(02-03-2018 07:15 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(02-03-2018 07:03 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-03-2018 06:54 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(02-03-2018 06:46 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-03-2018 06:36 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Tarmac meeting was Comey's boss, and happened while the investigation was active. One result was that she asked Comey to refer to it as a "matter", not an investigation.

The changing of text took it from a criminal matter, to not a criminal matter. negligence is a crime.

Every contact between a Trump campaign operative or Trump appointee is taken as smoke. Now the investigation is called the investigation into Russian meddling. What better way to meddle than passing false information to a Trump enemy working for the Clinton campaign in oppo research? Almost a direct pipeline from Russia to the MSM. Easy peasy, and they got paid for it too.

My point is that the entire collusion Russian meddling investigation is based on much weaker points of smoke than are emerging in the FBI/DOJ matter. If the first one merits a special counsel, so does the second one.

The only reason the text change is smoke to you is because the change in language resulted in a result you disagree with. How does editing a memo, which was then signed off on by the FBI, constitute smoke? Oh right, cus you disagree with the outcome.

I mean, the guy who changed the text has now been shown to have written a memo advocating for reopening the Clinton investigation based on the Weiner computer emails. That decision was definitely not a pro-Clinton one.

And for the Russian meetings, the smoke for Trump came from the frequency of meetings, the types of conversations, and most importantly, the desire to lie about them or cover them up.

The editing changed the whole thrust of the conclusion. THAT is why it is smoke, however much you want it to be something else.

But never mind. Clearing we need more smoke, maybe a smoking gun, before you will be able to see clearly. I think that will be forthcoming.

Again, you only see smoke because you disagree with the outcome! No one has suggested that those edits were snuck in at the last minute and done over extreme objections by others. It’s almost as if the FBI decided that those edits were, um, appropriate?

The only thing you’ve brought up that has any semblance of needing an investigation is the Steele dossier because of the potential role it may have played in the current situation. And I’ve been forward about how that wouldn’t be warranted...

I am getting a little miffed at your continual suggestions that the only reason I see smoke there is because I disagree with the outcome. I guess I could return the favor and say the only reason you don't see any smoke is because you agree with the outcome.

Actually, when were these edits put in? If this conclusion was written months before, that would be a problem in itself. So i am guessing the editing was done fairly close to the presentation. But if you have knowledge otherwise, please present it. You seem to know a lot about the timing.

And if there were no objections, that could be as bad. I have never heard of conspirators objecting to the actions of other conspirators.

The FISA thing is just one point of smoke, and believe me, the short list I presented is nowhere near exhaustive. But of course, nothing smoky about Russians feeding info to a Trump enemy working for a company hired by the Clinton campaign to do oppo research. Nowhere near as bad as meeting with a Russian lawyer for 15 minutes to get oppo research, and failing to get any. I can see why you think one is smoky, and one is pure. Just cannot understand why you chose that one and not this one.

Have I not routinely said I would support looking into the Steele Dossier? The last comment appears to suggest otherwise...