njbuff Posted February 15, 2018 Posted February 15, 2018 17 hours ago, Tiberius said: After the big flop of the Nunes memo--pushed by paid posters and Russian bots--I guess this is the next sinister hobgoblin you guys are out pushing. You are living proof that liberalism is a mental illness. People want TRUTH in matters, so if the Russian Collusion delusion is good for the goose (Dems and leftists who can't except the results of a duly elected President), then looking at the dirty Dems is good for the gander (Republicans). And there are the people like me who don't care for Dems or Reps, but want truth. And if you wanna take political bias out of this discussion, at face value it CERTAINLY looks like the left is way more dirtier than Trump. People who have no political bias are overwhelmingly on Trump's side now. I still don't have a dog in the fight and I want Mueller to continue his investigation and if he has dirt, BRING IT TO ME, but in this informationally charged society where crap gets out right away nowadays, Mueller has NOTHING, but I say continue on. Meanwhile, as an American citizen, I wanna know what the Dems, including the past administration and Hillary and her cronies were up to. According to you anything the left spews out is the truth and anything the right spews out are lies and propaganda. Ok, got it. Again, I will point this out, I DID NOT VOTE for Trump or Hillary as I thought both were horrific candidates. But I thought Hillary was the worst Presidential candidate ever. You might think I am some sorta staunch right winger here, but I want the truth. Where is the truth is the biggest question and I don't need answers from politically biased people like you. 1
Nanker Posted February 15, 2018 Posted February 15, 2018 What gets me is that some people just blindly believe the F.B.I. and the DOJ upper echelons are incapable of being politically motivated and corrupted by their biases. Toss the CIA and the other Deep State players into that group too. Of of course they believe that until they discover things like what was in J. Edgar Hoover’s closet.
row_33 Posted February 15, 2018 Posted February 15, 2018 so the FBI was warned about the Florida shooter but they were too busy working on the fake Trump thingamaroo 1
DC Tom Posted February 15, 2018 Posted February 15, 2018 4 minutes ago, row_33 said: so the FBI was warned about the Florida shooter but they were too busy working on the fake Trump thingamaroo The FBI is not responsible for mental health intervention, school security, or gun regulation. It's not their !@#$ing job.
row_33 Posted February 15, 2018 Posted February 15, 2018 what service should be warned about a lunatic that is obviously going to kill people next week?
DC Tom Posted February 15, 2018 Posted February 15, 2018 Just now, row_33 said: what service should be warned about a lunatic that is obviously going to kill people next week? Lunatics should usually be referred to county or state public health services. Murderers-to-be, local or state law enforcement.
row_33 Posted February 15, 2018 Posted February 15, 2018 doesn't mass murder sometimes touch into Federal jurisdiction, just asking....
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 15, 2018 Posted February 15, 2018 15 minutes ago, row_33 said: doesn't mass murder sometimes touch into Federal jurisdiction, just asking.... Are you advocating for pre-crime units?
DC Tom Posted February 15, 2018 Posted February 15, 2018 2 minutes ago, row_33 said: doesn't mass murder sometimes touch into Federal jurisdiction, just asking.... Not usually; typically only in instances of terrorism. And they can, of course, be invited by local law enforcement to an investigation. But the crime has to be committed, first. FBI has no authority to investigate future crime based on Facebook posts.
outsidethebox Posted February 15, 2018 Posted February 15, 2018 1 hour ago, DC Tom said: Not usually; typically only in instances of terrorism. And they can, of course, be invited by local law enforcement to an investigation. But the crime has to be committed, first. FBI has no authority to investigate future crime based on Facebook posts. Can they pass it along to the proper authorities?
