Joseph E. diGenova

Definitely worth the read.

https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/the-polit...f-the-fbi/

DiGenova is an ideologue, that's why Trump picked him. Don't believe a word out of his conspiracy theory mouth.

You guys are drinking the kool aid.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/01/opini...l-fbi.html

(03-25-2018 08:53 AM)Old Dominion Wrote:  DiGenova is an ideologue, that's why Trump picked him. Don't believe a word out of his conspiracy theory mouth.

You guys are drinking the kool aid.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/01/opini...l-fbi.html

Watch the Looming Tower, it’s about how little kingdoms and petty turf wars within the US intelligence community allowed Bin Ladin to succeed on 9/11. I don’t think anyone believes all the FBI rank and file are bad. But if you have a few key people who build a small enclosed kingdom within the intelligence agencies—you can do a lot of damage. I think that absolutely is happening and 9/11 is simply an example of where it has happened before. This Russia Russia Russia thing is just 9/11 political turf war with a dash of McCarthyism.

(03-25-2018 09:49 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-25-2018 08:53 AM)Old Dominion Wrote:  DiGenova is an ideologue, that's why Trump picked him. Don't believe a word out of his conspiracy theory mouth.

You guys are drinking the kool aid.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/01/opini...l-fbi.html

Watch the Looming Tower, it’s about how little kingdoms and petty turf wars within the US intelligence community allowed Bin Ladin to succeed on 9/11. I don’t think anyone believes all the FBI rank and file are bad. But if you have a few key people who build a small enclosed kingdom within the intelligence agencies—you can do a lot of damage. I think that absolutely is happening and 9/11 is simply an example of where it has happened before. This Russia Russia Russia thing is just 9/11 political turf war with a dash of McCarthyism.

I don't disagree in theory. All organizations consist of people with egos and sometimes personal agendas. If you accept that premise, it seems the reasonable thing to do is find those people and kick them out. Not broad stroke an entire agency this country desperately needs to believe in.
Just like the media, I have no problem with going after bad actors. What bothers me is deliberately delegitimizing whole institutions.

(03-25-2018 11:32 AM)Old Dominion Wrote:  

(03-25-2018 09:49 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-25-2018 08:53 AM)Old Dominion Wrote:  DiGenova is an ideologue, that's why Trump picked him. Don't believe a word out of his conspiracy theory mouth.

You guys are drinking the kool aid.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/01/opini...l-fbi.html

Watch the Looming Tower, it’s about how little kingdoms and petty turf wars within the US intelligence community allowed Bin Ladin to succeed on 9/11. I don’t think anyone believes all the FBI rank and file are bad. But if you have a few key people who build a small enclosed kingdom within the intelligence agencies—you can do a lot of damage. I think that absolutely is happening and 9/11 is simply an example of where it has happened before. This Russia Russia Russia thing is just 9/11 political turf war with a dash of McCarthyism.

I don't disagree in theory. All organizations consist of people with egos and sometimes personal agendas. If you accept that premise, it seems the reasonable thing to do is find those people and kick them out. Not broad stroke an entire agency this country desperately needs to believe in.
Just like the media, I have no problem with going after bad actors. What bothers me is deliberately delegitimizing whole institutions.

I don't think anyone is broad-stroking an entire agency, though having said that, the FBI's woes as far as public trust is concerned, lay squarely at the feet of the FBI and the Justice Department. Likewise, the MSM has earned every drop of scorn for their unapologetic support of left-leaning politicos.

Can you not see that?

(03-25-2018 01:44 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(03-25-2018 11:32 AM)Old Dominion Wrote:  

(03-25-2018 09:49 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-25-2018 08:53 AM)Old Dominion Wrote:  DiGenova is an ideologue, that's why Trump picked him. Don't believe a word out of his conspiracy theory mouth.

You guys are drinking the kool aid.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/01/opini...l-fbi.html

Watch the Looming Tower, it’s about how little kingdoms and petty turf wars within the US intelligence community allowed Bin Ladin to succeed on 9/11. I don’t think anyone believes all the FBI rank and file are bad. But if you have a few key people who build a small enclosed kingdom within the intelligence agencies—you can do a lot of damage. I think that absolutely is happening and 9/11 is simply an example of where it has happened before. This Russia Russia Russia thing is just 9/11 political turf war with a dash of McCarthyism.

