The FBI was actually trying to ‘Protect Trump’
- Thread starter Cellblock2429
- Start date
JakeStarkey
Diamond Member
- Aug 10, 2009
- 168,037
- 16,527
- 2,165
- Banned
- #63
Translation: Leo gets irked when people will not play along with his misopinions of what people write.
Leo, if we did that, we would be acting as if your point was worthy to discuss when in fact that when you misstate others' words, you have already given up the play.
Leo, if we did that, we would be acting as if your point was worthy to discuss when in fact that when you misstate others' words, you have already given up the play.
Pay no attention to trolls. Jake is one of our token idiots.
JakeStarkey
Diamond Member
- Aug 10, 2009
- 168,037
- 16,527
- 2,165
- Banned
- #66
You can write all you want, Leo: it changes nothing. You don't like inconvenient facts and get irked (upset) by them. If can't provide actual facts and evidence, then your opinion is only that and just does not matter to the argment, other than "that is what Leo believes, but he can't support it."
Jake has no facts so he lies about inconvenient facts that people post and claims other people are 'irked.' Kindergarten debate tactics there. Please provide FACTS that refute what I posted about Comey instead.
JakeStarkey
Diamond Member
- Aug 10, 2009
- 168,037
- 16,527
- 2,165
- Banned
- #67
People do not have to reply to misopinions unsupported by real facts. That you don't like that, asaritis or Leo, only reveals the point: you need objective factual evidence to carry the day. Provide it so I can respond to it; otherwise, I won't dignify opinions with combating them.
That is simply a LIE. Comey did not say that.
Roger Stone is known as the Dirty Strickster and Man of Darkness.
A crook
Heading to jail.....
Do not believe him, he lies, lies, and lies.
Glad to see that you recognize when you are wasting your time.
There is no proof that any spy was planted in the Trump campaign- but that doesn't stop Trump and the Trumpsters from saying it.
Let me put it another way- there is just as much proof that Trump is a criminal as there is that the FBI 'planted' a spy in the Trump campaign.
task0778
Diamond Member
So, let's see, The FBI/DOJ at the Obama Administration's orders authorized a spy to see if the Russians had spies of their own inside the Trump campaign, and they were doing that for Trump's own good, right? Surely you're not going to try to convince me that some lower level schmuck in the FBI/DOJ concocted this whole thing up and executed it without permission from the top? The very top?
So, if Obama people were trying to protect Trump, then they didn't think Trump was compromised, right? I mean, do you protect somebody if you think they might be compromised or guilty of something? Answer: of course not, so this is stuff about protecting Trump complete nonsense. Oh, wait, maybe they were afraid he would do a cover-up to protect his campaign and himself. Yeah, but if he does that then he's fucked politically, right? He would've lost the election, easy. And the FBI/DOJ could continue their investigation anyway into those involved with his campaign.
So as I see it there are 2 possibilities:
1. They had no verifiable evidence of wrongdoing on Trump's part or that of anyone in his campaign AT THAT TIME. If this is true then it means that they really didn't have anything on Trump and this whole thing was one big fishing expedition to frame him and his campaign for political purposes. Note: no such evidence has been brought to light; are we to believe that if any such evidence exists it wouldn't have been leaked by now? I THINK NOT.
It also means that if indeed they were protecting Trump then they must've known that the Steele Dossier was a bunch of lies and BS cuz none of that shit was ever verified, then or now. It also means (if they had no verifiable evidence against Trump) that they launched this surveillance/spying operation without sufficient reason to do so. Using the intelligence and investigation agencies of the US Gov't without verifiable evidence of wrong-doing against any American citizen is WRONG.
[Question for the Lefties: Do you believe that the FBI/DOJ should open a surveillance/spying operations on anybody, much less a political opponent without verified evidence of wrong-doing? Do you believe that a report compiled and paid for by the opposition political party should be used as a basis for such operations? Remember, this is all before the Special Counsel was appointed, you don't get to say well Manafort or Page or whoever said this or that or lied about this or that in 2017. What did they know AT THE TIME that justifies the decisions and actions they took? Answer: right now, we got nothin'.]
2. Or they did have some verifiable evidence of wrongdoing on his part, and therefore didn't tell him about the surveillance/spying operation. If this is true then it's easy to see why the FBI/DOJ/Obama Admin decided not to inform Trump of the operations into his campaign. It'd also easy to believe that the FBI/DOJ under Obama were in fact doing their jobs as they should have, and the gov't agencies involved were conducting legitimate investigations. There's only one problem with this theory: to-date there has been no verifiable evidence presented of wrongdoing on Trump's part or that of anyone in his campaign and no evidence of any collusion with the Russians either, on his part or anyone else's. However many meetings between Page or whoever and any Russians does not mean any collusion took place. Are we to assume no meeting at all took place between any Russians and those in the Clinton campaign? I THINK NOT.
