Russia Collusion Scandal (aka A Leftist fantasy)

Julio3000 said:
So do you (and you, thethe) think the NY FBI source(s) who "leaked" the imminent indictment story right before the election were on the level? Do you think it's analogous to a member of the Mueller team privately expressing a political opinion? Are you prepared to say that the Clinton Foundation investigation was in no way politically motivated, even though it was reportedly initiated based on allegations in a Mercer/Bannon-backed book?

Bear in mind, Mueller's guy was pulled from the investigation, and if he did anything else, we'll find out because apparently he's going to be investigated by the DoJ IG.

So there's accountability there. Just as there was for Brian Ross's corrected report.

Has there been any accountability for the FBI personnel who fed Baier a fake story? For Baier? For Fox with regard to the retracted Seth Rich story which was designed to publicly undercut the Russia investigation? It's really hard to take the woe-is-us claims of taint and bias seriously if you're only willing to consider one side.

It's fine to ask those questions, and it's obvious that doing is so is part of the PR strategy to push back on the investigation. Clinton did the same thing, albeit less ham-fistedly than Trump ranting about the FBI on Twitter. It's less fine to assume you know the answers.

To some degree, it's all just akin to working the refs.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure where you are going with all of this. Especially since the situations don't really parallel.

Did you want Bret Baier suspended for 4 weeks? Fox News to apologize to Clinton? Baier apologized, corrected his report, didn't try to squirm around the situation (which he, and the network, easily could have). So the gripe about accountability falls short of the mark to me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=nlmp4ZlyTHU

Plus, it's not like Baier had a jacket of nefariously erroneous reporting nearly as thick as the one on Ross.
 
I can't believe we have gone from collusion to the Logan act. That's quirk the pivot after screaming about collusion for over a year.
 
Hawk said:
I'm not sure where you are going with all of this. Especially since the situations don't really parallel.

Did you want Bret Baier suspended for 4 weeks? Fox News to apologize to Clinton? Baier apologized, corrected his report, didn't try to squirm around the situation (which he, and the network, easily could have). So the gripe about accountability falls short of the mark to me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=nlmp4ZlyTHU

Plus, it's not like Baier had a jacket of nefariously erroneous reporting nearly as thick as the one on Ross.
Click to expand...

More just commentary on how we're responding to it.

Or is your biggest concern really Brian Ross's credibility and probity?
 
Julio3000 said:
More just commentary on how we're responding to it.

Or is your biggest concern really Brian Ross's credibility and probity?
Click to expand...

I believe that (drastic) shifts in public opinion have the ability to sustain or suffocate the Mueller investigation, and I believe that is precisely why we've seen him leak what he has, when he has. I want to put G-men in a separate stack, in terms of how they play the game, but it is kinda curious how Ross (that guy) was the journalist fingered to take this particular angle to press. Especially since it fomented excitement and massive interest in a legal transaction that a) we'd known was coming for days (Flynn's cooperation, specifically) and b) isn't that exciting.

I mean nsacpi about stroked out.

That's my concern here. And those who broke into the NYE bubbly a month early.
 
I don't know enough to comment on that, except that you seem to be suggesting of that that leak came from the Mueller side. I'm not sure why that should be the conclusion, particularly as it was attributed to a Flynn confidant. If you're wondering why that[/] guy, it would seem more substantial to speculate that he was intentionally burned...the day it happened there was more than one journalist who said that they were going to withhold judgment until it was confirmed because of Ross's history.
 
Hawk said:
I believe that (drastic) shifts in public opinion have the ability to sustain or suffocate the Mueller investigation, and I believe that is precisely why we've seen him leak what he has, when he has. I want to put G-men in a separate stack, in terms of how they play the game, but it is kinda curious how Ross (that guy) was the journalist fingered to take this particular angle to press. Especially since it fomented excitement and massive interest in a legal transaction that a) we'd known was coming for days (Flynn's cooperation, specifically) and b) isn't that exciting.

I mean nsacpi about stroked out.

That's my concern here. And those who broke into the NYE bubbly a month early.
Click to expand...

When an even keeled, intelligent thoughtful person like nsacpi had that reaction you can see this had far reaching impact.
 
Julio3000 said:
I don't know enough to comment on that, except that you seem to be suggesting of that that leak came from the Mueller side. I'm not sure why that should be the conclusion, particularly as it was attributed to a Flynn confidant. If you're wondering why that[/] guy, it would seem more substantial to speculate that he was intentionally burned...the day it happened there was more than one journalist who said that they were going to withhold judgment until it was confirmed because of Ross's history.
Click to expand...


True enough. It's all just pretty baseless speculation on my part.

So you think the "fake news" ammo here is more valuable to the President than the actual incorrect report was damaging? I can see that too.
 
Fake News has to be a thing since Moore is back up in AL polls. And like a third of Alabamans believe the allegations of him are made up by the news.
 
Forever Fredi said:
Fake News has to be a thing since Moore is back up in AL polls. And like a third of Alabamans believe the allegations of him are made up by the news.
Click to expand...

Its gross, but predictable. I think the fake news aspect of Alabama is inconsequential.

This is what should be expected when your election process pits two contrasting ideologies against one another. Good luck trying to convince a conservative to vote for someone who Pro-Choice when the alternative is someone that perfectly aligns with your political sensibilities even if that person has horrific allegations from their past. It’s not as if we are asking Alabama to vote whether to legalize statutory rape.
 
Julio3000 said:
Flynn lied to the FBI. That part is as-yet unexplained in the "he was just lawfully doing his job" argument. As is the fact that he wasn't fired (err, resigned) for weeks after it was brought to the attention of the WH.
Click to expand...

Yes, I wrote incomplete.

Raises the question , what did he lie about ?
Why ?
..................

The Trumpian excuse Trump saying "this is all they have"!!!
Pretty low bar when the NSA Director takes a plea for lying to the FBI.
How many times have we wondered, why are they lying ?

All Mueller has -- nah --
 
Ted Lieu‏Verified account @tedlieu
4h4 hours ago

Ted Lieu Retweeted CNN

White House is now really desperate. They realize Trump committed Obstruction of Justice. So they are using defense that @POTUS is above the law. Except the central lesson of Watergate is no one is above the law. First Article of Impeachment for Nixon was Obstruction of Justice.

...............................

again, why?
What was there to hide !
 
Hawk said:
True enough. It's all just pretty baseless speculation on my part.

So you think the "fake news" ammo here is more valuable to the President than the actual incorrect report was damaging? I can see that too.
Click to expand...

I do, but of course that is purely speculative, too.

It's also possible that Ross massively misconstrued (honestly or not) what was said and it was rushed to air to win a race. That doesn't say much for ABC's process, but it's possible.

I don't think it's at all likely that it came from Mueller's side. There is no incentive for him to telegraph what he has, and, as you point out, the success of his investigation to some degree depends on the credibility that the public invests in it, so something like this would be a weird, no-upside way of affecting that dynamic.
 
We are basically at the point where it's obvious what type of criminal organization runs this country and it ain't the Don.
 
The collusion and Hillary investigations have provided reason to question the integrity of the FBI. Something is going on behind the scenes that should scare any citizen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top