EXPLOSIVE: “Secret Society” uncovered at FBI and DOJ tasked with bringing down Trump

originally posted by: Wayfarer
a reply to: butcherguy

I don't know what that proves exactly. Mueller runs a tight ship, and when he found out that two of his agents working on his team were having an inappropriate relationship he removed them. It is not illegal for agents to have personal biases, its illegal for agents to leverage those biases to create a specific outcome (which is something to be deliberated once an outcome has been rendered, not before like you're a guilty party trying to shut down an investigation before the dirt they're shining light on is made public). The dossier is but one avenue of Mueller's investigation (and I suspect one that's actually unlikely to be utilized since its far more likely Mueller is going after Trump for obstruction of justice), and your qualification that the FBI helped create it is, again, hearsay.

See here in lies the problem.

The narrative has changed from russian collusion to obstruction of justice.

Just like all of the dems saying trump can declassify anything he wants legally, he also could fire comey legally for any reason.

Yet as we see, that is now the only charge they can go after trump for, so if he did release the meo etc., people like you would again be saying its obstruction of justice.

As I have explained many times over, if the dossier was used in any capacity for a fisa warrant, it is the biggest political scandal of my lifetime by a long shot.

And again, there is more than just bias in these agents, there are verifiable questionable actions.

Like the massive leaks, the immunity deals with all of clintons people with no real quid pro quo, the fact that strzok knew the Mills and abedin lied to him during their interviews but werent charged, but Trump people were charged with the same thing, the fact that Manafort was charged for not filing as a foriegn lobbyist, but the Podesta group which was caught was allowed to retroactivly file to avoid criminal charges, the fbi stonewalling of info to the oversight committee, the fbi losing 5 months of texts, and so on.

The hopr of the anti trump people is so what if there was no trump russian collusion, so what if the fbi was biased against him, so what if they had criminal leaks and used a hillary team paid for document to spy on trumps team despite the fact is was not veirfied, so what if the fbi illegally leaked to make trump look bad and so on.

The investigation can morph and go on and on and on, until one thing is found that trump did bad, and then its all justified.

a reply to: Wayfarer

yeah cause that is a huge voting block.....
at this point your not even making sense
good day

originally posted by: Wayfarer
a reply to: butcherguy

Right, because a Republican Director appointed by a Republican President is just itching to dive into a conspiracy with the Democrats....

Appointed by Bush (as asst AG)... that makes him a good guy?

You think party lines mean anything in Washington?
They only mean things to the sheep that they are herding.

a reply to: DBCowboy

I guess it's too much to believe they are able to huh?
Gotta ask everybody how they voted before we let them investigate trump. Gotta make sure all the investigators are "on our side" so that it's fair right?

Hasn't it occurred to you guys yet that everyone being targeted are or work under all the people Comey told about trumps request for loyalty and his pressure to end the investigation into Flynn? Trump got rid of Comey now he needs to discredit anyone Comey gave a copy of his memos to.

a reply to: Sillyolme

Hasn't it occurred to you guys yet that everyone being targeted are or work under all the people Comey told about trumps request for loyalty and his pressure to end the investigation into Flynn?

Isnt it interesting that Comey alledgedly told people below him about this but not his actual boss...you know the one who could have actually done something about this. Wonder why that was? Why would this bastion of procedure and all that stands for doing good not report a crime to his boss?
Perhaps because there was not one???

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: DBCowboy

I guess it's too much to believe they are able to huh?
Gotta ask everybody how they voted before we let them investigate trump. Gotta make sure all the investigators are "on our side" so that it's fair right?

Hasn't it occurred to you guys yet that everyone being targeted are or work under all the people Comey told about trumps request for loyalty and his pressure to end the investigation into Flynn? Trump got rid of Comey now he needs to discredit anyone Comey gave a copy of his memos to.

And you would trust a partisan conservative to perform an investigation of Hillary or Bernie or Obama?


Nice try, but still a fail.

But as a consolation prize, we have the new Tide Pods with teriyaki flavor!

a reply to: Arnie123

Yeah the president may realize his mistake. Not that he'd admit it...

originally posted by: IAMTAT
Gowdy on FOX @ 10....More on the Secret Society mentioned in the texts.

what, no smoldering stew with eye of newt, frog teeth, and witch's spit???.......

a reply to: Grambler

Mueller may or may not have discovered a plethora of malfeasance, and has opted to go with obstruction of justice simply because its the most airtight case. I'm not really sure what you're saying in your above reply, since on first read-through it sounds like your are arguing the case for de-legitimizing the investigation. That same logic can practically be used to de-legitimize any and all investigations forever, so are we to just do away with law and order because you can logic a potential pathway that implies some shady action may 'potentially' have occurred?

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: DBCowboy

I guess it's too much to believe they are able to huh?
Gotta ask everybody how they voted before we let them investigate trump. Gotta make sure all the investigators are "on our side" so that it's fair right?

Hasn't it occurred to you guys yet that everyone being targeted are or work under all the people Comey told about trumps request for loyalty and his pressure to end the investigation into Flynn? Trump got rid of Comey now he needs to discredit anyone Comey gave a copy of his memos to.

let's remember that trump's own lawyer doesn't want him testifying because of the "threat of perjury"....huh?.....what's that called?.....the truth.....he is scared s*tless that trump will tell the truth.....WHAT A GREAT LEADER!!!!.....lololololololol...I crack myself up

a reply to: Wayfarer

I didnt argue things that may have occurred. I argued what we know for a fact occurred. You have no response to any of the many things I outlined that show double standards and problems with the investigation that hurt trumps side.

You seem to be arguing that we can never discuss wrong doing by investigators.

I find that absurd.

By that token, trump should just use fisa warrants to spy on all democrats, appoint a special council filled with his supporters to investigate them, constantly morph the investigation to look at their whole life and find any crime, and call out anyone who has a problem with this as merely hurting our system.

As far as obstruction, its not airtight, as trump is allowed to fire comey for any reason. The investigation went on unhindered, as was admitted by the FBI people.

Again, the morphing nature of the investigation proves that this is nothing more than an attempt to get trump, not to protect the country from russian influence.

I'm new and confused.

1. Talking to the Russians even if it happened is not a crime, Right? The only crime would be if in those talks you discussed committing a crime, Right?

At the end of the day someone will have to say "Hey, we wanted to rob the liquor store we all talked about it, made plans and actually robed it." Right?

2. If there is no evidence of said crime how can you "Obstruct Justice"?

Is it not like "You can resist an unlawful arrest"?

If at this point there is no evidence of the Crime that they are looking for everyone just needs to shut up and Quit talking because it is a fishing expedition to play gotcha with someone lying to a Federal Investigator about something they might not even know.

I would be so scared to say something that might conflict with something someone else said I wouldn't want to say anything. Are they compelling these people to testify and then charging them with a crime if their story doesn't fit someone else story?

Isn't rule number one "Don't talk to the Police"?

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: Wayfarer


You seem to be arguing that we can never discuss wrong doing by investigators.

Not quite; I'm saying YOU can't use wrongdoing by an agency to invalidate another investigation against your man.

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: DBCowboy

I guess it's too much to believe they are able to huh?
Gotta ask everybody how they voted before we let them investigate trump. Gotta make sure all the investigators are "on our side" so that it's fair right?

Hasn't it occurred to you guys yet that everyone being targeted are or work under all the people Comey told about trumps request for loyalty and his pressure to end the investigation into Flynn? Trump got rid of Comey now he needs to discredit anyone Comey gave a copy of his memos to.

let's remember that trump's own lawyer doesn't want him testifying because of the "threat of perjury"....huh?.....what's that called?.....the truth.....he is scared s*tless that trump will tell the truth.....WHAT A GREAT LEADER!!!!.....lololololololol...I crack myself up

I dont blame him for not testifying, seeing how what we are learning about how bias the fbi is against him.

But fine, lets leave him tetstify under the same circumstances that hillary was allowed.

first we can have Mueller write up how he knows trump is innocent before the testimony,

then we can give many people on trumps team immunity,

then we can agree to smash any that may be handed over mueller,

we should allow others being investigated like Flynn and manafort sit in on Trumps interview,

it should not be recorded,

he should just say he doesnt recall dozens of times,

and mueller himself should not be present, instead we should have an agent that has been texting about how much he likes trump and hate hillary do the interview.

That would seem like the precedent, right?

Oh and I am glad you can laugh at yourself, we all laugh at you too.

originally posted by: Wayfarer
a reply to: Grambler

Mueller may or may not have discovered a plethora of malfeasance, and has opted to go with obstruction of justice simply because its the most airtight case. I'm not really sure what you're saying in your above reply, since on first read-through it sounds like your are arguing the case for de-legitimizing the investigation. That same logic can practically be used to de-legitimize any and all investigations forever, so are we to just do away with law and order because you can logic a potential pathway that implies some shady action may 'potentially' have occurred?

Obstruction of Justice is the only thing they have left. It started with claims that Trump colluded with Russia, but the only collusion that's been discovered was committed by the Democrats/Fusion/Steele. Oops. The Trump Tower meeting is now known to have been set up by the Obama-era State Department, specifically to create the appearance of collusion. Oops again.

Some people have claimed that Trump laundered money for Russia, but there's been no evidence presented to support that, or even a semi-decent theory on how this is supposed to have happened. The people who've tried (like the Fusion guy) just take regular licensing agreements and try to spin them as being somehow shady.

So, we're down to Obstruction of Justice. Mueller has probably left this for last because it's a big stretch. After all, Trump did have the authority to fire Comey, Comey was in fact trying to undermine Trump (which justifies firing him), and the firing did not obstruct any investigations.

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: Wayfarer


You seem to be arguing that we can never discuss wrong doing by investigators.

Not quite; I'm saying YOU can't use wrongdoing by an agency to invalidate another investigation against your man.

When many of those same people are involved in the investogation, and were hand picked by the person leading it, yes you can.

And again, many of the things I mentioned, such as leaks, stonewalling oversight, etc., have occired during the Mueller investigation.

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

Obstruction of Justice is the only thing they have left.

They dont even have that.
They think we have all forgotten that comey testified under oath to congress about this and stated there was no obstruction.

originally posted by: iwanttobelieve70
I would be so scared to say something that might conflict with something someone else said I wouldn't want to say anything. Are they compelling these people to testify and then charging them with a crime if their story doesn't fit someone else story?

Most likely, this is exactly what happened to Flynn, etc. It's a game of "Gotcha!" and it's exactly why Trump should flat-out refuse to talk to Mueller. If Mueller has evidence of a crime, let him present it. Don't walk into an obvious trap.

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

Mueller hasn't released any information about what he's gathered or his angle in the investigation. Even obstruction of justice is merely our best guess for where its headed. I'm not sure how you can know with such certainty things that haven't been disclosed yet, but if you're that good I'd like tonight's winning lotto numbers please.

a reply to: shooterbrody

Comey wasn't actively investigating it like Mueller is doing now. Unless you believe Comey to be some modern day Nostradamus, I'm not sure how you can relate the two.