What if it was not the Russians?

mchammer said:
Hey SH, is this a fringe news source?

Click to expand...

The same folks implicated in the above crime likely were involved in the Flynn indictment, which if I recall also had altered documents. Some org you got there FBI.
 
mchammer said:
Taint is imminent!
AG BARR: Inspector General FISA report release IMMINENT
Click to expand...
giphy.gif
 
Garmel said:
I wonder if this is fake news or if Horowitz chickened out like I thought he would.
Click to expand...
Chickened out. Wait till Durham for more explosive info regarding Mifsud, etc. CIA knew that FBI would act more or less with some bias against the President, but the critical thing is the shot that started it.
 
mchammer said:
Chickened out. Wait till Durham for more explosive info regarding Mifsud, etc. CIA knew that FBI would act more or less with some bias against the President, but the critical thing is the shot that started it.
Click to expand...

Joseph Digenova, the conservative lawyer, says that his sources mention that this is all BS and Horowitz kills the FBI. I guess we'll see if he's right. We know that the high ranking guys signed off on the FISA warrants which were at least partly based on the unverified dossier, which was illegal.
 
Garmel said:
Joseph Digenova, the conservative lawyer, says that his sources mention that this is all BS and Horowitz kills the FBI. I guess we'll see if he's right. We know that the high ranking guys signed off on the FISA warrants which were at least partly based on the unverified dossier, which was illegal.
Click to expand...
Probably splits the middle then, with something for both sides.
 
mchammer said:
Probably splits the middle then, with something for both sides.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I also forgot it only pertains to FISA. Comey committed perjury which is easily provable but that has nothing to do FISA. However, if Horowitz let's these guys slide on signing the FISA warrants he will have lost all credibility.
 
There's a very good chance that this IG report will do what a lot of IG reports have done. It'll state that some people screwed up or had some bias but it'll say that it didn't impact the investigation or cause any significant harm. In other words, it'll concede some taint but basically deem it harmless taint.

If that happens, what will you taint-hunters (mchammer and Garmel) say? Will you reject the IG's findings? If not, then what evidence will you rely upon to contradict them?
 
Mr. Deez said:
If that happens, what will you taint-hunters (mchammer and Garmel) say? Will you reject the IG's findings? If not, then what evidence will you rely upon to contradict them?
Click to expand...

1) I'm wondering what the MSM interpretation of the top guys not being touched is about. Comey, McCabe and Strzok were fired so the upper echelon has been torched.

2) The FBI used the unverified dossier to get the FISA warrants. That isn't feelings or second hand info like in the Trump impeachment hearings. It's fact. It wasn't done by accident or in error. Like I said if Horowitz's doesn't recognize this he can't be taken seriously.
 
Mr. Deez said:
There's a very good chance that this IG report will do what a lot of IG reports have done. It'll state that some people screwed up or had some bias but it'll say that it didn't impact the investigation or cause any significant harm. In other words, it'll concede some taint but basically deem it harmless taint.

If that happens, what will you taint-hunters (mchammer and Garmel) say? Will you reject the IG's findings? If not, then what evidence will you rely upon to contradict them?
Click to expand...
It will probably say a lot of errors and lapses of judgement were made regarding handling of the Steele Dossier, etc. I call that bias but the IG likely won’t say it. Let’s use Enron as an example. Whether the top guys were guilty of crimes is sort of irrelevant if you were a Enron shareholder. The whole thing went into the crapper regardless. Same with the FBI. Also, the lawyer who altered a document will be punished with an indictment. His only crime is that it regarded physical evidence (an application). The others like Comey were smart enough to use their bias in non-indictable ways. Still the same taint from the same source: TDS.
 
mchammer said:
It will probably say a lot of errors and lapses of judgement were made regarding handling of the Steele Dossier, etc. I call that bias but the IG likely won’t say it. Let’s use Enron as an example. Whether the top guys were guilty of crimes is sort of irrelevant if you were a Enron shareholder. The whole thing went into the crapper regardless. Same with the FBI. Also, the lawyer who altered a document will be punished with an indictment. His only crime is that it regarded physical evidence (an application). The others like Comey were smart enough to use their bias in non-indictable ways. Still the same taint from the same source: TDS.
Click to expand...

I think he will call it bias. However, I think there's a very good chance that he'll dismiss it as immaterial. He'll say the investigation was warranted anyway and that the bias didn't impact anything.
 
Mr. Deez said:
I think he will call it bias. However, I think there's a very good chance that he'll dismiss it as immaterial. He'll say the investigation was warranted anyway and that the bias didn't impact anything.
Click to expand...
Who’s at fault for the Mueller special investigation? It was known at the start nothing was there. Or is that fault of special investigations (separate issue)? I don’t know if you can look at this in separate silos. You needed all the biased and crappy components to get the **** show that was delivered.
 
mchammer said:
You needed all the biased and crappy components to get the **** show that was delivered.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The need for an investigation was weak and if this was any other president no investigation would have happened. Strozk let us all know that the FBI had an insurance policy and we saw it.
 
Does anybody here trust FISA courts less now? Should these things and the access they grant exist? Even if the theory of what they were supposed to do convinces you that they are important. Doesn't the actual utilization of FISA seem unconstitutional?
 
Mr. Deez said:
I'm sure there is plenty of "sore loserism" in the equation. However, I do think the matter should be thoroughly investigated. I don't want foreign agents intervening in US elections and that includes hacking into anybody's emails, even my political opponents' emails. I also don't want them encouraging, paying, or threatening people on the inside to leak private emails.

This doesn't mean Trump has culpability. He may have had nothing to do with it, but it should be looked into.
Click to expand...

It was the Russians. What now?
 
LongestHorn said:
It was the Russians. What now?
Click to expand...

First, do what we've been doing. Investigate and prosecute those responsible to the extent that we can. Impose sanctions on Russia.

Second, improve the cyber security of our elections. Make sure our voting machines are secure, and consult with the major political parties on how they can improve their networks and email systems. (I'd strongly consider getting rid of electronic voting and bringing back paper ballots.)

Third, understand that Russia didn't interfere in the election just because they thought it would be cool to do so but because it was part of a broader geopolitical strategy. We need to take them seriously as a geopolitical threat. (Yes, that means Mitt Romney was right, as some Democrats have been forced to admit.) That means containing them when they seek to expand their influence, taking measures to keep European nations from being dependent on Russia for energy, and of course, maintaining a militarily strong NATO alliance including a strong US military presence in Europe and the Mediterranean Sea. At the time Russia annexed Crimea, the US Army didn't have a single tank in Europe. That was pathetic, and there's no question that our position of weakness was a significant factor in Putin's boldness.

Finally, we can't pretend that Russia is the only bad apple. They interfered more overtly and blatantly than anyone else, but only a fool would assume they were the only ones. As Politico has reported, there's very good reason to believe that Ukraine interfered as well, and China has intervened in the past. It's something that we're going to have to deal with for the long term and on many fronts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-HOGS *
Sat, Nov 16 • 11:00 AM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top