Gowdy: FBI Acted Properly With Use of Informant

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Grambler

My prediction is that if it says there was any wrong doing, all of the trump haters that told us we shouldn’t investigate the fbi, and questioning them would hurt America, will downplay it

My prediction is that if it says there was no wrong doing, the Trump cult will declare open war on the FBI... to the point of bombing field offices and shooting agents. After all, isn't that what the NRA says the Second Amendment is for?

lol
yeah because gop supporters are the ones asking "are those republicans or democrats out there?" before attempting to assassinate sitting members of congress
the only ones with this type of violence so far are the ones supporting the dems

I like Gowdy.

I also disagree with what he's saying. He has his timeline messed up. He says the spying is justified because Trump asked Comey to find out if anyone in his campaign is meddling with the Russians. Citing the Comey memos. Problem is, Trump was already president when he said this to Comey. The spying had already taken place. Gowdy is trying to frame this as a response to Trumps request, which is categorically false.

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: RickinVa

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Grambler

My prediction is that if it says there was any wrong doing, all of the trump haters that told us we shouldn’t investigate the fbi, and questioning them would hurt America, will downplay it

My prediction is that if it says there was no wrong doing, the Trump cult will declare open war on the FBI... to the point of bombing field offices and shooting agents. After all, isn't that what the NRA says the Second Amendment is for?

I predict you are wrong.

We will know soon enough. What will you, personally, do when it turns out the FBI did nothing wrong?

I doubt very seriously that the FBI did nothing wrong. The already released parts confirm that.

How bad it is remains to be seen. I don't expect much from the IG report that will be earth shattering, other than a few bad apples will be exposed.

I still have a lot of respect for my former support employees, who do a lot of hard work. Not very much for upper management though.

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Grambler

My prediction is that if it says there was any wrong doing, all of the trump haters that told us we shouldn’t investigate the fbi, and questioning them would hurt America, will downplay it

My prediction is that if it says there was no wrong doing, the Trump cult will declare open war on the FBI... to the point of bombing field offices and shooting agents. After all, isn't that what the NRA says the Second Amendment is for?

lol
yeah because gop supporters are the ones asking "are those republicans or democrats out there?" before attempting to assassinate sitting members of congress
the only ones with this type of violence so far are the ones supporting the dems

Gabrielle Giffords would disagree.

a reply to: RickinVa

I doubt very seriously that the FBI did nothing wrong. The already released parts confirm that.

No, they merely confirm that, like you, FBI agents have political opinions.

How bad it is remains to be seen. I don't expect much from the IG report that will be earth shattering, other than a few bad apples will be exposed.

And if the bad apples are Trump appointees?

I still have a lot of respect for my former support employees, who do a lot of hard work. Not very much for upper management though.

You dodged the question. When it turns out that your disrespected "upper management" acted appropriately? Will you at least change your opinion?

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: RickinVa

I doubt very seriously that the FBI did nothing wrong. The already released parts confirm that.

No, they merely confirm that, like you, FBI agents have political opinions.

How bad it is remains to be seen. I don't expect much from the IG report that will be earth shattering, other than a few bad apples will be exposed.

And if the bad apples are Trump appointees?

I still have a lot of respect for my former support employees, who do a lot of hard work. Not very much for upper management though.

You dodged the question. When it turns out that your disrespected "upper management" acted appropriately? Will you at least change your opinion?

It's a hypothetical question. Let's wait till we see what is in the report before passing judgement.

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Grambler

My prediction is that if it says there was any wrong doing, all of the trump haters that told us we shouldn’t investigate the fbi, and questioning them would hurt America, will downplay it

My prediction is that if it says there was no wrong doing, the Trump cult will declare open war on the FBI... to the point of bombing field offices and shooting agents. After all, isn't that what the NRA says the Second Amendment is for?

lol
yeah because gop supporters are the ones asking "are those republicans or democrats out there?" before attempting to assassinate sitting members of congress
the only ones with this type of violence so far are the ones supporting the dems

Gabrielle Giffords would disagree.

oh would you please post where the giffords shooter asked specifically who was gop and who was dem?
Others shot by the sanders supporting nut job were Crystal Griner, a U.S. Capitol Police officer assigned to protect Scalise; Zack Barth, a congressional aide; and Matt Mika, a Tyson Foods lobbyist. This guy should have saved his bullets and used them on the dnc as they screwed bernie and not the gop. Seems the "Trump cult" was not the first to "declare open war" as you posted.

a reply to: theantediluvian

Gowdy also says Trump isn't under investigation. So I expect you to not post he is, right?

a reply to: RickinVa

It's a hypothetical question. Let's wait till we see what is in the report before passing judgement.

In other words, you refuse to even consider the possibility that the FBI acted appropriately.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: theantediluvian

Gowdy also says Trump isn't under investigation. So I expect you to not post he is, right?

Trump is not under investigation, so why is he calling it a "witch hunt." He is innocent, and has nothing to worry about, right?

a reply to: introvert

From Qanon/"Q Clearance Patriot's" first "crumb":

"Hillary Clinton will be arrested between 7:45 AM - 8:30 AM EST on Monday - the morning on Oct 30, 2017."

Then "he" doubled down and said on October 28 that HRC was on a "cross border run" and that extradition was in the works and would be followed by massive demonstrations.

None of that happened of course and nonetheless, on October 31st, "he" "predicted" that Podesta (the assumption is John) would be indicted on "11-3" and Huma Abedin on "11-6" and then of course those dates came and went with nothing. So the Q fans decided that the dates were actually 3/11 and 6/11 of 2018. March 11th has obviously come and gone with nothing so now I see people talking about how you need this secret formula to decode everything.

