The hypocrisy of the ________

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by mooby

The beauty of a criminal investigation is that once it goes to trial, actual evidence is what determines if a person is guilty or not. Was Strzok corrupted by personal bias? Yes, but unless the game plan was to use Strzok's testimony in court that Drumpf is an incompetent boob, it's not going to make a difference. This whole case is contingent upon evidence that Drumpf/co. colluded with Russians. So they will either need someone from that circle to flip and testify (like Flynn perhaps) and/or they will need actual evidence, let's say bank accounts, phone records, video of them meeting up, etc. to prove they committed a crime.

What are you asking for, a totally non-partisan team of investigators to investigate? LOL we might as well shut the investigation down then.

As the old saying goes, what are you afraid of? If you don't have anything to hide, you're in the clear.

This. Evidence should be what wins the day. I hate Donald Trump more than anyone on this planet, and I would actually work damn hard to find something concrete. If I didn't find something, then hey, I'm just a guy who hates Trump. If I did, whatever, the proof is still in the delicious, delicious pudding.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

FBI agent's anti-Trump text messages released to Congress - CNNPolitics




So this is an unbiased investigation?

This investigation is clearly biased... Mueller gotta lotta plaining to do. Consider yourself officially "WOKE"

Chico ,news flash ,everyone in this country has an opinion on trump.Who was the FBI agent texting when he wrote that text???


Chico ,I like you but you need to educate yourself.


Newest Additions to Our Trump-Russia Timeline



As others have pointed out,if facts come to light it doesn't matter what my opinion is as long as the facts are true or the information is truthful.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Giantone

Chico ,news flash ,everyone in this country has an opinion on trump.Who was the FBI agent texting when he wrote that text???


Chico ,I like you but you need to educate yourself.


Newest Additions to Our Trump-Russia Timeline



As others have pointed out,if facts come to light it doesn't matter what my opinion is as long as the facts are true or the information is truthful.

Sorry, and I know it's tit for tat, and old news, and all that crap, BUT when in one investigation Abedin lied about the email servers in an interview with the biased FBI investigator and that's NOT obstruction of justice or worthy of charging her with lying to the FBI as determined by the acknowledged biased investigator, and then Flynn lied about a legal activity (contacting Russia as staff of the President elect), to the same investigator and IS charged, then I think it's reasonable to question if the investigator acted in bad faith, and the "facts" received are somehow tainted.

In the Clinton case, the Daily Caller reported that FBI documents show Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills told investigators they were not aware of Clinton’s email server until after Clinton left the State Department. However, released emails show Abedin and Mills discussing the server long before Clinton left the State Department. The two were both interviewed by Strzok and never faced criminal prosecution.

On the other hand, Michael Flynn, Trump’s first national security adviser, was charged with lying to the FBI last week for dishonest statements he gave in an interview with the FBI on Jan. 24. Strzok was the agent who interviewed him

[mooby]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Except when the same investigator handles two similar situations (Flynn and Abedin) in two polar opposite ways with a clear stated bias.

True, hence why he was removed from his job and demoted. And fortunately for you, he wasn't in a position to decide whether or not to bring charges anyways. So if all he brought to the table was corrupt bullshit, you are saying you don't have faith in Mueller that he could correctly decide whether that evidence would be admissible in court. Nor do you have faith that a pro-Republican Congress could look at that same evidence and determine whether it's admissible or not. This case is not going to built on his testimony. I bet Flynn will be the star witness, most likely along intercepts from Russia and other circumstantial bits and pieces used to tie it together.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by mooby

True, hence why he was removed from his job and demoted. And fortunately for you, he wasn't in a position to decide whether or not to bring charges anyways. So if all he brought to the table was corrupt bullshit, you are saying you don't have faith in Mueller that he could correctly decide whether that evidence would be admissible in court. Nor do you have faith that a pro-Republican Congress could look at that same evidence and determine whether it's admissible or not. This case is not going to built on his testimony. I bet Flynn will be the star witness, most likely along intercepts from Russia and other circumstantial bits and pieces used to tie it together.

I said before, if a majority Republican house sees the evidence and votes to impeach, or if the Supreme Court upholds the removal from office, I will abide by that.

But it's interesting, how many cases Baltimore just threw out on the basis of fake evidence by biased cops. The question is could a clearly biased investigator either by omitting evidence that clears or allowing patently false evidence (Steele Dossier) into the record, sway a case to a false end?

I think so...

[mooby]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I said before, if a majority Republican house sees the evidence and votes to impeach, or if the Supreme Court upholds the removal from office, I will abide by that.

But it's interesting, how many cases Baltimore just threw out on the basis of fake evidence by biased cops. The question is could a clearly biased investigator either by omitting evidence that clears or allowing patently false evidence (Steele Dossier) into the record, sway a case to a false end?

I think so...

