Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 73
Thanks Tree107Thanks

Thread: Trump is attacking the First Amendment

  1. #11
    A Character Tennyson's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    2,266
    Thanks
    503

    From
    Barsoom
    Quote Originally Posted by Chief View Post
    No.

    Everyone is entitled to their opinion so long as it doesn't impact their work. Unless you can demonstrate it impacted their work, their opinions are irrelevant.
    Those are not opinions in their professional capacities. Those are political statements in the course of their jobs that demonstrate a likelihood of bias at a government job that demands being non-political.

  2. #12
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    64,503
    Thanks
    36057

    From
    in my head
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennyson View Post
    Nothing has to be proved to substantiate my statement. The evidence points to a blatant appearance of unfairness and political bias. The FBI and the DIJ are supposed to be non-political and unbiased.
    The problem with your argument--it is based on appearance. Everyone has biases, which they express privately. The appearance of impropriety is only a question when those thoughts are made public, which wasn't voluntary on the part of these FBI agents.

  3. #13
    Moderator HayJenn's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    51,618
    Thanks
    39664

    From
    CA
    Quote Originally Posted by Chief View Post
    Prove that their opinions influenced their work.
    The FISA judge was informed that the dossier came from a political source. Doesn't matter. Bias is not against the law.
    Thanks from Friday13 and EnigmaO01

  4. #14
    A Character Tennyson's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    2,266
    Thanks
    503

    From
    Barsoom
    Quote Originally Posted by Rasselas View Post
    The problem with your argument--it is based on appearance. Everyone has biases, which they express privately. The appearance of impropriety is only a question when those thoughts are made public, which wasn't voluntary on the part of these FBI agents.
    My argument is based on appearances, the body of the texts, the perception of interfering with the election, and the higher standard FBI agents are legally held to.

    The Department of Justices Handbook for On and Off-Duty Conduct.


    14 General Principles of Ethical Conduct

    Employees shall not knowingly make unauthorized commitments or promises of any kind purporting to bind the Government.

    Employees shall endeavor to avoid any actions creating the appearance that they are violating the law or the ethical standards set forth in this part. Whether particular circumstances create an appearance that the law or these standards have been violated shall be determined from the perspective of a reasonable person with knowledge of the relevant facts

    An employee shall endeavor to avoid any actions creating the appearance that the employee is violating the law or the ethical standards set forth in this part.

    Strzok is married to Melissa Hodgman and was having an affair with an FBI attorney who was the recipient of his texts. Mueller gave Strzok the axe over this. It is not defensible.

  5. #15
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    64,503
    Thanks
    36057

    From
    in my head
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennyson View Post
    My argument is based on appearances, the body of the texts, the perception of interfering with the election, and the higher standard FBI agents are legally held to.

    The Department of Justices Handbook for On and Off-Duty Conduct.


    14 General Principles of Ethical Conduct

    Employees shall not knowingly make unauthorized commitments or promises of any kind purporting to bind the Government.

    Employees shall endeavor to avoid any actions creating the appearance that they are violating the law or the ethical standards set forth in this part. Whether particular circumstances create an appearance that the law or these standards have been violated shall be determined from the perspective of a reasonable person with knowledge of the relevant facts

    An employee shall endeavor to avoid any actions creating the appearance that the employee is violating the law or the ethical standards set forth in this part.

    Strzok is married to Melissa Hodgman and was having an affair with an FBI attorney who was the recipient of his texts. Mueller gave Strzok the axe over this. It is not defensible.
    Giving someone the axe over revelations of some private communication is appropriate. Expecting people never to share private communications, or never to have political opinions, is not.
    Thanks from Ian Jeffrey and EnigmaO01

  6. #16
    A Character Tennyson's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    2,266
    Thanks
    503

    From
    Barsoom
    Quote Originally Posted by HayJenn View Post
    The FISA judge was informed that the dossier came from a political source. Doesn't matter. Bias is not against the law.
    Was the judge told that Steele was terminated by the FBI for misconduct? Was the judge told that Steele is a foreigner who stated that he wanted to prevent Trump from winning the election? Was the judge told that the second source cited as verifying the dossier was actually Steel's creation?

  7. #17
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    64,503
    Thanks
    36057

    From
    in my head
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennyson View Post
    Was the judge told that Steele was terminated by the FBI for misconduct? Was the judge told that Steele is a foreigner who stated that he wanted to prevent Trump from winning the election? Was the judge told that the second source cited as verifying the dossier was actually Steel's creation?
    Was the Steele report the only evidence offered or did it corroborate other intelligence presented to the judge?
    Thanks from Friday13 and EnigmaO01

  8. #18
    A Character Tennyson's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    2,266
    Thanks
    503

    From
    Barsoom
    Quote Originally Posted by Rasselas View Post
    Giving someone the axe over revelations of some private communication is appropriate. Expecting people never to share private communications, or never to have political opinions, is not.
    FBI agents are not average people in the context of their mandated on and off behavior.

    Extolling hate for Trump and writing out what they did is not political opinion, and it was done in their professional capacities, which violates their explicit workplace prohibition of such acts.
    Thanks from carpe diem

  9. #19
    Moderator HayJenn's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    51,618
    Thanks
    39664

    From
    CA
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennyson View Post
    Was the judge told that Steele was terminated by the FBI for misconduct? Was the judge told that Steele is a foreigner who stated that he wanted to prevent Trump from winning the election? Was the judge told that the second source cited as verifying the dossier was actually Steel's creation?
    I have no idea. Neither you nor I have seen the FISA warrant in it's entirely for a good reason.

    And Steel's comment on Trump was because he had proof that Russia had comprised him. Why would you want a POTUS that has been comprised by a foreign adversary?

    But like others here, you seem to be taking the track that the judge had no idea what he/she was doing.

    Weak.
    Thanks from Friday13

  10. #20
    A Character Tennyson's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    2,266
    Thanks
    503

    From
    Barsoom
    Quote Originally Posted by Rasselas View Post
    Was the Steele report the only evidence offered or did it corroborate other intelligence presented to the judge?
    To be honest, I have no idea. I am following it peripherally as it is a train wreck on all sides and I very, very rarely read news or listen to the news. I gain a couple of IQ points each day for not doing so.

Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Trump continues attacking the 1st amendment
    By OHjulie in forum Current Events
    Replies: 91
    Last Post: 28th May 2017, 12:45 PM
  2. Turkey attacking US allies, what will Trump do?
    By The Man in forum Current Events
    Replies: 66
    Last Post: 7th March 2017, 06:34 PM
  3. Why Buffet is attacking Trump
    By Friday13 in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 2nd August 2016, 11:56 PM
  4. Trump Now Attacking GW
    By MaryAnne in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 17th October 2015, 09:13 AM
  5. Trump boo'ed at Rightwing conference for attacking Rubio-
    By GordonGecko in forum Current Events
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 25th September 2015, 03:15 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed