US Politics The Mueller Investigation - report is out

[Xorkoth]

PD '06 Boyeeee...

 

[Roger&Me]

PD '06 Boyeeee...

qft.

 

[Roger&Me]

It's pretty frustrating.

Some of it is just so ridiculous. Like the FISC thing, for example. I mean, a FISA warrant is huge deal. Appearing before FISC is something you really prepare for, because those judges will eviscerate you if you don't. They're really good at their jobs and they don't take any of it lightly. If you want a FISA warrant, you have to fight hard for it. It's honestly the last court I'd ever consider to be a "rubber-stamp."

 

[Droppersneck]

There was a good piece written in the WSJ the other day about Nunes trying to figure out who the spy was that Obama’s FBI put in to monitor the Trump campaign. They were talking about holding Sessions in contempt of court for not releasing documents. Xork/rog did you guys see anything about this by chance? The writer even speculated who the person might be, but couldn’t confirm it so they didn’t include it in the article. That helped restore my faith, just a little, in MSM press. 9 times out 10 they would have used ‘sources familiar with the investigation’ or some fake Bs like that.

 

[JGrimez]

And he knows law better than someone that went to law school apparently, too

What an incredibly ignorant comment.
Does going to law school make someone honest?
No it just means that one can potentially push a partisan agenda while sounding more convincing to people that do not understand the topic.
It's not hard to learn enough of the law to know when someone is blatantly lying (or using lawyerspeak to deceive). A friend of mine is a lawyer and he stated that he has met common folk who know more about the law than some of his professional colleagues. Shit he said some criminals know more about the law than some lawyers.

But I know enough in regards to the law and the Clinton email investigation which is why I'm posing these questions to Roger, and I'm not receiving direct answers, for a reason.
I'm actually very fascinated and amused by his answers so I'm enjoying this exchange. It's nice to speak to someone who knows what they're talking about yet uses their knowledge to lie.
If these accusations were against Trump I'd be no doubt hearing a much different story. Funny how some choose to apply the full weight of the law only when it suits them.

The problem with the Internet is that people can say anything

Instead of cheerleading perversions of jusitice and continuing to contribute nothing I recommend you go and learn about the case yourself (and Uranium One).
The good thing about the internet is that this information is publicly available. You have no excuse not to be informed

This is also just plain false. FISC is not a rubber-stamp court. It's actually a notoriously demanding court. It will usually decline to issue a warrant in the absence of an overwhelming showing of probable cause. The standard it applies typically is higher than what the constitution demands. The reason it issues warrants in a high percentage of cases is that investigators don't even bother applying for a FISA warrant unless they know they can get it. But FISC still rejects some warrant applications, for a variety of reasons.

OK the court that has declined just 11 of the more than 33,900 surveillance requests made by the government in 33 years is not a rubber-stamp court?
So please tell me, why would a warrant application as important as Carter Page be rejected by the court?
How is it even possible that they could not convince a FISA court to grant them their warrant?
What changed between the first and second application?
They used the "salacious and unverified" dossier, acquired by violating campaign law (only bad when Trump does it), and was a document that was 'corroborated' by a news article that used the same source, Christopher Steele, which I'm sure you will agree does not equal corroboration. So it appears to be a fact that they needed the dossier to secure the warrant, otherwise the first application would have been accepted and they would not have needed to present the fake dossier. Using knowingly false intel to secure a warrant is a crime.

<MOVED CLINTON-RELATED QUESTIONS>

 

[alasdairm]

Instead of cheerleading perversions of jusitice and continuing to contribute nothing...

if you stick round for about another 9 years, you might match xorkoth's contribution to bluelight.

you just got back from an enforced vacation. if you can't find a way to post without thee kinds of insults, i'll infract you myself and you can have another vacation. stop. please.

alasdair

 

[JGrimez]

OK I apologize. Xortkoth's exchanges have been relatively civil albeit completely conflicting. But it's obvious to me I've put in far more effort than them into researching the details of certain stories yet I read stuff like:

I think it's because when people with the ability to self-reflect and who have good intentions like our friend Grimez find out they've been so thoroughly hoodwinked and manipulated, it's quite difficult to handle.

Grimez gets his evidence from conspiracy theory sites so it's kinda pointless trying to tell him there's no evidence, because to him it's as plain as day.

The problem with the Internet is that people can say anything. When you're led to believe that anything from mainstream sources, and anything that disagrees with the conspiracy you support, is part of the conspiracy you support, the only things left are sites made to present pieces of evidence in a misleading way, and sites that are outright fabricating information, all to support said conspiracy. At that point, logical rebuttal of said points is, well, pointless. It's pretty frustrating.