The beauty of it is that it's a team of investigators, so if one of them deliberately withheld evidence you'd like to assume there would be enough checks and balances in place to ensure it's not passed over. Additionally, in light of the fact he was removed for bias, you would also assume they are going over all his contributions to make sure they didn't miss anything, especially because it's going to be heavily scrutinized in court.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by mooby

The beauty of it is that it's a team of investigators, so if one of them deliberately withheld evidence you'd like to assume there would be enough checks and balances in place to ensure it's not passed over. Additionally, in light of the fact he was removed for bias, you would also assume they are going over all his contributions to make sure they didn't miss anything, especially because it's going to be heavily scrutinized in court.

well Politifact has this to say (before the removal of Stroetz (sp))

Duffy says Mueller "has brought in Democrat campaign donors at a very high level" on his team of lawyers.

Six of the 15 lawyers who have been publicly identified have not made campaign contributions to any political campaigns at the federal level. But among the lawyers who did make contributions, a total of $62,043 went to Democrats and $2,750 to Republicans, according to the special counsel’s office.

As for a Democratic bias in the investigation, Duffy doesn’t specifically make that charge. But Mueller himself is a longtime Republican. And he is prohibited from choosing lawyers based on political affiliations.

For a statement that is partially accurate, our rating is Half True.

So there is some level of affiliation bias likely in the team. I hope they are setting it aside, and if facts of guilt do come out, I hope they aren't concealed by classified or other bureacratic red tape. IF Trump did somehow collude with the Russians illegally then he should be gone.

BUT, so far what we KNOW is that the DNC run by HC funded the creation of a false dossier with the HELP OF THE RUSSIANS through an intermediary, AND that the FBI at the encouragement of a now exposed biased investigator may have used that fraudelent document to WIRETAP Hillary Clinton's opponent (Trump)'s team in the election.

So forgive me, if I am not seeing charges Trump but I do see a case for charges against Clinton, SURE WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT WAS IN THOSE DELETED EMAILS.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

well Politifact has this to say (before the removal of Stroetz (sp))



So there is some level of affiliation bias likely in the team. I hope they are setting it aside, and if facts of guilt do come out, I hope they aren't concealed by classified or other bureacratic red tape. IF Trump did somehow collude with the Russians illegally then he should be gone.

BUT, so far what we KNOW is that the DNC run by HC funded the creation of a false dossier with the HELP OF THE RUSSIANS through an intermediary, AND that the FBI at the encouragement of a now exposed biased investigator may have used that fraudelent document to WIRETAP Hillary Clinton's opponent (Trump)'s team in the election.

So forgive me, if I am not seeing charges Trump but I do see a case for charges against Clinton, SURE WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT WAS IN THOSE DELETED EMAILS.

See this has nothing to do with Mueller,it has to do with GOP crybaby BS that if they go after trump they must go after Hillary.


Hillary went through eight House investigations and they found nothing,go back to my link they have trump underlings to the tee .People are afraid that Mueller is going to find something so they want him gone,Facts be damn!

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Giantone

See this has nothing to do with Mueller,it has to do with GOP crybaby BS that if they go after trump they must go after Hillary.


Hillary went through eight House investigations and they found nothing,go back to my link they have trump underlings to the tee .People are afraid that Mueller is going to find something so they want him gone,Facts be damn!

It is not BS. Everything I said is open knowledge except how or if the dossier relates to the fisa warrant.

So far Mueller has not presented any factual basis for any charges against Trump. If there are facts - not innuendo and leaks - that present a compelling case then when they are shown we can discuss them. For now the facts that are coming out, bias investigator, a team with a minimum of 8 democratic partisans including one who defended the Clinton foundation, proven facts that documents were deleted and lied with no charges filed, about all point to a less then unbiased fact finding mission.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

It is not BS. Everything I said is open knowledge except how or if the dossier relates to the fisa warrant.

So far Mueller has not presented any factual basis for any charges against Trump. If there are facts - not innuendo and leaks - that present a compelling case then when they are shown we can discuss them. For now the facts that are coming out, bias investigator, a team with a minimum of 8 democratic partisans including one who defended the Clinton foundation, proven facts that documents were deleted and lied with no charges filed, about all point to a less then unbiased fact finding mission.

LOL, yes ,yes it is BS. You continue the presumption of bias without any proof of it. Go back to the time line link I gave,where if any of it is false?

Interactive Timeline: Everything We Know About Russia and President Trump


https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/...201843092.html

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Giantone

LOL, yes ,yes it is BS. You continue the presumption of bias without any proof of it. Go back to the time line link I gave,where if any of it is false?

Interactive Timeline: Everything We Know About Russia and President Trump


https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/...201843092.html

There is proof of bias, in that the FBI Investigator was demoted and reprimanded. How far that bias went, we don't know.

As to your timeline link, 6 events happen in the timeframe of the primaries and the 2016 election. None of which points to anything close to illegal, Although a VK page would be a stupid move for any Republican candidate. (Surprised Hillary didn't though cutesy wink )


Some are from before Pres Obama was elected.

The rest occur once Trump is President Elect.

NONE of your timeline is illegal in terms of Trump's actions, and the charges that were filed so far are procedural (I understand that is part of trying to get the big fish).

BUT, Huma did lie to the FBI and was not charged. Hillary DID takeover the DNC and rig the Democratic Primaries. Hillary and the DNC did pay for the Russian portion of the Steele Dossier. A democratic leaning investigator who feels like you do about Trump WAS dismissed from the investigation.

I have stated that IF Trump is convicted in the Senate, and that conviction stands, or if he resigns like Nixon, I will accept that.

Now let me ask Trump haters

• IF Mueller's investigation ends with no documented charges against Trump will you accept that conclusion.

[CRedskinsRule]

I am curious how people interpret this text from Strzok

“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office - that there’s no way he gets elected - but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk,” Strzok texted on Aug. 15, 2016. “It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40.”*

[mooby]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

There is proof of bias, in that the FBI Investigator was demoted and reprimanded. How far that bias went, we don't know.

As to your timeline link, 6 events happen in the timeframe of the primaries and the 2016 election. None of which points to anything close to illegal, Although a VK page would be a stupid move for any Republican candidate. (Surprised Hillary didn't though cutesy wink )


Some are from before Pres Obama was elected.

The rest occur once Trump is President Elect.

NONE of your timeline is illegal in terms of Trump's actions, and the charges that were filed so far are procedural (I understand that is part of trying to get the big fish).

BUT, Huma did lie to the FBI and was not charged. Hillary DID takeover the DNC and rig the Democratic Primaries. Hillary and the DNC did pay for the Russian portion of the Steele Dossier. A democratic leaning investigator who feels like you do about Trump WAS dismissed from the investigation.

I have stated that IF Trump is convicted in the Senate, and that conviction stands, or if he resigns like Nixon, I will accept that.

Now let me ask Trump haters

• IF Mueller's investigation ends with no documented charges against Trump will you accept that conclusion.

Yes. I do have faith in the investigation team and if they find Flynn was acting on his own behalf then so be it.

However, I also believe because Flynn was in a leadership position on the transition team, he was also acting on Trump/Trump Jr's/Kushner's behalf. If he wasn't doing anything illegal, he wouldn't have been charged, and also pled guilty.

TBH, I find this discussion semi-pointless because obviously the investigation hasn't concluded yet. Why rush them? If there's nothing to hide, they will eventually come to that conclusion, and there's nothing to fear. So sit back, and let them come to that conclusion. The FBI isn't the judge and jury here, and I doubt a Republican majority in Congress is going to do anything unless they have some damn solid proof this was an organizational effort to collude with Russia.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by mooby

Yes. I do have faith in the investigation team and if they find Flynn was acting on his own behalf then so be it.

However, I also believe because Flynn was in a leadership position on the transition team, he was also acting on Trump/Trump Jr's/Kushner's behalf. If he wasn't doing anything illegal, he wouldn't have been charged, and also pled guilty.

TBH, I find this discussion semi-pointless because obviously the investigation hasn't concluded yet. Why rush them? If there's nothing to hide, they will eventually come to that conclusion, and there's nothing to fear. So sit back, and let them come to that conclusion. The FBI isn't the judge and jury here, and I doubt a Republican majority in Congress is going to do anything unless they have some damn solid proof this was an organizational effort to collude with Russia.

CR, I agree with Mooby ...to a point.Yes there is a very god chance all these others were doing what they did for trump and there wasn't any collusion but you said something about resigning like Nixon. You do realize Nixon was never part of the original Watergate investigation right,he got nailed in the cover up of it and I (IMPO) think trump will get nailed the same way.Mueller team is honest and I believe will find proof that many more of trumps underlings are dirty.Remember that is what trump does,he requires an oath of allegiance to him and will throw anyone he can under the bus.

My question to Chico and CR,you believe there is bias in the investigation and the media ....everywhere,what about a jury? How do you suppose we make sure there is no bias on the jury,regardless of bias by whomever a jury must decide on actual facts ,correct? The trumplings that have been snagged all have admitted to their wrong doing,what bias is there in that?

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by Giantone

Chico ,news flash ,everyone in this country has an opinion on trump.Who was the FBI agent texting when he wrote that text???


Chico ,I like you but you need to educate yourself.


Newest Additions to Our Trump-Russia Timeline



As others have pointed out,if facts come to light it doesn't matter what my opinion is as long as the facts are true or the information is truthful.

Your rationalize of those facts I presented as just “opinions people have” is perfect for this thread. Because if this was president Hillary Clinton with an investigation against her emails, server, etc being lead by a team of trump supporters, with biased text messages against Hillary, with a lead investigator who had pushed a fictitious dossier which was funded by the Republican Party, etc. then you would have zero problem with it...right?