Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 73
Thanks Tree107Thanks

Thread: Trump is attacking the First Amendment

  1. #21
    Moderator HayJenn's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    47,615
    Thanks
    36779

    From
    CA
    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?
    Other evidence linked to Page and Papadopoulos was in Nune's "memo". That evidence was key to the FISA warrant. The dossier was a small piece.
    Thanks from EnigmaO01

  2. #22
    quichierbichen
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    63,158
    Thanks
    34742

    From
    in my head
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennyson View Post
    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.
    Texts aren't quite like spoken conversations and yet aren't quite "writing out" either. Your standard seems perhaps unrealistic for people who know each other well. And their political talk was much more general than just Trump. From the OP:
    Collectively, the texts show the two officials disliked Trump and feared what he might do as president, and they freely intermingled talk of politics with talk of work. But the pair also seemed to harbor animosity for many other politicians, including Democrats, and even co-workers.
    Thanks from EnigmaO01

  3. #23
    quichierbichen
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    63,158
    Thanks
    34742

    From
    in my head
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennyson View Post
    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.
    It hasn't done your sense of self-worth any harm either.
    Thanks from EnigmaO01

  4. #24
    A Character Tennyson's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,873
    Thanks
    405

    From
    Barsoom
    Quote Originally Posted by HayJenn View Post
    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.
    Provide the timeline and evidence that this September of 2016 statement by Steele, a foreigner, was a reaction to Russia compromising Trump: "...was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being president...."

    The more evidence that the judge was giving all the relevent extraneous information regarding the dossier, the more it seems the judge should be impeached and removed from the bench.

  5. #25
    A Character Tennyson's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,873
    Thanks
    405

    From
    Barsoom
    Quote Originally Posted by Rasselas View Post
    Texts aren't quite like spoken conversations and yet aren't quite "writing out" either. Your standard seems perhaps unrealistic for people who know each other well. And their political talk was much more general than just Trump. From the OP:
    My standard is the exact standard that caused Mueller to axe him. So I feel fine with my standard.

    Knowing each other well as in two married FBI employees with security clearances having an affair, which can cause them to lose their security clearances, is a horrible excuse.

  6. #26
    A Character Tennyson's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,873
    Thanks
    405

    From
    Barsoom
    Quote Originally Posted by Rasselas View Post
    It hasn't done your sense of self-worth any harm either.
    Gravitating towards the gutter again. It will not work with me.

  7. #27
    quichierbichen
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    63,158
    Thanks
    34742

    From
    in my head
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennyson View Post
    My standard is the exact standard that caused Mueller to axe him. So I feel fine with my standard.
    But the reason for the appearance was that the texts were made public. You think all texts between FBI agents should be public domain?

    Knowing each other well as in two married FBI employees with security clearances having an affair, which can cause them to lose their security clearances, is a horrible excuse.
    Not sure their affair is germane to the larger question.
    Thanks from EnigmaO01

  8. #28
    quichierbichen
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    63,158
    Thanks
    34742

    From
    in my head
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennyson View Post
    Gravitating towards the gutter again. It will not work with me.
    I'm nowhere near the gutter. You were snarky. I was snarky in return. Don't say something "will not work with" you when you practice it. Passive aggressive hypocrisy.
    Thanks from EnigmaO01

  9. #29
    Veteran Member Madeline's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    54,014
    Thanks
    31035

    From
    Cleveland, Ohio
    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.

    Peter Strzok to Lisa Page:

    I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office (Andrew McCabe) that there’s no way he gets elected — but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40.

    So look, you say we can text on that phone when we talk about Hillary because it can't be traced.

    Strzok et al. are now working for Mueller.
    You are asserting FBI agents have no freedom of thought or expression. This argument is often made about government employees, especially the military. I don't think it's correct.

    That exchange was private, and without proof that either agent changed their conduct from the standards of professionalism in accordance with the distaste they had for Trump, I don't think there's a crime or even a disciplinary offense.

    If General A tells General B he hates Trump in a private conversation, but carries out his orders faithfully, has he violated the law?
    Thanks from Friday13 and EnigmaO01

  10. #30
    Veteran Member Chief's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    26,931
    Thanks
    7614

    From
    Earth
    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.
    Having an affair is something that can make the FBI question your integrity, etc.... that's clearly an offence that can get someone fired. Having an opinion is not.
    Thanks from Madeline and EnigmaO01

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Trump continues attacking the 1st amendment
    By OHjulie in forum Current Events
    Replies: 91
    Last Post: 28th May 2017, 01:45 PM
  2. Turkey attacking US allies, what will Trump do?
    By The Man in forum Current Events
    Replies: 66
    Last Post: 7th March 2017, 07:34 PM
  3. Why Buffet is attacking Trump
    By Friday13 in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 3rd August 2016, 12:56 AM
  4. Trump Now Attacking GW
    By MaryAnne in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 17th October 2015, 10:13 AM
  5. Trump boo'ed at Rightwing conference for attacking Rubio-
    By GordonGecko in forum Current Events
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 25th September 2015, 04:15 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed