B-Man Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 Here’s the Washington Examiner’s Byron York on that explosive NYT story published tonight reporting that the FBI began a counterintelligence investigation of President Trump after he fired James Comey as FBI director: Byron York ✔@ByronYork James Comey bungled Hillary Clinton investigation. Then started sketchy Trump probe. Then did a dossier-based, Moscow hookers, J. Edgar Hoover-style 'we know about you' routine with Trump before Trump became president... Then Comey told Trump three times he wasn't under investigation while leaving public impression that he was. Trump understandably angry. Then, when Trump fired Comey--as some advisors had advocated for months--FBI saw it as treason Now, NYT reports FBI reacted to justified firing of Comey by opening counterintelligence investigation, probing 'whether [Trump] had been working on behalf of Russia against American interests.' Investigation result: 'No evidence has emerged publicly that Mr. Trump was secretly in contact with or took direction from Russian government officials.' Is NYT story about Trump, or about FBI malfeasance? 10:04 PM - Jan 11, 2019 . 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 Just now, B-Man said: Here’s the Washington Examiner’s Byron York on that explosive NYT story published tonight reporting that the FBI began a counterintelligence investigation of President Trump after he fired James Comey as FBI director: Byron York ✔@ByronYork James Comey bungled Hillary Clinton investigation. Then started sketchy Trump probe. Then did a dossier-based, Moscow hookers, J. Edgar Hoover-style 'we know about you' routine with Trump before Trump became president... Then Comey told Trump three times he wasn't under investigation while leaving public impression that he was. Trump understandably angry. Then, when Trump fired Comey--as some advisors had advocated for months--FBI saw it as treason Now, NYT reports FBI reacted to justified firing of Comey by opening counterintelligence investigation, probing 'whether [Trump] had been working on behalf of Russia against American interests.' Investigation result: 'No evidence has emerged publicly that Mr. Trump was secretly in contact with or took direction from Russian government officials.' Is NYT story about Trump, or about FBI malfeasance? 10:04 PM - Jan 11, 2019 . It's not even new news in the NYT piece. It's old news, recycled with a fancy new headline and all sourced to former law enforcement officials. Wonder who those could be... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 It was always a coup. Politics aside, that's exactly what unfolded and what's coming to light. We've just been way ahead of the game down here for awhile. Still are. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: It was always a coup. Politics aside, that's exactly what unfolded and what's coming to light. We've just been way ahead of the game down here for awhile. Still are. What's truly amazing is that in all the NYT's reporting, nowhere is there any evidence of anyone at the Times stopping and saying "Wait a minute...did the FBI take it on themselves to spy on the ***** president?????" Where was the oversight? Where was anyone at the FBI going to Congressional majority and minority leaders and saying "I think we might have a problem here?" There's an FBI investigation into the president being an agent of a foreign power, and Congress finds out when they do their own investigation in to the FBI investigation? And Democrats are arguing in support of that police-state tactic? Seriously...what the *****? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 Just now, DC Tom said: What's truly amazing is that in all the NYT's reporting, nowhere is there any evidence of anyone at the Times stopping and saying "Wait a minute...did the FBI take it on themselves to spy on the ***** president?????" Where was the oversight? Where was anyone at the FBI going to Congressional majority and minority leaders and saying "I think we might have a problem here?" There's an FBI investigation into the president being an agent of a foreign power, and Congress finds out when they do their own investigation in to the FBI investigation? And Democrats are arguing in support of that police-state tactic? Seriously...what the *****? It's the only option left to them. They're admitting, through their media cut-outs, what they did and trying to get ahead of the OIG report which is looming. Not to mention Huber's report and whatever Mueller has (really) been up to. This is spin. But it's also a sign of how badly they're losing where it counts. They can't deny what really happened anymore - go back to the earlier 100s of this thread and compare the story then to the story now. It's amazing to witness... for those paying attention to the slow shift in positions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 9 hours ago, Logic said: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/11/us/politics/fbi-trump-russia-inquiry.htmlF.B.I. Opened Inquiry Into Whether Trump Was Secretly Working on Behalf of Russia WASHINGTON — In the days after President Trump fired James B. Comey as F.B.I. director, law enforcement officials became so concerned by the president’s behavior that they began investigating whether he had been working on behalf of Russia against American interests, according to former law enforcement officials and others familiar with the investigation. The inquiry carried explosive implications. Counterintelligence investigators had to consider whether the president’s own actions constituted a possible threat to national security. Agents also sought to determine whether Mr. Trump was knowingly working for Russia or had unwittingly fallen under Moscow’s influence. The investigation the F.B.I. opened into Mr. Trump also had a criminal aspect, which has long been publicly known: whether his firing of Mr. Comey constituted obstruction of justice. Agents and senior F.B.I. officials had grown suspicious of