FBI allegedly engaging in 'purge' of conservative employees, retaliating against whistleblowers: Jim

[Valletta]

"During the course of this investigation, we have received protected whistleblower disclosures that the FBI is engaging in a ‘purge’ of employees with conservative views by revoking their security clearances and indefinitely suspending these employees," Jordan wrote, noting that "many of the formal notices" for those personnel actions had been signed by Moore.

Jordan also wrote that he has information suggesting Moore has "retaliated against at least one whistleblower who has made protected disclosures to Congress."
FBI allegedly engaging in 'purge' of conservative employees, retaliating against whistleblowers: Jim Jordan

 

[disciple Clint]

"During the course of this investigation, we have received protected whistleblower disclosures that the FBI is engaging in a ‘purge’ of employees with conservative views by revoking their security clearances and indefinitely suspending these employees," Jordan wrote, noting that "many of the formal notices" for those personnel actions had been signed by Moore.

Jordan also wrote that he has information suggesting Moore has "retaliated against at least one whistleblower who has made protected disclosures to Congress."
FBI allegedly engaging in 'purge' of conservative employees, retaliating against whistleblowers: Jim Jordan

There needs to be a real house cleaning at DOJ.

 

[Gene2memE]

Given that "conservative viewpoints" could basically mean anything that is being bandied about by the conservative leaning side of politics - up to and including insane conspiracy theories about stolen elections, antifa/BLM caused the January 6 unrest, military juntas will execute Democrats, the 'deep state', Jewish space lasers or COVID-19 vaccinations make you magnetic - there's likely good grounds for getting security clearances revoked.

These allegations aren't new. Nor new to J Jordan. In June he said something very similar. The FBI's response was that they had retracted the security clearances of agents who had "espoused conspiratorial views", “promoted unreliable information which indicates support for the events of January 6” and questioned the loyalty of the FBI to the United States.

 

[disciple Clint]

Given that "conservative viewpoints" could basically mean anything that is being bandied about by the conservative leaning side of politics - up to and including insane conspiracy theories about stolen elections, antifa/BLM caused the January 6 unrest, military juntas will execute Democrats, the 'deep state', Jewish space lasers or COVID-19 vaccinations make you magnetic - there's likely good grounds for getting security clearances revoked.

These allegations aren't new. Nor new to J Jordan. In June he said something very similar. The FBI's response was that they had retracted the security clearances of agents who had "espoused conspiratorial views", “promoted unreliable information which indicates support for the events of January 6” and questioned the loyalty of the FBI to the United States.

So if an agent questions any of these things they should not be an agent? Sounds very much like cancelling anyone who does not share a particular point of view.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Given that "conservative viewpoints" could basically mean anything that is being bandied about by the conservative leaning side of politics - up to and including insane conspiracy theories about stolen elections, antifa/BLM caused the January 6 unrest, military juntas will execute Democrats, the 'deep state', Jewish space lasers or COVID-19 vaccinations make you magnetic - there's likely good grounds for getting security clearances revoked.

These allegations aren't new. Nor new to J Jordan. In June he said something very similar. The FBI's response was that they had retracted the security clearances of agents who had "espoused conspiratorial views", “promoted unreliable information which indicates support for the events of January 6” and questioned the loyalty of the FBI to the United States.

One wonders why Conservatives ought then support an institution which excludes and seems to work actively against them. If the FBI does not work in the interests of the Conservatives to an acceptable degree and is blatantly partisan in favouring the left, the right should be legitimately wary of such an institution. In fact, any Conservative government going forward should make it a policy position to destroy the FBI.

 

[pdudgeon]

So if an agent questions any of these things they should not be an agent? Sounds very much like cancelling anyone who does not share a particular point of view.

Agreed.
And that is what is scary about all of this.
When the necessity to uphold politics replaces the need to search for what is true for either side, no one wins, and all are lost.

 

[KCfromNC]

So if an agent questions any of these things they should not be an agent? Sounds very much like cancelling anyone who does not share a particular point of view.

Some might reasonably think that having a point of view which consistently runs counter to reality might be a liability for a law enforcement employee.

 

[disciple Clint]

Some might reasonably think that having a point of view which consistently runs counter to reality might be a liability for a law enforcement employee.

That is far from what the evidence of past FBI actions has proven to be. Even the people who work there are disgusted with what has been happening.

 

[Valletta]

One wonders why Conservatives ought then support an institution which excludes and seems to work actively against them. If the FBI does not work in the interests of the Conservatives to an acceptable degree and is blatantly partisan in favouring the left, the right should be legitimately wary of such an institution. In fact, any Conservative government going forward should make it a policy position to destroy the FBI.

Sadly, I can say from experience that other government agencies and organizations have their share of entrenched corruption. I have come to find out the importance of transparency and accountability. I interviewed a number of whistleblowers, and one gentleman who was forced out of his job and career for coming forward had just returned from Lexington and Concord Green, and said it would do well for people to remember the sacrifices those people made, many gave their very lives, for the sake of this country.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

One wonders why Conservatives ought then support an institution which excludes and seems to work actively against them. If the FBI does not work in the interests of the Conservatives to an acceptable degree and is blatantly partisan in favouring the left, the right should be legitimately wary of such an institution. In fact, any Conservative government going forward should make it a policy position to destroy the FBI.

So… Defund the police…?

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

So… Defund the police…?

Is the FBI the police in the USA?

 

[Moral Orel]

Is the FBI the police in the USA?

They're the federal level police in America.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

They're the federal level police in America.

Defund the Federal police force all the more then.

 

[durangodawood]

Lets not forget, "conservative" doesnt mean what it used to.

Used to be small govt, law n order, etc. Now its "alternate elector" madness and q adjacent Victor Orban envy.

 

[stevil]

So if an agent questions any of these things they should not be an agent? Sounds very much like cancelling anyone who does not share a particular point of view.

I don't think there is room in important and trusted agencies such as the FBI for members promoting dangerous unsupported nonsense conspiracies. Why some people on the "USA right" want to tie their brand to these conspiracies and complain about moderation or removal of people with these dangerous ideas, is confusing to me.

If a person really cared about Conservatism, then they ought to be standing up against the rot and be pleased when the rot is cut out of Conservative groups or trusted agencies such as the FBI.
I bet Liz Cheney would not want to tie her reputation to defending the plight of dangerous conspiracy promoters.

Politically it does not help a party that is wanting to promote the idea that they are being persecuted to tie their brand to nonsense extreme conspiracies. Conservatives are not generally being persecuted. Hate speech, calls to violence and dangerous unsupported conspiracies are being moderated or cast out from agencies that the public needs to trust. THIS DOES NOT MEAN that people with conservative beliefs are being pushed out. One is allowed to believe that unions are bad, taxes are bad, untethered capitalism is good. Conservativism should not be tied to 2020 Election denialism.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Lets not forget, "conservative" doesnt mean what it used to.

Used to be small govt, law n order, etc. Now its "alternate elector" madness and q adjacent Victor Orban envy.

I don't know about that stuff the conservative abandonment of impotent libertarianism is a welcome change.

 

[Valletta]

I don't think there is room in important and trusted agencies such as the FBI for members promoting dangerous unsupported nonsense conspiracies. Why some people on the "USA right" want to tie their brand to these conspiracies and complain about moderation or removal of people with these dangerous ideas, is confusing to me.

If a person really cared about Conservatism, then they ought to be standing up against the rot and be pleased when the rot is cut out of Conservative groups or trusted agencies such as the FBI.
I bet Liz Cheney would not want to tie her reputation to defending the plight of dangerous conspiracy promoters.

Politically it does not help a party that is wanting to promote the idea that they are being persecuted to tie their brand to nonsense extreme conspiracies. Conservatives are not generally being persecuted. Hate speech, calls to violence and dangerous unsupported conspiracies are being moderated or cast out from agencies that the public needs to trust. THIS DOES NOT MEAN that people with conservative beliefs are being pushed out. One is allowed to believe that unions are bad, taxes are bad, untethered capitalism is good. Conservativism should not be tied to 2020 Election denialism.

We know the FBI colluded with the Hillary Clinton campaign to push the Russia Russia Russia conspiracy theory, and not just Democrats, but other people were fooled as well. We were assured by the New York Times that stories had been verified when in fact they had not. The hard left has not only been part of these hoaxes, but pushes an agenda which promotes the drug cartels, thugs on the street, and is destroying our nation's economy. Now the Attorney General is threatening the whistleblowers who go to Congress, such threats are yet another violation of U.S. law. Until the hard left individuals who commit these crimes and until the thugs in the street and the leftists who promote sex trafficking and the drug trade by their policies are dealt with (that means holding them accountable) our nation will continue to suffer.

 

[SimplyMe]

We know the FBI colluded with the Hillary Clinton campaign to push the Russia Russia Russia conspiracy theory, and not just Democrats, but other people were fooled as well. We were assured by the New York Times that stories had been verified when in fact they had not. The hard left has not only been part of these hoaxes, but pushes an agenda which promotes the drug cartels, thugs on the street, and is destroying our nation's economy. Now the Attorney General is threatening the whistleblowers who go to Congress, such threats are yet another violation of U.S. law. Until the hard left individuals who commit these crimes and until the thugs in the street and the leftists who promote sex trafficking and the drug trade by their policies are dealt with (that means holding them accountable) our nation will continue to suffer.

It is odd, then, that Donald Trump won in 2016. After all, the FBI leaked information that they were re-opening an investigation into Hillary Clinton's emails just weeks before voting, in violation of DoJ policy that you don't investigate candidates within 60 days of an election. There is solid evidence that Hillary Clinton lost the 2016 election because of the FBI "leaking" the reopening (when they should have waited until after the election) of the Hillary email case.

 

[stevil]

We know the FBI colluded with the Hillary Clinton campaign to push the Russia Russia Russia conspiracy theory,

This never happened.
The FBI started the investigation into the Trump campaign coordinating with Russians to interfere in the 2016 election because Papadopoulos said stuff to people.

Crossfire Hurricane (FBI investigation) - Wikipedia
Crossfire Hurricane was the code name for the counterintelligence investigation undertaken by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) from July 31, 2016, to May 17, 2017, into myriad links between Russian officials and associates of Donald Trump and "whether individuals associated with [his] presidential campaign were coordinating, wittingly or unwittingly, with the Russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

The investigation was officially opened on July 31, 2016, initially due to information on Trump campaign member George Papadopoulos's early assertions of Russians having damaging material on Trump's rival candidate Hillary Clinton.

As you can see Hillary was the victim here, not the perpetrator. Her email had been hacked and Papadopoulos had blurted out that Russians were talking to the Trump 2016 campaign about this material.

We were assured by the New York Times that stories had been verified when in fact they had not.

It turned out to be factual that the FBI, CIA and other agencies were investigating if there was collaboration between Russians and members of the Trump 2016 presidential campaign.
It turned out to be factual that many members of the Trump 2016 presidential campaign had been communicating with and meeting up with the Russians and sharing information pertinent to the 2016 USA election. Manafort had been sharing polling data with them. Many members of the Trump 2016 presidential campaign had met in secret with the Russians at Trump tower in the hopes of getting dirt on Hilary.

Trump Tower meeting - Wikipedia
A meeting took place at Trump Tower in New York City on June 9, 2016, between three senior members of the 2016 Trump campaign – Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, and Paul Manafort – and at least five other people, including Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya.

The media broke this news to the public as soon as they found out about it, but details in the early days were unknown.
When Don Jr was asked about the meeting, he lied to the media.
Donald Trump Jr. made several misleading statements about the meeting. He initially told the press that the meeting was held to discuss adoptions of Russian children by Americans.

Trump Jr. released a statement calling it a "short introductory meeting" about American adoption of Russian children and "not a campaign issue"

Both Donald Trump and Jr lied about the meeting.
When The New York Times was about to report on email exchanges between Goldstone and Trump Jr., Trump Jr. himself published the emails. In early July 2017, it was reported that President Donald Trump himself drafted Trump Jr.'s initial misleading statement. The report was later confirmed by the president's attorneys. In July 2018, the president denied knowledge of the meeting

Donald Jr lied about how the meeting was set up
He told Sean Hannity that the meeting had been fully arranged by email, and that he had received no further details by phone. He would later contradict this statement during a closed-door interview with the Senate Judiciary Committee on September 7, acknowledging three short phone calls with Agalarov prior to the meeting

Pretty much everyone in Trump's team lied about the source of the statement put out under Trump Jr's name
1. On July 11 it was reported that the statement had been drafted by presidential advisers aboard Air Force One, and that it had been approved by President Trump.
2. On July 12 Trump's lawyer Jay Sekulow insisted that it had been written by Trump Jr. in consultation with his lawyer, and that Donald Trump "wasn't involved in that".
3. On July 31 The Washington Post reported that Trump had indeed personally dictated, worked on, and released the statement in Trump Jr's name
4.White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders stated that Trump "certainly didn't dictate, but ... he weighed in, offered suggestions, like any father would do".[
5. In January 2018, in a confidential letter from Trump's legal team to special counsel Robert Mueller, Trump's lawyers acknowledged for the first time that Trump had in fact dictated the first statement put out about the meeting in Trump Jr.'s name, thus contradicting prior representations

So it turns out when Trump, Trump Jr, Sekelow, Sanders etc talk to the media they lie, when they talk to the special cousel they tell the truth, and it turns out that the truth exactly matches what the media had been reporting (see 3 above)

The hard left has not only been part of these hoaxes,

I'm not sure what hoaxes you are talking about.
If you are claiming the "Russia hoax"
Well it turned out to be true that the FBI were investigating the Trump campaign
and it turned out to be true that members of the Trump campaign were talking to and meeting Russians and sharing information regarding the upcoming presidential election.

but pushes an agenda which promotes the drug cartels,

Huh?

thugs on the street,

Huh?

Now the Attorney General is threatening the whistleblowers who go to Congress,

I don't know much about this, but thanks for bringing it to my attention. I'll look into it.
On the what-about-ism front though, Trump sought to seek out whisle blowers during his administration. He ultimately fired people who testified against him and pardoned people who refused to testify. In one instance he even fired the brother of a person who testified against him.
This what-about-ism doesn't make it right for Garland or Biden to do the same though. I will look into what has happened recently.

Until the hard left individuals who commit these crimes

What crimes?

and the leftists who promote sex trafficking and the drug trade

I know about Matt Gates, but which "leftists" have been doing sex trafficking too?

 

[durangodawood]

....I know about Matt Gates, but which "leftists" have been doing sex trafficking too?

Like I said, "conservative" anymore indicates some weird q adjacent cognitive tendencies.