Spygate and the Trump Campaign. - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14918518
Hong Wu wrote:Clearly from an unbiased source that calls it a "public campaign of dissimulation". This is like an incompetent school bully who complains when you fight back.

The primary source was Giuliani, that gift which keeps giving.
#14918529
Hong Wu wrote:Trump: If FBI spy was there after Russians and not us, why didn't they tell us what Russia was trying to do?

I'm not sure what the answer to that is supposed to be but it's a pretty strong question, perhaps even stronger than the "why is there an investigation if they already had an informant" question.

From your own link: "It was also reported in late 2017 that the FBI did, in fact, warn the Trump campaign of possible Russian meddling."

In the weeks after he became the Republican nominee on July 19, 2016, Donald Trump was warned that foreign adversaries, including Russia, would probably try to spy on and infiltrate his campaign, according to multiple government officials familiar with the matter.

The warning came in the form of a high-level counterintelligence briefing by senior FBI officials, the officials said. A similar briefing was given to Hillary Clinton, they added. They said the briefings, which are commonly provided to presidential nominees, were designed to educate the candidates and their top aides about potential threats from foreign spies.
...
By the time of the warning in late July or August, at least seven Trump campaign officials had been in contact with Russians or people linked to Russia, according to public reports. There is no public evidence that the campaign reported any of that to the FBI.

After the FBI warning, the candidate's son, Donald Trump Jr., exchanged Twitter messages in September with Wikileaks, which the U.S. intelligence community publicly accused in October of acting as an agent in Russia's covert operation to interfere in the election.
...
That same month, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, then a senator running the Trump campaign's foreign policy operation, met with Russia's ambassador to the U.S., Sergey Kislyak, in his Senate office -- a meeting he failed to disclose during his confirmation hearing. (Sessions said he routinely met with foreign officials as a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.)

"If I give you a defensive briefing and the illicit behavior continues, I'm not going to just scratch my head over that, especially if I see continued interference," Montoya said. "If we're telling these guys stuff and they are not acting on it, then we're going to keep that as evidence."
...
In May 2016, Trump Jr. met at a National Rifle Association dinner with a Russian central banker with ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin who had previously contacted the campaign saying he wanted to pass on a message from the Russian president to Trump.

Also in May, Trump was told by campaign aide George Papadopoulos that he had connections with people who could facilitate a meeting between the candidate and Putin, according to a court filing. Papadopoulos had met with a London-based professor two weeks earlier who claimed to have connections to Russian officials, according to court documents.

In June 2016, Trump Jr. hosted a meeting in Trump Tower with a Russian lawyer with ties to the Kremlin, and a Russian-American lobbyist. Paul Manafort and Jared Kushner also sat in. An email to Trump Jr. setting up the meeting promised incriminating information about Clinton as part of a Russian government effort to help the Trump campaign.

In July 2016, Manafort sent an email offering a private briefing on the Trump campaign to his former business partner, a Russian oligarch with ties to Putin.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/fb ... gn-n830596

It's laughable for the Trump campaign to whine "they didn't give us enough warning that they were onto us". These people are meant to be adults, with an understanding of the law, and a vague idea of the office they want to get elected to. Now they're falling back on "hey, we're so dumb, we didn't realise that all these foreigners trying to help get us elected might have been doing it for their own reasons that are not in the best interests of the USA, and that there are laws against outside interference in elections". it looks like there are a few people in the world gullible enough to fall for it, though.

I cannot understand why anyone thinks "why is there an investigation if they already had an informant" is a "strong" question. It's a dumb question. If someone tells you there could be illegal activity going on, you don't say "well, we've got an informant, so there will never be any need to look at the information he is giving us".
#14918530
Crantag wrote:The primary source was Giuliani, that gift which keeps giving.

This is just "Obama was wire tapping me" phase 2. Trump trying to discredit the witnesses against him before he even gets indicted. I think he'd like to just "Fire" the entire FBI.

Image

Zam :|
#14918658
Prosthetic Conscience wrote:Now they're falling back on "hey, we're so dumb, we didn't realise that all these foreigners trying to help get us elected might have been doing it for their own reasons that are not in the best interests of the USA, and that there are laws against outside interference in elections".

