Current Events > Why is nobody talking about the FBI actively colluding to fight Donald Trump?

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/01/22/gowdy_strzok_and_page_need_to_explain_anti-trump_secret_society_texts.html

tl;dr: FBI members, looking to stop Trump from winning the presidency "by any means necessary" were literally keeping 'insurance policy' documents to leak to the press should they decide he needs to be stopped and actively working together to sabotage both the election and his presidency.
---

Nothingburger
---

Its not on CNN. They dont even know its happening. The ones that have heard about it in passing just attempt to hand wave it as a nothingburger.
---

What was actually done to prevent him from being president though? And even if there was some secret cabal, they completely failed. This is by definition a nothingburger.
---

legendary_zell posted...

What was actually done to prevent him from being president though? And even if there was some secret cabal, they completely failed. This is by definition a nothingburger.

This tbqh
Whatever grand plan they had obviously didn't affect much
---

legendary_zell posted...

And even if there was some secret cabal, they completely failed

Worked on Bernie though.

But hey, if you cheat and still don't win, the cheating doesn't count, amirite?
---

I mean, two FBI agents texting critical things about Trump doesn't seem like a big deal to me.

s0nicfan posted...

FBI members, looking to stop Trump from winning the presidency "by any means necessary" were literally keeping 'insurance policy' documents to leak to the press should they decide he needs to be stopped

Seems to me that if this were true, they would have done so.
---

So it's totally cool that FBI members were actively colluding to rig the election is cool because Trump won anyway? Really? "Attempting to rig the election" isn't something to take seriously now?
---

This board only likes to talk about things that are bad for Trump and they ignore things like this. Don't worry, it's all coming out.
---

s0nicfan posted...

So it's totally cool that FBI members were actively colluding to rig the election is cool because Trump won anyway?

What evidence is there that they took steps towards rigging the election? Is there something more than vague texts?
---

If everyone colludes is it really an issue?

At this point why does it even matter?
---

s0nicfan posted...

tl;dr: FBI members, looking to stop Trump from winning the presidency "by any means necessary" were literally keeping 'insurance policy' documents to leak to the press should they decide he needs to be stopped and actively working together to sabotage both the election and his presidency.

it has been covered extensively already

this isn't new

and the actions of a couple agents doesn't reflect on the status of the entire agency

also your description of their actions is pretty extreme hyperbole

the one guy was fired once word came out about his texts
---

Antifar posted...

I mean, two FBI agents texting critical things about Trump doesn't seem like a big deal to me.

s0nicfan posted...

FBI members, looking to stop Trump from winning the presidency "by any means necessary" were literally keeping 'insurance policy' documents to leak to the press should they decide he needs to be stopped

Seems to me that if this were true, they would have done so.

You dont think that is a big deal? Someone has a clear bias and an agenda against a person, and that someone is investigating you, and that someone admitted to achieving his goal by any means necessary. You dont think thats a big deal?
---

Nomadic View posted...

You dont think that is a big deal? Someone has a clear bias and an agenda against a person, and that someone is investigating you, and that someone admitted to achieving his goal by any means necessary. You dont think thats a big deal?

big enough to be fired

good thing he was fired

idk what else you want

well, i do, but youre not getting it
---

I dont have time to read the article but was this the action of just a couple agents or are the top dogs in on it too.
---

Darkman124 posted...

Nomadic View posted...

You dont think that is a big deal? Someone has a clear bias and an agenda against a person, and that someone is investigating you, and that someone admitted to achieving his goal by any means necessary. You dont think thats a big deal?

big enough to be fired

good thing he was fired

idk what else you want

well, i do, but youre not getting it

Fruit of the poisonous tree.
---

Antifar posted...

s0nicfan posted...

So it's totally cool that FBI members were actively colluding to rig the election is cool because Trump won anyway?

What evidence is there that they took steps towards rigging the election? Is there something more than vague texts?

Well, ignoring the fact that the agent in question altered Comey's letter during the election to soften the language, he is also the one to leak the "piss documentary" to the press. He claims to have an "insurance policy" to stop Trump if he beats Hillary. He was an active part in the early stages of the Russia investigation.

The man is at the center of a lot of the election-altering drama.