Mr. Trump’s ties to Russia during the 2016 campaign but held off on opening an investigation into him, the people said, in part because they were uncertain how to proceed with an inquiry of such sensitivity and magnitude. But the president’s activities before and after Mr. Comey’s firing in May 2017, particularly two instances in which Mr. Trump tied the Comey dismissal to the Russia investigation, helped prompt the counterintelligence aspect of the inquiry, the people said. That is nothing new. Hahahaahhaa. Logic proves he's stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemp Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 17 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said: Its been covered here at length in prior posts. He was an establishment/K-Street plant. I've learned that all bad news can be explained away as conspiracy. It's going to be fun for all of us when all the reports come out. One side will say I told you so. The other will cry bullshite. Time (not much) will tell which side we all fall on. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 8 minutes ago, Kemp said: I've learned that all bad news can be explained away as conspiracy. It's going to be fun for all of us when all the reports come out. One side will say I told you so. The other will cry bullshite. Time (not much) will tell which side we all fall on. Not really. If you've been unable to make up your mind about an administration using the power of the government to run intelligence operations on the opposition, and the DOJ launching an investigation simple for the purpose of creating an investigation ---couched with the unbelievably moronic allegation that "We thought maybe he was/is an agent of the Russian government but really had no idea how to proceed and decided the best way forward was to let him be President but take him apart with a series of paper cuts over the duration of his presidency"...you've already made your mind up. Apologies for the run-on sentence, but after all this, it makes you wonder why Watergate is anything more than a little misunderstanding between friends. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Gal Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 (edited) 3 hours ago, Boyst62 said: That is nothing new. Hahahaahhaa. Logic proves he's stupid. Facts already in evidence. His "breaking news" proves that he's just a tad slower than an idiot. Edited January 12, 2019 by 3rdnlng Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 https://mobile.twitter.com/SaraCarterDC/status/1084104267424763905 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Gal Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 Just now, Deranged Rhino said: https://mobile.twitter.com/SaraCarterDC/status/1084104267424763905 Boy, that is the real question: "Who investigates the investigators?" 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemp Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 3 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: Not really. If you've been unable to make up your mind about an administration using the power of the government to run intelligence operations on the opposition, and the DOJ launching an investigation simple for the purpose of creating an investigation ---couched with the unbelievably moronic allegation that "We thought maybe he was/is an agent of the Russian government but really had no idea how to proceed and decided the best way forward was to let him be President but take him apart with a series of paper cuts over the duration of his presidency"...you've already made your mind up. Apologies for the run-on sentence, but after all this, it makes you wonder why Watergate is anything more than a little misunderstanding between friends. You let me know when you can find anyone here who has NOT made up their mind as to how this will play out. One side will turn out to be right, the other wrong. People disagree now which side will turn out to be right. For people who share my viewpoint, the notion that all bad news for the other side can be explained as conspiracy is the oddest part. For the people on the other side, it's clear that a conspiracy by the "Deep State" is behind everything against Trump. The most fascinating thing to me is that even if you agree with Trump on policy, that someone cannot see that on a personal level, Trump has done a lot of crooked things and that he has a personality you would never accept on a personal level. You can say that most politicians are crooked to some extent, but it's absurd to think that Trump is not a liar and a crook. There is enough evidence of it that has been documented to believe it's not true. Is there anyone here that still believes that Trump has not been involved in money laundering? Yeah, I know that some here will say it's not true, but if they have the ability to think and deduct, they are lying if they say they don't think he may have been involved in money laundering. The collusion stuff is up-for-grabs, but without a doubt there's a lot of odd coincidences linking Trump and his inner circle with Russia in many unusual ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 11 minutes ago, Kemp said: You let me know when you can find anyone here who has NOT made up their mind as to how this will play out. One side will turn out to be right, the other wrong. People disagree now which side will turn out to be right. For people who share my viewpoint, the notion that all bad news for the other side can be explained as conspiracy is the oddest part. For the people on the other side, it's clear that a conspiracy by the "Deep State" is behind everything against Trump. The most fascinating thing to me is that even if you agree with Trump on policy, that someone cannot see that on a personal level, Trump has done a lot of crooked things and that he has a personality you would never accept on a personal level. You can say that most politicians are crooked to some extent, but it's absurd to think that Trump is not a liar and a