Here's what we know:
U.S. officials, including the head of the FBI and chief deputies in the Justice Department, misled a FISA court to obtain intelligence surveillance on U.S. citizens, by providing information that they knew at the time, but did not disclose to the court, was by their own private admission unverified, compiled by a foreign national whom they had used and fired as an unreliable informant, paid for by the Clinton campaign, and served as the basis for news accounts that were used in circular fashion to verify to the court the dossier’s contents.
Was this also what they used to justify spying on the Trump campaign? That was it? Who here is okay with this? I'm not.
So, if Obama people were trying to protect Trump, then they didn't think Trump was compromised, right? I mean, do you protect somebody if you think they might be compromised or guilty of something? Answer: of course not, so this is stuff about protecting Trump complete nonsense. Oh, wait, maybe they were afraid he would do a cover-up to protect his campaign and himself. Yeah, but if he does that then he's fucked politically, right? He would've lost the election, easy. And the FBI/DOJ could continue their investigation anyway into those involved with his campaign.
So as I see it there are 2 possibilities:
1. They had no verifiable evidence of wrongdoing on Trump's part or that of anyone in his campaign AT THAT TIME. If this is true then it means that they really didn't have anything on Trump and this whole thing was one big fishing expedition to frame him and his campaign for political purposes. Note: no such evidence has been brought to light; are we to believe that if any such evidence exists it wouldn't have been leaked by now? I THINK NOT.
It also means that if indeed they were protecting Trump then they must've known that the Steele Dossier was a bunch of lies and BS cuz none of that shit was ever verified, then or now. It also means (if they had no verifiable evidence against Trump) that they launched this surveillance/spying operation without sufficient reason to do so. Using the intelligence and investigation agencies of the US Gov't without verifiable evidence of wrong-doing against any American citizen is WRONG.
[Question for the Lefties: Do you believe that the FBI/DOJ should open a surveillance/spying operations on anybody, much less a political opponent without verified evidence of wrong-doing? Do you believe that a report compiled and paid for by the opposition political party should be used as a basis for such operations? Remember, this is all before the Special Counsel was appointed, you don't get to say well Manafort or Page or whoever said this or that or lied about this or that in 2017. What did they know AT THE TIME that justifies the decisions and actions they took? Answer: right now, we got nothin'.]
2. Or they did have some verifiable evidence of wrongdoing on his part, and therefore didn't tell him about the surveillance/spying operation. If this is true then it's easy to see why the FBI/DOJ/Obama Admin decided not to inform Trump of the operations into his campaign. It'd also easy to believe that the FBI/DOJ under Obama were in fact doing their jobs as they should have, and the gov't agencies involved were conducting legitimate investigations. There's only one problem with this theory: to-date there has been no verifiable evidence presented of wrongdoing on Trump's part or that of anyone in his campaign and no evidence of any collusion with the Russians either, on his part or anyone else's. However many meetings between Page or whoever and any Russians does not mean any collusion took place. Are we to assume no meeting at all took place between any Russians and those in the Clinton campaign? I THINK NOT.
Here's what we know:
U.S. officials, including the head of the FBI and chief deputies in the Justice Department, misled a FISA court to obtain intelligence surveillance on U.S. citizens, by providing information that they knew at the time, but did not disclose to the court, was by their own private admission unverified, compiled by a foreign national whom they had used and fired as an unreliable informant, paid for by the Clinton campaign, and served as the basis for news accounts that were used in circular fashion to verify to the court the dossier’s contents.
Was this also what they used to justify spying on the Trump campaign? That was it? Who here is okay with this? I'm not.
task0778
Diamond Member
You must be living under a rock, man.
I actually pay attention to the facts- and don't live in your Trumpster echo chamber.
There is no proof that any spy was planted in the Trump campaign- but that doesn't stop Trump and the Trumpsters from saying it.
Let me put it another way- there is just as much proof that Trump is a criminal as there is that the FBI 'planted' a spy in the Trump campaign.
What 'spy'?
"Spygate," the false allegation that the FBI had a spy in the Trump campaign, explained
He also worked on presidential campaigns for Reagan and George H.W. Bush, work that got him in hot water for, interestingly, allegedly spying on President Jimmy Carter’s campaign. As a profile in the Washington Post puts it:
Aides to Reagan, including Halper, were accused of having spied on Carter’s campaign and obtaining private documents that Carter was using to prepare for a debate. Some Reagan White House officials later alleged that Halper had used former CIA agents to run an operation against Carter. Halper called the reports at the time “absolutely false” and has long denied the accusations.