Oh, and the FBI deleted the archive with most of his messages "accidentally" so it's going to be difficult to dig further.
---

Nomadic View posted...

and that someone is investigating you,

But they were removed from the investigation months ago.
---

Nomadic View posted...

Fruit of the poisonous tree.

so, if a member of a team is a criminal, the entire team is criminal?

good to know since multiple members of trump's team have plead guilty.
---

Why should someone get upset over something that's pure conjecture?
---

Antifar posted...

Nomadic View posted...

and that someone is investigating you,

But they were removed from the investigation months ago.

So? They still compiled work that the investigation continued to build on.

You still didnt answer my question. According to the conditional statement I laid out, are those conditions a big deal?
---

Nomadic View posted...

Antifar posted...

I mean, two FBI agents texting critical things about Trump doesn't seem like a big deal to me.

s0nicfan posted...

FBI members, looking to stop Trump from winning the presidency "by any means necessary" were literally keeping 'insurance policy' documents to leak to the press should they decide he needs to be stopped

Seems to me that if this were true, they would have done so.

You dont think that is a big deal? Someone has a clear bias and an agenda against a person, and that someone is investigating you, and that someone admitted to achieving his goal by any means necessary. You dont think thats a big deal?

First you need to show an actual attempt was made. You'd need to show they did anything more than talk. You'd need to show it had any sort of affect on the real world. Lots of people are biased in this world, do you really think investigators are typically neutral? The difference is that these people were especially careless and text messaging exists now.

You'd also need to show they had any influence on biasing the investigation previously since they are no longer working on the investigation. Their mere internal bias and presence on the team isn't enough to actually cause things to operate differently than they would have with an objectively neutral team.

Once you prove all of these things, then you might have a case for a somethingburger (which is just a burger I guess).
---

Yep there's certainly no way they could have gone back and reviewed that work for its accuracy and honesty or anything like that.
---

Darkman124 posted...

Nomadic View posted...

Fruit of the poisonous tree.

so, if a member of a team is a criminal, the entire team is criminal?

good to know since multiple members of trump's team have plead guilty.

Everything that member compiled is not valid. And everything that any accomplice that worked on while knowing the criminal behavior is also subject to having any evidence they gathered being suppressed.
---

legendary_zell posted...

First you need to show an actual attempt was made. You'd need to show they did anything more than talk. You'd need to show it had any sort of affect on the real world. Lots of people are biased in this world, do you really think investigators are typically neutral? The difference is that these people were especially careless and text messaging exists now.

You'd also need to show they had any influence on biasing the investigation previously since they are no longer working on the investigation. Their mere internal bias and presence on the team isn't enough to actually cause things to operate differently than they would have with an objectively neutral team.

Once you prove all of these things, then you might have a case for a somethingburger (which is just a burger I guess).

I've been told repeatedly that it can take up to 2.5 years for investigations like this one to conclude, so given that new details are still coming out and Trey Gowdy of all people thinks there's something serious underneath it all, I'd say that's reason enough to hold off on concluding that it's a nothingburger.
---

Do you actually believe that the team responsible for heading up the highest profile federal investigation in recent times would literally just say "Well, that sucks, someone on the team could have tainted the investigation, guess we'll just chance it"?
---

s0nicfan posted...

Trey Gowdy of all people thinks there's something serious underneath it all

Isn't he the guy that spent years trying to find something nefarious about Benghazi?
---

You think they're going to close this investigation in a year and then have all the charges thrown out because "oops lol yeah we forgot about that guy that was sending the texts and the work he did".

Seriously.
You seriously think that?
---

Bloodychess posted...

legendary_zell posted...

And even if there was some secret cabal, they completely failed

Worked on Bernie though.

But hey, if you cheat and still don't win, the cheating doesn't count, amirite?

Again, gotta prove there was cheating. You're bringing up a completely different incident of alleged cheating that isn't relevant to this situation because it's a completely different context and different types of alleged actions are involved as well.
---

Antifar posted...

s0nicfan posted...

Trey Gowdy of all people thinks there's something serious underneath it all

Isn't he the guy that spent years trying to find something nefarious about Benghazi?

Gowdy is certainly right in his politics, but he's an incredibly principled man. As the Chair of the House Oversight Committee he's responsible for overseeing a long of investigations and IMO regardless of the length I've only ever known him to be extremely professional about it.
---

legendary_zell posted...

