What the big deal with this "memo"?

[LordBrownTrout]

I don't know, I guess I look at burner phones as a common thing in law enforcement. I could be wrong, but I'd have to look at why they were used. I don't know what destroyed messages you are talking about. If it is government intel then no

so it wouldn't bother you if evidence against trump were this mishandled?

not defending trump - just tired of incompetence from our FBI.

I think the incompetence of the FBI is being overblown to sew seeds of doubt in their investigation into Trump. I could be wrong but thats what it sounds like to me. There has been a very active campaign from the Trumpsters to make this point and i find it very dangerous. If I am wrong and evidence comes to light to prove gross misconduct then I'll apologize and be grateful it has come to light.

What is happening is not just an active campaign to discredit the FBI and DoJ, but also the media, the courts, and our electoral processes. It's very disturbing - I've never seen attacks like this nor such intense efforts to politicize these institutions and attack the professionalism of career people who have served under multiple administrations.

the media? really? this didn't start with obama going after fox news?

Obama didn't go after the media to the extent that this president has.

to be clear - no president should get involved with the media the way the last 2 have. but let's not pretend the media shit is anything new. if trump kicked it up some, well that's what happens when you allow your side to get away with bullshit, the other side will push it then point to back. then they will push it again and again and again and look where it gets us?

I wonder if it's possible you can ever criticize Trump with out trying to blame Obama? Obama's rhetoric towards Fox was mild compared to Trump and I don't recall Obama ever putting the role of the entire media in question. Trump painted them as an adversary to democracy and that ought to be disturbing to anyone who supports both the democratic process, the role of the press in preserving it...and freedom.

if they can attack trump, they damn well better be able to defend the manner in which they do it, these professionals who text insurance plans to their mistresses...

So Trump and his supporters are so thin skinned eh? That indicates a huge insecurity.

Oh yes he did. Amazing how quickly we forget:

"Criticism of Mr. Obama’s stance on press freedom, government transparency and secrecy is hotly disputed by the White House, but many journalism groups say the record is clear. Over the past eight years, the administration has prosecuted nine cases involving whistle-blowers and leakers, compared with only three by all previous administrations combined. It has repeatedly used the Espionage Act, a relic of World War I-era red-baiting, not to prosecute spies but to go after government officials who talked to journalists."

Opinion | If Donald Trump Targets Journalists, Thank Obama

 

[iceberg]

I don't know, I guess I look at burner phones as a common thing in law enforcement. I could be wrong, but I'd have to look at why they were used. I don't know what destroyed messages you are talking about. If it is government intel then no

so it wouldn't bother you if evidence against trump were this mishandled?

not defending trump - just tired of incompetence from our FBI.

I think the incompetence of the FBI is being overblown to sew seeds of doubt in their investigation into Trump. I could be wrong but thats what it sounds like to me. There has been a very active campaign from the Trumpsters to make this point and i find it very dangerous. If I am wrong and evidence comes to light to prove gross misconduct then I'll apologize and be grateful it has come to light.

What is happening is not just an active campaign to discredit the FBI and DoJ, but also the media, the courts, and our electoral processes. It's very disturbing - I've never seen attacks like this nor such intense efforts to politicize these institutions and attack the professionalism of career people who have served under multiple administrations.

the media? really? this didn't start with obama going after fox news?

Obama didn't go after the media to the extent that this president has.

to be clear - no president should get involved with the media the way the last 2 have. but let's not pretend the media shit is anything new. if trump kicked it up some, well that's what happens when you allow your side to get away with bullshit, the other side will push it then point to back. then they will push it again and again and again and look where it gets us?

I wonder if it's possible you can ever criticize Trump with out trying to blame Obama? Obama's rhetoric towards Fox was mild compared to Trump and I don't recall Obama ever putting the role of the entire media in question. Trump painted them as an adversary to democracy and that ought to be disturbing to anyone who supports both the democratic process, the role of the press in preserving it...and freedom.

if they can attack trump, they damn well better be able to defend the manner in which they do it, these professionals who text insurance plans to their mistresses...

So Trump and his supporters are so thin skinned eh? That indicates a huge insecurity.

I didn't say he did. I said when one side does something stupid n we let it go, the next side will push it further. Heh and has nothing to do with thin skin. But you don't seem be he listening to what I'm saying n going the wrong way with it.

