Has Pam Bondi entered the conversation for most corrupt AG in just 6 months?

[Delldude]

Everything stems from this recently declassified document, although heavily redacted.

Nope.

 

[Marener]

What's to argue about?

Whether this attempt to create a scandal has any logical or factual basis.

I don’t think it does.

 

[Delldude]

Whether this attempt to create a scandal has any logical or factual basis.

I don’t think it does.

It's obviously beyond a 'scandal'.

 

[Marener]

It's obviously beyond a 'scandal'.

You may call it what you wish. The issue is whether there’s any factual or logical basis for it.

She seems quite upset that the intelligence agencies believed Russia was trying to help Trump. That was their call to make. It’s an opinion based on the information available to them. She can come to a different opinion if she really wants, but in the years since it happened, it only seems more appropriate.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Of course there is. There were multiple investigations including the bipartisan Senate investigation whose findings are opposed to the assessment of the House Republicans.

Then there's no reason to think that this investigation will be any different.

 

[Marener]

Then there's no reason to think that this investigation will be any different.

Of course there’s reason. This investigation is being managed by the Trump DoJ and we have reason to believe their department is infused with politics. Trump has a personal vendetta.

The investigation itself is inexplicable.

 

[Delldude]

You may call it what you wish. The issue is whether there’s any factual or logical basis for it.

You actually think DNI/DOJ has released everything they have online?

Of course there’s reason. This investigation is being managed by the Trump DoJ and we have reason to believe their department is infused with politics. Trump has a personal vendetta.

LoL.... you're naive enough to say something like that after eight years of the same bullshit?

 

[Rawley]

This seems to be a tacit admission that you guys don’t really know what this scandal is all about.

Why are you pretending you know what evidence they have and what they are submitting to the GJ?

 

[Rawley]

Of course there’s reason. This investigation is being managed by the Trump DoJ and we have reason to believe their department is infused with politics. Trump has a personal vendetta.

The investigation itself is inexplicable.

QED

 

[Marener]

You actually think DNI/DOJ has released everything they have online?

Gabbard is saying that the information released is sufficient for people to believe her accusations.

LoL.... you're naive enough to say something like that after eight years of the same bullshit?

Your opinion of the DoJ under Biden is not relevant.

 

[Marener]

Why are you pretending you know what evidence they have and what they are submitting to the GJ?

Because they’re releasing documents and claiming this is evidence of a crime. I believe she mentioned treason or a coup, which seems very outlandish.

 

[Rawley]

Because they’re releasing documents and claiming this is evidence of a crime. I believe she mentioned treason or a coup, which seems very outlandish.

Pam Bondi alleged treason?

 

[Winston]

Nope.

What the **** do you know? Go ahead hoss, show me another source, another basis. There is none. I mean seriously,

The move follows a referral from Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who declassified documents in July that she alleges undermine the Obama administration’s conclusion that Russia tried to help Trump defeat Hillary Clinton.

https://www.cnn.com/2025/08/04/politics/justice-department-russia-grand-jury

I give you those declassified documents. I present it to you on a silver platter. I even tell you where to go to find the information this Grand Jury call stems from. I mean it is clear, Gabbard is blowing smoke up your ass. It is quite clear, Russia did try to influence the election. No, they probably weren't able to manipulate the hardware, but social media, damn Skippy. It is all in that report.

Honestly, I find it both insulting and sad. Gabbard, Bondi, they know you are not going to look for the declassified document. They know you are not going to read it. And has been mentioned in this thread, they know you can't think for yourself. That is the sad part. The insulting part, well that ain't me. I don't play that way. I don't do the media thing, except to find the source. I sure as hell don't need the media to explain things to me. Probably not as qualified as I am anyway. And I sure as hell don't need some dumbfuck on Facebook or Youtube to direct me. They certainly are not as qualified.

 

[Marener]

Pam Bondi alleged treason?

I believe Gabbard and Trump have.

 

[Delldude]

Your opinion of the DoJ under Biden is not relevant.

It's what got us to this juncture.

Gabbard is saying that the information released is sufficient for people to believe her accusations.

Because they’re releasing documents and claiming this is evidence of a crime

She also said that there is much more beyond that.

 

[Delldude]

What the **** do you know?

The same things you know.

 

[Winston]

Why are you pretending you know what evidence they have and what they are submitting to the GJ?

The evidence IS RIGHT HERE IN THIS THREAD. I posted it. For the love of God, do you people have to be told when it is time to take a shit?

 

[Marener]

It's what got us to this juncture.

I don’t think so. They let Durham proceed unimpeded. All of this was already available to their special counsel.

She also said that there is much more beyond that

It strains credulity if they’re saying the documents they release show crimes when they don’t. Why would we believe their opinion of the unseen evidence?

 

[Delldude]

The evidence IS RIGHT HERE IN THIS THREAD. I posted it. For the love of God, do you people have to be told when it is time to take a shit?

LoL......who says that's all the evidence?

 

[Rawley]

I believe Gabbard and Trump have.

Well, this thread is about Pam Bondi and her office is the one submitting evidence to a GJ that you find inexplicable, even though you have no idea what this evidence is.