Jeffrey Epstein matter reopened... going to get ugly

[Johnny68]

It exists, but only a fool would believe it's an existential threat.



That's not how the system is supposed to work - that's an indication of the level of politicization and corruption.



Screaming "right wing talking points" and "racism" and denying obvious evidence doesn't change any of the facts.

Again, we have very smart people who look at the threats facing the country. Once again, you'll find that I'll choose to trust the experts over some right wing conspiracy theorist.

The DOJ investigates matters when they have facts and evidence that a crime may have been committed. No matter how much you right wing loons whine and cry, they are not going to go after your political enemies based on your BS accusations.

There you are again claiming you have all the facts and evidence. That's rich coming from someone who so blatantly dismisses any bit of information that doesn't support the thoughts clanging around their empty skull.

 

[Spartanmack]

Again, we have very smart people who look at the threats facing the country. Once again, you'll find that I'll choose to trust the experts over some right wing conspiracy theorist.

The DOJ investigates matters when they have facts and evidence that a crime may have been committed. No matter how much you right wing loons whine and cry, they are not going to go after your political enemies based on your BS accusations.

There you are again claiming you have all the facts and evidence. That's rich coming from someone who so blatantly dismisses any bit of information that doesn't support the thoughts clanging around their empty skull.

Is that how it worked with Crossfire Hurricane and all the other illegitimate and illegal programs byco mentioned? Calling them right wing conspiracies doesn't make them go away or not be true. You have all the facts and evidence, you just refuse to see it.

 

[Johnny68]

Is that how it worked with Crossfire Hurricane and all the other illegitimate and illegal programs byco mentioned? Calling them right wing conspiracies doesn't make them go away or not be true. You have all the facts and evidence, you just refuse to see it.

You really make this too easy. The IG determined way back in 2019 that Crossfire Hurricane was opened with justification and was not politically biased.

https://apnews.com/article/campaign...itics-russia-a734c40d142c8950f57ad4c8f8af565c

Funny how you just pretend that didn't happen. Who knows, maybe like Trump, you're able to just deny reality for so long that eventually you actually believe it.

Now go ahead and counter with the partisan hack Durham saying that the FBI shouldn't have opened the investigation even though he couldn't find anything actually wrong with it.

You really are a one trick pony. :no:

 

[byco42]

Again, we have very smart people who look at the threats facing the country. Once again, you'll find that I'll choose to trust the experts over some right wing conspiracy theorist.

You mean they look at the threats facing them personally. The so-called experts depend on the profane to accept what they say without questioning them.

We live in a digital prison without walls, warrants, or the will of the people. I do not consent to that.

 

[Johnny68]

You mean they look at the threats facing them personally. The so-called experts depend on the profane to accept what they say without questioning them.

We live in a digital prison without walls, warrants, or the will of the people. I do not consent to that.

Sure is telling when a person gets so triggered by the fact white supremacists are considered the biggest threat to the country. I bet if the very same people said BLM was the biggest threat, you'd be perfectly fine with accepting their findings then.

Also, questioning something and flat out denying it without evidence are two very different things.

 

[Spartanmack]

You really make this too easy. The IG determined way back in 2019 that Crossfire Hurricane was opened with justification and was not politically biased.

https://apnews.com/article/campaign...itics-russia-a734c40d142c8950f57ad4c8f8af565c

Funny how you just pretend that didn't happen. Who knows, maybe like Trump, you're able to just deny reality for so long that eventually you actually believe it.

Now go ahead and counter with the partisan hack Durham saying that the FBI shouldn't have opened the investigation even though he couldn't find anything actually wrong with it.

You really are a one trick pony. :no:

This is wrong. In June 2018, Horowitz released the report for his first investigation, concluding that Peter Strzok and other FBI employees "brought discredit to themselves" and to the agency. He found that Comey indulged in ad hoc decision making and did not follow FBI procedures, but did not find that he was motivated by any political bias.[7]

In 2019 he released the report of his second investigation stating that the FBI found 17 ?basic and fundamental? errors and omissions in its applications to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA Court), but did not find political bias during their investigation.

The idea that it wasn't motivated by political bias is laughable considering just Strzok's texts with his paramor. It's also irrelevant - I wonder if Horowitz, an Obama appointee, could find the political bias in either of his reports.

The Durham report pretty thoroughly discredits the Horowitz nonsense, particularly from the 2019 report. It tells a completely different story, one that (shockingly) comports with the evidence rather than ignoring it. Surprise, surprise, surprise - Durham is a right wing conspiracy theorist!

 

[Johnny68]

Wrong - In June 2018, Horowitz released the report for his first investigation, concluding that Peter Strzok and other FBI employees "brought discredit to themselves" and to the agency. He found that Comey indulged in ad hoc decision making and did not follow FBI procedures, but did not find that he was motivated by any political bias.[7]

In 2019 he released the report of his second investigation stating that the FBI found 17 ?basic and fundamental? errors and omissions in its applications to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA Court), but did not find political bias during their investigation.

The idea that it wasn't motivated by political bias is laughable considering just Strzok's texts with his paramor. It's also irrelevant. So weird that the AP would misrepresent the findings of those two reports. If I didn't know better (thanks to you) I might think the AP was just another hack leftist media outlet.

The Durham report tells a completely different story, one that (shockingly) comports with the evidence. Surprise, surprise, surprise - Durham is a right wing conspiracy theorist!

LOL so you discount the IG's report and hype up the one from the political hack on a mission from Orange Hitler. Also hilarious you would bring up Strzok, a favorite right wing boogeyman, but leave out the fact that the IG found that he had no control over the direction of the investigation.

Crossfire Hurricane found a ton of crimes and led to many convictions. The political hack found a single minor issue that led to some probation and a slap on the wrist.

But you go ahead and keep claiming things that were not part of any report. That's how we know not to take you seriously.

 

[Spartanmack]

LOL so you discount the IG's report and hype up the one from the political hack on a mission from Orange Hitler.

The Durham investigation proved the FBI knew the Clinton campaign was behind the Steele Dossier, that it was fake and they didn't corroborate any of it. And you think he's the biased hack.

Crossfire Hurricane found a ton of crimes and led to many convictions.

The political hack found a single minor issue that led to some probation and a slap on the wrist.

can you name the crimes those convictions were for? There was a total of 30 at last count. Are you aware none of those crimes had anything to do with Trump or his campaign?

- Paul Manafort convicted of tax fraud, wire fraud and unregistered lobbying for Ukraine, not Russia, no election interference and not under Trump.

- George Popodopolous for lying under oath to the FBI - no Russian connection, no election interference.

- Lt Gen Flynn indicted for a process crime - not filling out paperwork properly to become national security advisor, getting him for unregistered lobbying for Turkey. nothing to do with Russia, nothing to do with election interference, it is linked to Trump but Trump has no culpability for Flynn not filing the right document.

- Michael Cohen, serial perjurer indicted for taxi medallion fraud in NYC, tax fraud and wire fraud for his personal dealings trying to save his failing business. Nothing to do with Russia, election interference or Trump

- Obama's White House council indicted for unregistered foreign lobbying for taking $4mm from Cyprus. Nothing to do with Trump or election interference.

The other 25 indictments were all Russian citizens running Russian troll farms, none of them linked to Trump or his campaign in any way.

Mueller spent $30mm on an investigation that resulted in a bunch of crimes that had nothing to do with Trump or his campaign and could have been handled by the DOJ without wasting $30mm if they simply did their job. But you hear 30 indictments and you think there's something to this nonsense - and you still think horowitz is the more credible one.

I had a friend that used to use the saying "you can't get 'em all wrong" but I'm beginning to think that's not true for you.

 

[Johnny68]

I guess you just forgot to mention that multiple occasions where Mueller documented Trump obstructing justice. The only reason Trump wasn't charged is because he was in office. You may remember the report making the point of saying that it "does not exonerate" Trump.

You also conveniently left out the part where Trump associates repeatedly lied about their contacts with Russia. Also, the fact that members of Trump's campaign met with Russians in Trump Tower. Those people included his campaign manager, Paul Manafort.

Lets also not forget that it was uncovered that Trump was working on a deal to build a hotel in Moscow, something he denied over and over during the campaign.

Funny how you try to downplay the convictions when they included Trump's campaign manager, National Security Advisor and personal attorney. I guess it's only everyone around Trump who is crooked or something.

I could keep going but I'm not putting a ton of effort into this as you clearly are.

edit: Oh and one very important thing to add. Durham states in his report that the FBI was warranted in opening an investigation.

 

[byco42]

Sure is telling when a person gets so triggered by the fact white supremacists are considered the biggest threat to the country. I bet if the very same people said BLM was the biggest threat, you'd be perfectly fine with accepting their findings then.

Also, questioning something and flat out denying it without evidence are two very different things.

None of this reply is relevant to the discussion I'm trying to maintain. Presumptuousness is a lazy way to respond. Do better.

 

[Johnny68]

None of this reply is relevant to the discussion I'm trying to maintain. Presumptuousness is a lazy way to respond. Do better.

It's very relevant, you clearly tried to be dismissive of white supremacy being a threat. Seems you need to do better if you can't clearly state what you do and don't believe.

 

[Spartanmack]

I guess you just forgot to mention that multiple occasions where Mueller documented Trump obstructing justice. The only reason Trump wasn't charged is because he was in office. You may remember the report making the point of saying that it "does not exonerate" Trump.

You also conveniently left out the part where Trump associates repeatedly lied about their contacts with Russia. Also, the fact that members of Trump's campaign met with Russians in Trump Tower. Those people included his campaign manager, Paul Manafort.

Lets also not forget that it was uncovered that Trump was working on a deal to build a hotel in Moscow, something he denied over and over during the campaign.

Funny how you try to downplay the convictions when they included Trump's campaign manager, National Security Advisor and personal attorney. I guess it's only everyone around Trump who is crooked or something.

I could keep going but I'm not putting a ton of effort into this as you clearly are.

edit: Oh and one very important thing to add. Durham states in his report that the FBI was warranted in opening an investigation.

Wrong again, the report identified instances where trump or associates may have instructed but there wasn?t sufficient evidence to charge him or associates with anything. I never said the report exonerated trump - it also doesn?t find criminal wrong doing. mueller also made a fool of himself in his testimony where it was made clear he knew nothing about the report itself.

I didn?t mention the meeting in Trump tower because there was no evidence of wrong doing or any further involvement with the Russians - a nothing burger.

Who cares about the hotel or the fact he lied about it. Your boy Biden hasn?t told the truth since the 70s, you really expect people to care about something that trivial? Good job there Sherlock, you?ve solved the mystery.

The convictions should be downplayed because they?ve nothing to do with election interference and Manaforts crimes were committed before he had anything to do with Trump. We paid $30mm for Mueller to do the job that AGs and regular law enforcement could and should have done.

You could keep going but all you?d come up with is weaker garbage than the weak garbage you?ve already posted. And I?m not putting any effort into this - all this information is right there at your finger tips.

Regarding your edit I?ll just say LOL, no. Even CNN isn?t dumb enough to try to spin that. I did find Chris Hayes (the female Rachel Madow) and Lawrence O?Donnel?s reporting on the report quite amusing. Is that where you got that bit from?

 

[Spartanmack]

It's very relevant, you clearly tried to be dismissive of white supremacy being a threat. Seems you need to do better if you can't clearly state what you do and don't believe.

Got any evidence of this existential white supremacist threat? Other than your faith in the ?really smart? people at the FBI? Have you heard any of the whistleblower testimony about senior FBI officials manipulating data and cases to inflate the threat?

Edit: are the really smart people at the FBI as smart as your insiders with the stellar track records regarding football and basketball recruiting?

 

[byco42]

It's very relevant, you clearly tried to be dismissive of white supremacy being a threat. Seems you need to do better if you can't clearly state what you do and don't believe.

I clearly stated we live in a digital prison. And that there's absolutely nothing we can do about it. But you don't understand is that we, the profane, are the threat, to them, our masters. We live in an electric-fence world. As long as we don't cross that line, we won't get shocked. Clear enough?

 

[Johnny68]

Wrong again, the report identified instances where trump or associates may have instructed but there wasn?t sufficient evidence to charge him or associates with anything.

And there it is, now you're just blatantly lying. Mueller has clearly stated that they did not attempt to reach a decision on charges because they were operating under the DOJ guidelines that a sitting president could not be indicted. Additionally, he said that Trump could be charged after leaving office.

Next you'll be telling me how Trump can totally declassify documents with his mind and that it's okay that he took all those documents when he left office because Obama totally did the same thing. :nuts:

 

[Spartanmack]

And there it is, now you're just blatantly lying. Mueller has clearly stated that they did not attempt to reach a decision on charges because they were operating under the DOJ guidelines that a sitting president could not be indicted. Additionally, he said that Trump could be charged after leaving office.

Next you'll be telling me how Trump can totally declassify documents with his mind and that it's okay that he took all those documents when he left office because Obama totally did the same thing. :nuts:

has he been charged with obstruction? he's been out of office for almost 3 years now and has had a couple new investigations opened on him. seems if he was indictable based on the evidence, someone would have indicted him. Maybe he has too many friends at the DOJ protecting him.

 

[tinselwolverine]

has he been charged with obstruction? he's been out of office for almost 3 years now and has had a couple new investigations opened on him. seems if he was indictable based on the evidence, someone would have indicted him. Maybe he has too many friends at the DOJ protecting him.

Probably.

 

[Johnny68]

has he been charged with obstruction? he's been out of office for almost 3 years now and has had a couple new investigations opened on him. seems if he was indictable based on the evidence, someone would have indicted him. Maybe he has too many friends at the DOJ protecting him.

Trump is being investigated on multiple fronts, ask me this question again in 6 months.

 

[Spartanmack]

Trump is being investigated on multiple fronts, ask me this question again in 6 months.

why has it taken 30 months and they haven't indicted him for what you say are indictable crimes backed up by evidence? Why do you need 6 more months?

 

[Spartanmack]

Probably.

You get it.