Not going into insult mode with you.

And I criticize Trump a lot too. All on his own. Again you leap to discredit n insults vs talking it out. I really do try to not do that so I'll bow out now.

 

[iceberg]

so if trumps camp starts using burner phones and destroying messages, we're cool?

I don't know, I guess I look at burner phones as a common thing in law enforcement. I could be wrong, but I'd have to look at why they were used. I don't know what destroyed messages you are talking about. If it is government intel then no

so it wouldn't bother you if evidence against trump were this mishandled?

not defending trump - just tired of incompetence from our FBI.

How do you know it's incompetence from our FBI? They've been working non stop to discredit the FBI and DoJ in this with no actual evidence at this point. These are institutions I have more respect for than some of our elected representatives at this point.

who else loses evidence they never collected (as told by FBI defenders here over the last few days) and then finds it?

and if they give trump all the breaks they gave hillary, you're fine with that? or did hillary not get any breaks (aka, a matter, not an investigation and careless, not negligence - that stuff would be ok if they toned down the trump assault?

Any "breaks" Hillary got were lost by the public thrashing she got by Comey (unprecidented I might add, as they usually sau very little other than indictment or not) and by Comey's announcement days before the election that he was reopening it (also an unprecedented). Add to that - she lost the election. So isn't it time to TONE DOWN the Clinton assault and focus on what is happening with the man in office NOW. Clinton is passe. She lost. She is unlikely to have any other political future.

Trump is currently the man in power.

Ah the ignore Obama cause he's out of office tactic.

No.

Twitter

No punches pulled?

 

[Coyote]

I don't know, I guess I look at burner phones as a common thing in law enforcement. I could be wrong, but I'd have to look at why they were used. I don't know what destroyed messages you are talking about. If it is government intel then no

so it wouldn't bother you if evidence against trump were this mishandled?

not defending trump - just tired of incompetence from our FBI.

How do you know it's incompetence from our FBI? They've been working non stop to discredit the FBI and DoJ in this with no actual evidence at this point. These are institutions I have more respect for than some of our elected representatives at this point.

who else loses evidence they never collected (as told by FBI defenders here over the last few days) and then finds it?

and if they give trump all the breaks they gave hillary, you're fine with that? or did hillary not get any breaks (aka, a matter, not an investigation and careless, not negligence - that stuff would be ok if they toned down the trump assault?

Any "breaks" Hillary got were lost by the public thrashing she got by Comey (unprecidented I might add, as they usually sau very little other than indictment or not) and by Comey's announcement days before the election that he was reopening it (also an unprecedented). Add to that - she lost the election. So isn't it time to TONE DOWN the Clinton assault and focus on what is happening with the man in office NOW. Clinton is passe. She lost. She is unlikely to have any other political future.

Trump is currently the man in power.

Ah the ignore Obama cause he's out of office tactic.

No.

Twitter

No punches pulled?

but but but Bush is now but but but Obama.

 

[Coyote]

so it wouldn't bother you if evidence against trump were this mishandled?

not defending trump - just tired of incompetence from our FBI.

I think the incompetence of the FBI is being overblown to sew seeds of doubt in their investigation into Trump. I could be wrong but thats what it sounds like to me. There has been a very active campaign from the Trumpsters to make this point and i find it very dangerous. If I am wrong and evidence comes to light to prove gross misconduct then I'll apologize and be grateful it has come to light.

What is happening is not just an active campaign to discredit the FBI and DoJ, but also the media, the courts, and our electoral processes. It's very disturbing - I've never seen attacks like this nor such intense efforts to politicize these institutions and attack the professionalism of career people who have served under multiple administrations.

the media? really? this didn't start with obama going after fox news?

Obama didn't go after the media to the extent that this president has.

to be clear - no president should get involved with the media the way the last 2 have. but let's not pretend the media shit is anything new. if trump kicked it up some, well that's what happens when you allow your side to get away with bullshit, the other side will push it then point to back. then they will push it again and again and again and look where it gets us?