I don't disagree in theory. All organizations consist of people with egos and sometimes personal agendas. If you accept that premise, it seems the reasonable thing to do is find those people and kick them out. Not broad stroke an entire agency this country desperately needs to believe in.
Just like the media, I have no problem with going after bad actors. What bothers me is deliberately delegitimizing whole institutions.

I don't think anyone is broad-stroking an entire agency, though having said that, the FBI's woes as far as public trust is concerned, lay squarely at the feet of the FBI and the Justice Department. Likewise, the MSM has earned every drop of scorn for their unapologetic support of left-leaning politicos.

Can you not see that?

I see some bad apples in both organizations. But the very fact you refer to news agencies as MSM kinda makes my point. You are talking about left leaning MSM, not right leaning MSM. There are bad apples on both sides. Not all FBI's are political idealogues and not all MSM is to be distrusted.
Somewhere along the line we all forgot how to be objective. We are all to quick to throw out the baby with the bath water.

(03-25-2018 08:53 AM)Old Dominion Wrote:  DiGenova is an ideologue, that's why Trump picked him. Don't believe a word out of his conspiracy theory mouth.

You guys are drinking the kool aid.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/01/opini...l-fbi.html

Honest question OD. Did you read the article word for word? If so, feel free to highlight the parts of his comments that are easily proven false.

I read most of these types of articles I can find, both left and right. I feel more comfortable making assertions when I know what I'm talking about. And it seems that most every day brings a new tidbit of information, a new piece of the puzzle so to speak, that helps make the big picture more clear.

For instance, I had wondered why the FBI had a hard-on for Flynn. What had he done to the FBI? Then, reading an article yesterday, I learn that McCabe and Flynn had gotten crossways within the last year or so over a female FBI agent who had a run-in with her superiors.......McCabe was in full railroad mode against her when Flynn and others stepped in on her behalf, in court IIRC.

Then there was that meeting in Flynn's office with those FBI agents, our buddy Strzok being one of them. Here's another bit of new info I did not have before and makes Flynn's actions even more clear than ever:

Quote: Flynn had met with the same agents the day before regarding security clearances. McCabe called Flynn and asked if agents could come to the White House. Flynn agreed, assuming it was about personnel. It was not.

I loved the following paragraph, and again, if anything the man says is in error, feel free to correct it.

Quote:Compare the FBI’s treatment of Flynn to its treatment of Paul Combetta, the technician who used a program called BleachBit to destroy thousands of emails on Hillary Clinton’s computer. This destruction of evidence took place after a committee of the U.S. House of Representatives issued letters directing that all emails be preserved and subpoenaing them. Combetta first lied to the FBI, claiming he did not recall deleting anything. After being rewarded with immunity, Combetta recalled destroying the emails—but he could not recall anyone directing him to do so.

Yeah, sure.

I don't know if all of this will ever be proven to the American people but I sure as the hell hope someone has the balls to make the effort. You can call it a conspiracy theory all day long, but as I said before, with each passing day, more info comes to light that makes it all the more clear what was going on.

The hard part about believing "the conspiracy" is that people would put their jobs and reputations on the line in the that manner. That's what doesn't make sense, right? But then we have to remember, His Orangeness in the White House was never supposed to have happened. If Hillary wins the election......and that's what everyone expected, then none of this ever sees the light of day.

Wasn't just a bunch of snowflake women and soy boys crying on election night, I can think of a few FBI and DOJ employees who didn't sleep that night either.

(03-25-2018 01:56 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  I see some bad apples in both organizations. But the very fact you refer to news agencies as MSM kinda makes my point. You are talking about left leaning MSM, not right leaning MSM. There are bad apples on both sides. Not all FBI's are political idealogues and not all MSM is to be distrusted.
Somewhere along the line we all forgot how to be objective. We are all to quick to throw out the baby with the bath water.

The great majority of FBI employees are not political ideologues and do their jobs honestly and professionally.....the overwhelming majority in fact. The problem is that those at the top, I believe, are ideologues and corrupt.

The great majority of the left leaning MSM are ideologues and again, make no apologies for it.....now more than ever. They openly rooted for Hillary Clinton to win that election and were not ashamed that everyone knew it.

The right wing leaning MSM, as you call it, was created slowly but surely to fill the void of objectivity when many Americans had given up on learning the truth from CBS, NBC, ABC, etc. As Dan Rather basically said, it didn't matter that the documents were faked, we believe what they claimed was the truth so that's good enough.