After his career in American politics ended, Halper remade himself as an academic, teaching and writing about foreign affairs from his perch at Cambridge. There, he led something called the Cambridge Intelligence Seminar, an annual forum in which intelligence professionals from across the Western Hemisphere, both current and retired, meet to discuss the ins and outs of spying. Interestingly, Halper stepped down from his role in the seminar in 2016, telling the Financial Times that there was “unacceptable Russian influence on the group.”
This deep familiarity with both Republican politics and the world of international spycraft may have been what made Halper an ideal informant for the FBI during the 2016 campaign.
On July 7 of that year, Trump foreign policy adviser Carter Page traveled to Moscow to give a lecture. Page had long been on the FBI’s radar due to his contacts with Russia; in 2013, Russian intelligence reached out to him directly in a short-lived effort to recruit him as an intelligence asset. Less than a week later, Halper met Page at a conference on US foreign policy and the 2016 election held in Cambridge. The two men struck up an email correspondence.
It’s not clear whether that initial meeting was done at the FBI’s behest. It’s possible that these two men just had a lot in common and established a sort of friendship; Halper is reportedly known for being a major networker.
But on July 31, about three weeks after Halper and Page first met, the FBI began a counterintelligence investigation into Russian efforts to infiltrate the Trump campaign and alter the outcome of the 2016 election. As part of this investigation, they asked Halper to reach out to two Trump advisers — Page and George Papadopoulos — to see what he could learn about connections between the Trump campaign and Russia.
Between August 1 and the November 2016 election, Halper was in regular contact with those two men. In September, he met with Papadopoulos in London — the pretext was Halper paying Papadopoulos to write a paper on Middle Eastern energy markets — and asked him about Trump contacts with the Kremlin.
Papadopoulos denied any knowledge of Russian outreach to the Trump team, which was a lie: Papadopoulos had drunkenly bragged to an Australian diplomat about Russia offering him “dirt” on Hillary Clinton back in May, which led to the FBI beginning its counterintelligence investigation in the first place.
Halper also met with a third Trump foreign policy adviser, Sam Clovis; according to Clovis, they discussed China policy, not Russia. It’s not clear if this meeting was also at the FBI’s behest, or if what they discussed was relayed back to the FBI.
And that’s it. There is no evidence so far that Halper attempted to join the Trump campaign and act as a double agent; nor is there evidence that he conducted any kind of illegal snooping on Page or Papadopoulos. We also don’t know whether Halper’s meetings yielded anything useful to the FBI: Papadopoulos seems to have stonewalled him, and the contents of his conversations with Page aren’t yet public knowledge.
Do you refer to the head of the FBI as "Trump's people"?
The FBI and the DOJ work for the American people- not President Trump or President Obama.
I find it fascinating how Trump has been campaigning to destroy the reputation of the FBI just in order to discredit the investigation into his campaign.
Except of course that is just the GOP House talking points- neither true- or complete.
The Justice Department didn't mislead the FISA court- as the GOP has since admitted that information was in the request.
Nor was the Steele Dossier the only reason provided to the FISA court to request the surveillance.
As we all know- a Trump campaign member had told an Australian Ambassador that the Russians had dirt on Clinton and another Trump campaign member before the campaign had been approached by Russian's spies in a recruitment attempt.
The Democratic rebuttal to the Nunes memo tears it apart
Schiff quotes a lengthy passage from the actual application the FBI sent to the FISA court asking for permission to snoop on Page. In the key line, the application explicitly notes that “the FBI speculates” that Steele had been hired to find “information that could be used to discredit Candidate #1’s [Trump’s] campaign.”
But then something interesting happened. After the FISA warrant was approved, Schiff writes, “[the] DOJ provided additional information obtained through multiple independent sources that corroborated Steele’s reporting.” The precise nature of those sources is included in the Schiff memo, but it’s redacted in the public copy, to the point where it’s not even clear which specific Steele claims have been vindicated.
Nonetheless, it’s incredibly important. It suggests that Steele’s information was borne out by the FBI’s own work. Citing him wasn’t some kind of intelligence malpractice, or anti-Trump bias, but rather the result of a source who has a track record of providing relevant, correct intelligence.
Syriusly?
Yes.
We shall see.
Maybe we will- maybe we won't.
Trump is not exactly known for being forthcoming.
I look forward to when Mueller completes his investigation and hopefully the American people will be allowed to find out his conclusions.
Similar threads
New Topics
-
The Curious Case of the Republican Medicaid Turncoats- Started by C_Clayton_Jones
- Replies: 0
-
Biden has one year left to live,,,,,deceiving voters about his medical crisis..- Started by Freedomisneverfree
- Replies: 16
-
-
-
putin´s Colonel General Andrey Mordvichev: "the war in Ukraine a "stepping stone" before the march on Europe"- Started by Litwin
- Replies: 10
