FBI
- Thread starter 57Brave
- Start date
Guess she's not 'to big to jail' like she thought he was.
You're only concerned about this because it's against Hillary. If it were against Donald instead, you'd say the FBI was doing the right thing.
Doesn't bother me. If you break the law you should be charged.
bravesnumberone
Well-known member
And much like a ninth grader, you always avoid the point. He never said the FBI charged.
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
I am more concerned about the influence thats left us with only 2 choices to be President who are both viewed unfavorably by 60% of likely voters. If this was happening in another country we would say it is not a legitimate election. Big picture I think we look back at this election as the official moment our democracy died.
sturg33
I
bravesnumberone
Well-known member
Probably the biggest reason I'm voting for Johnson today. Mostly a protest vote.
50PoundHead
Hessmania Forever
I'm a little troubled, but the FBI under Hoover did a lot of really underhanded stuff. They threatened public officials with a variety of things, but didn't get into the elections so much. Tough place for Comey to be in, but I do wonder if he got pressure from Republican operatives. I have no proof. We'll just have to wait it out. Trump has legal problems of a different sort waiting for him if he's elected and maybe that's the nature of the game now. Maybe no one will ever be able to run for President again given the scrutiny. That doesn't excuse out-and-out breaking of the law, but anyone who gets to the level of Trump or Clinton in their respective field is standing on a pile of figurative dead bodies and they didn't play nice to get where they are.
57Brave
Well-known member
excuse me but I took his statement " If you break the law you should be charged. "
to mean the FBI has jurisdiction over charging people.
In fact, the point is, the FBI and not me
You obviously have no problem with the investigative arm of law enforcement dropping unsubstantiated hearsay and innuendo into a national election.
Or the one-sidedness of the participation of the FBI. Kinda putting their authoritative thumb on the scale of an election.
Regardless the candidate
Because hey, both sides suck --- right?
And you voted for Johnson, so you get a free pass.
I call Bull****
People on sites like reddit and 4chan are starting to uncover the tangled web that the mainstream won't talk about. Go check it out for yourself. This stuff is getting weirder and weirder by the day and where there's smoke, there's usually fire.
I can only shake my head at someone who thinks the FBI is trying to influence the election by investigating possible acts of treason by someone who might run this country here soon. I've never seen blinders on so tight.
I can only shake my head at someone who thinks the FBI is trying to influence the election by investigating possible acts of treason by someone who might run this country here soon. I've never seen blinders on so tight.
57Brave
Well-known member
People on sites like reddit and 4chan are like posters on the baseball side of this blog that report on imminent trades.
Stop with that nonsense
" I can only shake my head at someone who thinks the FBI is trying to influence the election by investigating possible acts of treason by someone who might run this country here soon. I've never seen blinders on so tight. "
This has been documented by both NYTimes and Wall Street Journal.
This excerpt from an overview :
The implications of an increasingly partisan F.B.I. are deeply troublesome. If Clinton becomes president, the bureau will likely become the primary tool of Republicans seeking to investigate her. The word “impeachment” is already on the lips of several lawmakers eager to resurrect the scandal-driven Clinton mania of the late 1990s. And if Trump becomes president, he may find in the bureau an army of sympathetic law enforcement officers ready to assist his political agenda—or vendetta, as the case may be. During interviews with The Guardian, published Thursday, a number of F.B.I. agents described an intensely anti-Clinton atmosphere at the F.B.I., with one characterizing it as “Trumpland.” Clinton, the agent said, is seen as “the antichrist personified” to many people within the bureau, and “the reason why they’re leaking is they’re pro-Trump.”
LINK
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016...-clinton-foundation-peter-schweizer-breitbart
.....
I don't care who the candidate is. The FBI, the military or any other law enforcement entity has no place interjecting themselves in elections in this manner.
IF you disagree tell me why
Stop with that nonsense
" I can only shake my head at someone who thinks the FBI is trying to influence the election by investigating possible acts of treason by someone who might run this country here soon. I've never seen blinders on so tight. "
This has been documented by both NYTimes and Wall Street Journal.