Yeah, sure Dan.

All this may be true, but from what I've read, many in the FBI loathed Hillary and were furious at Comey giving her a pass. They wanted his orangeness to win. How am I supposed to reconcile the contradiction? If top level FBI directors were running a conspiracy, wouldn't it seem reasonable that some of the Hillary hating folks would have blown the whistle on them? Has anyone from within the FBI blown the whistle? leaked info? complained to congress or the press? How could the FBI be such a monolith?
Are you basically asking me to believe a handful of top directors organized and conducted a deep state conspiracy and no one in that organization either knew or dared talk?

(03-25-2018 02:29 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  All this may be true, but from what I've read, many in the FBI loathed Hillary and were furious at Comey giving her a pass. They wanted his orangeness to win. How am I supposed to reconcile the contradiction? If top level FBI directors were running a conspiracy, wouldn't it seem reasonable that some of the Hillary hating folks would have blown the whistle on them? Has anyone from within the FBI blown the whistle? leaked info? complained to congress or the press? How could the FBI be such a monolith?
Are you basically asking me to believe a handful of top directors organized and conducted a deep state conspiracy and no one in that organization either knew or dared talk?

The politically appointed leadership at the top was anti-Trump. And there have been lots of articles that actually quoted people saying many in the FBI were furious. Now those agents weren't named, but the ex-agents were quoted by name, unlike all the anonymous anti-Trump newspaper articles.

And the Inspector General's reports are from people blowing the whistle.

So the only contradiction is your cognitive dissonance.

(03-25-2018 08:43 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  Joseph E. diGenova

Definitely worth the read.

https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/the-polit...f-the-fbi/

"They besmirched the reputation of federal law enforcement by their role in a scheme to destroy a duly elected president and his appointees."

(03-25-2018 02:29 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  All this may be true, but from what I've read, many in the FBI loathed Hillary and were furious at Comey giving her a pass. They wanted his orangeness to win. How am I supposed to reconcile the contradiction?

Not a contradiction at all. I'm sure many down-the-line agents were furious......key words, down-the-line.....not in decision-making positions.

(03-25-2018 02:29 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  If top level FBI directors were running a conspiracy, wouldn't it seem reasonable that some of the Hillary hating folks would have blown the whistle on them? Has anyone from within the FBI blown the whistle? leaked info? complained to congress or the press? How could the FBI be such a monolith?

Actually, I think I've read of multiple instances of FBI agents expressing frustration with how they saw the investigation being handled. I cannot say that I've read any of them named, that's to say that they've been outted or outted themselves, but I will definitely see what I can find.

Having said all that, can you imagine the pressure of being an FBI whistle blower? Career over I would think.

(03-25-2018 02:29 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  Are you basically asking me to believe a handful of top directors organized and conducted a deep state conspiracy and no one in that organization either knew or dared talk?

No. I'm not, because I personally don't think that's actually what took place. What I do believe is that this whole mess started out as gentle pressure from above, say the White House, to make certain that favorable outcomes could be counted upon....for the good of the country, of course. The more it looked like Cankles would win the presidency, the easier it was to justify "looking the other way and doing less than was normal to completely investigate her". Think of the tarmac meeting and McCabe sitting on those Weiner-computer emails for example.

I think Comey was actually conflicted about it all but eventually realized he'd screwed up so badly that he had to pick one side, and he did. Once he did, he himself has admitted that he actively plotted against the president by leaking information in the "hopes" that it would trigger a special prosecutor. Hey Comey, I would ask, why the phuck didn't you think Bubba meeting Lynch on the tarmac a few days before Cankles was to testify to your investigators cause enough for a special prosecutor?

For all of them involved, all of them who did their part to gently push the outcome in a certain direction, this whole thing eventually ended up like a mouthful of something that you can't spit out nor can you swallow. What started out small, ended up looming large, ruining careers, and possibly sending people to jail.

Again, I don't know if we'll ever get to the bottom of it all, but for the sake of the FBI and the Justice Department, I certainly hope we do. What's good for the goose is good for the gander and Trump's goose has been in the oven for a long time. Time some others feel the heat in my humble opinion. That IG report can't get here soon enough. We may not learn all there is to know, but I'm betting there's stuff in there that's gonna rock DC.