Russia Collusion Scandal (aka A Leftist fantasy)

Hawk said:
It's shady if it's true and if it's a material difference.

This is Schiff we're talking about, who is like Colonel Kurtz-level paranoid.
Click to expand...

Schiff could certainly be grandstanding, 'cause he's that guy, but considering Nunes's late-night jaunt to the WH last to "discover" some documents and his working angles in the investigation without even notifying the rest of the majority on the committee, it's not a stretch to believe it.
 
Hawk said:
"While the Majority's changes do not correct the profound distortions and inaccuracies in your document, they are nonetheless substantive."

This language makes it sounds like the changes were possibly made in an attempt to placate the FBI.
Click to expand...

That would be my guess. Particularly since other R members of the committee were pushing on Nunes on that score.
 
Forever Fredi said:
Whoa what is going on.

How many House GOP members have announced they're not seeking re-election this year?

Gowdy is surprising since he's one of the younger tea party guys.
Click to expand...

[hawk answered this...I thought it was more, though].

Some of them are older members who are term-limited out of their committee chairs, so probably want to cash out. Some are in seats in districts very likely to flip. A couple are running for other office. Some of them probably don't fancy either being in the minority (which is far from a sure thing, IMO, but a distinct possibility) or don't want to be forced to carry water for Trump when nut-cutting time starts.
 
If this memo was nothing but lies do you think the intelligence community would be so against it being released?
 
Hawk said:
22 Republicans, 8 Democrats

You really have to take each seat on a case by case basis, but there's nothing that I see as indicative of any sort of trend or prevailing thought pattern (like being afraid of losing an election, as you allude).
Click to expand...

Maybe, but there are several, maybe 8-9, in swing districts whose decisions are probably informed by their electoral prospects. Whether or not you call that a trend is subjective, I guess.
 
Julio3000 said:
Maybe, but there are several, maybe 8-9, in swing districts whose decisions are probably informed by their electoral prospects. Whether or not you call that a trend is subjective, I guess.
Click to expand...

Those electoral prospects are changing by the day.
 
thethe said:
If this memo was nothing but lies do you think the intelligence community would be so against it being released?
Click to expand...

I feel like I've answered this more than once.

I don't think anyone is saying it's nothing but lies. The contention is that it's drawing misleading conclusions from an (intentionally) limited set of data. So, in effect a lie by omission, maybe?
 
There are plenty of legitimate possible reasons for true professionals to not want the memo released, beyond the expected partisan spin it may contain. Simply allowing other nations to know what we are able to prove or disprove can go a long way in giving them knowledge of our intelligence assets and any blindspots we may have. That could also be the reason for the last minute edits. I have a fairly low opinion of Comey but am inclined to trust Wray on this if he is truly signalling that he thinks it's damaging.
 
Let's take the leaks at face value and say that it's about, as alleged, the Carter Page FISA application.

If the contention is that the FBI used info from the Steele dossier but didn't accurately disclose its provenance, that's going to be a major issue if you're looking to poke holes in the justification or the surveillance. But if it was one of many sources of PC for obtaining the warrant, it would be a bit of sleight-of-hand to cite it without considering the others.

The FBI/DoJ beef could be as simple as being trapped by what MAY be a ****-up without being able to air the evidence that they had adequate reason to otherwise be asking for the warrant. Because maybe those other reasons involve sources and methods which can't be made public without compromising their future use. So they're stuck saying "trust us" in an environment where people are not likely to do so.
 
[tw]958925125721776128[/tw]

Schiff overreacting and making it more of a dog and pony show? He wouldn't do that right?
 
[tw]958920596276105216[/tw]

If these were in fact the changes that were made it makes Schiff look real bad and should make it even more important to release the memo.
 
Democrats claiming some of the Republicans' assertions were watered down, didn't deal with changes to the sensitive material. Sorry, I believe them over Nunes but I guess release both?

The more interesting thing to me is when Nunes says the FBI/DOJ are under the investigation by the committee but he hasn't told the minority members when he's required to by the committee rules. When they press him on this, he just derps and clams up.
 
thethe said:
The premise is such a joke I can't believe that you'd believe it in the face of all the evidence we have now
Click to expand...

Is it? Rudy is on audio saying it as is the other guy on a radio show.

So you are telling me that McCabe gets these emails, deliberately conceals them from Comey for a week, then they write a letter to Congress (which Strzok helps with) less than two weeks before the election, which is incredibly detrimental to her chances of winning, all as some plot in support of her?
 
Julio3000 said:
I feel like I've answered this more than once.

I don't think anyone is saying it's nothing but lies. The contention is that it's drawing misleading conclusions from an (intentionally) limited set of data. So, in effect a lie by omission, maybe?
Click to expand...

it's a summary
 
bravesnumberone said:
Is it? Rudy is on audio saying it as is the other guy on a radio show.

So you are telling me that McCabe gets these emails, deliberately conceals them from Comey for a week, then they write a letter to Congress (which Strzok helps with) less than two weeks before the election, which is incredibly detrimental to her chances of winning, all as some plot in support of her?
Click to expand...

They had to present it because it was discovered. If not then we would have had a huge crisis on our hands even more than what we have now. Did you want yhem to not say anything? Maybe if they did an actual investigation they would have located these emails long before but the fbi decided to exonerate Clinton well before the investigation was concluded. I mean we have actual message's with the lead agent saying they were not going to go hard on her. And this opinion piece is supposed to squash that obvious bias m ok, whatever makes you feel better st the end of the day.

The new York office had to get involved because it was obvious to any objective expert what the senior leadership of the fbi did and we will learn more and more as the months pass
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top