59% want FBI agents charged

[KCfromNC]

Trump did nothing wrong.

He did ask Russia to hack his opponent's email in a campaign press conference. I guess there might be some wiggle room on the details of what makes that illegal, but seems pretty wrong to me.

 

[childeye 2]

Just keep in mind it was Clinton that actually got stuff against Trump from Russian agents. It wasn't Trump.

I've read about the Steele dossier in all of the reports, and it played no meaningful role in the Russian interference of our elections. Clinton's role was simply paying a company to do opposition research. The Trump campaign did in fact meet with Russians at Trump Tower and then lie about the Russians helping their campaign and they still do.

I guess we'll debate this till the cows come home, but it's been shown how the FBi acted unethically at least. Treated Trump and Clinton differently etc

I've read the report, its articulation is critical because the purpose as stated by the AG was to find anything wrong about how the investigation was conducted. But they essentially found nothing wrong that Horowitz hadn't already found. You need to show from the report what you're referring to as unethical treatment.

This was deep state stuff. Those that were involved in all of this should be removed from the agency at the very least. They are supposed to be above board in all they do. Everyone treated equally, no questions that justice was blind and no one received harsher treatment than anyone else. They are supposed to be above politics. But they weren't. All those involved need to be removed for failing to uphold the standard.

According to the report, they followed the protocols as laid out by the book. Durham just articulates every action from a critical view. For example, there is this:

The matter was opened as a full investigation without ever having spoken to the persons who provided the information. Further, the FBI did so without (i) any significant review of its own intelligence databases, (ii) collection and examination of any relevant intelligence from other U.S. intelligence entities, (iii) interviews of witnesses essential to understand the raw information it had received or (iv) using any of the standard analytical tools typically employed by the FBI in evaluating raw intelligence. Had it done so, again as set out in Sections IV.A.3.b and c, the FBI would have learned that their own experienced Russia analysts had no information about Trump being involved with Russian leadership officials, nor were others in sensitive positions at the CIA, the NSA, and the Department of State aware of such evidence concerning the subject.

This above basically conveys that the FBI didn't speak to the diplomats, search their database, ask other agencies, or go to their Russian experts before doing surveillance, if they had done so, they would have learned they knew nothing.

 

[KCfromNC]

Just keep in mind it was Clinton that actually got stuff against Trump from Russian agents.

I'm pretty sure that never happened. I think it was a claim from a GOP congressman that never panned out. I mean, given that was the same GOP source that tried to sue a cow and lost, I'm not sure why anyone would take him seriously. But hey, modern conservative political thought is kinda weird, who am I to judge.

 

[childeye 2]

This thread is not about me, or any other posters being liars or being controlled by the devil.

This is a debate forum.

This thread is about a poll of people some of whom characterize the actions of the FBI as sinister. This world is full of lies that deceive people, and My Lord was crucified by wicked people because He spoke the truth that testified to their wickedness. I have a role in the body of Christ to carry my own cross and speak truth so as to expose the slander and wickedness that turns brother against brother.

You may believe it doesn't pertain to you, but your post stated you want to see these FBI agents tarred and feathered. I could have written it off and not cared what you think or say. But to Love you as myself I felt I should show you the facts, because that's what I would want done to me.

 

[Landon Caeli]

This thread is about a poll of people some of whom characterize the actions of the FBI as sinister. This world is full of lies that deceive people, and My Lord was crucified by wicked people because He spoke the truth that testified to their wickedness. I have a role in the body of Christ to carry my own cross and speak truth so as to expose the slander and wickedness that turns brother against brother.

You may believe it doesn't pertain to you, but your post stated you want to see these FBI agents tarred and feathered. I could have written it off and not cared what you think or say. But to Love you as myself I felt I should show you the facts, because that's what I would want done to me.

Well that's not what I want done to me.

I'm free to want them to be tarred and feathered regardless of your opinions, and am under no special obligations to think any certain way.

 

[childeye 2]

What information did the Trump campaign recieve from Russia exactly, that the FBI needed to make a years-long, media-crazed circus show over?