Nomadic View posted...

Antifar posted...

I mean, two FBI agents texting critical things about Trump doesn't seem like a big deal to me.

s0nicfan posted...

FBI members, looking to stop Trump from winning the presidency "by any means necessary" were literally keeping 'insurance policy' documents to leak to the press should they decide he needs to be stopped

Seems to me that if this were true, they would have done so.

You dont think that is a big deal? Someone has a clear bias and an agenda against a person, and that someone is investigating you, and that someone admitted to achieving his goal by any means necessary. You dont think thats a big deal?

First you need to show an actual attempt was made. You'd need to show they did anything more than talk. You'd need to show it had any sort of affect on the real world. Lots of people are biased in this world, do you really think investigators are typically neutral? The difference is that these people were especially careless and text messaging exists now.

You'd also need to show they had any influence on biasing the investigation previously since they are no longer working on the investigation. Their mere internal bias and presence on the team isn't enough to actually cause things to operate differently than they would have with an objectively neutral team.

Once you prove all of these things, then you might have a case for a somethingburger (which is just a burger I guess).

It is absolutely material to the investigation. Even if no actual wrongdoing is discovered it is still an unethical move to allow someone with open bias and hatred towards someone that is being investigated. Especially when the investigator stated that he is willing to engage in a witch hunt. Due process be damned.

I certainly wouldnt want to be investigated by someone that stated they would do anything necessary to get me. I cant imagine you would feel comfortable being investigated by such a person either.
---

It's a good thing they removed him from the investigation then when they discovered that, isn't it?
---

s0nicfan posted...

and Trey Gowdy of all people thinks there's something serious underneath it all

That makes it less credible, not more. How much taxpayer money did Gowdy waste chasing the Benghazi rabbit, again?
---

s0nicfan posted...

legendary_zell posted...

First you need to show an actual attempt was made. You'd need to show they did anything more than talk. You'd need to show it had any sort of affect on the real world. Lots of people are biased in this world, do you really think investigators are typically neutral? The difference is that these people were especially careless and text messaging exists now.

You'd also need to show they had any influence on biasing the investigation previously since they are no longer working on the investigation. Their mere internal bias and presence on the team isn't enough to actually cause things to operate differently than they would have with an objectively neutral team.

Once you prove all of these things, then you might have a case for a somethingburger (which is just a burger I guess).

I've been told repeatedly that it can take up to 2.5 years for investigations like this one to conclude, so given that new details are still coming out and Trey Gowdy of all people thinks there's something serious underneath it all, I'd say that's reason enough to hold off on concluding that it's a nothingburger.

Is that Trey Gowdy thing supposed to help your argument? That's like me saying "well Chuck Schumer believes there's really something to those pee tapes". We don't have enough information to completely dismiss the possibility of improper conduct during the election and I'm sure that'll be investigated thoroughly. I think it's pretty safe to dismiss the idea that they tainted the Russia investigation, especially as it's been conducted since they were removed. So at most you have two guys trying and spectacularly failing to stop Trump from becoming President, and a legit investigation into potential crimes.
---

Hexenherz posted...

It's a good thing they removed him from the investigation then when they discovered that, isn't it?

It's a bad thing that texts reveal he was actively working with other agents on these issues, thus the sarcastic "secret society" comment, and that none of those other agents have been identified. It's also a bad thing that the FBI has now claimed to have lost ALL messages related to said agent, making it difficult if not impossible to find out WHO he was actively colluding with.
---

legendary_zell posted...

Is that Trey Gowdy thing supposed to help your argument? That's like me saying "well Chuck Schumer believes there's really something to those pee tapes". We don't have enough information to completely dismiss the possibility of improper conduct during the election and I'm sure that'll be investigated thoroughly. I think it's pretty safe to dismiss the idea that they tainted the Russia investigation, especially as it's been conducted since they were removed. So at most you have two guys trying and spectacularly failing to stop Trump from becoming President, and a legit investigation into potential crimes.

that's fine? I never said this should somehow result in ending the Russia investigation. That can keep on trucking for all I care. I'm just saying what was done is a big deal and it's disheartening that the media doesn't seem to care, even as new details are coming out.
---

Hexenherz posted...

It's a good thing they removed him from the investigation then when they discovered that, isn't it?