I wonder if it's possible you can ever criticize Trump with out trying to blame Obama? Obama's rhetoric towards Fox was mild compared to Trump and I don't recall Obama ever putting the role of the entire media in question. Trump painted them as an adversary to democracy and that ought to be disturbing to anyone who supports both the democratic process, the role of the press in preserving it...and freedom.

if they can attack trump, they damn well better be able to defend the manner in which they do it, these professionals who text insurance plans to their mistresses...

So Trump and his supporters are so thin skinned eh? That indicates a huge insecurity.

I didn't say he did. I said when one side does something stupid n we let it go, the next side will push it further. Heh and has nothing to do with thin skin. But you don't seem be he listening to what I'm saying n going the wrong way with it.

Not going into insult mode with you.

And I criticize Trump a lot too. All on his own. Again you leap to discredit n insults vs talking it out. I really do try to not do that so I'll bow out now.

I wasn't insulting you.

 

[iceberg]

You are not listening either.

Night.

 

[Coyote]

You are not listening either.

Night.

Not exactly sure what I've done to deserve that response but good night.

 

[Seawytch]

I hear the authors of this "Memo" spew their partisan spin every other night on Hannity and Conservative radio.

I'm well aware of how they warp reality to fit a narrative

the authors of this "Memo" spew their partisan spin every other night on Hannity and Conservative radio. I'm well aware of how they warp reality to fit a narrative that they think progresses their agenda. It may work with their blind loyalist base but objective thinking people see right through that crap. It happens from the wingnuts on the Left too.

I really don't understand the hype around this memo. All it sounds to be is a partisan spin on sensitive information. The Reps want to release a bias narrative and the Dems appear ready to release their bias spin to retort. It's all a joke. I'd rather the testimony and transcripts from their hearings be released rather than some spin job memo.

Wake up people, this memo buzz is just media and partisan hype. Remember when the author of the memo Nunez got caught pulling a PR stunt last year and had to recuse himself from leading the investigation? We are being played by partisan hacks. The "memo" is meaningless, no different than that Dossier that the right hates so much. We all need to grow up

I don’t know what is in the memo I would like to see it and everything else released. It might be something big it might be nothing but I would rather see it and make up my own mind than getting bits and pieces released by both sides to push their narrative and agenda.

The memo is partisan hype, plain and simple.

You have seen the memo with your own eyes? Wait, you have not so

I have not... I've heard the Author and his buddy's talking about it along with other BS hyped up conspiracy theories, so it's not a new song they are singing. Their credibility is in the dumpster as far as i'm concerned.

Like I asked earlier. If you heard that Schumer and Pelosi had excluded Republicans to author a secret memo exposing Trumps collusion with Russia, would you assume it credible or partisan hype? Add to that accounts from Republicans that read the memo and said it was full of misrepresentations and inaccuracies. Really think about that...

I'll make this simple for you, you know jack shit about this memo hence you are in no position to declare it partisan spin or anything of the sort. Even more ridiculous you base your personal opinions on what you have heard on tv and radio wow.

Well, that's not true. We know a bunch of things about "the memo".

1. We know it was written by Nunes - a politician.
2. We know that he won't share it with the FBI or the DOJ.
3. We know the Democrats on the committee don't agree with its conclusions.


All of those factors point directly to it being a pile of partisan nonsense. As for basing your personal opinions on "what you heard on tv and the radio" - that's how you formed your opinion of "the memo" too. I know how desperately you guys are hoping this memo is something amazing - but where do you think that hope came from?

4. Won't even share it with Senate Republicans.

Senate intelligence panel denied access to Nunes memo - CNNPolitics

 

[Seawytch]

so if trumps camp starts using burner phones and destroying messages, we're cool?

I don't know, I guess I look at burner phones as a common thing in law enforcement. I could be wrong, but I'd have to look at why they were used. I don't know what destroyed messages you are talking about. If it is government intel then no

so it wouldn't bother you if evidence against trump were this mishandled?

not defending trump - just tired of incompetence from our FBI.

How do you know it's incompetence from our FBI? They've been working non stop to discredit the FBI and DoJ in this with no actual evidence at this point. These are institutions I have more respect for than some of our elected representatives at this point.

who else loses evidence they never collected (as told by FBI defenders here over the last few days) and then finds it?

and if they give trump all the breaks they gave hillary, you're fine with that? or did hillary not get any breaks (aka, a matter, not an investigation and careless, not negligence - that stuff would be ok if they toned down the trump assault?