The FBI didn't investigate that, nor would they care since that's not their job. The FBI's job was a counter-intelligence investigation into the Russian hacking of the Whitehouse, the state department, the joint chiefs of staff, and the DNC. When they heard that Russia was approaching a Trump campaign official with possible hacked emails, they were obligated to investigate whether Russia was attempting to compromise the Trump campaign or whether the Trump campaign had been compromised.

 

[Landon Caeli]

The FBI didn't investigate that, nor would they care since that's not their job. The FBI's job was a counter-intelligence investigation into the Russian hacking of the Whitehouse, the state department, the joint chiefs of staff, and the DNC. When they heard that Russia was approaching a Trump campaign official with possible hacked emails, they were obligated to investigate whether Russia was attempting to compromise the Trump campaign or whether the Trump campaign had been compromised.

Exactly. A lot of drama over absolutely nothing.

 

[childeye 2]

Well that's not what I want done to me.

I'm free to want them to be tarred and feathered regardless of your opinions, and am under no special obligations to think any certain way.

Well, you're mistaken, I didn't present opinion. I presented facts from actual documents, and testimony, according to the actual history of events.

 

[Landon Caeli]

Well, you're mistaken, I didn't present opinion. I presented facts from actual documents, and testimony, according to the actual history of events.

You said that if we call the FBI investigation a "circus", then we are "liars" being "controlled by the devil"... That's an opinion.

 

[childeye 2]

Exactly. A lot of drama over absolutely nothing.

The drama being played out is on a geopolitical scale. The Russians wanted Trump compromised so as to set U.S. foreign policy in favor of Putin's interests.

 

[Landon Caeli]

The drama being played out is on a geopolitical scale. The Russians wanted Trump compromised so as to setr U.S. foreign policy in favor Putin's interests.

And how would Russia manage to "compromise" Trump in this long, drawn out, fanatical scenario? And why does the FBI feel like it's authority supercedes the presidential office?

 

[childeye 2]

You said that if we call the FBI investigation a "circus", then we are "liars" being "controlled by the devil"... That's an opinion.

I didn't say that. I said it's wrong to slander people. And it's not an opinion that to slander others is immoral.
VERB

1. make false and damaging statements about (someone):

Here are your words below that disparage the agents of the FBI as worthy of being tarred and feathered not based on facts, but based on your personal opinion that the investigation was a circus:

There doesn't need to be anything "false"... The circus show *is* the reason that some FBI agents ought to be tarred, feathered, and marched across the White House lawn. IMO.

...Because they made a mockery of our country, and presented it to the entire world.

Maybe, a lot of FBI agents should quit their jobs, and go work in soap operas, where the drama is never-ending.

 

[childeye 2]

And how would Russia manage to "compromise" Trump in this long, drawn out, fanatical scenario?

By getting someone in his campaign to accept secret help from Russia. Once the campaign did that, and then denied it publicly, Russia would have kompromat on Trump.

And why does the FBI feel like it's authority supercedes the presidential office?

It doesn't. Why would you want to believe the FBI feels that way?

 

[Landon Caeli]

By getting someone in his campaign to accept secret help from Russia. Once the campaign did that, and then denied it publicly, Russia would have kompromat on Trump.

Exactly like something you would find in a soap opera. It's a dramatized story-line that never existed, which the FBI pursued, looking for any prospect of evidence they could find to support the story... Maybe someone in the FBI has been reading too many mystery novels.

...Maybe they should have waited for actual evidence of something before wasting our time.

 

[childeye 2]

Exactly like something you would find in a soap opera. It's a dramatized story-line that never existed, which the FBI pursued, looking for any prospect of evidence they could find to support the story... Maybe someone in the FBI has been reading too many mystery novels.

But this is reality and not a soap opera or an imaginary story line. These events all happened and are documented in five separate official investigations, and the FBI didn't do anything to make it happen. Look at the timeline according to the factual evidence, the Trump campaign welcomed help from Russia and then lied about it before the FBI crossfire hurricane investigation even began.

 

[Landon Caeli]

But this is reality and not a soap opera or an imaginary story line. These events all happened and are documented in five separate official investigations, and the FBI didn't do anything to make it happen. Look at the timeline according to the factual evidence, the Trump campaign welcomed help from Russia and then lied about it before the FBI crossfire hurricane investigation even began.

Okay, what "help" did the Trump campaign get from Russia that helped Trump win the presidency?