That is a correct move, however, everything that agent came in contact with is corrupted, and everything that was built on from that agents work is corrupted.

All the work that agent did would have to be scrapped, and all subsequent work that relied on that agents work will also need to be scrapped.

It doesnt mean that the facts that agent worked on are now off limits, but that all work that agent did will have to be redone by another agent.
---

Nomadic View posted...

Everything that member compiled is not valid.

sadly for you, that's not how law works. for evidence to be invalid it'd have to have been collected in a manner that is illegal, not collected by a person with a conflict of interest or whose behavior was unethical in other ways.
---

s0nicfan posted...

Trey Gowdy of all people thinks there's something serious underneath it all

This is my new favorite GameFAQs quote lol
---

Trump was elected in to, and remains in office. Therefore... fake news.
---

RealClearPolitics is a joke website like all right wing media. Nothing will stop Mueller. He'll be questioning Trump soon, so I expect to see more of this BS coming out from right wingers lmao
---

I love how angry Trumpers get at the (justified) lack of reaction to these stories

*stomps feet* "WHY IS NO ONE TAKING THIS SERIOUSLY REEEEE"
---

Were_Wyrm posted...

Nothingburger

---

Oh look, apparently thousands of FBI phones were affected by the glitch and tons of messages were deleted, not just Trump related ones. Kinda puts a damper on this part of the conspiracy theory
---

Why should liberals care about this? It's not as if any of the FBI agents made rude comments on Twitter.
---

Doom_Art posted...

I love how angry Trumpers get at the (justified) lack of reaction to these stories

*stomps feet* "WHY IS NO ONE TAKING THIS SERIOUSLY REEEEE"

The biggest story of the past year has been the investigation into the possibility that trump colluded with russia to rig the election. It's been nearly 24/7 coverage of it. We're being told its the watergate of our time, and one of the most important events in modern politics.

Now we have hard evidence that someone relatively high in the FBI actively tried to rig the election and may have had help, and we're being told this is a "nothingburger"

I'm sure you'd understand why some people would take issue with the hypocrisy. I also understand why people who hate trump would shrug it off. "No bad tactics, only bad targets" after all.
---

s0nicfan posted...

Doom_Art posted...

I love how angry Trumpers get at the (justified) lack of reaction to these stories

*stomps feet* "WHY IS NO ONE TAKING THIS SERIOUSLY REEEEE"

The biggest story of the past year has been the investigation into the possibility that trump colluded with russia to rig the election. It's been nearly 24/7 coverage of it. We're being told its the watergate of our time, and one of the most important events in modern politics.

Now we have hard evidence that someone relatively high in the FBI actively tried to rig the election and may have had help, and we're being told this is a "nothingburger"

I'm sure you'd understand why some people would take issue with the hypocrisy. I also understand why people who hate trump would shrug it off. "No bad tactics, only bad targets" after all.

Where is the evidence that anything was done? Even if something was done, it wouldn't constitute rigging. I don't see how a few agents could possibly rig an election.

I don't think anyone is saying what you are attributing to "liberals". If FBI agents really attempted to influence the election, that's bad and should be investigated and punished, I don't think you'll find liberals attempting to taint or shut down a legit investigation like the right is with Mueller. You're not gonna have the NYT saying the prosecutor should be fired like the WSJ did with Russia.

It's also markedly worse when a candidate is the one conspiring any with a foreign country in a way that harms our national security and faith in democracy.

There's no same thing both sides here and there is no equivalency. The level of proof that something truly unethical or illegal was done is also not equivalent.
---

legendary_zell posted...

Where is the evidence that anything was done?

Ignoring the fact that said agent edited the Comey letter directly during the election to soften the language, and that fact that he was directly involved in the Russia investigation, and the fact that he may very well be the source of many of the leaks that plagued Trump's early tenure, AND completely discounting his sarcastic "secret society" message as totally without merit of investigating whether others were involved... He still said he had an "insurance policy" against Trump to use if he won the election. He literally said "we can't take that risk". This ties DIRECTLY back to the "piss dossier".

"I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy's officethat there's no way he gets electedbut I'm afraid we can't take that risk. It's like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you're 40"

I get what you're saying, but I think you're also completely downplaying the significance of this guy's texts because you hate the guy he hates.
---

We don't talk about fake news here.
---