IG Report: No bias?

[*bfine32*]

(06-19-2018, 05:39 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Those were lower level agents who made no decisions and took no actions that effected anyone.  What we are talking about are the actions of Comey during the campaign that seriously hurt Hillary and had nothing to do with Trump. What actions are you claiming the FBI took during the campaign that hurt Trump? 

I didn't claim there were actions the FBI took during the campaign that hurt Trump. That was 22 talking about how they helped him. I simply pointed to content that could lead one to believe that FBI officials (as you consider the chief of the counterespionage section and the lead of the investigation to be "lower level" agents) we biased in their investigations. For instance I heard today that while interviewing Clinton the word intent was never mentioned; although it was asserted that she didn't intend.

[*bfine32*]

If you are not absolutely sick of the partisanship in Congress then I recommend watching the Strzok interrogation. GOP dude brought up his infidelities, which was totally out of order, Dem dude said he deserves a Purple Hurt, a slap in the face to every Soldier that was injured or killed in combat. The GOP hounded him and the Dems actually applauded him (for what?)

BTW, if I were forced to punch someone in the neck I might pick this Strzok dude.

[Millhouse]

(07-12-2018, 09:30 PM)bfine32 Wrote: If you are not absolutely sick of the partisanship in Congress then I recommend watching the Strzok interrogation. GOP dude brought up his infidelities, which was totally out of order, Dem dude said he deserves a Purple Hurt, a slap in the face to every Soldier that was injured or killed in combat. The GOP hounded him and the Dems actually applauded him (for what?)

BTW, if I were forced to punch someone in the neck I might pick this Strzok dude.

I watched some of it today when Gowdy was questioning him, and he (Strokz) just rubbed off on me the wrong way.

It was pretty much a circus overall though. I didint see that Dem saying that, but not surprised either.

The partisanship though on trying to get to the truth is a lost cause. All either side cares about is asking (or not asking) questions that tries to make their own party look good. If there is a chance the person testifying doesn't fit their own party's narrative, then they will avoid finding that truth. So really, its all about each party trying to prove their point, or disprove the other's point, while giving two squirts about finding the transparent truth of the matter.

[NATI BENGALS]

Why was there a secret hearing we didn't get to hear much about? And then an all day witch hunt with Republicans repeating the same things over and over personally attacking a lifelong servant to America?

Viciously attacking an FBI agent for his personal affairs and some private text messages. All to defend a president guilty of marital misconduct and a litany of examples of lying many times worse than the witch on trial. Wtf is this? Wtf was that?

I saw some nasty weird political theater on TV today.

[*bfine32*]

(07-12-2018, 10:03 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Why was there a secret hearing we didn't get to hear much about? And then an all day witch hunt with Republicans repeating the same things over and over personally attacking a lifelong servant to America?

Viciously attacking an FBI agent for his personal affairs and some private text messages.  All to defend a president guilty of marital misconduct and a litany of examples of lying many times worse than the witch on trial.  Wtf is this? Wtf was that?

I saw some nasty weird political theater on TV today.

I actually posted on this in another thread instead of starting a shiny new one. To suggest the GOP is solely to blame for the circus we saw today shows extreme bias. The Dems actually applauded this dude, the same dude the FBI removed from positions of increased responsibility because of poor behavior. Another Dem suggested this dude should be awarded a Purple Heart an award reserved for service members injured or killed in combat. 

I agree that you saw some nasty weird political theater today; but let's be honest enough to understand the the GOP didn't have a monopoly on it. 

[Goalpost]

I really want all the info out at this point. I have no problem he is being interrogated. His texts are disturbing as a lead investigator.

[NATI BENGALS]

(07-12-2018, 10:44 PM)Goalpost Wrote: I really want all the info out at this point.  I have no problem he is being interrogated.  His texts are disturbing as a lead investigator.

He shared displeasure with multiple presidential candidates. Like most Americans i know. 

Like he said. He was one of few who knew about the depth of the trump campaigns russian involvement when the election was wide open. And he didnt do shit to taint the water.

If people think an American citizen is not allowed to have political opinions then they are not American and can piss all the way off. 

[NATI BENGALS]

(07-12-2018, 10:22 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I actually posted on this in another thread instead of starting a shiny new one. To suggest the GOP is solely to blame for the circus we saw today shows extreme bias. The Dems actually applauded this dude, the same dude the FBI removed from positions of increased responsibility because of poor behavior. Another Dem suggested this dude should be awarded a Purple Heart an award reserved for service members injured or killed in combat. 

I agree that you saw some nasty weird political theater today; but let's be honest enough to understand the the GOP didn't have a monopoly on it. 

This isnt about the IG report. 

This is about corrupt members of congress on an all day witch hunt attacking an FBI agent.

[NATI BENGALS]

(07-12-2018, 10:22 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I actually posted on this in another thread instead of starting a shiny new one. To suggest the GOP is solely to blame for the circus we saw today shows extreme bias. The Dems actually applauded this dude, the same dude the FBI removed from positions of increased responsibility because of poor behavior. Another Dem suggested this dude should be awarded a Purple Heart an award reserved for service members injured or killed in combat. 

I agree that you saw some nasty weird political theater today; but let's be honest enough to understand the the GOP didn't have a monopoly on it. 

He was removed.

His repuatation had/has been destoyed

The indictments continued to role in.


Today accomplished nothing other than a shitshow. 


Are we going to publicly humiliate every public servant who dislikes leadership from now on?

[*michaelsean*]

(07-12-2018, 11:15 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: He was removed.

His repuatation had/has been destoyed

The indictments continued to role in.


Today accomplished nothing other than a shitshow. 


Are we going to publicly humiliate every public servant who dislikes leadership from now on?

Dislike and saying you are going to stop someone from becoming president are two different things.

[Belsnickel]

(07-13-2018, 07:45 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Dislike and saying you are going to stop someone from becoming president are two different things.

He actually explains the context of that comment in the hearing. Whether you believe it or not is up to you. But the comment in context was that it was a late night text after Trump attacking the Gold Star family and it was in reference to the American people not letting him become president. Not him, not the FBI, but the American people.

[*michaelsean*]

(07-13-2018, 08:40 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: He actually explains the context of that comment in the hearing. Whether you believe it or not is up to you. But the comment in context was that it was a late night text after Trump attacking the Gold Star family and it was in reference to the American people not letting him become president. Not him, not the FBI, but the American people.

I heard his explanation, but you are going to get questioned on it and not just because you have a political point of view.

And saying you don't remember writing the text, but explaining what it meant is a little odd.

[GMDino]

(07-13-2018, 08:40 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: He actually explains the context of that comment in the hearing. Whether you believe it or not is up to you. But the comment in context was that it was a late night text after Trump attacking the Gold Star family and it was in reference to the American people not letting him become president. Not him, not the FBI, but the American people.

Politicians to not want explanations...they want soundbites. 

And voters that already know which party they are behind don't believe explanations...they believe what their politicians tell them.

[Belsnickel]

(07-13-2018, 08:55 AM)michaelsean Wrote: I heard his explanation, but you are going to get questioned on it and not just because you have a political point of view.

And saying you don't remember writing the text, but explaining what it meant is a little odd.

I agree with all of that. My position is that it is an equally plausible explanation for the meaning as the one implying improper behavior. Therefore, lacking any evidence that he acted improperly and with bias in the investigations, I will go with the more benign meaning.

[*michaelsean*]

(07-13-2018, 09:06 AM)GMDino Wrote: Politicians to not want explanations...they want soundbites. 

And voters that already know which party they are behind don't believe explanations...they believe what their politicians tell them.

Or believe the explanation because of the party they are behind.

Edit: We will stop him is an odd way to say our person will win. If I think back to elections, I never thought of them as stopping someone else. Especially if they weren't an incumbent.

[*michaelsean*]

(07-13-2018, 09:42 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I agree with all of that. My position is that it is an equally plausible explanation for the meaning as the one implying improper behavior. Therefore, lacking any evidence that he acted improperly and with bias in the investigations, I will go with the more benign meaning.

I mean I don't think the Mueller investigation should be altered no matter what he meant.  Yeah you probably need to go over what he worked on, so it may be a hassle, but in the end I don't know that it will matter one way or the other.

[Belsnickel]

(07-13-2018, 09:43 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Or believe the explanation because of the party they are behind.

Edit: We will stop him is an odd way to say our person will win. If I think back to elections, I never thought of them as stopping someone else. Especially if they weren't an incumbent.

I have thought of elections in that way. I thought of the 2016 election in that way. Trump had autocratic behaviors during the campaign, that was concerning for me.

[*michaelsean*]

(07-13-2018, 09:59 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I have thought of elections in that way. I thought of the 2016 election in that way. Trump had autocratic behaviors during the campaign, that was concerning for me.

But you're odd.

Unless I remember incorrectly, they were pro-Hillary not just anti-Trump.  A normal answer would be "she will win".  

In the end it just does not seem like thew words someone would use to mean what he said.

[GMDino]

(07-13-2018, 09:43 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Or believe the explanation because of the party they are behind.

Edit:  We will stop him is an odd way to say our person will win.  If I think back to elections, I never thought of them as stopping someone else.  Especially if they weren't an incumbent.

If I had time I'd go back and see if Trump ever said "we will stop Clinton" or something similar...but that's not my point.

As soon as this was discovered he was let go off the case.  Honestly I haven't read all the emails so I can't personally attest to the context of them, but optically the situation was handled quickly and correctly.

[*michaelsean*]

(07-13-2018, 10:05 AM)GMDino Wrote: If I had time I'd go back and see if Trump ever said "we will stop Clinton" or something similar...but that's not my point.

As soon as this was discovered he was let go off the case.  Honestly I haven't read all the emails so I can't personally attest to the context of them, but optically the situation was handled quickly and correctly.

I have no problem with the way any of it was handled.  He should have been released,   he should be questioned, and his work reviewed but I'm not going to say the investigation is no longer valid.