Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Anyway, back to Trump demanding the DOJ launch another investigation into yet another matter that he has not a shred of evidence to support. Other than his usual "people tell me" nonsense, of course.
Fascinating LATimes article from 2016, written by Eric Tucker of the Associated Press.
"Long-standing protocol dictates that the FBI and Justice Department operate free of political influence or meddling from the White House. That's one reason that the FBI director serves a 10-year term and does not turn over the reins as presidential administrations come and go. It also means that presidents are not supposed to supervise, initiate or stop law enforcement investigations."
"Any hint of political meddling could undermine public faith in the legitimacy of an investigation. It could raise the prospect that a person is being investigated, or is being spared from investigation, on the whims of political considerations rather than evidence of guilt or innocence."
Instances where past administrations have blurred the line between politics and justice have not gone well.
Nixon comes to mind, of course.
Obama received sharp rebukes for comments he made about national security not being impacted by Petraeus' or Clinton's actions.
If the Republicans are fine with the POTUS demanding investigations or calling a halt to investigations, then they better buckle up for a bumpy ride.
The pendulum will swing the other way. It always does. Sooner or later, there will be a Democrat in the WH.
It doesn't matter how much you dems whine about it, this investigation is moving forward.
The truth of the matter is that there is more evidence of wrongdoing by those that brought the Russian investigation, than there is of any Russian collusion.
This investigation is absolutely necessary, and was in fact already underway, Trump simply asked that the investigation be expanded into very serious matters that have recently come up.
Complaining about is only shows you have no interest in the truth, and only want Trump to be targeted.
Trump is following the Erdogan playbook. Recep Erdogan was under corruption investigation in Turkey in 2013. He proclaimed a “deep state conspiracy”, fired the investigators, launched investigations into his political rivals and purged prosecutors.
If anyone ever wondered how authoritarians gain power and become dictators, this is how they do it. They destroy non-political institutions of law enforcement and justice, and they do it by convincing a segment of the country that mysterious “deep state” forces are out to get them.
Is there anyone left in the GOP base who doesn’t want to surrender this countries institutions to protect a supremely awful person like Donald Trump? This really can’t be worth it.
Obama made up his own playbook. He is the only president in US history to conduct total surveillance on the opposing presidential campaign.
His excuse, Russian collusion which in almost two years, several investigations, nobody has found a single piece if evidence to prove any Russian collusion.
Yes, Obama will go down in history, and in the future when other presidents spy on their political opponents, everybody will say they are going right out of the Obama playbook.
Status:
"It Can't Rain All The Time"
(set 25 days ago)
Location: North Pacific
15,754 posts, read 7,589,592 times
Reputation: 2576
Quote:
Originally Posted by G1..
Actually it was cut and dried and was proven to be false and trump never apologized for the false accusation surprisingly enough.
The FBI never lied, they have always been investigating the russians interference into the presidential election that was never a question.
Trump is a paranoid sob he isn't going to believe what people tell him.
If I remember this right in chronological, it started with Hilary use of electronic devices and email, not on secure gov server, to contents of the email, possible shared classified material, Russia (interfere w/elections) trying to get Hilary elected, to Russia trying to get Trump elected.
That just gave me a headache ...
Hilary, not enough evidence presented to grand jury, they wouldn't indict.
To ... Russia hacked the DNC proven or unproven? Unproven I think ...
So basically there is nothing to any of this yet people continue the on going saga of Russia/Trump and u.s. elections ... With now, Trump orders an investigation into Obama?
When will we realize, we're being played? or Do we realize it, but don't care? In the meantime, who's minding the chicken coop?
Status:
"It Can't Rain All The Time"
(set 25 days ago)
Location: North Pacific
15,754 posts, read 7,589,592 times
Reputation: 2576
Quote:
Originally Posted by GotHereQuickAsICould
The above is a perfect example of how a lie gets implanted in people's minds.
The DOJ stated clearly that they found not a shred of evidence to support Trump's claim, yet people are still asking about judge that signed off on the warrant.
Just caught this ... one has to have evidence to get a warrant yes? This post is a perfect example of why we have been chasing our tails all this time over something that is nothing ... the media is on a feeding frenzy as they are 'selling' in record highs, they love it.
As it is though, my question about a warrant didn't come from me exactly. I read it in a comments post under one of the first articles that came out right after Trump began the frenzy. The poster said ... Trump might want to pipe down, because if there was a warrant for wiretapping, then there is evidence of a crime for a judge to sign off on. What the poster said, made sense to me and would to you too, if you thought about it.
One other thing. I was raised learning as my mother used the phrase often enough ... the guilty dog, always barks first. When it came to lying about something, she really detested being lied to. And when I look at people talking and saying stuff ... often times I default to her words and many times I find them helpful. Just thought I'd share.
Obama made up his own playbook. He is the only president in US history to conduct total surveillance on the opposing presidential campaign.
His excuse, Russian collusion which in almost two years, several investigations, nobody has found a single piece if evidence to prove any Russian collusion.
Yes, Obama will go down in history, and in the future when other presidents spy on their political opponents, everybody will say they are going right out of the Obama playbook.
If you notice, Obama has that arrogance about him that he's the Man totally in charge of everything. So trying to get at the guy (Trump) willing to undo his legacy seems to be pretty clear here.
As it is though, my question about a warrant didn't come from me exactly. I read it in a comments post under one of the first articles that came out right after Trump began the frenzy. The poster said ... Trump might want to pipe down, because if there was a warrant for wiretapping, then there is evidence of a crime for a judge to sign off on. What the poster said, made sense to me and would to you too, if you thought about it.
#1 - Sure that makes sense but there is no warrant as far as we know now. If there was, it would have been signed off by the AG.
Comey and Clapper testified under oath they didn't know of any official surveillance. But now Clapper has admitted and spun the story as "it was for protection".
There are 2 problems with this.
-If Lynch signed off on this, and it was court approved, there would have to be evidence beforehand. As far as we know now, there is non. The official evidence and their reason has come from AFTER the informant/spy was sent in. And no less that spy initiated the 'crime' (which looks like entrapment to me).
#2 - No sign-off by the AG and therefore no warrant. Therefore it was a 'anything goes' to get this guy mentality.
Better hope it's #1, and even then, that underlying evidence better be good. But so far, #1 seems unlikely.
For #2, if you notice, they are going around as much as possible by using foreign Nationals to make it appear there's no direct link, but a 'helping' hand. Also makes tracing money a bit more tedious.
This will ultimately come down to what happens in the mid-terms. Republicans hold the House and Senate, there will be major punishment. Democrats win the House... Let's forget about it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
With now, Trump orders an investigation into Obama?
