ILikePie5

The “cop” claimed a guilty on the guy everyone knew was guilty already and hasn’t had a result to share since then. How convenient.

no he didn't. He extended a small amount of the unemployment benefits. And he did not stop evictions at all. His order asked a government department to look into whether evictions should be stopped. It did not order them to stop it. 

what a joke. The republicans outright refused to continue these. They wanted them cut. But somehow it is the democrat's fault?

and gotten covid under control so that the economy would be recovering much faster. Instead America is still having massive numbers of cases which is continuing to cripple the economy. 

the problem with that logic is that this is not a local issue. It is a national one. Viruses don't stop at the border between states. When florida went ahead with spring break, it spread cases all across the country. allowing the pandemic to be mismanaged and letting the virus spread is a complete botching of the response.

What bill? There is no way the republicans agreed to extending the unemployment. At least half the republicans in the senate were dead set against this. So i'm pretty sure you are making this up. 

They went with obstruction of Congress instead of obstruction of justice for grounds for impeachment since the evidence bar is so much lower for that.

what are you talking about? The email you referred to did refer to anything that wasn't public knowledge. It was a person sending themselves an email about a discussion where publicly available information was discussed. Why do you think this is evidence of something?

Do you think you're making sense? You're not. You are just stating random things and seem to be convincing yourself that it is evidence of something. 

no. obstruction of justice is a crime. 

so your argument is that if a politician conspires with a foreign power against the interests of america, as long as it isn't technically illegal we should all just be fine with that? 

because collusion isn't a crime. Trump was the one who constantly repeated the line about collusion specifically because it wasn't a crime. There was never any question about whether he would be charged with "collusion".

the email you are using as evidence makes no mention of FISA or Crossfie hurricane. It doesn't say anything that anyone who watches the news would have known. 

it appears to be basically just notes for herself. It doesn't appear to implicate anyone of anything.

lol you appear to be confusing "wrong" with "criminal". If you scream obscenities at a child it might not be a crime. But it is still wrong.

still no. Mueller showed the trump team committed multiple counts of obstruction of justice, which is a crime. 

are you high? The economy is floating on the stimulus checks the government was giving out. Those just ended and the republicans are refusing to continue it. That means there is about to be WAY less money floating through the economy. The moratorium on evictions is also ending which will further add to the crisis. The cases are also nowhere near under control. 

We are a long way from a comeback. 

that's because lots of people are stupid and believe what talking heads on Fox news say. People tend to confuse the economy and the stock market as the same thing. They are not.

hell no. for 1, if the government had gotten a better handle on the virus, we would be having a much better time economically. Trump completely botched it.

2nd, the only thing keeping the economy afloat was the stimulus money coming from the government. The republicans have now cut that off which is going to hit the economy hard.

so you are going to give Trump points for inheriting a booming economy from Obama. but you aren't going to blame him for tanking that economy with his horrendous response to a global crisis? How biased can you get?

information about the steele dossier and Carter Page had been public knowledge for months at that point. Everyone knew about it. You are surprised that the President knew about things that had been in the news?

this is exactly my point. Trump's team did collude with the russians. That is well established. But collusion is not criminal. That is exactly why trump popularized using that term rather than a more accurate one. Because no matter what information came to light, he could spin it as not being "collusion".

so he colluded with the foreign power that has been proven to have interfered in the election to help trump. That is established. It was not able to be proven he committed a crime while doing this.

you brought up mueller, not me.

This is exact text from the email you are referring to. It says he was not asking for information about or instructing them to do anything. Jesus, even your own "evidence" goes contrary to the narrative you are trying to set. 

The trump team did collude with russia. They wanted to use WikiLeaks to damage clinton. Mueller was very clear about that. Then the russians went ahead and did it. There just isn't a neat line between the Trump team trying to commit a crime, and the russians who actually carried out the crime the trump team wanted to commit.

Of course. But would he benefit the entire nation? We have to focus on everybody, not just ourselves. 

but trumps better than biden, that i definitely agree with.

Trump's complete botching of a global crisis is causing the greatest economic problems since the great depression. So no, he most definitely is not better for anyone economically (except maybe billionaires who are still getting richer as the economy tanks)

in the same way that a fire cracker is comparable to nuclear bomb, sure. They are both explosions. But one is massively bigger in scale. So pretending like they are the same thing makes you look insanely biased or delusional. 

are you ever going to explain what you are taking about and provide some evidence? Or are you just going to keep making random statements make no sense?

what? Are you kidding? The investigation “identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump Campaign” and established that the Trump Campaign “showed interest in WikiLeaks's releases of documents and welcomed their potential to damage candidate Clinton”

Muller found lots of evidence of collusion and they wanted to use this collusion to damage clinton.

I'm not justifying it. It is completely unacceptable. But you are pretending like it is somehow comparable to Watergate. It isn't. 

they did tell the court that. The court agreed.

you haven't provided any evidence of anything. In fact your narrative itself is kind of all over the place. 

Hunter Biden didn't actually do anything at all. He sat on a board. There is no evidence, or even legitimate suspicion, he committed any kind of crime. There is no comparison.

of course it is. I have never claimed it isn't. You are attempting to paint this specific case as if it is as important as watergate. The reality is that this entire FISA process is shady and corrupt. Pointing to one specific case of it's misuse and pretending like it is unique is stupid. 

there was good reason to believe he was a russian agent. Lots of spies play both sides. Just like lots of criminals inform to the FBI. It doesn't make them less of a criminal.

no, it wasn't.

which one? There were lots of warrents issued. 

what the hell are you even talking about? You just keep making random statements and asking random questions. I have no idea what your point is. 

So because a law enforcement agency did shady stuff while investigating a legitimate threat, you think that an incredibly corrupt politician should abuse that agency?

i tried watching cookie. my action failed

What was the Russia hoax? At the root, "Competing memos from the Republicans and the Democrats on the House intelligence committee both say that information about George Papadopoulos, a Trump campaign foreign policy adviser, had prompted the FBI investigation in July 2016."https://www.factcheck.org/2019/03/dossier-not-what-started-all-of-this/

I never said it was. But the system was designed to work this way. So pretending like this specific example of it's abuse is somehow more serious is just your bias. 

The other was law enforcement agents investigating potentially very serious crimes and committing crimes to do it. They weren't elected officials. They weren't doing it to protect their own power and they had legitimate reasons to believe a crime had been committed.

you're aware the dossier contains lots of information on lots of different things right? Lots of it is accurate. Some of it isn't.

what are you talking about? Why do you just make vague statements and pretend like you have made an argument?

yes, Trump is a sad, pathetic joke. He spends most of his days spreading lies and misinformation and his cultish follower eat it up. When it is disproved they pretend it never happened. When 1 out of the thousands of lies ends up having a grain of truth they pretend like he was always telling the truth. It's really sad.

yes. it is a problem. I never said it wasn't. But comparing it is nowhere near the level of seriousness of watergate. 

true. but FISA warrants are by design a secretive process with not much oversight. My point was that since this process is designed to be secretive neither you nor I have any idea how much this system is abused. It is entirely possible that this case is totally normal for the FISA courts. And again, that is a terrible thing. But you are trying to pretend like this is somehow in the same ballpark as Watergate, which is nuts.

It was funded by republicans. Then when they lost interest the DNC continued their work. But that doesn't, in any way, dispute the fact that alot of the report was accurate and it was therefore evidence that serious crimes had been committed.

where is your evidence of that?

lol trump lies a dozen times a day. he says crazy ass shit constantly. One of the thousands of crazy things he says happened to have level of truth in it so we are supposed to pretend like he is somehow reliable?

Gotta wait on Durham.

You are uninformed. We all are to an extent. It's just I have the grace to wait for more information instead of throwing out baseless conjectures. 

Trump is the modern day Nero. Only interested in himself and helping to burn it down. 

Because spying on a political opponent via a hotel burglary is worse than using the FBI to do it.

Again, i'm not saying they didn't commit crimes. Maybe they did. But there was circumstantial evidence that trump and his associates were engaging in crime. They were investigating that potential crime. 

ok, but how much of that is standard practice though? the FISA process is super shadowy by design. Saying there were 17 errors or omissions means nothing if that is how lots of FISA applications work.

parts of it, sure. Lots of it was very accurate.

do you think the FBI notifies the president of their investigations? Why would they do that?

There is no evidence that any elected official did anything wrong. There is evidence that some FBI agents committed some crimes while investigating potentially serious crimes. This is nothing even close to the Watergate scandal. So hyping it up will go over great on right wing forums. But to regular people it just sounds stupid.

Not at all. However the article in the OP is reasonably innocuous. Hence any further discussion to be had will be rooted in your imaginations until further results come out. That and you don't seem to be all that well informed in the first place means that as usual, conversation on this topic will be unproductive (until those factors change). 

No. Just that conversations around this topic tend to be unproductive and this thread already has the hallmarks of being an unproductive thread

This appears to be a technical foul by an individual.

Do you have any evidence of a "conspiracy"?

"russiagate" was the FBI investigating a politician for potentially very serious crimes. 

Very true, which is why I say there's something fishy going on. I wouldn't call this proof, though. We need to dig deeper

but I'm not sure these articles exactly prove it is on the level of the Watergate scandal. 

That they are clever enough to avoid pointless squabbles?

So did we track down oro’s gifting? DiDi was saying he got a telescope which he used to watch, and it sounds like that was confirmed yesterday?

How do you debate orangemanbad?

You can't.