the origin of the smoke

But they went ahead with a full investigation anyway, Durham reports, even though FBI personnel acknowledged “both then and in hindsight — that they did not genuinely believe there was probable cause to believe that the target [the Trump campaign] was knowingly engaged in clandestine intelligence activities on behalf of a foreign power.” They “disregarded significant exculpatory information” and used “investigative leads provided or funded (directly or indirectly) by Trump’s political opponents” to obtain search warrants. One FBI official falsified evidence presented to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

Worst of all, the FBI failed to inform the court that the primary source behind the Steele dossier, which the agency used to secure FISA warrants, was the subject of an unresolved FBI counterespionage investigation for ties to — wait for it — Russian intelligence.

Think of what that means: It was the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee that funded the Steele dossier, which relied on a Russian with suspected ties to Russian intelligence. The FBI then included the dossier as part of the materials it used to investigate Trump, paralyzing our country, undermining a newly elected president for two years while costing tens of millions of dollars — all over what ended up being a conspiracy theory.

So the origin of the smoke was the biased FBI and the biased MSM. They blew smoke up our ass for years,, at the taxpayer's expense. Ironically, today on "some" news channels, there is a committee meeting on FBI whistleblowers, greatly opposed by...you guessed it, the Democrats.

Personalities aside for a moment... If even a small fraction of what is included in this report... including quotes from emails about who knew or thought what and when, or where information came from... are true... then we need to be VERY aggressive against people/media trying to downplay the report. You can ignore the actors without ignoring the issues.

and while yes, this is damning of current/recent Democrats and therefore supportive of Trump (not even Republicans, but Trump)... they are not remotely alone... this is simply a matter (imo) of how aggressively (often with legitimate reason) some people were willing to go... to abuse the system... to weaponize something against Americans that is supposed to shield us.... to reach their own personal, internal goals. The ends can NEVER justify the means... even if we support the ends. If the system can't do it legally, then the system can't do it.

This crap has got to stop.... it HAS to. Yes, it is more important to me that it stop than it is that people be punished for what has already been done.... ABSOLUTELY my goal would be both.... and that is exactly what SHOULD happen... but just like treating any other virus, delaying intervention only allows the virus to grow, spread and become more immune to intervention. Sometimes you just have to amputate the leg at the knee... despite the fact that a few toes are still viable.

At the risk of incurring negative reaction from certain quarters, THIS is why I don't trust the (mis)information of the the 1-6 committee or the 51 intelligence officers or the MSM.

(05-18-2023 10:05 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Yes, it is more important to me that it stop than it is that people be punished for what has already been done....

Agree.

Rethinking this and other conversations, I can imagine how someone might interpret my comment that the ends never justify the means might conflict with the opinion that (paraphrasing myself) some legal positions might have to be subjugated for the greater good....

The state does not have a right to exist in my mind. It has no inalienable rights endowed by its creators... it has only those specific rights to which the people it governs agree to give it.... which are subject to change, especially over time.

I would NOT support granting amnesty (using someone else's word) to ANYONE in government against the collective will of the people. I am merely suggesting that because large portions of the population would be unwilling to 'let their guy get convicted while the other guy walks', that this might be the only way to get 'the people' to enact the changes that MUST happen. If it can be done without that, count me in.

The biggest changes we need are the de-weaponization of the government and media; particularly for political purposes. These entities should NEVER be associated with either party. Not one on each side, not 10 who are slightly one way vs 1 who is way the other... they should be by any objective measure, apolitical.

This should not ever or in any way be the case.

At this point, this thread is showing 115 views.

I can understand why most of the lefties don't want to comment. Nobody likes confessing to being a dupe, much less a willing one.

And for most of the righties, "I told you so" is not very satisfying.

Ham, as usual, has hit upon the key takeaway: how to get the government out of king-making.

Any suggestions?

(05-18-2023 05:08 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Any suggestions?

Start by putting some restraints on the essentially unrestrained power of federal administrative agencies:
1) Reverse Chevron
2) Revise the Administrative Procedure Act to a) give congress advise and consent over all new rule making, b) provide for sunset review of every agency and all its regulations every 10 years, and c) move adjudication of disputes from captive ALJs to Article III administrative law courts in each federal judicial district.

OK, that gets at agencies like EPA and OSHA more than DOJ and FBI, but it establishes the precedence that all agencies must answer to congress, which is a start.

As long as the priorities for a high-level bureaucrat are, in order, 1) my career, 2) my agency, 3) my country, there will be problems. Breaking that mindset will be difficult, but learning that they are not invincible would be a good first step. So start investigating and firing the worst offenders.

Unlike numbers and I suspect, Tanq... I don't have the judicial background knowledge to speak to specific acts that might need to be changed, or to specific agency charters that might respond to your question, OO... So I'll go vastly more 'practical'...

The agencies have too much power.... in part because they have too broad of charters. While not related to this in specific, I find a relationship to this in practice... I saw a video the other day where a guy was essentially arguing that seat belt laws were a bad idea... and I am struggling to argue with him. His point was that wearing seat belts absolutely saves lives and are good ideas and should be encouraged, but as opposed to using the government to encourage a positive, it has been turned into a revenue source for some municipalities and a means of punishing non-compliance. These are my words now, trying to make the connection even if the specific words don't fit... Why has the government 'weaponized' people taking care of themselves? Why are we fining people for not taking care of themselves? Why is it the government's job to protect people from themselves... and more... if this is an okay thing to do, why don't we start fining people for failing to maintain a healthy diet or weight? I know it recently failed in NY iirc, but perhaps it was just 'too soon'.... but how long before we get fined for drinking soda? Or failing to take a prescribed medication?

The government needs to focus on protecting us from external threats... Customs, immigration, CIA, Military. It needs to focus on protecting us from internal threats... Police, FBI. (not exclusive lists of course)... It needs to (among other things) stop trying to protect us from ourselves... and it needs to stop

I mean seriously... watch the first 15 minutes of a movie called idiocracy... It essentially speaks to 'intelligent, thoughtful, conservative (in the classic not political sense... meaning they think before they act) people waiting to have a small number of kids... and of course, their offsrping doing the same.. as compared to uneducated, thoughtless and selfish people who have multiple kids withoout a thought of how to afford, care for and educate them... so of course they don't, and perpetuate that model.... ending in a society filled with morons... because 'the educated' have been overwhelmed by the uneducated.... and our immigration policies are only exacerbating the problem. They essentially 'breed' their way out of intelligence. The comedy was done in 2006.

I know I've gotten off track, but my point is that we have lost focus and we need to completely refocus government.

(05-19-2023 11:22 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  I know I've gotten off track, but my point is that we have lost focus and we need to completely refocus government.

wait...what? Seems your last sentence was unintentionally funny, but I know what you're sayin'.

(05-19-2023 05:11 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(05-19-2023 11:22 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  I know I've gotten off track, but my point is that we have lost focus and we need to completely refocus government.

wait...what? Seems your last sentence was unintentionally funny, but I know what you're sayin'.

lol... fair enough. It's a perfect example.

It seems we are sometimes so busy trying to think of ways 'some people' might misinterpret what we say or deflect from it for often an unknown purpose that we end up NOT doing precisely and simply what it is that the overwhelming majority of the nation agrees with and supports.... sometimes simply because we don't like the way someone says it.