Any "breaks" Hillary got were lost by the public thrashing she got by Comey (unprecidented I might add, as they usually sau very little other than indictment or not) and by Comey's announcement days before the election that he was reopening it (also an unprecedented). Add to that - she lost the election. So isn't it time to TONE DOWN the Clinton assault and focus on what is happening with the man in office NOW. Clinton is passe. She lost. She is unlikely to have any other political future.

Trump is currently the man in power.

Trump is going to find out "but Hillary" is not a legal defense.

 

[Coyote]

I don't know, I guess I look at burner phones as a common thing in law enforcement. I could be wrong, but I'd have to look at why they were used. I don't know what destroyed messages you are talking about. If it is government intel then no

so it wouldn't bother you if evidence against trump were this mishandled?

not defending trump - just tired of incompetence from our FBI.

How do you know it's incompetence from our FBI? They've been working non stop to discredit the FBI and DoJ in this with no actual evidence at this point. These are institutions I have more respect for than some of our elected representatives at this point.

who else loses evidence they never collected (as told by FBI defenders here over the last few days) and then finds it?

and if they give trump all the breaks they gave hillary, you're fine with that? or did hillary not get any breaks (aka, a matter, not an investigation and careless, not negligence - that stuff would be ok if they toned down the trump assault?

Any "breaks" Hillary got were lost by the public thrashing she got by Comey (unprecidented I might add, as they usually sau very little other than indictment or not) and by Comey's announcement days before the election that he was reopening it (also an unprecedented). Add to that - she lost the election. So isn't it time to TONE DOWN the Clinton assault and focus on what is happening with the man in office NOW. Clinton is passe. She lost. She is unlikely to have any other political future.

Trump is currently the man in power.

Trump is going to find out "but Hillary" is not a legal defense.

Great sig!

 

[Seawytch]

so it wouldn't bother you if evidence against trump were this mishandled?

not defending trump - just tired of incompetence from our FBI.

How do you know it's incompetence from our FBI? They've been working non stop to discredit the FBI and DoJ in this with no actual evidence at this point. These are institutions I have more respect for than some of our elected representatives at this point.

who else loses evidence they never collected (as told by FBI defenders here over the last few days) and then finds it?

and if they give trump all the breaks they gave hillary, you're fine with that? or did hillary not get any breaks (aka, a matter, not an investigation and careless, not negligence - that stuff would be ok if they toned down the trump assault?

Any "breaks" Hillary got were lost by the public thrashing she got by Comey (unprecidented I might add, as they usually sau very little other than indictment or not) and by Comey's announcement days before the election that he was reopening it (also an unprecedented). Add to that - she lost the election. So isn't it time to TONE DOWN the Clinton assault and focus on what is happening with the man in office NOW. Clinton is passe. She lost. She is unlikely to have any other political future.

Trump is currently the man in power.

Trump is going to find out "but Hillary" is not a legal defense.

Great sig!

But Chappaquiddick!!!

 

[iceberg]

You are not listening either.

Night.

Not exactly sure what I've done to deserve that response but good night.

not really sure how this is a bad response - i've said a few times in our exchanges you keep putting words in my mouth and going into attack mode on trump and anyone who doesn't hate him like you do.

i'm really not here for attacks but talking and learning. i've never found either much by someone who's just pissed all the time.

 

[iceberg]

How do you know it's incompetence from our FBI? They've been working non stop to discredit the FBI and DoJ in this with no actual evidence at this point. These are institutions I have more respect for than some of our elected representatives at this point.

who else loses evidence they never collected (as told by FBI defenders here over the last few days) and then finds it?

and if they give trump all the breaks they gave hillary, you're fine with that? or did hillary not get any breaks (aka, a matter, not an investigation and careless, not negligence - that stuff would be ok if they toned down the trump assault?

Any "breaks" Hillary got were lost by the public thrashing she got by Comey (unprecidented I might add, as they usually sau very little other than indictment or not) and by Comey's announcement days before the election that he was reopening it (also an unprecedented). Add to that - she lost the election. So isn't it time to TONE DOWN the Clinton assault and focus on what is happening with the man in office NOW. Clinton is passe. She lost. She is unlikely to have any other political future.

Trump is currently the man in power.

Trump is going to find out "but Hillary" is not a legal defense.

