New Texts Reveal FBI Leaked Information to the Press to Damage Trump

originally posted by: Arnie123
a reply to: soberbacchus

Nothing to do with OP. We get it, you see us getting close, it unnerves you and others of your ilk, this is GOOD.

Means accountability for the bad guys and awakening for you blind folks who've been indoctrinated by liberal media for the better part of your lives.

So, please, keep up the nonsense, it only validates what we've come to know 😌

Stay tuned 😤

That post reads like really bad wannabe fiction.

It is a weird fantasy world for the right wing at times.

Just trying to interject a little reality, logic and discussion of facts, but if you prefer to circle jerk to internet forum ideological-porn-fantasy, have at it. Grand conspiracy and civil war! Journalists and lefties hung in the streets!

a reply to: soberbacchus

Yes the topic was an example of corruption by the fbi

That user claimed to be a member of a three latter agency

I said I assumed then that they were concerned about stories like th op and the IG report

That user then ignored that, and discussed mueller and his trumo were investigation

Now if you posted a thread on trump possibly breaking the law, and I instead ignored that completely and just said Hillary committed crimes, you would say i must not care about trump committing crimes

In fact when I further discussed this deflection with that poster, they said “that’s fair”

And yes I know you conveniently forget your lies about that New York time article

As always, I will not respond to you with the rudeness you usually show toward me

I will get back in topic addressing the fbi leaks and corruption

originally posted by: soberbacchus
a reply to: vinifalou

Two lines of text messages days apart.

Yes, because on this meantime they were too busy leaking classified material to the Washington Post.

Pulled from several thousand pages of context (not shared) and pasted together to fit a narrative.

Texts don't need to be placed all together to set a context. Each text has a context itself. If we were talking about getting specific quotes from a letter or a document I'd give you the benefit of the doubt. Not in this case.

You are welcome to abuse your own mind anyway you seem fit.

Same advice goes to you.

a reply to: Grambler

Still no clue what you are talking about with my "lies" about the NYTs etc.
I will take your unwillingness to be specific for what it is, more unsubstantiated BS.

As far as Mueller's credibility:

A majority of registered voters approve of special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia and possible obstruction of justice charges against President Trump and members of his administration, according to a Fox News poll released Wednesday.

thehill.com...

More approve of Mueller than Trump in new poll
www.marketwatch.com...

CNN Poll: More approve of Mueller than of Trump
www.cnn.com...

Again, ATS seems a safe space for reality-disconnected far right wingers to affirm each others deflection conspiracies.

Anyone interjecting facts is attacked.

Right wingers fantasizing about civil war, killing people and hanging journalists.

It really is ridiculously disconnected from the average American.

Will be back tomorrow to check in. I have a job to attend to.

a reply to: soberbacchus

You're quoting polls from CNN to prove that Mueller has more approve than Trump?

Desperation reaching high stakes there, huh?

originally posted by: vinifalou
a reply to: soberbacchus

You're quoting polls from CNN to prove that Mueller has more approve than Trump?

Desperation reaching high stakes there, huh?

Fox News and The Hill.

I even bolded it for you.

Reading ability is a life skill.

a reply to: soberbacchus

Sorry, I tend to just ignore your posts.

originally posted by: JasonBillung
a reply to: Lumenari



Actually yes, but mine is different, because I was a Commissioned Officer in the United States Army. And my commission was and act of Congress, not my recruiter

Ummmm...yeah, recruiters don't handle the oath for enlisted people, an Army officer does it at MEPS.

And actually, unless you were commissioned at the rank of Major or above, it's a commission that is appointed by the POTUS, not congress. My money is that you did not enter service as an O-4. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

10 U.S. Code § 531 - Original appointments of commissioned officers

And, under the UCMJ, I have the right to disobey an unlawful order. Even from the US President.

Sure you do (and, some would say that you have a DUTY to disobey unlawful orders), but the UCMJ also allows for you to be brought up on charges for disobeying a lawful order, and then you must work to show that it was unlawful.

I know--I was a 27D in the Army and it happened more than I can count. TDS is there to help with that, and it goes for Article 15s, too. Sadly, there are too many officers and NCOs who don't understand the boundaries of what a legal order is, and we in the JAG office had to deal with that constantly.

I know that this is a late and rather off-topic comment, but I feel it needed pointed out.

a reply to: soberbacchus

Again you resot to smearing of right wingers in you post.

As for mueller credibility or lack there of, what are you responding too?

What does that have to do with rather or not the FBI was corrupt in leaking to the press?

I will say I was wrong about the New york times article, is was Wall st journal.

But because you are again saying this is unsubstantiated, here is the thread.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

You say my article says the exact opposite of what I claim, and then admit pages later that you were wrong and actually couldnt read the article because it was behind a paywall.

Back on topic, its a shame that it appears the FBI is leaking to hurt trump like this.

An investigation should occur immediately with all of the relevant material given over to congressional oversight.

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: Arnie123
a reply to: soberbacchus

Nothing to do with OP. We get it, you see us getting close, it unnerves you and others of your ilk, this is GOOD.

Means accountability for the bad guys and awakening for you blind folks who've been indoctrinated by liberal media for the better part of your lives.

So, please, keep up the nonsense, it only validates what we've come to know 😌

Stay tuned 😤

That post reads like really bad wannabe fiction.

It is a weird fantasy world for the right wing at times.