When I spoke of contributing nothing I was referring to the Uranium One + Clinton server investigation discussions.
I'm speaking verifiable facts that you can read for yourself on government records and from legitimate journalists so it is frustrating when people who disagree just resort to slinging insults like conspiracist etc

 

[Xorkoth]

Man I get what you're saying. I have been flippant towards you occasionally and I apologize because you have been pretty unfailingly polite. It's just that you continually do not seem to get my point. We are coming from two opposing places of source information. And neither of us trusts the others' source. What are you supposed to do about that? To me it seems extremely obvious you've been hoodwinked. To you, it seems like I've swallowed the blue pill, or the red pill or whichever one of them is the one you don't want to swallow. Where do we go from here? We can't convince each other of anything. It's frustrating because I want to debate with you and I feel like whatever I spend time coming with to say isn't received as I intended. And you probably feel the same way. It's a weird fucking place we're at in this country man. I don't like it.

 

[cduggles]

This thread is for the Mueller investigation. Some side chatter is fine, such as just above.

Derailing the thread to focus on other completely unrelated issues or stories is a Trump strategy, and is not happening here.

Posts primarily about Secretary Clinton and anything including uranium, uranium one, her emails, FBI investigation of her emails, her "homebrewed server", classified emails from the "possibly-Russian hacks" and/or Wikileaks, BENGHAZI; former president Clinton and any topic; KILLARY, $hillary, NO REALLY SHE KILLS PEOPLE, the Clinton Foundation and other related Clinton stories should be posted here:

http://www.bluelight.org/vb/threads/828382-The-Clinton-Discussion-Thread?highlight=Clinton

If you've been warned privately, and for some reason can't post in the appropriate threads, your post will be UA'd.

If you haven't been warned, you'll get a heads up.

I understand there are overlapping individuals and narratives, but lumping everything together is clogging up an already complicated thread.

Thank you! CD

 

[JGrimez]

Derailing the thread to focus on other completely unrelated issues or stories is a Trump strategy

lol

http://www.bluelight.org/vb/threads/828382-The-Clinton-Discussion-Thread?highlight=Clinton

Thank you

I understand there are overlapping individuals and narratives, but lumping everything together is clogging up an already complicated thread.

This was not my intention. It's just that this discussion is vitally important and I appreciate Roger&Me giving me the opportunity to engage him on this issue.
I will move my questions there and we can continue if it pleases him.

Posts primarily about Secretary Clinton and anything including uranium, uranium one, her emails, FBI investigation of her emails, her "homebrewed server", classified emails from the "possibly-Russian hacks" and/or Wikileaks, BENGHAZI; former president Clinton and any topic; KILLARY, $hillary, NO REALLY SHE KILLS PEOPLE, the Clinton Foundation and other related Clinton stories should be posted here:

I'd be interested to hear your opinion perhaps in the other thread. Do you think that all these discussions are simply a vast, right-wing conspiracy or do you think that HRC is guilty of at least some wrongdoing over the years?

 

[JGrimez]

Man I get what you're saying. I have been flippant towards you occasionally and I apologize because you have been pretty unfailingly polite. It's just that you continually do not seem to get my point. We are coming from two opposing places of source information. And neither of us trusts the others' source. What are you supposed to do about that? To me it seems extremely obvious you've been hoodwinked. To you, it seems like I've swallowed the blue pill, or the red pill or whichever one of them is the one you don't want to swallow. Where do we go from here? We can't convince each other of anything. It's frustrating because I want to debate with you and I feel like whatever I spend time coming with to say isn't received as I intended. And you probably feel the same way. It's a weird fucking place we're at in this country man. I don't like it.

Thanks it's all good, <SNIP>
I agree I don't like where we are at sometimes as well, the people are watching the exact same movie screen but seeing completely different movies.
I like to think I am objective as possible, for example judging people on their actions and if they follow the law. You know if Trump unlawfully colluded with Russia or broke campaign finance law then collect evidence (legally), charge him and have him carry out the punishment. But I'm just saying if the full letter of the law applies to the commander-in-chief, then it should apply to everyone else equally across the board.

So yeah you've at least stated that you are open to the theories I've presented and actually hope that they're true. So can't really ask for more than that.

 

[alasdairm]

...the people are watching the exact same movie screen but seeing completely different movies.

right? to me, it seems very straightforward. but one group of people - who are 'red-pilled' - feel that they're right and everybody else who disagrees with them is wrong...



alasdair

 

[JGrimez]

but one group of people - who are 'red-pilled' - feel that they're right and everybody else who disagrees with them is wrong...

But you think that you are right and "we" are wrong!
Can't take that stance if you engage in the same thinking

or...

we both think that we are wrong and open to new developments, but some of us are at different points on the ladder of understanding and evolution (which one of us is further along is where we disagree)

The reason there's so much animosity and division imo is because the stakes are high - nobody wants a fascist Trump-led 4th Reich overthrow, and nobody wants a SJW communist takeover and subsequent genocide.

Both sides feel one of those realities is possible so I can understand the impassioned way that many approach these movements.

 

[zephyr]

^ Which group is red pilled?

Current Events and Politics. In the bluelight forums, political opinions are considered especially heinous. In CEP, the dedicated blrs who investigate these vicious posts are members of an elite squad known as the butthurt crew. These are their stories

Cmon guys chill out : the inflammatory comments are from a lot of you, arent you enjoying arguing?

The investigation was necessary and the findings are not a shock, Trump is full of it so are the Clintons so are all politicians.

 

[Droppersneck]

But you think that you are right and "we" are wrong!
Can't take that stance if you engage in the same thinking

or...

we both think that we are wrong and open to new developments, but some of us are at different points on the ladder of understanding and evolution (which one of us is further along is where we disagree)

The reason there's so much animosity and division imo is because the stakes are high - nobody wants a fascist Trump-led 4th Reich overthrow, and nobody wants a SJW communist takeover and subsequent genocide.

Both sides feel one of those realities is possible so I can understand the impassioned way that many approach these movements.

What I fear about the progressive mind set is very real, I was talking to a friend that’s progressive last night. He is completely for having open borders and allowing for the free flow of people. He believes that it’s an eventuality, like many other things, and the further we move these things along, the better. It’s a difference of opinion, often times, I just think it’s destructive and trying to preserve our country with laws and boundaries is something worth fighting for. Call me old fashion.

 

[alasdairm]

But you think that you are right and "we" are wrong!

no. no i don't. i recognise that two different people or different groups can see the same thing and have a different reaction.

people believe trump is doing a great job. i think he's doing a terrible job and he's a disgrace to the office of the president.

do i think you're 'wrong'? no.

alasdair

 

[JGrimez]

no. no i don't. i recognise that two different people or different groups can see the same thing and have a different reaction.

people believe trump is doing a great job. i think he's doing a terrible job and he's a disgrace to the office of the president.

do i think you're 'wrong'? no.

alasdair

Yes, because removing my opinion and your opinion - Trump is still taking actions which will lead to either an improvement or reduction to the average American's quality of living.
Let's say 8 years pass and we can assess his performance.
Although I will admit people assess Obama's presidency very differently - let's say something like, the gun crime/murder in Chicago (Obama's home) got worse during Obama's 8 years. Is that a fact we can verify?
Now let's get crazy for a second and hypothesize that after 8 years Trump manages to greatly increase GDP, lower debt, lower unemployment massively, increase average wages, lower taxes and faciliate peace in Korea, Iran and Palestine. Only the most deranged haters of Trump would disagree that he did a good job.
So right now as we speak he's either working to improve the state of the country, or he's actively making the country worse (or only working to benefit himself).
One of those statements is true. One of us is correct.

 

[Droppersneck]

no. no i don't. i recognise that two different people or different groups can see the same thing and have a different reaction.

people believe trump is doing a great job. i think he's doing a terrible job and he's a disgrace to the office of the president.

do i think you're 'wrong'? no.

alasdair

The problem is ‘we’ have evidence that supports our claim. While stormy Daniels has become the leader of the Democratic Party, Trump has been getting folks back to work and uniting the Korean Peninsula. There are very real accomplishments to back up our claims.

 

[alasdairm]

i have evidence to back up my perspective too but you (plural) tend to just poohpooh it

While stormy Daniels has become the leader of the Democratic Party...

i this this is emblematic of the kind of stuff that gives 'your side' a bad name. when people accuse you of trolling, it's stuff like this i expect they have in mind.

i don't have the same problem, generally, with jgrimez. while i disagree with his (i assume) position on many issues, for the most part he tends to make well-considered arguments, substantiated with links to credible resources.

alasdair

 

[JGrimez]

Imo a lot of the trolling is a reaction to many on the Left who moralize with a holier-than-thou attitude.

I'm generalizing but today's Right view the Left like they are wrong.
The Left view the Right like they are beneath them.