Also, as the "crumbs" have evolved to be even more unnecessarily cryptic and waaaaaaaay more vague (can't keep making clearly stated predictions that fall flat), and there's been a switch from 4chan to 8chan, some Q followers have posited that there was some sort of hijacking or takeover of the Q persona.

You cannot reason with people who have deeply entrenched blind faith in something like that. A bit off topic but I think it goes to the mindset of people who are determined to believe no matter what.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: RickinVa

It's a hypothetical question. Let's wait till we see what is in the report before passing judgement.

In other words, you refuse to even consider the possibility that the FBI acted appropriately.

There has already been proof presented that the FBI acted inappropriately. The only question that remains is how bad it was.

Andrew McCabe....cough cough

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: theantediluvian

Gowdy also says Trump isn't under investigation. So I expect you to not post he is, right?

Trump is not under investigation, so why is he calling it a "witch hunt." He is innocent, and has nothing to worry about, right?

because for a year of being investigated the investigators are now trying to claim he was never under investigation and the whole thing was just a counter intel investigation.

yet a few months back they came out and cleared trump of the original claims leveled against him in the investigation

how could they clear him if they were never investigating him?

they have all called it for over a year "the trump investigation" and now they claim it is just counter intelligence and neither matches the scope of the investigation rules nor the constitution.

it is a hoax

Me personally, I can’t wait for the IG report to be released. Not that it will contain any bombshells or “booms”, just that I’m curious what everyone will jump behind next when this turns out to be the same as every other “memo” or “report” the republicans try to use to take the focus off of the Mueller investigation. Namely nothing at all.

You’d think people would wise up to how they’re being played. But I guess the religion runs deep amongst the true believers. Keep it up guys! The REAL bombshell is just around the corner. All you have to do is keep believing and supporting! Lmao.

a reply to: underwerks

Mueller investigation

Exactly what is the mueller investigation?

Where does he get the authority?
What is his scope?
Is the investigation on trump and his election team?
What is a counter intelligence investigation?
What crime triggered the investigation?

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Gowdy also says Trump isn't under investigation. So I expect you to not post he is, right?

Oh ffs. How many times do I have to repeat myself? I have seen nothing that indicates to me that Trump conspired with the Russian government to benefit his campaign/hurt Clinton's. I do not expect Mueller to find any evidence of this. I would be genuinely shocked if he did.

On the other hand, I would not be surprised to find that somebody in his orbit did, knowingly or not, coordinate with the Russian government in some form or fashion. Manafort was an obvious target because of what he'd been doing for more than a decade prior to joining Team Trump in 2016. Yanukovych was directly and materially supported by the Kremlin. I find it hard to believe that Manafort didn't coordinate with the Russians for the benefit of Yanukovych/PoR in Ukrainian elections.

I would also point out that as things have come out about Cohen, Broidy, Prince, Nader, etc, Trump supporters have been quick to say that there's no proof that Trump knew about any of it. If he didn't know about any of that, doesn't it stand to reason that he didn't know about what every person involved in his campaign was up to either? I'm sure that no Trump supporter is going to argue that he knew about Manafort's communications with Deripaska via Kilimnik.

With that in mind, shouldn't Trump actually be in favor of an investigation that would uncover bad actors in his orbit? Which is what he reportedly told Comey (which was used as a defense against the possibility of obstruction) which is what Gowdy alluded to.

What happens when Mueller doesn't turn up any evidence of Trump conspiring with the Russians? Can I expect you to run around to all of your peers and tell them that it wasn't a "deep state witch hunt" blah blah after all? Or nah?

I wanted to see a post about Gowdy, not sure if someone has done one. They either have dirt on him or he's been replaced by a body double. He could've risen as high as he wants to in politics, was publicly taking the Dems to task the last couple years. Now he's suddenly retiring, and not only that he's done a 180 on everything. Something seems fishy.

originally posted by: jjkenobi
I wanted to see a post about Gowdy, not sure if someone has done one. They either have dirt on him or he's been replaced by a body double. He could've risen as high as he wants to in politics, was publicly taking the Dems to task the last couple years. Now he's suddenly retiring, and not only that he's done a 180 on everything. Something seems fishy.

What has he done a 180 on?

originally posted by: Heisenburg
I like Gowdy.

I also disagree with what he's saying. He has his timeline messed up. He says the spying is justified because Trump asked Comey to find out if anyone in his campaign is meddling with the Russians. Citing the Comey memos. Problem is, Trump was already president when he said this to Comey. The spying had already taken place. Gowdy is trying to frame this as a response to Trumps request, which is categorically false.

That's the spin that TCT tried to put on it. What Gowdy was saying essentially is that as President, Trump voiced approval to Comey of exactly what the FBI had been doing all along.

He was in no way implying that the counterintelligence investigation was a response to a request from Trump. It's self-evident. Gowdy isn't an idiot and he's not confusing any timeline and he sure as hell wouldn't fumble such fundamental facts.

What we have here is a misrepresentation of the point he was making as an attempt to undermine Gowdy and his statement.

But for those who want to go that route, the FBI's counterintelligence investigation was ongoing at the time of that conversation, including the additional FISA warrants for surveillance of Carter Page and Halper maintaining contact with Page.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Xtrozero

Took it easy on Hillary? The Obama admin was SUPER soft on the whole Russia trying to help the Trump campaign bit.

On one side Hillary was interviewed, and not put under oath with written exoneration for things she actually did before the investigation was even finished, kind of soft wouldn't you say. On the other hand the FBI goes after Trump using a DNC pay for document for FISA warrants, wire tapping and under cover informant, mainly Page, that they put on Trump's in the first place and then used him as a reason for the investigation from his prior FBI under cover informant role in another Russian event, so soft is not the word I would use...