The Glade 4.0

BREAKING: IG Horowitz has found "reasonable grounds" for believing there has been a violation of federal criminal law in the FBI/DOJ's handling of the Clinton investigation/s and has referred his findings of potential criminal misconduct to Huber for possible criminal prosecution

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

BREAKING: Comey/Yates targeted Gen. Flynn in C.I. investigation a yr BEFORE he communicated w Russian ambassador in Dec 2016 as a transition official

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

Where did this come from? All I've seen so far is that Horowitz has said a draft version of his report is complete.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Paul Sperry, who has demonstrated trustworthiness related to this topic.

https://mobile.twitter.com/paulsperry_/ ... 4499671040

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

Paul Sperry again:

"Sally Yates keeps reappearing in the political espionage scandal. Now we know her aide Matthew Axelrod called FBI HQ to demand NY agents back off Clinton Foundation probe during 2016 campaign. Yates also signed a FISA spy warrant on Page & got Flynn fired"

https://mobile.twitter.com/paulsperry_/ ... 1644874752

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

This tweet has aged particularly well.

"Is it legal for a sitting President to be "wire tapping" a race for president prior to an election? Turned down by court earlier. A NEW LOW!"

https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTr ... 3679560704

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

Candidate Trump: The Obama Administration has bugged my campaign

Obama Administration and Main Stream Media: You are a liar and you are colluding with Russia

Today's Washington Post, a CIA asset and mouthpiece, trying to get out in front of the coming **** storm: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pos ... edirect=on

Are we all seeing it yet? Prepare yourselves for what's to come. It's going to get truly awful.

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

It's been awful for a long time. Let's look at the headlines!

We have liberals defending the character of violent murders and the media obsessed with a porn star.

Buried below the fold:

The lowest level of unemployment in years, the FBI sent to infiltrate a presidential campaign, and China actively working with the US to address the trade imbalance

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

For the sake of argument, assume for a moment that, in the middle of a Presidential campaign, the FBI obtains what it in good faith believes to be credible intelligence that a hostile foreign government is attempting to influence the outcome of the election in favor of one of the candidates by, among other things, hacking the emails of the other candidate's campaign, planting stories in the media, and attempting to coordinate with members of their preferred candidate's campaign staff. In an ideal world, how do you think the FBI, DOJ, CIA, and sitting Presidential Administration should handle that? And how would that differ from what was actually done in the Trump/Clinton election?

The FBI should not have a preferred candidate. They are supposed to be politically neutral. The fact that the FBI is not politically neutral is part of the problem.

_________________
"If you haven't got anything nice to say about anybody, come sit next to me." - Alice R. Longworth

"Good? Bad? I'm the guy with the gun." - Ash Williams

For the sake of argument, which of the allegations you've outlined against the Trump campaign are illegal?

Influencing elections in other nations isn't something the US should throw stones about since our glass house is particularly fragile where that topic is concerned. We've toppled governments in my lifetime. We pick the winners in elections in other nations all the time.

Check your privilege.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

That's not what happened though. You're going to be told, at first, that's what happened by those desperately trying to control the narrative because the alternative involves them swinging from nooses.

What will materialize is that this whole fiasco started because the Obama Administration was accessing raw 702 SIGINT to spy on their political opponents and create leverage, and when they were caught doing it by Mike Rodgers, who demanded an explaination, they concocted the Russian narrative in the hopes it would throw the election for Clinton and none of this would ever be exposed. It went into hyperdrive because she lost, and they were unprepared. She was never suppsed to lose.

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

Oh, that's no where near the level of awful. America is about to learn that everything it has believed for the last 60 years is a lie perpetrated on them by wolves dressed in sheep's clothing.

They are going to have to confront true evil in the process. Yes, evil.

Almost all of this is going to loop back onto what they were trying to hide.

Think KSA, think DPRK, think NXIVM. Human trafficking, and worse.

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

More: President Obama's Campaign funneled nearly $1,000,000 to a law firm linked closely with Fusion GPS in 2016

Are we all seeing it yet?

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

The word "their" in that sentence was meant to be a reference back to the hostile foreign power, not the FBI. So, it would read, "...the FBI obtains what it in good faith believes to be credible intelligence that a hostile foreign government is attempting to...coordinate with members of their [the hostile foreign government's] preferred candidate's campaign staff

You're avoiding the question by assuming the underlying premise for the investigation was bogus, thus tainting everything that came after. I'm asking you to assume, just for the sake of discussion, that the underlying premise was legit. If that were the case, how would/should the investigation play out differently?

You too are avoiding the question. Again, if the original trigger for the investigation were legit - i.e., credible intel of interference and attempted infiltration by a foreign power - how would/should the response of the government differ from what they did in this case?

There's no reason for infiltrating a presidential campaign to gather intelligence. If there's issues with certain people, you investigate them, you don't put a mole in place in the campaign.

Second, the sort of thinking you're seemingly proposing is the problem. Clinton's campaign worked with foreign intelligence agents to gather dirt on Trump, and used fabricated, unsubstantiated evidence paid for by the DNC to get warrants from the FISA courts to spy on Trump.

You seem to be following the same pattern as other liberals - it's OK because it's Trump. You're rationalizing your opinion based on animus towards the president. You'd be spitting nails if in 2020 Trump pulled that same ****.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

Ok, so you object to the use of confidential informants and to including information from biased / self-interested sources in FISA warrant applications. Do you object to those practices in all investigations or just investigations where the targets are members of a campaign? For example, if the FBI were investigating a potential al-Qaeda terrorist cell, would you object to them using a confidential informant within the target group and seeking a FISA warrant on the basis of intel provided by a rival group (e.g., Hezbollah)?

Any other objections, or is that it?

I object to political use of governmental and intelligence organizations and assets to influence the outcome of an election or shift policy to favor any political party. It's not as difficult as you keep trying to make it. The previous administration seems to have used the power of the government to try to pick the winner of the 2016 election.

You'd have a **** fit if Trump played politics that way.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

Again, though, you seem to be pointing to all these ordinary aspects of any counterintelligence investigation and declaring them outrageous, but when pressed, your actual objection seems to just come back to a claim that the investigation was politically motivated in the first place. What I'm trying to figure out is whether you actually object to the investigatory tactics themselves or just to what you presume to be the motivation for the investigation.

Let me try to clear it up then...

I'm OK with plumbers, just not the kind sent to help rig an election.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

That doesn't really help, though, as the Watergate activities weren't even facially valid. They didn't even bother with the appearance of propriety by running things through normal channels, seeking warrants, etc.; they just flat out established a small, standalone team and engaged in break-ins and surveillance without any pretense of authority or oversight beyond post-facto claims of inherent Executive power. In the Trump/Russia investigation, by contrast, the Obama Administration and DOJ jumped through all the usual procedural hoops of opening an investigation, obtaining FISA warrants, etc.

That's an important distinction, because if the Trump/Russia investigation followed all the rules but was nevertheless corruptly motivated, it suggests that the rules themselves likely need to be reformed, whereas if the investigation broke the rules, then we're just talking about bad actors rather than bad rules.

I disagree totally, notwithstanding the possibility that reformation might provide some benefit.

There's no way to stop corruption by changing the rules. All you end up with is more creative corruption - like the difference between Nixon's administration and Obama's.

The IRS targeting conservatives ended with Comey saying that charges were unwarranted, Clinton's personal email server investigation ending with Comey saying charges being unwarranted...

Creative ways to play corrupt politics. It'll be a cold day in hell before any changes occur no matter what the rules are.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.