DC Tom Posted February 15, 2018 Posted February 15, 2018 8 minutes ago, westside said: Can they pass it along to the proper authorities? Maybe. I wouldn't count on it, though. That ends being a separation of powers issue that, while it seems insanely nitpicky (largely because it is), is still very real. The bottom line, though is that the FBI is for criminal investigations, not law enforcement or crime prevention. They aren't the police. 1
boyst Posted February 15, 2018 Posted February 15, 2018 2 hours ago, DC Tom said: Not usually; typically only in instances of terrorism. And they can, of course, be invited by local law enforcement to an investigation. But the crime has to be committed, first. FBI has no authority to investigate future crime based on Facebook posts. But they will investigate if they believe that there is a threat. I've seen enough testimonials of somebody just simply searching for something on Google and having the feds come knocking One of my favorite was some typeype of reporter similar to trans greg investigating homemade bombs only to have the FBI show up 8 hours later in the middle of the night
Nanker Posted February 15, 2018 Posted February 15, 2018 38 minutes ago, DC Tom said: Maybe. I wouldn't count on it, though. That ends being a separation of powers issue that, while it seems insanely nitpicky (largely because it is), is still very real. The bottom line, though is that the FBI is for criminal investigations, not law enforcement or crime prevention. They aren't the police. How DARE you!
DC Tom Posted February 15, 2018 Posted February 15, 2018 36 minutes ago, Boyst62 said: But they will investigate if they believe that there is a threat. I've seen enough testimonials of somebody just simply searching for something on Google and having the feds come knocking One of my favorite was some typeype of reporter similar to trans greg investigating homemade bombs only to have the FBI show up 8 hours later in the middle of the night Like I said, only in instances of terrorism. Bomb making is looked on as a federal crime these days.
3rdnlng Posted February 15, 2018 Posted February 15, 2018 1 hour ago, DC Tom said: Maybe. I wouldn't count on it, though. That ends being a separation of powers issue that, while it seems insanely nitpicky (largely because it is), is still very real. The bottom line, though is that the FBI is for criminal investigations, not law enforcement or crime prevention. They aren't the police. Iberius wants to remind you of the Federal Bureau of Traffic Cops and Meter Maids.
Deranged Rhino Posted February 16, 2018 Author Posted February 16, 2018 Judge Collyer's response to both Nunes and Goodlatte just dropped. Nunes was asking for the release of FISA transcripts, Goodlatte was asking for the release of the full FISA application. Her responses are interesting: Nunes response: https://www.scribd.com/document/371621778/FISA-Court-Presiding-Judge-Rosemary-M-Collyer-Response-to-Chairman-Nunes Goodlatte: https://www.scribd.com/document/371622097/FISA-Court-Presiding-Judge-Rosemary-M-Collyer-Response-to-Chairman-Goodlatte 1
Taro T Posted February 16, 2018 Posted February 16, 2018 1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said: Judge Collyer's response to both Nunes and Goodlatte just dropped. Nunes was asking for the release of FISA transcripts, Goodlatte was asking for the release of the full FISA application. Her responses are interesting: Nunes response: https://www.scribd.com/document/371621778/FISA-Court-Presiding-Judge-Rosemary-M-Collyer-Response-to-Chairman-Nunes Goodlatte: https://www.scribd.com/document/371622097/FISA-Court-Presiding-Judge-Rosemary-M-Collyer-Response-to-Chairman-Goodlatte So, It seems that she's saying the FBI can release the transcripts without any concerns being raised by the court but that it's their call (or their bosses) whether to release them.
Cinga Posted February 16, 2018 Posted February 16, 2018 5 minutes ago, Taro T said: So, It seems that she's saying the FBI can release the transcripts without any concerns being raised by the court but that it's their call (or their bosses) whether to release them. Well, she mention both the FBI and DOJ, and that she has informed them to keep her in the loop. I think it may have been more of a PC way of telling those agencies that she was not going to be the excuse for not releasing them.
Taro T Posted February 16, 2018 Posted February 16, 2018 1 hour ago, Cinga said: Well, she mention both the FBI and DOJ, and that she has informed them to keep her in the loop. I think it may have been more of a PC way of telling those agencies that she was not going to be the excuse for not releasing them. Better stated than my post.
Recommended Posts