 

[Landon Caeli]

I didn't say that. I said it's wrong to slander people. And it's not an opinion that to slander others is immoral.
VERB

1. make false and damaging statements about (someone):

Here are your words below that disparage the agents of the FBI as worthy of being tarred and feathered not based on facts, but based on your personal opinion that the investigation was a circus:

There doesn't need to be anything "false"... The circus show *is* the reason that some FBI agents ought to be tarred, feathered, and marched across the White House lawn. IMO.

...Because they made a mockery of our country, and presented it to the entire world.

Maybe, a lot of FBI agents should quit their jobs, and go work in soap operas, where the drama is never-ending.

Voicing a desire for punishment, and criticising an investigation by the FBI, are not "slander". Even by your own definition.

Maybe in a fantasy land novel they could be, but not according to the English language.

 

[USincognito]

Just keep in mind it was Clinton that actually got stuff against Trump from Russian agents. It wasn't Trump.

Citation needed.

I guess we'll debate this till the cows come home, but it's been shown how the FBi acted unethically at least. Treated Trump and Clinton differently etc.

You mean by keeping Crossfire Hurricane under wraps while announcing weeks before the election that Secretary Clinton was being investigated for her email server?

This was deep state stuff.

There is no "deep state". Normal people call it a bureaucracy or what keeps a government with a constantly rotating legislature and head of state functioning.

 

[USincognito]

Rigged is doing things like Pennsylvania did by violating it's own laws and having the courts declairs it was okay to do so.

The law was changed in 2019 and no one had a problem with it until Donald lost the election. SCOTUS decided it was legal.

Zuckerberg spending spree of 400 million dollars in specific democratic areas to get out the vote.

That didn't happen.

Posts misrepresent Mark Zuckerberg’s election spending

CLAIM: Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg spent more than $400 million in 2020 to elect Joe Biden, violating campaign finance rules that limit donations. AP’S ASSESSMENT: Missing context.

apnews.com

The media all in the same page of attacking Trump while supporting Biden.

Conservative mythology.

New York Times can't stop obsessing over "Trump Voters"

White Trump voters

pressrun.media

Twitter and Facebook misinformation campaigns.

More conservative mythology.

Opinion | Why the ‘Twitter Files’ Are Falling Flat

Elon Musk’s effort to shape the media narrative is failing.

www.politico.com

All perfectly legal by the way. That's how you rig an election and it will happen again in 2024. You just have to learn how to overcome that. It won't be easy, unless things get worse in the US and the independents say enough is enough. The Democrats have learned how to rig an election. We'll find out if the Republicans learned how to counter that.

As opposed to:

Current GOP efforts to make it harder to vote: list from 538

538 has a long rundown of efforts in various states and localities that GOP politicians are spearheading to make voting more difficult. Some highlights: In Ohio, the Republican secretary of state is blocking any county from having more than one ballot drop-off location — even though it would...

www.christianforums.com

New GOP efforts to make it harder to vote

In a previous thread, we discussed various GOP efforts to make the election less Democratic (and therefore less democratic) in the run-up to the 2020 elections. Given the outcome of the election, it's clear that not enough votes were suppressed to satisfy the Republican Party, so new efforts are...

www.christianforums.com

Current GOP efforts to make it harder to vote: list from 538

538 has a long rundown of efforts in various states and localities that GOP politicians are spearheading to make voting more difficult. Some highlights: In Ohio, the Republican secretary of state is blocking any county from having more than one ballot drop-off location — even though it would...

www.christianforums.com

The Never-ending Omission

I worry that Aaron may have looked directly into the time vortex. Perhaps the streams got crossed, wait, wrong universe.

www.christianforums.com

 

[RocksInMyHead]

If all else fails, just ignore the law. Isn't that what the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in the 2020 election? Mail-in ballots are directly addressed in the state constitution. Any changes required a constitutional amendment, yet that the new mail-in ballot changes were not an amendment to the constitution. A 3rd grader could see something fishy here, yet the state Supreme Court said the changes were fine.

Just pointing out here - Republicans, not Democrats, pushed those mail-in ballot changes through in 2019. Then flipped around and tried to get rid of them a year later when Trump said mail-in voting was bad.