crook. There is enough evidence of it that has been documented to believe it's not true. Is there anyone here that still believes that Trump has not been involved in money laundering? Yeah, I know that some here will say it's not true, but if they have the ability to think and deduct, they are lying if they say they don't think he may have been involved in money laundering. The collusion stuff is up-for-grabs, but without a doubt there's a lot of odd coincidences linking Trump and his inner circle with Russia in many unusual ways. I don't have a side. I go by evidence. To date the evidence is very clear as to what happened and why. It has nothing to do with trump Russian collusion and everything to do with covering up an illegal spying operation run on, not just trump, but every candidate in the 2016 election (and beyond). If you compare the actual evidence between your position and mine, you'd see very quickly that your position lacks any evidentiary heft. There's been no evidence of collusion or conspiracy provided. The entire narrative is built on sand which has already begun to shift as the story crumbles. The narrative engineers are doing their best to keep it alive devoid of evidence, but only partisans or those not paying close attention are buying. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snafu Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 12 minutes ago, Kemp said: You let me know when you can find anyone here who has NOT made up their mind as to how this will play out. One side will turn out to be right, the other wrong. People disagree now which side will turn out to be right. For people who share my viewpoint, the notion that all bad news for the other side can be explained as conspiracy is the oddest part. For the people on the other side, it's clear that a conspiracy by the "Deep State" is behind everything against Trump. The most fascinating thing to me is that even if you agree with Trump on policy, that someone cannot see that on a personal level, Trump has done a lot of crooked things and that he has a personality you would never accept on a personal level. You can say that most politicians are crooked to some extent, but it's absurd to think that Trump is not a liar and a crook. There is enough evidence of it that has been documented to believe it's not true. Is there anyone here that still believes that Trump has not been involved in money laundering? Yeah, I know that some here will say it's not true, but if they have the ability to think and deduct, they are lying if they say they don't think he may have been involved in money laundering. The collusion stuff is up-for-grabs, but without a doubt there's a lot of odd coincidences linking Trump and his inner circle with Russia in many unusual ways. Yet he was still elected President. The only thing to be revealed is if Trump committed crimes while in office. Any crimes he may have committed prior to being elected need to be dealt with after he's out of office, if at all. You like to post about the fact that nobody actually knows the full story. Then you come with this post about your "side" and the other "side". That's not very honest. I can say that I strongly suspect a lot of things, but I haven't made up my mind on anything. Just because you've made up your mind, don't project that onto everyone else here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 44 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said: Boy, that is the real question: "Who investigates the investigators?" the problem is conflict of interest. you can't have one party investigate the other and you most certainly can't have the government investigate itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Gal Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 Just now, Foxx said: the problem is conflict of interest. you can't have one party investigate the other and you most certainly can't have the government investigate itself. I think that the government investigating itself is the OIG? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 2 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said: I think that the government investigating itself is the OIG? yep, that is a governmental office. conflict of interest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemp Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 42 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: I don't have a side. I go by evidence. To date the evidence is very clear as to what happened and why. It has nothing to do with trump Russian collusion and everything to do with covering up an illegal spying operation run on, not just trump, but every candidate in the 2016 election (and beyond). If you compare the actual evidence between your position and mine, you'd see very quickly that your position lacks any evidentiary heft. There's been no evidence of collusion or conspiracy provided. The entire narrative is built on sand which has already begun to shift as the story crumbles. The narrative engineers are doing their best to keep it alive devoid of evidence, but only partisans or those not paying close attention are buying. It's clear to no one that you don't have a side. Why do you believe there are so many links between Trump, his employees and Russia? Why do you believe Trump had all the Ukranians at the inauguration? Why do you believe Mnuchin just dropped some sanctions? Why do you believe Trump believes everything Putin says? How did Trump purchase a property and quickly sell it to a Russian at double what he paid? You believe Manafort is a plant. Does that mean you believe he is a crook who the Deep State took advantage of or that he is not a crook? With or without Trump's knowledge, do you believe that Russians tried to sway the election towards Trump? Why did Manafort send voter info to Ukraine and/or Russia? Trump may turn out to be innocent, but to deny that there are a lot of oddities going on with Trump and Russia defies facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts