d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate >
Poll > Trump 2016 > Trump Vs Clinton
Prev1189218931894189518963169Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
  Guests cannot view or vote in polls. Please register or login.
Member
Posts: 46,671
Joined: Jan 20 2010
Gold: 22,164.69
May 19 2018 11:08am
Quote (fender @ May 19 2018 10:52am)
do you actually believe those thing? i mean, you put so much effort into your hacky essays, but each time they are riddled with ridiculous assumptions and major logical flaws and / or outright false claims, so i'm wondering who you're even expecting to convince typing all that...


https://twitter.com/paulsperry_/status/997168568042172418
source is reasonably credible and theres every reason to think he has an inside scoop on the upcoming IG report now that its gone to congress, as republicans in congress would instantly leak any juicy bits.
so yes, I think Flynn got spied on for having dinner with Putin. That's not exactly far fetched

next up is that they didn't find anything: something I have no doubts about because if they had found anything, it would have been shouted on high from the mountain tops.
The leakers in the FBI made it so that the public knows every time Trump farts in an elevator. There's no secret smoking gun yet to drop, sorry, if it was going to happen it would have happened over a year ago

and of course politically it would hurt hillary. If Comey came out and said that Obama's FBI was investigating Trump, and he had no reason to announce this but to hurt Trump politically, and there's no evidence of any wrongdoing- it would have the immediate and easily predictable impact of vindicating every conspiracy theory and sending red hats into an unholy furor. Screw hurting the election, we'd have armed militias overrunning FBI headquarters in DC before the election could take place.
Member
Posts: 66,666
Joined: May 17 2005
Gold: 17,384.69
May 19 2018 11:14am
goodbye mueller investigation episode n°327
Member
Posts: 48,844
Joined: Jun 18 2006
Gold: 5,016.77
May 19 2018 11:29am
Quote (Goomshill @ May 19 2018 03:28am)
Well first I'd hope they have more than such vague suspicions warranted only by association. Flynn got spied on for having dinner with Putin. Then, if they have legitimate counter-intelligence cause, any investigation should be carried out with extreme care, quarantined from political intrigue and subjected to the highest scrutiny possible. They should be dotting every i and crossing every t. When the incumbent government uses its intelligence apparatus to spy on the opposition candidate, they have to be fully aware of how dangerous it to democracy, and how politically toxic it would be if/when it gets revealed. Of course, three things we've seen since then: Its quite probably we'd never have found out about any of this if Hillary was elected president, as the FBI heads all expected. That should be cause for alarm to the safeguards against abuse. And second, we've seen the abuse. The FBI leaking all the past couple years, especially the unmasked FISA wiretap transcripts used to destroy Michael Flynn- show that at least after the election, the FBI was engaged in rampant political weaponization of that same spying. Third, we've seen that the safeguards didn't exist. The surveillance on Trump used flimsy premises and exploited all the loopholes and 4th amendment violations that the IC has insisted it only needed to go after terrorists. Warrantless national security letters, informants, rubber stamp fisa approval citing DNC-funded opposition research, and those sneaky FISA 702 queries.

To me, we shouldn't be giving them benefit of the doubt only because we lack proof that the spying on Trump was used during the campaign. Perhaps it was, perhaps it wasn't. Maybe Obama got rolls of microfilm hidden under a fake rock in the rose garden. Maybe nobody at the FBI ever let any information slip. If we found that proof, the right-wing media would explode and it would be armageddon... but I'd maintain that maybe it doesn't really matter. Its the fact that everything surrounding the spying stinks. The lack of quarantine, the clearly politicized officials, the weaponization of the intel. It matters more than the walls are made of bamboo and paper than that someone walked through them.



Well the most rational answer is because they didn't find anything. How would it play out if they announced that the FBI was spying on Trump's campaign, but had no actual evidence of any wrongdoing?
Politically, it would actually hurt Hillary by whipping up accusations of abuse, just like it has after the fact. Comey has said that his decision making was operating on the assumption Hillary was going to win, so taking the very bold step of revealing the existence of the investigation in an openly political fashion- far moreso than the already public clinton investigation- wouldn't make much sense from either a political or professional lens. And besides any grand agenda or conspiracy, there's the element of individual motivations of the actors involved and self-preservation. The abuse of the spying apparatus doesn't require a grand conspiracy, it just requires like-minded individuals who tolerate the erosion of our civil liberties and protections. They aren't necessarily motivated to take overt actions that would throw away their careers, they aren't kamikaze pilots, especially not when it seems so unnecessary. And take James Comey at his word for his motivation; if he valued the FBI as an institution, then such political interference and ensuing firestorm would have been guaranteed the destruction of the FBI in apocalyptic scandal. Announcing the investigation for no reason but politics, with no evidence to show, without any ironclad justification? If Trump had lost as he expected, we might be in the civil war timeline.

But what would have happened if the FBI had found dirt on Trump's campaign? If it looked like he was in the lead, and this politically compromised surveillance dug up some political dirt on him, could we have trusted they wouldn't have used it?


Considering all the evidence we know of publicly, it would've been negligent for the FBI to not start the Crossfire Hurricane investigation. That's plain as day, it's hard to believe anyone would even dispute that.

Fender has a point, you constantly make assumptions in favor of Trump and co. and against FBI and co.

I think the FBI leaking(not another Comey press conference) that some campaign officials under Trump were being investigated would've hurt his campaign. The Trump base of course would immediately dismiss it, but there's a lot of Republican/independent voters who held their nose to vote for the guy. That might've been the tipping point for some of them to say "fuck it, I'm sitting this one out". Not every Republican is paranoid of institutions like the FBI.
Member
Posts: 52,304
Joined: May 26 2005
Gold: 4,404.67
May 19 2018 11:38am
Quote (IceMage @ 19 May 2018 19:29)
Considering all the evidence we know of publicly, it would've been negligent for the FBI to not start the Crossfire Hurricane investigation. That's plain as day, it's hard to believe anyone would even dispute that.

Fender has a point, you constantly make assumptions in favor of Trump and co. and against FBI and co.

I think the FBI leaking(not another Comey press conference) that some campaign officials under Trump were being investigated would've hurt his campaign. The Trump base of course would immediately dismiss it, but there's a lot of Republican/independent voters who held their nose to vote for the guy. That might've been the tipping point for some of them to say "fuck it, I'm sitting this one out". Not every Republican is paranoid of institutions like the FBI.


the fbi leaking that the trump campaign is under investigation, only to admit 1 week after president clinton's inauguration that they found absolutely nothing, would have done unimaginable damage to the fbi's reputation. "Not every Republican is paranoid of institutions like the FBI" right now, but after a stunt like that, half the country would have become staunchly anti-fbi. this move would have politicized the fbi irredeemably.

and in the 2018 midterms, the GOP would have inched towards 300 seats in the house and 60 seats in the senate.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on May 19 2018 11:40am
Member
Posts: 48,844
Joined: Jun 18 2006
Gold: 5,016.77
May 19 2018 11:55am
Quote (Black XistenZ @ May 19 2018 12:38pm)
the fbi leaking that the trump campaign is under investigation, only to admit 1 week after president clinton's inauguration that they found absolutely nothing, would have done unimaginable damage to the fbi's reputation. "Not every Republican is paranoid of institutions like the FBI" right now, but after a stunt like that, half the country would have become staunchly anti-fbi. this move would have politicized the fbi irredeemably.

and in the 2018 midterms, the GOP would have inched towards 300 seats in the house and 60 seats in the senate.


Uh... the FBI wouldn't have ended the investigation 1 week after Hillary got elected. It would've gone on much longer. After it did end though, Republicans would investigate it, and find that(as we know now) it was completely legitimate. And, like they are doing now, they would totally cherry pick and distort the information so that Fox News viewers would get the impression it was illegitimate.
Member
Posts: 46,671
Joined: Jan 20 2010
Gold: 22,164.69
May 19 2018 11:58am
Quote (IceMage @ May 19 2018 11:29am)
I think the FBI leaking(not another Comey press conference) that some campaign officials under Trump were being investigated would've hurt his campaign. The Trump base of course would immediately dismiss it, but there's a lot of Republican/independent voters who held their nose to vote for the guy. That might've been the tipping point for some of them to say "fuck it, I'm sitting this one out". Not every Republican is paranoid of institutions like the FBI.




Having the FBI simultaneously give Hilldog a free pass on her emails while revealing- whether by leak or announcement- that they're spying on Trump: That's not a recipe for boosting Hillary. Not without evidence.
We had Paul Manafort's foreign connections get exposed during the campaign, in no small irony from the DNC collusion with Ukraine, and the result was Trump simply cut him loose. Did it hurt Trump much? Not really. And Flynn and Page were likewise expendable. But if all the FBI could substantiate was 'we are vaguely suspicious over wikileaks', well, I think we need to crank the clock back a couple years and put ourselves into a contemporary mindset. One mantra I keep repeating is that we can't anachronistically apply our russia hysteria lens from the past year to the months of the election. Nobody was hysterical over russia at the time. Wikileak's emails were all the rage. Hillary's deflections to Russia were very slow and clumsy to take off, and driving a wedge with the berniecrats. Giving people more reason to distrust the establishment and prove high level conspiracies, man, that would just not be wise. I don't think that given where the country was 2 years ago, that it would do more harm than good.
And again, this is all moot because everyone already expected Hillary to win handily and nobody was lining up to take severe risks to help her. If they were, they'd have stopped Comey from his announcement about the emails being reopened and let the FBI eat shit for the coverup affter Hillary won. As Comey himself explained, the expectation that Hillary would win either way was in his mind.


Quote
Considering all the evidence we know of publicly, it would've been negligent for the FBI to not start the Crossfire Hurricane investigation. That's plain as day, it's hard to believe anyone would even dispute that.
Fender has a point, you constantly make assumptions in favor of Trump and co. and against FBI and co.


I dont buy that. In a reasonable world of an apolitical FBI doing their jobs free of corruption and abuse, investigators wouldn't dare go near such an incredibly volatile investigation without having iron clad probable cause and strict discretion/quarantine. And everything we've seen since then shows they had neither. At best they cut every corner and were needlessly careless and then failed to stop low level staff from leaking. But it stretches credulity to chalk up the steele dossier, unmasking, strzok's texts, extensive surveillance and the oodles of FBI leaking all to benign neglect when we already know McCabe was a politically motivated liar and we're about to drop the hammer on Comey in a couple weeks. And again, there's other plot holes for the FBI to explain: If such a thin basis is all it took to merit an investigation, why didn't all the other shit going on merit the same scrutiny? Ukraine, Cui Tiankai, Muh Russian Uranium Megamillions, the Clinton Foundation. They had an actual whistleblower claiming Russians conspired to bribe the Clintons and sent her millions after she visited Putin's private cottage, but Flynn gets on the shitlist for having a public dinner next to Jill Stein?

It should have been the FBI making the assumptions in favor of Trump and co. It should have been top officials saying 'This is far too dangerous for us to investigate on such a flimsy basis, we need a real probable cause, otherwise we simply give it benefit of the doubt. And if we do get reason, we must be incredibly careful to avoid even the appearance of impropriety.'
instead we got a clusterfuck of leaks, grandstanding and the 4th amendment getting bent over the pommel horse



also you have to acknowledge: Comey admits he was put into a situation where he was forced to make one of two decisions that would harm the FBI's reputation, either the appearance of a coverup or political interference. He chose the latter, saying he felt it was actually less damaging to the FBI as an institution to meddle in politics than to face the distrust of a public who thought the FBI was cheating to help Hillary. Thats how serious Comey took the threat. And you're dismissing it out of hand and saying it would have helped Hillary if the FBI blatantly interfered to hurt Trump and say they're spying on him!? Like I said, I don't think it would have just caused an uproar and backfired, I think the militia nutters would have stormed the FBI headquarters.

This post was edited by Goomshill on May 19 2018 12:02pm
Member
Posts: 104,575
Joined: Apr 25 2006
Gold: 10,485.00
May 19 2018 12:15pm
Quote (IceMage @ May 19 2018 01:55pm)
Uh... the FBI wouldn't have ended the investigation 1 week after Hillary got elected. It would've gone on much longer. After it did end though, Republicans would investigate it, and find that(as we know now) it was completely legitimate. And, like they are doing now, they would totally cherry pick and distort the information so that Fox News viewers would get the impression it was illegitimate.




1. Has anyone been convicted yet?
2. "as we know now" we know nothing...now/yet.



Quote (Ghot @ May 19 2018 01:26am)
Damn!! I bet the "we can explain this" dept. is working overtime tonight.

It almost looks like we colluded with ourselves to hack the election in Hillary's favor. And still lost.


This post was edited by Ghot on May 19 2018 12:18pm
Member
Posts: 33,652
Joined: Oct 9 2008
Gold: 2,617.52
May 19 2018 07:52pm
The Trp campaign spying had nothing to do with Russia. Muh russia didnt exist until the DNC created it a month after the election
Member
Posts: 64,732
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 260.11
May 19 2018 08:14pm
Quote (EndlessSky @ May 19 2018 07:52pm)
The Trp campaign spying had nothing to do with Russia. Muh russia didnt exist until the DNC created it a month after the election


It became an issue when he made Manafort his campaign manager. We talked about it at length on this forum before he was even the Republican nominee.
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev1189218931894189518963169Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll