of the Trump campaign.

Like, how can someone outside of the intelligence community know this, one way or the other, to make so categorical a statement?

They've got a ton of information we're not privvy to. That's like their thing.

 

[Broken_Erika]

Apparently, the intelligence community is obligated to publicly reveal any and all information they get as they get it. At least according to the braindead moronic fecal-filled wastes of skin over on fox news and their audience of terminally incomplete braindead sycophants .

 

[Takhisis]

Like, how can someone outside of the intelligence community know this, one way or the other, to make so categorical a statement?

They've got a ton of information we're not privvy to. That's like their thing.

We can just ask Agent whatsisname who's following Bootstoots to make sure he doesn't actually build a uranium-powered Giant Death Robot.

 

[FriendlyFire]

No. Your denial not-with-standing, it's a rational statement of the situation in the spring of 2016. Note that Comey stated that as of July, the investigation was already underway. He's a known liar and serial leaker, but it's what the record shows. If you want to lay out a case for surveillance prior to him announcing as a candidate, feel free. The only one that occurs to me is police state partisan politics. J

Yes why not LEAK that Trump associates were under FBI investigation right before the election ?
Why not LEAK the Steele Dossier during the election ?
Why did Trump and Republicans praise the "integrity" of Comey (and the FBI) during the election ?

 

[onejayhawk]

Like, how can someone outside of the intelligence community know this, one way or the other, to make so categorical a statement? They've got a ton of information we're not privvy to. That's like their thing.

The FBI deals in criminal matters. Different rules and standards. Also, I do not buy the idea that there is a ton of information unavailable to the public. Details, yes, but not broad strokes. The whole stuttering mess has leaked like a sieve. For example, the leak exposing Gen. Flynn was a more serious crime than his.

I do acknowledge that the intelligence services are deeply involved.

Yes why not LEAK that Trump associates were under FBI investigation right before the election? Why not LEAK the Steele Dossier during the election ?

They thought it was unnecessary. Hillary was expected to win.

J

 

[FriendlyFire]

They thought it was unnecessary. Hillary was expected to win J

And yet the FBI "Leaked" the re-opening of Hillary email investigation to the media which then forced Comney to publicly announce they had re-opened FBI investigation into Hillary
I assume that the FBI did this because Hillary was expected to win

Its almost like the FBI was helping Trump

 

[Takhisis]

inb4 jay says that cannot be true because trumps not part of the system kthanksbai

 

[Timsup2nothin]

No. Your denial not-with-standing, it's a rational statement of the situation in the spring of 2016. Note that Comey stated that as of July, the investigation was already underway. He's a known liar and serial leaker, but it's what the record shows.

If you want to lay out a case for surveillance, feel free. The only one that occurs to me is police state partisan politics.

J

First off, no one but Dingbat Don and his various propaganda outlets; Faux News, Breitbarf, you; are talking about "spies" and "surveillance" and whatever other emotionally charged idiot words the base eats up.

Yes, an informant spoke to members of the Trump campaign. Welcome to criminal investigations...which we already knew were going on. Do I wish the investigators had opted for a "shake the trees" strategy and just dragged Flynn in for questioning instead of using a CI? Yeah, I do. Dragging that lying asshat off the stage at a Trump campaign rally in handcuffs would have suited me fine. The rest of Dingbat Don's 'best people' that were either of interest or outright targets of an espionage investigation right along with him would have been even better. Maybe three days before the election so that lying GOP shills could actually have something to complain about when they are trolling on-line communities.

Second, feel free to explain how Dingbat Don merits having his defense team invited to interrogate the prosecution while he is being investigated. I've never seen anyone else get such special treatment, and I've seen plenty of people get investigated. And of course they immediately compromised an FBI informant, but you couldn't care less despite your GOP proclaiming constantly that you support law and order.

 

[Gori the Grey]

If you want to lay out a case for surveillance, feel free.

Sorry, should have appended a response to this to my previous post.

Again, how are any of us in a position to do this, to be the ones who lay out such a case? I served on a grand jury in my county, and that's when I first learned about confidential informants. Small time stuff, by comparison with this. Drug user caught and as part of his plea, he helps bring in a drug dealer. The thing is, prior to that, I'd never had any direct information about how law enforcement in my county nabbed drug dealers. Since then I've not known the specifics of how they've built any of their cases. Just this one time, I got a glimpse. That's their job, to take what evidence there is of crimes being committed and develop them up to the legal standards needed for warrants, arrests, indictments, convictions.

You're taking the fact that we the public don't have evidence that confidential informants were warranted as grounds for asserting that there wasn't evidence sufficient to warrant such investigation.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

You're taking the fact that we the public don't have evidence that confidential informants were warranted as grounds for asserting that there wasn't evidence sufficient to warrant such investigation.

This is giving him far too much credit. He's actually just parroting out what the GOP talking points of the day are and has absolutely no concern for facts, period, much less who is taking what as fact, or why they should or shouldn't.

 

[Birdjaguar]

For example, the leak exposing Gen. Flynn was a more serious crime than his.

J

Ok.
Mike Flynn is in cahoots with the Russians
He lies to the FBI about it
The DOJ tells Trump that Flynn has been compromised.
The WH does nothing and keeps him in as Nat Security Advisor and gives him access the most important secrets we have.
Only when that info is leaked does Trump respond.
If you know that there is a known foreign agent serving in the WH, don't you think they should be outed? Trump wasn't going to do it.

So do you think that Flynn should still be NSA? Do you think it is possible that there were other crimes Flynn could have been indicted for that we don't know about?

You appear to think that Flynn should still have his job and yet at the same time, you seem to support giving Trump secret information about what he is is under investigation for. In the rest of country, such information is only revealed upon indictment and then the defense gets to squawk and complain. Messed up thinking.

 

[onejayhawk]

And yet the FBI "Leaked" the re-opening of Hillary email investigation to the media which then forced Comney to publicly announce they had re-opened FBI investigation into Hillary
I assume that the FBI did this because Hillary was expected to win

Its almost like the FBI was helping Trump

See part about "Hillary was expected to win."

Ok.
Mike Flynn is in cahoots with the Russians
He lies to the FBI about it
The DOJ tells Trump that Flynn has been compromised.
The WH does nothing and keeps him in as Nat Security Advisor and gives him access the most important secrets we have.
Only when that info is leaked does Trump respond.
If you know that there is a known foreign agent serving in the WH, don't you think they should be outed? Trump wasn't going to do it.

So do you think that Flynn should still be NSA? Do you think it is possible that there were other crimes Flynn could have been indicted for that we don't know about?

You appear to think that Flynn should still have his job and yet at the same time, you seem to support giving Trump secret information about what he is is under investigation for. In the rest of country, such information is only revealed upon indictment and then the defense gets to squawk and complain. Messed up thinking.

Not close. Go back several months further. Sandbagging Flynn was a nice piece of tradecraft, which is one reason I think the intel community is involved, but it is long after the fact.

Sorry, should have appended a response to this to my previous post.

Again, how are any of us in a position to do this, to be the ones who lay out such a case? I served on a grand jury in my county, and that's when I first learned about confidential informants. Small time stuff, by comparison with this. Drug user caught and as part of his plea, he helps bring in a drug dealer. The thing is, prior to that, I'd never had any direct information about how law enforcement in my county nabbed drug dealers. Since then I've not known the specifics of how they've built any of their cases. Just this one time, I got a glimpse. That's their job, to take what evidence there is of crimes being committed and develop them up to the legal standards needed for warrants, arrests, indictments, convictions.

You're taking the fact that we the public don't have evidence that confidential informants were warranted as grounds for asserting that there wasn't evidence sufficient to warrant such investigation.

You need evidence of criminal acts. In over a year, in which every little thing gets leaked, we have nada about the basis of a criminal investigation. If it is about Russia and the election, where are the indictments concerning the DNC hack?

J

 

[FriendlyFire]

You need evidence of criminal acts. In over a year, in which every little thing gets leaked, we have nada about the basis of a criminal investigation. If it is about Russia and the election, where are the indictments concerning the DNC hack?
J

Bill Clinton says Hello J
Five Year investigation ending with impeachment of President for perjury over an extra marital affair. I think its is Hilarious that Republicans are complaining there no evidence and indictments after a year.


https://fivethirtyeight.com/feature...ares-to-watergate-iran-contra-and-whitewater/

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Not close. Go back several months further. Sandbagging Flynn was a nice piece of tradecraft, which is one reason I think the intel community is involved, but it is long after the fact.


You need evidence of criminal acts. In over a year, in which every little thing gets leaked, we have nada about the basis of a criminal investigation. If it is about Russia and the election, where are the indictments concerning the DNC hack?

J

LOL...you say he needs evidence, but make wild accusations about "sandbagging" Mike Flynn, as if someone forced him to work for the Turks. Take your BS talking points somewhere else.

 

[metalhead]

You need evidence of criminal acts. In over a year, in which every little thing gets leaked,

No, see, this is a lie. Many journalists have lamented how little Mueller's team leaks. Your whole premise is a lie. And a laughable one at that.

 

[Gori the Grey]

In over a year, in which every little thing gets leaked, we have nada about the basis of a criminal investigation.

This is the very point I keep making and was trying to make through my grand jury anecdote. How are we in a position to know what percentage of information that exists has leaked?

 

[metalhead]

This is the very point I keep making. How are we in a position to know what percentage of information that exists has leaked?

We aren't. He's just repeating a lie that is absurd on its face.

He's not gonna explain it, either. He'll ignore this part of the conversation and then days later be back repeating the same lie. It's a defense mechanism these people are using, so they can continue ignoring the glaringly obvious thing that they backed someone more corrupt and much more incompetent than what they supposedly feared. Any excuse no matter how ridiculous is acceptable if it keeps up the facade.

 

[Broken_Erika]

Nope, Mueller leaks more than any other investigator in history.
There have been no indictments of any kind whatsoever.
It was the Democrats who colluded with the Russians.
It's all a witch hunt. Mueller is a Lifelong Democrat and a puppet of Hillary and the deep state.
Trump is the most successful leader in the history of the universe.
The Earth is flat
Bananas are Marsupials
Fish live in trees and eat pencils.
E.T. for the Atari 2600 was the greatest video game ever made.

 

[metalhead]

Trump's campaign manager has been indicted and both his deputy campaign manager and first National Security Advisor have pled guilty to lying to the FBI.

I don't know how much more one needs to see before they figure out something was really, really wrong with this campaign. If Robby Mook or John Podesta had been indicted, I can't even imagine what the right wing media crapstorm would look like. I can tell you for certain that CNN and MSNBC would be participating in it, for those who like to make the very false equivalency.

 

[Gori the Grey]

He's not gonna explain it, either. He'll ignore this part of the conversation and then days later be back repeating the same lie.

Well, if he does that, it will be a tacit admission of what I'm tacitly accusing him of, which is making categorical declarations on insufficient evidence.

On the very point in question, we have from yesterday what I would regard as strong evidence that investigators know a lot more than the public does. Yesterday, top law enforcement officials met with the Gang of Eight (plus Trey Gowdy) to (at the president's inappropriate request) disclose the grounds the FBI had for employing that confidential informant in questioning certain members of Trump's campaign. The Gang of Four and Gang of Eight are only drawn together for briefings on the most critical national security matters. If there had actually been insufficient grounds for the FBI employing a CI to question Page and Papadopolis, the Republican complaint would have been this: "The FBI is feigning that this investigation is a matter of the highest national security when it's not."