Biden: I Know Nothing About Investigation Of Flynn, New Strzok Notes Reveal He Brought Up Logan Act

[LordBrownTrout]

Oopsey. He’s toast.

Doubtful. Rs should be firing up endless investigations over this but alas, they're spineless jellyfish.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

We trust Strzok today????
Oh...okay...just trying to keep up.

No. We don't trust Strzok.

We DO trust things he wrote in notes that he doesn't appear to have known would ever see the light of day.

I understand that this distinction requires one to understand an individual as more than a good-or-bad binary, which sadly puts it beyond the ken of the average progressive, but hopefully you're able to understand the particular factors at play here, and not just the most brief and low-resolution characterization you could manage to paint.

So that's a "We do when it suits us to"...much shorter.

Are you TRYING to over-simplify everything, or are you just that simple?

Did you know that there are people out there who have told a lie before. . . who are still capable of saying things that are factually true? Sounds crazy, I know, but apparently they've done all these sociological studies that seem to indicate that a person who has lied is still capable of not lying, and a person who has spoken a factual truth still has the physical potential to say something that isn't accurate at all!

Anyway, if you can wrap your mind around the idea of this brave new world where a single human is able to exhibit two, or even several completely different patterns of behavior, we can roll this discussion forward to the concept of how dishonest people tend to lie only when it suits their motivations. Granted, there are pathological liars out there who just ENDLESSLY make up insane stories, but I think that if you examine the claims of ANYONE YOU HAVE EVER HAD THIS ARGUMENT WITH, you'll find that approximately ZERO OF THEM have ever claimed that Strzok is a pathological liar.

Anyway, the idea is that Strzok, despite being corrupt, isn't going to lie to himself while taking notes at a meeting, particularly when he was assured that the notes in question would never be seen by anyone not involved in his little game. We also assume that when he's privately discussing plans and operations with Lisa Page, his confidant and apparent co-conspirator, those are likely honest moments. The inverse explanation was that he was lying to his confidant for no apparent reason in private conversations, and then lying to himself in the notes he took, all to make it look like something untoward was going on in the investigation even though he was operating above board and being totally honest in his work.

Seriously, there's reasons to believe that the Trump team's narrative isn't air tight, but this particular line of argument you're making? Too stupid for honest consideration.

 

[Agit8r]

In fairness, Biden doesn't seem like someone who remembers anything well.

 

[easyt65]

Biden sat in on Obamagate meetings in the WH. With his dementia, it is understandable that he doesn't remember...

.

 

[idb]

We trust Strzok today????
Oh...okay...just trying to keep up.

No. We don't trust Strzok.

We DO trust things he wrote in notes that he doesn't appear to have known would ever see the light of day.

I understand that this distinction requires one to understand an individual as more than a good-or-bad binary, which sadly puts it beyond the ken of the average progressive, but hopefully you're able to understand the particular factors at play here, and not just the most brief and low-resolution characterization you could manage to paint.

So that's a "We do when it suits us to"...much shorter.

Are you TRYING to over-simplify everything, or are you just that simple?

Did you know that there are people out there who have told a lie before. . . who are still capable of saying things that are factually true? Sounds crazy, I know, but apparently they've done all these sociological studies that seem to indicate that a person who has lied is still capable of not lying, and a person who has spoken a factual truth still has the physical potential to say something that isn't accurate at all!

Anyway, if you can wrap your mind around the idea of this brave new world where a single human is able to exhibit two, or even several completely different patterns of behavior, we can roll this discussion forward to the concept of how dishonest people tend to lie only when it suits their motivations. Granted, there are pathological liars out there who just ENDLESSLY make up insane stories, but I think that if you examine the claims of ANYONE YOU HAVE EVER HAD THIS ARGUMENT WITH, you'll find that approximately ZERO OF THEM have ever claimed that Strzok is a pathological liar.

Anyway, the idea is that Strzok, despite being corrupt, isn't going to lie to himself while taking notes at a meeting, particularly when he was assured that the notes in question would never be seen by anyone not involved in his little game. We also assume that when he's privately discussing plans and operations with Lisa Page, his confidant and apparent co-conspirator, those are likely honest moments. The inverse explanation was that he was lying to his confidant for no apparent reason in private conversations, and then lying to himself in the notes he took, all to make it look like something untoward was going on in the investigation even though he was operating above board and being totally honest in his work.

Seriously, there's reasons to believe that the Trump team's narrative isn't air tight, but this particular line of argument you're making? Too stupid for honest consideration.

Oh...you're looking for a reasoned discussion!
I dunno but, I think you're in the wrong place.

Anyway...in the spirit of your plea for a sensible answer I'll just say that you answered what was intended to be a satirical reply to the OP.
When you take a sarcastic statement and treat it as if it was supposed to be a serious contribution to the discussion it...well...it just takes all the fun out of it.
So..."thanks very much" for pouring cold water all over my incredibly witty repartee.

Just to be clear..."thanks very much" was me being ironically sarcastically satirical.

 

[Weatherman2020]

We trust Strzok today????
Oh...okay...just trying to keep up.

Biden: "Logan Act"

Obama: "Have the right people on" Flynn case.

Comey: The Flynn/Kislyak calls "appear legit."

 

[Billiejeens]

We trust Strzok today????
Oh...okay...just trying to keep up.

Reasonable people have always trusted the notes that he took.
It is the covering up, the lies, the leaks and the unethical and criminal behaviors that we look disfavorably on.
So now you are getting up to speed?

 

[Billiejeens]

We trust Strzok today????
Oh...okay...just trying to keep up.

Comey told Barry and Crazy Joe there was nothing wrong with the Flynn calls.

Crazy Joe brings up the Logan Act......................and then denied even knowing about the investigation.

Oops!

It was multiple phases -

Originally he knew nothing.
Then it was noted that he was in the room during the discussions,
Oh I thought that you meant something different - yeah I was there.
Now it is documented that it was his idea.

Just not a trustworthy man.

 

[easyt65]

Biden already confessed to having extorted the previous Ukraine PM.

The State Department testified Biden ignored warnings about a conflict of interest with Burisma when they came calling AND testified before Nadler that it was Biden who needed to be investigated.

Despite denial it was revealed Biden personally engaged in unmasking just before he and Barry stepped down...

Testimny and text messages already put him in the room during Obamagate meetings about Barry's failed coup attempt...

Biden is dirty, crooked, criminal as hell...and now he is literally losing his mind.

.

 

[Weatherman2020]

In fairness, Biden doesn't seem like someone who remembers anything well.

Is he faking dementia to create an excuse or does he really have it?