Great sig!

But Chappaquiddick!!!

the whole "how dare you do the BUT HILLARY" thing is old. esp since obama spend 6 years doing "but bush..."

it's just a way to deflect and try to move people to what *you* are mad at while "giggling" at their own anger.

yea, that will help.

i simply the same laws to hit us all and if i get 2 wishes, people to stop making excuses for breaking the law yet find laws not broken the other guy still did.

 

[Coyote]

You are not listening either.

Night.

Not exactly sure what I've done to deserve that response but good night.

not really sure how this is a bad response - i've said a few times in our exchanges you keep putting words in my mouth and going into attack mode on trump and anyone who doesn't hate him like you do.

i'm really not here for attacks but talking and learning. i've never found either much by someone who's just pissed all the time.

I try to avoid attacking individual members in these conversations so if you feel I have attacked you then I apologize. As far as hating Trump, yes I do, for many sound reasons based on his policies, behavior and character. I have as much right to those feelings as you do in your dislike for Obama.

 

[Coyote]

who else loses evidence they never collected (as told by FBI defenders here over the last few days) and then finds it?

and if they give trump all the breaks they gave hillary, you're fine with that? or did hillary not get any breaks (aka, a matter, not an investigation and careless, not negligence - that stuff would be ok if they toned down the trump assault?

Any "breaks" Hillary got were lost by the public thrashing she got by Comey (unprecidented I might add, as they usually sau very little other than indictment or not) and by Comey's announcement days before the election that he was reopening it (also an unprecedented). Add to that - she lost the election. So isn't it time to TONE DOWN the Clinton assault and focus on what is happening with the man in office NOW. Clinton is passe. She lost. She is unlikely to have any other political future.

Trump is currently the man in power.

Trump is going to find out "but Hillary" is not a legal defense.

Great sig!

But Chappaquiddick!!!

the whole "how dare you do the BUT HILLARY" thing is old. esp since obama spend 6 years doing "but bush..."

it's just a way to deflect and try to move people to what *you* are mad at while "giggling" at their own anger.

yea, that will help.

i simply the same laws to hit us all and if i get 2 wishes, people to stop making excuses for breaking the law yet find laws not broken the other guy still did.

Attacking others?

 

[sedwin]

Ever notice all the good shit that we see is when they dont say a word?

I get dizzy listening to these partisan Yahoos on both sides. The only ones I can semi take seriously are the moderates that speak out critically against members of their own party.

Hatred needs fuel. As long as you can keep people "mad" whether by using nicknames, false narratives or just plain, old, trash talk you keep many motivated. Some people are motivated by policy, some by fact and some by the same things that inspire a pre-adolescent bully on a schoolyard.

 

[Coyote]

so it wouldn't bother you if evidence against trump were this mishandled?

not defending trump - just tired of incompetence from our FBI.

I think the incompetence of the FBI is being overblown to sew seeds of doubt in their investigation into Trump. I could be wrong but thats what it sounds like to me. There has been a very active campaign from the Trumpsters to make this point and i find it very dangerous. If I am wrong and evidence comes to light to prove gross misconduct then I'll apologize and be grateful it has come to light.

What is happening is not just an active campaign to discredit the FBI and DoJ, but also the media, the courts, and our electoral processes. It's very disturbing - I've never seen attacks like this nor such intense efforts to politicize these institutions and attack the professionalism of career people who have served under multiple administrations.

the media? really? this didn't start with obama going after fox news?

Obama didn't go after the media to the extent that this president has.

to be clear - no president should get involved with the media the way the last 2 have. but let's not pretend the media shit is anything new. if trump kicked it up some, well that's what happens when you allow your side to get away with bullshit, the other side will push it then point to back. then they will push it again and again and again and look where it gets us?

I wonder if it's possible you can ever criticize Trump with out trying to blame Obama? Obama's rhetoric towards Fox was mild compared to Trump and I don't recall Obama ever putting the role of the entire media in question. Trump painted them as an adversary to democracy and that ought to be disturbing to anyone who supports both the democratic process, the role of the press in preserving it...and freedom.

if they can attack trump, they damn well better be able to defend the manner in which they do it, these professionals who text insurance plans to their mistresses...

So Trump and his supporters are so thin skinned eh? That indicates a huge insecurity.

I didn't say he did. I said when one side does something stupid n we let it go, the next side will push it further. Heh and has nothing to do with thin skin. But you don't seem be he listening to what I'm saying n going the wrong way with it.

Not going into insult mode with you.

And I criticize Trump a lot too. All on his own. Again you leap to discredit n insults vs talking it out. I really do try to not do that so I'll bow out now.

Presidents have endured hostile and critical press for ages. Obama certainly had his share of it with Fox, and so did Bush, Clinton...and the rest. The difference is that Trump creates many of his own problems with the media where as staying above it would avoid some of the self-emoliation. When you are the most powerful man in the world you don’t need to be attacking and intimidating every little guy that slights and insults you. That is the essence of bully and very thin skinned. His supporters jump to his defense regardless of what he has done.

And the what aboutisms. What kind of excuse is that a year into office?

 

[Indeependent]

Fox does not present anything in context.

 

[easyt65]

The 'Memo' has an OFFICIAL NAME. The Liberal media is refusing to use that OFFICIAL NAME because 'Memo' sounds like inconsequential chatter between unofficial people, insignificant partisan bias spread around.

As several former prosecutors and ex-FBI agents have come out and explained, the 'Official Name' of this document is 'SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE'.

The Intel Committee is an investigative body that is actually conducting an investigation right now. They are investigating the DOJ and the FBI. IDIOTS claim there must not be anything to the 'Summary of Evidence' because the Committee won't share it with the DOJ and FBI.

Think about that for a minute - the people being investigated are upset that the investigators won't share their evidence / what they have on them. No investigator goes to the suspected criminal in advance of any judicial action and shares with them what they have evidence-wise. Still, snowflakes claim because the Committee won't do so means there is nothing to the 'Summary of Evidence'.

The DJ opposes the release of the 'Summary of Evidence' because it could potentially expose methods of US Intel collections. If such actual information was released it could give our enemies an edge and also put Americans in harm's way.

Of course, more importantly, it could embarrass the hell out of a lot of top people in the DOJ and FBI, which is what they are, IMO, far more afraid of.

IF the Summary is released, for example, and shows the DOJ actually did violate the Constitution and broke laws to spy on Americans - **which we know they did - it would expose the fact that the recent renewal of the 702s should NEVER have happened because of the massive abuse of power. If people had gotten this information about the abuses potentially listed in the Summary the American people would have revolted and demanded the DOJ's abusive powers be brought to an end / stopped immediately instead of renewed. The Govt did not want that to happen, it hid the Summary until after it was renewed, and now they some demand the release of the Summary which would potentially prove all of this. Again, the DOJ does NOT want this to come out for far more reason that that is might expose US collection methods.

** We already KNOW the Obama administration ILLEGALLY spied on American citizens - NSA Director James Clapper admitted this under oath before Congress....right after his earlier testimony was exposed as Felonious Perjury and he was given a 2nd chance to 'amend' his testimony to prevent being indicted.

** We already KNOW the Obama administration ILLEGALLY spied on reporters and the media. The media reported this endlessly for a while.

** We KNOW the Obama administration ILLEGALLY spied on US Senators and USSC Justices - D-Diane Feinstein brought this to light.

...and despite the PROVEN Constitutional violations and criminal acts just mentioned Obama nor any of his Cabinet members proven to have committed these crimes (Clapper, Brennan, Mueller, Comey, Holder, Lynch...) were ever held accountable, and no one called for Obama's Impeachment.

...despite all this being proven, snowflakes still try now to claim that Obama did NOT do these things and would 'never do such a thing'?!

Trump claimed he was being wire-tapped / spied upon. Liberals / snowflakes mocked him and called him a liar....now we KNOW Trump was right. The Obama administration illegally used the unsubstantiated Russia/Brit-spy generated document to get illegal warrants to tap / spy on Trump and his team during an election.


These events / examples are only a small part of why Obama's administration will go down in history as the most criminal administration in US history.

 

[Doc1]

It's quite sad how both sides try and tear each other down to the ground and light the wreckage on fire. Fact is the Memo IS important, it IS needed, the electorate has the "RIGHT" to see it. America has the "Right" to know if their Government is dirty or not. ALL Admins are dirty and many American's are sick of the double standard in our Justice system.