United We Stand - uwsboard.com

Virginia Tech fans discussing politics, religion, and football
It is currently Sun Feb 18, 2018 1:44 am

Time zone: America/New_York


UWS DWF UWS Lunch UWS Sports UWS Help TSL Football TSL Lounge TSL MBB Acronyms Top 25 Topics


Forum rules


Please be civil.



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 32 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 7:30 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 8:29 pm
Posts: 6214
UpstateSCHokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:

Yeh, and the people who spent 5 minutes to ask people about what was being requested, learned that Obama was asking about Russia election info, because he was meeting with Putin in 5 days.
The texts were from Sep. 2016, after the Clinton email investigation had ended, and right in the middle of the Russia investigation.


I find it weird how people just accept this so-called explanation with zero curiosity.

=================================================

Quote:
But this explanation isn’t as airtight as reporters all agreed it was. For one, Obama adamantly declared on national television that he never got involved in any FBI investigation at any time for any reason. You can watch him here. Asked if he’d pressure the FBI on the Hillary Clinton case, he responded: “I do not talk to the Attorney General about pending investigations. I do not talk to FBI directors about pending investigations. We have a strict line and always have maintained it. I guarantee it.”

That Strzok was drafting the talking points about Russia is again reasonable. He was running the investigation into alleged collusion between Trump and Russia, having launched that investigation in July, if not earlier informally. Let me quote CNN from last month, “As a leading counterintelligence expert, Strzok was also involved in opening the investigation into ties between Trump campaign associates and suspected Russian operatives.”

And if the President of the United States wanted to know everything about Strzok’s investigation into Trump and Russia, he’s the president and can do that, even if that contradicts his televised claims.

Now, a reasonable and even mildly curious press corps would start to have some synapses firing. Hmm. President Obama was briefed by Comey on an ongoing investigation into Russia’s election meddling. He wanted to know everything. Was he told everything? Was he told about the focus on the Trump campaign? Was he told about the dossier? Was he told about the source and funding of the dossier? Was he not told about the focus of Strzok’s investigation?


http://thefederalist.com/2018/02/08/how ... yesterday/

Yeah, this is just as disconcerting as if he wanted to know everything about the Hillary investigation. If he wanted to know tge details about the Russia investigation and was given them, then he knew about the fake dossier. What did he do with that info? Did he share it with the Hillary campaign? Inquiring minds should want to know. He's not busy right now so depose him. What did you know? When did you know it? Who did you tell?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 7:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 5:58 pm
Posts: 19818
Location: Fake Dossier Writing Center
Party: Draintheswamp
UpstateSCHokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:

Yeh, and the people who spent 5 minutes to ask people about what was being requested, learned that Obama was asking about Russia election info, because he was meeting with Putin in 5 days.
The texts were from Sep. 2016, after the Clinton email investigation had ended, and right in the middle of the Russia investigation.


I find it weird how people just accept this so-called explanation with zero curiosity.

=================================================

Quote:
But this explanation isn’t as airtight as reporters all agreed it was. For one, Obama adamantly declared on national television that he never got involved in any FBI investigation at any time for any reason. You can watch him here. Asked if he’d pressure the FBI on the Hillary Clinton case, he responded: “I do not talk to the Attorney General about pending investigations. I do not talk to FBI directors about pending investigations. We have a strict line and always have maintained it. I guarantee it.”

That Strzok was drafting the talking points about Russia is again reasonable. He was running the investigation into alleged collusion between Trump and Russia, having launched that investigation in July, if not earlier informally. Let me quote CNN from last month, “As a leading counterintelligence expert, Strzok was also involved in opening the investigation into ties between Trump campaign associates and suspected Russian operatives.”

And if the President of the United States wanted to know everything about Strzok’s investigation into Trump and Russia, he’s the president and can do that, even if that contradicts his televised claims.

Now, a reasonable and even mildly curious press corps would start to have some synapses firing. Hmm. President Obama was briefed by Comey on an ongoing investigation into Russia’s election meddling. He wanted to know everything. Was he told everything? Was he told about the focus on the Trump campaign? Was he told about the dossier? Was he told about the source and funding of the dossier? Was he not told about the focus of Strzok’s investigation?


http://thefederalist.com/2018/02/08/how ... yesterday/


This whole thing is an exercise in confirmation bias. We're in a scary place where the political divide is so great that any excuse, no matter how ridiculous, is sufficient.

_________________
“At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child — miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats.”

― P.J. O'Rourke


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 8:15 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 8:29 pm
Posts: 6214
USN_Hokie wrote:
UpstateSCHokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:

Yeh, and the people who spent 5 minutes to ask people about what was being requested, learned that Obama was asking about Russia election info, because he was meeting with Putin in 5 days.
The texts were from Sep. 2016, after the Clinton email investigation had ended, and right in the middle of the Russia investigation.


I find it weird how people just accept this so-called explanation with zero curiosity.

=================================================

Quote:
But this explanation isn’t as airtight as reporters all agreed it was. For one, Obama adamantly declared on national television that he never got involved in any FBI investigation at any time for any reason. You can watch him here. Asked if he’d pressure the FBI on the Hillary Clinton case, he responded: “I do not talk to the Attorney General about pending investigations. I do not talk to FBI directors about pending investigations. We have a strict line and always have maintained it. I guarantee it.”

That Strzok was drafting the talking points about Russia is again reasonable. He was running the investigation into alleged collusion between Trump and Russia, having launched that investigation in July, if not earlier informally. Let me quote CNN from last month, “As a leading counterintelligence expert, Strzok was also involved in opening the investigation into ties between Trump campaign associates and suspected Russian operatives.”

And if the President of the United States wanted to know everything about Strzok’s investigation into Trump and Russia, he’s the president and can do that, even if that contradicts his televised claims.

Now, a reasonable and even mildly curious press corps would start to have some synapses firing. Hmm. President Obama was briefed by Comey on an ongoing investigation into Russia’s election meddling. He wanted to know everything. Was he told everything? Was he told about the focus on the Trump campaign? Was he told about the dossier? Was he told about the source and funding of the dossier? Was he not told about the focus of Strzok’s investigation?


http://thefederalist.com/2018/02/08/how ... yesterday/


This whole thing is an exercise in confirmation bias. We're in a scary place where the political divide is so great that any excuse, no matter how ridiculous, is sufficient.

Andrew McCarthy sums all of this up clearly and concisely. He always brings the discussion back to the difference between counterintelligence investigations and criminal investigations. And using these parameters Obama is expected to ask for and receive briefs from the DOJ/FBI on the Russia Investigation as it is a counterintelligence investigation and that is his purview. Likewise, Trump can't obstruct the Mueller investigation as it is HIS purview as president to know all and do with it what he wants. What's good for the goose (democrats) is good for the gander (republicans). In sum, this is all about nothing.

A good and informative read...again.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 ... -absurdity


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 10:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 10:50 am
Posts: 5499
Location: Kicking over crayons in a safe space for libruls....
133743Hokie wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
UpstateSCHokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:

Yeh, and the people who spent 5 minutes to ask people about what was being requested, learned that Obama was asking about Russia election info, because he was meeting with Putin in 5 days.
The texts were from Sep. 2016, after the Clinton email investigation had ended, and right in the middle of the Russia investigation.


I find it weird how people just accept this so-called explanation with zero curiosity.

=================================================

Quote:
But this explanation isn’t as airtight as reporters all agreed it was. For one, Obama adamantly declared on national television that he never got involved in any FBI investigation at any time for any reason. You can watch him here. Asked if he’d pressure the FBI on the Hillary Clinton case, he responded: “I do not talk to the Attorney General about pending investigations. I do not talk to FBI directors about pending investigations. We have a strict line and always have maintained it. I guarantee it.”

That Strzok was drafting the talking points about Russia is again reasonable. He was running the investigation into alleged collusion between Trump and Russia, having launched that investigation in July, if not earlier informally. Let me quote CNN from last month, “As a leading counterintelligence expert, Strzok was also involved in opening the investigation into ties between Trump campaign associates and suspected Russian operatives.”

And if the President of the United States wanted to know everything about Strzok’s investigation into Trump and Russia, he’s the president and can do that, even if that contradicts his televised claims.

Now, a reasonable and even mildly curious press corps would start to have some synapses firing. Hmm. President Obama was briefed by Comey on an ongoing investigation into Russia’s election meddling. He wanted to know everything. Was he told everything? Was he told about the focus on the Trump campaign? Was he told about the dossier? Was he told about the source and funding of the dossier? Was he not told about the focus of Strzok’s investigation?


http://thefederalist.com/2018/02/08/how ... yesterday/


This whole thing is an exercise in confirmation bias. We're in a scary place where the political divide is so great that any excuse, no matter how ridiculous, is sufficient.

Andrew McCarthy sums all of this up clearly and concisely. He always brings the discussion back to the difference between counterintelligence investigations and criminal investigations. And using these parameters Obama is expected to ask for and receive briefs from the DOJ/FBI on the Russia Investigation as it is a counterintelligence investigation and that is his purview. Likewise, Trump can't obstruct the Mueller investigation as it is HIS purview as president to know all and do with it what he wants. What's good for the goose (democrats) is good for the gander (republicans). In sum, this is all about nothing.

A good and informative read...again.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 ... -absurdity

It’s all about Dems trying to bring down a rightfully elected president.

_________________
Image
"if you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face-forever."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 1:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:57 pm
Posts: 8894
133743Hokie wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
UpstateSCHokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:

Yeh, and the people who spent 5 minutes to ask people about what was being requested, learned that Obama was asking about Russia election info, because he was meeting with Putin in 5 days.
The texts were from Sep. 2016, after the Clinton email investigation had ended, and right in the middle of the Russia investigation.


I find it weird how people just accept this so-called explanation with zero curiosity.

=================================================

Quote:
But this explanation isn’t as airtight as reporters all agreed it was. For one, Obama adamantly declared on national television that he never got involved in any FBI investigation at any time for any reason. You can watch him here. Asked if he’d pressure the FBI on the Hillary Clinton case, he responded: “I do not talk to the Attorney General about pending investigations. I do not talk to FBI directors about pending investigations. We have a strict line and always have maintained it. I guarantee it.”

That Strzok was drafting the talking points about Russia is again reasonable. He was running the investigation into alleged collusion between Trump and Russia, having launched that investigation in July, if not earlier informally. Let me quote CNN from last month, “As a leading counterintelligence expert, Strzok was also involved in opening the investigation into ties between Trump campaign associates and suspected Russian operatives.”

And if the President of the United States wanted to know everything about Strzok’s investigation into Trump and Russia, he’s the president and can do that, even if that contradicts his televised claims.

Now, a reasonable and even mildly curious press corps would start to have some synapses firing. Hmm. President Obama was briefed by Comey on an ongoing investigation into Russia’s election meddling. He wanted to know everything. Was he told everything? Was he told about the focus on the Trump campaign? Was he told about the dossier? Was he told about the source and funding of the dossier? Was he not told about the focus of Strzok’s investigation?


http://thefederalist.com/2018/02/08/how ... yesterday/


This whole thing is an exercise in confirmation bias. We're in a scary place where the political divide is so great that any excuse, no matter how ridiculous, is sufficient.

Andrew McCarthy sums all of this up clearly and concisely. He always brings the discussion back to the difference between counterintelligence investigations and criminal investigations. And using these parameters Obama is expected to ask for and receive briefs from the DOJ/FBI on the Russia Investigation as it is a counterintelligence investigation and that is his purview. Likewise, Trump can't obstruct the Mueller investigation as it is HIS purview as president to know all and do with it what he wants. What's good for the goose (democrats) is good for the gander (republicans). In sum, this is all about nothing.

A good and informative read...again.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 ... -absurdity


Agreed, good post.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 2:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 10:12 am
Posts: 5259
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Eclectic
133743Hokie wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
UpstateSCHokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:

Yeh, and the people who spent 5 minutes to ask people about what was being requested, learned that Obama was asking about Russia election info, because he was meeting with Putin in 5 days.
The texts were from Sep. 2016, after the Clinton email investigation had ended, and right in the middle of the Russia investigation.


I find it weird how people just accept this so-called explanation with zero curiosity.

=================================================

Quote:
But this explanation isn’t as airtight as reporters all agreed it was. For one, Obama adamantly declared on national television that he never got involved in any FBI investigation at any time for any reason. You can watch him here. Asked if he’d pressure the FBI on the Hillary Clinton case, he responded: “I do not talk to the Attorney General about pending investigations. I do not talk to FBI directors about pending investigations. We have a strict line and always have maintained it. I guarantee it.”

That Strzok was drafting the talking points about Russia is again reasonable. He was running the investigation into alleged collusion between Trump and Russia, having launched that investigation in July, if not earlier informally. Let me quote CNN from last month, “As a leading counterintelligence expert, Strzok was also involved in opening the investigation into ties between Trump campaign associates and suspected Russian operatives.”

And if the President of the United States wanted to know everything about Strzok’s investigation into Trump and Russia, he’s the president and can do that, even if that contradicts his televised claims.

Now, a reasonable and even mildly curious press corps would start to have some synapses firing. Hmm. President Obama was briefed by Comey on an ongoing investigation into Russia’s election meddling. He wanted to know everything. Was he told everything? Was he told about the focus on the Trump campaign? Was he told about the dossier? Was he told about the source and funding of the dossier? Was he not told about the focus of Strzok’s investigation?


http://thefederalist.com/2018/02/08/how ... yesterday/


This whole thing is an exercise in confirmation bias. We're in a scary place where the political divide is so great that any excuse, no matter how ridiculous, is sufficient.

Andrew McCarthy sums all of this up clearly and concisely. He always brings the discussion back to the difference between counterintelligence investigations and criminal investigations. And using these parameters Obama is expected to ask for and receive briefs from the DOJ/FBI on the Russia Investigation as it is a counterintelligence investigation and that is his purview. Likewise, Trump can't obstruct the Mueller investigation as it is HIS purview as president to know all and do with it what he wants. What's good for the goose (democrats) is good for the gander (republicans). In sum, this is all about nothing.

A good and informative read...again.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 ... -absurdity



It was a good read. FTR though, counterintelligence collection methods are not immune from Constitutional legal limits.

_________________
"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize." - Voltaire


"Christian socialism is but the holy water with which the priest consecrates the heart-burnings of the aristocrat" Karl Marx


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 3:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 8:29 pm
Posts: 6214
HokieJoe wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
UpstateSCHokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:

Yeh, and the people who spent 5 minutes to ask people about what was being requested, learned that Obama was asking about Russia election info, because he was meeting with Putin in 5 days.
The texts were from Sep. 2016, after the Clinton email investigation had ended, and right in the middle of the Russia investigation.


I find it weird how people just accept this so-called explanation with zero curiosity.

=================================================

Quote:
But this explanation isn’t as airtight as reporters all agreed it was. For one, Obama adamantly declared on national television that he never got involved in any FBI investigation at any time for any reason. You can watch him here. Asked if he’d pressure the FBI on the Hillary Clinton case, he responded: “I do not talk to the Attorney General about pending investigations. I do not talk to FBI directors about pending investigations. We have a strict line and always have maintained it. I guarantee it.”

That Strzok was drafting the talking points about Russia is again reasonable. He was running the investigation into alleged collusion between Trump and Russia, having launched that investigation in July, if not earlier informally. Let me quote CNN from last month, “As a leading counterintelligence expert, Strzok was also involved in opening the investigation into ties between Trump campaign associates and suspected Russian operatives.”

And if the President of the United States wanted to know everything about Strzok’s investigation into Trump and Russia, he’s the president and can do that, even if that contradicts his televised claims.

Now, a reasonable and even mildly curious press corps would start to have some synapses firing. Hmm. President Obama was briefed by Comey on an ongoing investigation into Russia’s election meddling. He wanted to know everything. Was he told everything? Was he told about the focus on the Trump campaign? Was he told about the dossier? Was he told about the source and funding of the dossier? Was he not told about the focus of Strzok’s investigation?


http://thefederalist.com/2018/02/08/how ... yesterday/


This whole thing is an exercise in confirmation bias. We're in a scary place where the political divide is so great that any excuse, no matter how ridiculous, is sufficient.

Andrew McCarthy sums all of this up clearly and concisely. He always brings the discussion back to the difference between counterintelligence investigations and criminal investigations. And using these parameters Obama is expected to ask for and receive briefs from the DOJ/FBI on the Russia Investigation as it is a counterintelligence investigation and that is his purview. Likewise, Trump can't obstruct the Mueller investigation as it is HIS purview as president to know all and do with it what he wants. What's good for the goose (democrats) is good for the gander (republicans). In sum, this is all about nothing.

A good and informative read...again.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 ... -absurdity



It was a good read. FTR though, counterintelligence collection methods are not immune from Constitutional legal limits.

He's the chief executive. They all work or him. He can ask to be briefed on any aspect, and he can fire anyone he wants.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 32 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Time zone: America/New_York


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: