59% want FBI agents charged

[NxNW]

Exactly. A lot of drama over absolutely nothing.

Hacking the election is a bit more than nothing.

 

[childeye 2]

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

You could just look up the Mueller report to get the details if your desire were genuine towards learning the truth.

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

When you talk disparagingly about others spreading false claims, it's slander. If your criticism of the investigation were genuine you could say something substantive as opposed to it's a circus.

 

[USincognito]

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.

There goes my irony meter.

 

[Landon Caeli]

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.

Trump threatened the beaurocracy from day one, and so the beaurocracy went after him full force, using every bit of their power to stop him.

In 2024, we'll see who wins... The American people, or the Deep State beurocracy.

 

[Landon Caeli]

When you talk disparagingly about others spreading false claims, it's slander. If your criticism of the investigation were genuine you could say something substantive as opposed to it's a circus.

Calling the investigation a circus, still isn't "slander" in this world...

...Maybe in la-la land it is.

 

[childeye 2]

Trump threatened the beaurocracy from day one, and so the beaurocracy went after him full force, using every bit of their power to stop him.

In 2024, we'll see who wins... The American people, or the Deep State beurocracy.

Trump put it this way, If I win the election was fair, but if I lose it was rigged.

 

[childeye 2]

Calling the investigation a circus, still isn't "slander" in this world... Or in this universe.

...Maybe in la-la land it is.

Again, slander is against people/persons. You said the Agents deserve punishment and you can't give any factual evidence as to why.

 

[Landon Caeli]

Again, slander is against people/persons. You said the Agents deserve punishment and you can't give any factual evidence as to why.

There's no purpose engaging anymore, since you don't seem to understand basic terms and their proper definitions.

...And the constant doubling-down. All ridiculous. Earlier you said I was being "controlled by the devil", and that I'm a "liar".

Please don't respond to, or about me again.

 

[rambot]

Trump did nothing wrong. What about bearing false witness against someone, for personal or political gain?

Why yes, I remember, like all truly great men, when he said, "Im not responsible for anything"

If you argue he did nothing wrong you'd be obliged to qrgue he did nothing right then either.

What an inspiring man.


Lastly...out of curiosity, which of trumps marriages do you most think is best to emulate?

Which is what has happened and is still happening? What about the Spirit to love others as themselves in that regard?

 

[Pommer]

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

My understanding is that the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s policy is to not comment on ongoing investigations under its purview.
I’ll grant you that there was wild speculation about what the Bureau might do, especially after Comey was fired for not swearing fealty to President Trump, (which, in turn, led the Attorney General to turn things over to AAG Rosen who appointed Mister Mueller to come in and take a look at things, though that investigation was very tight-lipped).

 

[USincognito]

Trump threatened the bureaucracy from day one,

How so? And please be specific.

and so the bureaucracy went after him full force, using every bit of their power to stop him.

How so?

In 2024, we'll see who wins... The American people, or the Deep State bureaucracy.

Laughably false dichotomy.

 

[rjs330]

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'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.

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.

You just supported what I said. They failed in their jobs. They did not follow proper investigation and sent unverified garbage to a judge for a warrant. In my opinion that's unethical.

 

[Landon Caeli]

How so? And please be specific.

Trump mentions draining the swamp, and the Deep State, in many of his speeches and comments. It's common knowledge.

...Obviously 'some people' felt threatened by that, and so it's one soap-opera investigation after another. That's what beaurocrats do.

 

[childeye 2]

You just supported what I said. They failed in their jobs. They did not follow proper investigation and sent unverified garbage to a judge for a warrant. In my opinion that's unethical.

Oh, the Carter Page FISA application. I agree they failed there. I'd think the intent would determine whether it's unethical, but it's illegal either way.

 

[KCfromNC]

Trump mentions draining the swamp, and the Deep State, in many of his speeches and comments. It's common knowledge.

Yeah, but the guy also promised to replace Obamacare with something better and get Mexico to pay for building a wall. I don't know why anyone would trust him to tell the truth at this point.

 

[Say it aint so]

Where's that flat earther poll when one needs it?

 

[NxNW]

Trump mentions draining the swamp, and the Deep State, in many of his speeches and comments. It's common knowledge.

Trump was more corrupt than any swamp.

There is no Deep State. It's a made-up concept.

 

[rjs330]

Trump was more corrupt than any swamp.

There is no Deep State. It's a made-up concept.

No there is a deep state. It was on display during the Trump presidency.

Was Trump corrupt? Maybe. I don't like the guy. While he did good things he also did some shady things as well. I would really prefer someone who could get things done without the shady aspect. He's a wild talker, Mexico will build the wall he says. He'll have the best this or that. He will drain the swamp he says. Yeah he's a big talker and sure didn't drain the swamp or get mexico to build the wall. But he did do other good things. I would like someone who will get things done without all the wild boasting and shady dealing.

 

[rambot]

Trump threatened the beaurocracy from day one, and so the beaurocracy went after him full force, using every bit of their power to stop him.

Wow. Thank goodness you have such a manipulative hero who set himself so that ANYONE who could hold him accountable would automatically be someone who was threatenned by him before he was in power and could be easily discredited.

In 2024, we'll see who wins... The American people, or the Deep State beurocracy.

Just so I understand the reference, which is the group that is currently using ZERO evidence to say that Trump won the election in 2020?

 

[Hans Blaster]

Where's that flat earther poll when one needs it?

For all practical purposes, the poll quoted in the OP might as well be one. I do not see how that number could possibly be reached.

59% of all Republicans or Republican voters or Trump voters, sure, I could buy that number, but *all voters* no way, no how.

Charging investigators is a pretty severe sanction for bad behavior. Public demand almost never rises to that level.

I could see Trump fans having been subjected to years of his complaints about "corrupt agents" in a "witch hunt" against him would take such a position, but that gets us no where near 59% of the population. The poll numbers would require a large portion of those who are indifferent or somewhat dislike him to *also* think he was investigated so unfairly as for the investigation to be criminal. It just doesn't add up.

I'm beginning to think Rassmussen just doesn't know how to do polls properly.