What laws are those? What does "interference" consist of? Our politicians are not allowed to take money from foreign sources. Nobody is alleging Trump took contributions from Russia. They can stand on the sidelines and cheer for one side or the other. There is no law agains that, but it usually isn't done.

Zamuel wrote:Trump trying to discredit the witnesses against him before he even gets indicted. I think he'd like to just "Fire" the entire FBI.

Well, he shouldn't because they are hurting their own cause. Democrats are doing stupid things like fighting the wall and taking sides with MS-13 murderers against the president. If anything, you'd think Trump had spies in Nancy Pelosi's organization that were convincingly dispensing with bad advice..
#14918714
The FBI needs to be disbanded, I do not even know if you can save it at this point by removing any political motivated personal in order to make it impartial. FBI has proven to intervene in domestic political affairs again and again. This is not the function of the institution, it is not supposed serve a political agenda but be an instrument of a government.

It can be replaced by a new organization that is apolitical in its function. At the same time I can see it is more likely the politicians themselves who abuse the function of FBI.
#14918719
Right, it can't possibly be because there is actual wrongdoing, it is just a political conspiracy that means the government has to be dismantled until they agree with your regime, even though you lot literally campaigned on using the FBI to investigate your opponent.

Maybe that's why you think it is politically biased, because you'd make it politically biased from day 1 if you could and can't comprehend not abusing power.
#14918723
Zagadka wrote:Maybe that's why you think it is politically biased, because you'd make it politically biased from day 1 if you could and can't comprehend not abusing power.

I'm sure that's the case in many instances, but I think there are also a lot of numbnuts out there who just want to "stick it" to the cops. It's an easy attitude to adopt given the behavior of some of these guys. But that's no excuse.

Zam
#14918738
Zagadka wrote:Right, it can't possibly be because there is actual wrongdoing, it is just a political conspiracy that means the government has to be dismantled until they agree with your regime, even though you lot literally campaigned on using the FBI to investigate your opponent.

Maybe that's why you think it is politically biased, because you'd make it politically biased from day 1 if you could and can't comprehend not abusing power.

Obama's administration ostensibly was conducting a criminal investigation, which they requested James Comey refer to publicly as a "matter" rather than a "criminal investigation." She was also clearly guilty. If she were not politically connected, she would be in jail right now. Compare what she did with General Flynn for example. Tell me there isn't more than a thumb on the scales of justice. Themis is peeking, that bitch.
#14918743
even a nitwit can see that this is just a croc of shit cooked up by Rudi and Donald to deflect from Donald's many issues. Donald demonstrates once again one of the paramount features of his reign: simple things for simple minds. what's next? a photo of Obama punking Hillary in the ass published in Donald's favorite newspaper, the National Enquirer?
#14921921
This one seems like a big deal: http://thefederalist.com/2018/06/06/fbi ... mp-russia/

The story up until recently was that the FBI began investigating the Trump campaign after Papadopoulos told a man named Downer (ironic name?) that the Russians might have and use "dirt" on Hillary Clinton in the form of hacked emails. The problem is, according to Downer and various other sources that have been analyzed, Papadopoulos never said that they had dirt or that it was emails, which disconnects his statement from the Russian hackers theory.

In an interview with The Australian, as Chuck Ross recently highlighted in The Daily Caller, Downer said Papadopoulos merely told him the “Russians might use material that they have on Hillary Clinton in the lead-up to the election, which may be damaging.” Papadopoulos “didn’t say dirt; he said material that could be damaging to her.” Downer also stressed Papadopoulos “didn’t say what it was.”

So if Papadopoulos never said anything about dirt or hacked emails, how could his statement connect the Trump campaign to alleged Russian hacking? The quote attributed to Papadopoulos here sounds like a complete non-statement to me, that Russians might use material that they have, which may be damaging. If this is accurate it couldn't possibly be enough in of itself to justify spying on a Presidential campaign.
#14921980
Speaker Paul D. Ryan agreed on Wednesday that the F.B.I. did nothing wrong by using a confidential informant to contact members of the Trump campaign as it investigated its ties to Russia, contradicting President Trump’s assertions of a broad conspiracy by federal law enforcement.

Trey Gowdy also insisted that the FBI did not, in fact, plant a spy in the Trump camp for political purposes. Rather, he said, the FBI appropriately deployed an informant to glean intelligence from members on the outer edge of Trump’s campaign. The FBI had received troubling evidence that those individuals had suspect ties to Russia, and the bureau had been obligated to pursue those legitimate leads, Gowdy said. Gowdy was immediately attacked by various Trump lackeys Including his cartoonish Minister of Propaganda Sean Hannity who said Wednesday that “Trey Gowdy doesn’t get it.”

Republicans showing hints of a backbone :eek: ?? Totally unexpected ……...
#14922149
Hong Wu wrote:So if Papadopoulos never said anything about dirt or hacked emails, how could his statement connect the Trump campaign to alleged Russian hacking? The quote attributed to Papadopoulos here sounds like a complete non-statement to me, that Russians might use material that they have, which may be damaging. If this is accurate it couldn't possibly be enough in of itself to justify spying on a Presidential campaign.

Because Papadopoulos was part of Trump's campaign. If a member of a campaign knows the Russians have material on an opponent that they might use against her during the campaign, this is an indication of knowledge that a crime may be committed. You would then ask "how does this person know about this - is it because they are colluding with the suspects? Since they'd stand to gain from the crime, they should be investigated too".

This has been your middle-school introduction to police work, or "how to watch a TV crime drama". Now you might be able to understand them, Hong.
#14922209
Lmao even Trey Gowdy, the guy who you can watch DESTROY the LIBS YouTube, said this was bullshit.

So obviously PoFo's dumbest posters spent the first page parroting bullshit back and forth at each other like some kind of support group for tinfoil clad retards.

Also lmfao at citing Scott Adams.
#14922211
Prosthetic Conscience wrote:Russians have material on an opponent that they might use against her during the campaign, this is an indication of knowledge that a crime may be committed. You would then ask "how does this person know about this - is it because they are colluding with the suspects?


Not quite … You then investigate EVERYTHING, you learn what ever you can. "Credibility" of a source is a major factor. You don't go "Looking for collusion" you just go looking. Sometimes what you find has serious implications. Investigating Papadopoulos was good police work, not a plot.

Zam
#14922213
If there is one knowledgeable and authoritative source I look up to it's Scott Adams. The guy who showed off his fucking ripped muscles with this pic:

Image

And also had to get elective throat surgery because he has a sadbrains condition that wouldn't let him talk for two years. That's who I, a normal person, look up to.
#14922214
Zamuel wrote:Not quite … You then investigate EVERYTHING, you learn what ever you can. "Credibility" of a source is a major factor. You don't go "Looking for collusion" you just go looking. Sometimes what you find has serious implications. Investigating Papadopoulos was good police work, not a plot.

Zam


That only holds true if they had notified Trump. They did not. Unless they have reason to believe he was involved then it is against all precedent not to inform him. They had no such reason. This makes it a plot.
#14922215
SpecialOlympian wrote:If there is one knowledgeable and authoritative source I look up to it's Scott Adams. The guy who showed off his fucking ripped muscles with this pic:

Image

And also had to get elective throat surgery because he has a sadbrains condition that wouldn't let him talk for two years. That's who I, a normal person, look up to.


Are you sure that is not Trudeau?
#14922216
One Degree wrote:That only holds true if they had notified Trump. They did not. Unless they have reason to believe he was involved then it is against all precedent not to inform him. They had no such reason. This makes it a plot.


Dude, you think the news reporting on politicians criticizing Trump is a plot. Anything less than putting your lips on Trump's dick is plotting to you, Trump humper.
#14922220
One Degree wrote:That only holds true if they had notified Trump. They did not. Unless they have reason to believe he was involved then it is against all precedent not to inform him. They had no such reason. This makes it a plot.

They had nothing to report until AFTER investigating, and what they found required further investigation. It pointed in Trump's direction. The investigators followed established procedure, which does not included announcing themselves to the world or alerting potential suspects.

Zam

A new film has been released destroying the offic[…]

Sounds like perfect organized crime material ex[…]

Since you keep insisting on pretending that the I[…]

Commercial foreclosures increase 97% from last ye[…]