This excerpt from an overview :
The implications of an increasingly partisan F.B.I. are deeply troublesome. If Clinton becomes president, the bureau will likely become the primary tool of Republicans seeking to investigate her. The word “impeachment” is already on the lips of several lawmakers eager to resurrect the scandal-driven Clinton mania of the late 1990s. And if Trump becomes president, he may find in the bureau an army of sympathetic law enforcement officers ready to assist his political agenda—or vendetta, as the case may be. During interviews with The Guardian, published Thursday, a number of F.B.I. agents described an intensely anti-Clinton atmosphere at the F.B.I., with one characterizing it as “Trumpland.” Clinton, the agent said, is seen as “the antichrist personified” to many people within the bureau, and “the reason why they’re leaking is they’re pro-Trump.”
LINK
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016...-clinton-foundation-peter-schweizer-breitbart
.....
I don't care who the candidate is. The FBI, the military or any other law enforcement entity has no place interjecting themselves in elections in this manner.
IF you disagree tell me why
Julio3000
<B>A Chip Off the Old Rock</B>
When the "smoke" goes beyond anonymous denizens of the internet making unverifiable claims, let me know.
I can only shake my head at someone who thinks the FBI is trying to influence the election by investigating possible acts of treason by someone who might run this country here soon.
I'm not sure how anonymous sources leaking unsupported innuendo (about what is apparently a dead letter, i.e. the Clinton Foundation "investigation") six days before the election isn't an attempt to influence said election. Do you disagree?
I can only shake my head at someone who thinks the FBI is trying to influence the election by investigating possible acts of treason by someone who might run this country here soon.
I'm not sure how anonymous sources leaking unsupported innuendo (about what is apparently a dead letter, i.e. the Clinton Foundation "investigation") six days before the election isn't an attempt to influence said election. Do you disagree?
57Brave
Well-known member
I can only shake my head at someone who thinks the FBI is trying to influence the election by investigating possible acts of treason by someone who might run this country here soon.[/I]
from Reuters:
Two law enforcement sources familiar with the FBI's New York Field Office, which initially discovered the emails, said a faction of investigators based in the office is known to be hostile to Hillary Clinton. A spokeswoman for the FBI's New York office said she had no knowledge about this.
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN12Y2QD
.....
going beyond 2016 --- this precedent ?
from Reuters:
Two law enforcement sources familiar with the FBI's New York Field Office, which initially discovered the emails, said a faction of investigators based in the office is known to be hostile to Hillary Clinton. A spokeswoman for the FBI's New York office said she had no knowledge about this.
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN12Y2QD
.....
going beyond 2016 --- this precedent ?
New York Times and Wall Street Journal? I can't even take you seriously. I figured at this point, with all that's come out, you guys would have learned by now that your trusted "news sources" are complete biased BS. You guys like to make fun of other people for using non mainstream sources when in fact your mainstream sources are akin to a mom saying her son who is a proven convicted murderer is innocent. If you can't follow the money and see the bias, then go ahead walking through life with your blinders on, completely oblivious to how the world around you is ran.
Julio, if this was some scapegoat like Anthony Weiner or some lower level person not named Hillary, they would have been indicted months ago. Can you honestly sit here and say that Hillary got no special treatment originally from the FBI and DOJ on this matter? I don't care what the timing is, the right thing is the right thing. The president of this country should not be breaching our national security due to incompetence. You guys are so brainwashed by the mass media pounding "woman hater" and "bad businessman" in your heads that you can't even take the time to think about the danger that the other candidate brings to this country. Real present danger. Not just "he's an asshole" fear mongering fake danger.
I know you guys all want proof but it's simply not going to be presented to you as a smoking gun and it especially wont be presented to you by the mass media outlets who are doing their damn best to cover her ass on this entire thing until the bottom eventually drops out and they're forced to cover the corruption. The funny thing is that you'll refuse to believe there is any sort of corruption going on here because we don't have proof but I guarantee in 10 years if news broke that most of this stuff was true, you'd either ignore it because it doesn't pique your interest anymore or you'd just say haha you'd have to be an idiot to not think it was going on. Conspiracies are true way more often than we think and they are much more simple and realistic than aliens and lizard people.
50PoundHead
Hessmania Forever
People can gripe about The New York Times, but The Wall Street Journal has probably the best--and least biased--reporting outfit in the world.
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
Can't wait for the movie.
bravesnumberone
Well-known member
Which is why their reporting on the Clinton Foundation investigation being a thing and other outlets choosing to ignore it is interesting.