Just trying to interject a little reality, logic and discussion of facts, but if you prefer to circle jerk to internet forum ideological-porn-fantasy, have at it. Grand conspiracy and civil war! Journalists and lefties hung in the streets!

lol, I seriously doubt you can even distinguish reality from scifi based off your post.

You say interject a "little" reality, logic and disussion? Lmfao, yeah right more like squat down and crap all over the place, San Fran streetwalk style bruh.

If I had my way, I wouldn't mind that outcome for leftist media, I mean, ya'll brought it upon yourselves 😌

Keep up the nonsense, I'll be here all day 😏

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: soberbacchus


But because you are again saying this is unsubstantiated, here is the thread.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Holy crap.
That is what you are throwing a tantrum about?
You posted an article that no one on the forum could access. It was behind a paywall.
AND my very first post included this line:

originally posted by: soberbacchus
If you have link proving Trump was working to silence Daniels before the election season, I am open to being wrong.

In the end I acknowledged your claim even though it wasn't fully substantiated.
In-touch magazine was threatened with a lawsuit, not sued, and even that is sketchy singular sourcing.

Wow. Amazing that was you big moment of me being dishonest. The thread where you didn't have an accessible and posters were forced to find secondary reporting and I said I was open to be wrong if you had a link to support your dead link?

Honestly? You feel solid about calling me a liar for challenging on that while leaving the door open to being wrong?

Character matters. That is crazy you are looking to use that exchange to call me a liar.

originally posted by: [post=23759038]Arnie123

If I had my way, I wouldn't mind that outcome for leftist media, I mean, ya'll brought it upon yourselves 😌

Keep up the nonsense, I'll be here all day 😏

You will only have your way in your parents basement fantasizing about genocide for half the country.

Fortunately, I will not be here all day. Gotta get back to work.

a reply to: soberbacchus

Character does matter

You seem to have a pension for going on threads and making them about you going after posters or hurling insults

In that thread you claimed that the article I posted said the exact opposite of what I claimed, and lectured me about not posting stuff that doesn’t back up my claims, only to have to admit that in fact you made that claim without even reading the article.

That is horribly disingenuous thing to do

And it is a pattern of you insulting, calling other people liars, and ignoring the topic at hand

I will not indulge you any further in that right now

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: [post=23759038]Arnie123

If I had my way, I wouldn't mind that outcome for leftist media, I mean, ya'll brought it upon yourselves 😌

Keep up the nonsense, I'll be here all day 😏

You will only have your way in your parents basement fantasizing about genocide for half the country.

Fortunately, I will not be here all day. Gotta get back to work.

...basements and genocide, huh? Strange fantasies you got there and your ad hominens lack sufficient punch as they old and overused, surely you could think of something much better worthy of me, hmmm??

Back to work you go like a good little boy 😏

a reply to: soberbacchus

Got it...so in half a year an investigation was all but buttoned up, but two-ish years later, we have to keep waiting and seeing because 'investigations can take a while.'

And during this multi-year investigation that has yielded NOTHING concerning its initial approved scope (which is possibly too broad for the purpose of a special investigation anyhow), there is a plethora of evidence damning those opposed to the POTUS and showing them to be "allegedly" breaking the law or breaching the public's trust, and we're all just supposed to sit back and be patient about the "collusion" investigation but disregard everything else?

See, approval ratings mean nothing--what the real concern here is that you're comparing something that was so blatantly obvious that it had indictments of actual players related to the incident within mere months of the incident to something that doesn't even really have a smidgen of proof nearly two years later.

But, yes, let's compare and see who's approval rating is bigger, because that matters in the veracity of accusations against the POTUS.

It certainly doesn't have anything to do with people willing to act to stop such insanity from continuing in our government.

So, I guess all of that is to say: Do you have pertinent point, did you just want to compare apples to oranges for fun, or what?

a reply to: vinifalou

Yes, because on this meantime they were too busy leaking classified material to the Washington Post.

If there was proof it would have been provided by now. You are being played by desperate partisans.

a reply to: DJW001

Pfft. Stop playing dumb & dumber.

Who would've provided these proofs? The FBI? The DOJ?

originally posted by: vinifalou
a reply to: DJW001

Pfft. Stop playing dumb & dumber.

Who would've provided these proofs? The FBI? The DOJ?

The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. They are the ones making the claim. As usual, they refuse to "leak" everything we need to know to tell if they are being truthful.

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: soberbacchus

Character does matter

You seem to have a pension for going on threads and making them about you going after posters or hurling insults

In that thread you claimed that the article I posted said the exact opposite of what I claimed, and lectured me about not posting stuff that doesn’t back up my claims, only to have to admit that in fact you made that claim without even reading the article.

That is horribly disingenuous thing to do

And it is a pattern of you insulting, calling other people liars, and ignoring the topic at hand

I will not indulge you any further in that right now

You realize what you just did, right?

Rep. Jim Jordan: Remember Stuart when Michael Horowitz, the Inspector General, did his investigation he talked about the fact that one reporter had 13 different individuals at the FBI who were feeding him information. So, there was certainly a leak strategy going on. The most troubling aspect of all of this is that, remember Devin Nunes memo about what they took to the FISA Court. They cited media reports to buttress the dossier which we know wasn’t valid, wasn’t corroborated, wasn’t credible. But they used media reports to buttress the dossier. They were leaking information to the media that they were then using to buttress the document that they were using to then get the warrant to spy on the Trump campaign.

13 different leakers in the FBI. So far we only know about Comey, Strzok and Page for sure...