Random Politics & Arguments Over Nothing #16

It could be, and I agree it does sound fishy but that doesn't mean it was politically motivated.

Further more, How much are you selling it for? I will take it off your hands if you want my Polio-causing ice cream.

I also think its relatively safe to say that the CIA has expertise in influencing foreign elections, so they probably understand the methodology a bit better than the FBI.

Why are you trying to make excuses for the CIA when it's pretty obvious they are playing a partisan game?

Same concept applies to you. You can't go full ham on a possible (but so far unproven) CIA political ploy but ignore previous Obama administration's political ploys.

He sure as hell can do that, if it supports his ideology and helps "The Team" win.

This is only the beginning of the meltdown, shits gonna get worse and worse until he's swore in, then it's going Apocalyptic. All their hopes and dreams of strongly centralizing the government with the eventual removal of states entirely, all of it washed away.

At least that's how it seems to them.

You are mistaken, can we not acknowledge both possibilities? That they were actually doing their job and that political motivation was potentially at play?

If his administration was politically motivated, why would the FBI release a statement that they were re-opening up their investigation into Clinton a week before the election?

The difference is that your theory is a conspiracy, albeit a more likely one, while my theory is that they are just doing their jobs. Both can be true or one has to be wrong and the other right.



I see that you know nothing about me and have an inability to read anything I posted on the last few pages. Thanks for continuing to prove your general ignorance and awareness.

The issue is they know that Wikileaks received the emails from individuals tied to Russian intelligence. They don't have proof of their motive, which is what is needed to pin anything on anybody.

It's must be coincidence that Trump loved him some Wikileaks's during the campaign.

Or that Paul Manafort his campaign manager through the primaries had political and business ties to Russia. When that information came out he was dismissed from his position.

Which on one hand could be a demonstration of integrity or on the other an attempt to cover up their plans.

All depends on how you feel and look at it.

Then oddly enough he's considering friend of Russia, Rex Tillerson as Secretary of State.

I'm not saying it's Russia but it sure does seem to come up a often with people he associates with.

#feels.

Furthermore, It won't change the election results but rather give Trump something to act on. If it is proven true, I think the public deserve to see how him and his administration will handle it.

That was pure Comey there. He made that press statement...exactly when it didn't need to occur.

Not saying that both sides aren't guilty of such of a thing, but these moves are heavily political in their making.

Most of the decisions made by agencies as it pertains to a political candidate/political group are politically motivated, but most of the decisions made by agencies in regards to normal business are not.

However, we are talking about agency decisions that pertains to political candidates (Clinton and Trump, or in the IRS's case, the GOP/Tea Party). They are by nature politically motivated moves, and go beyond (or in the case of Clinton's email investigation, non-existent) normal operating procedures.

You just don't want to admit that the CIA is equally culpable in being politically motivated as the FBI and IRS were.

No recount for PA, the federal judge has denied them that request.

Clinton and stein still have an appeal however.

Some Dems just can't get over it it seams.

It's a distraction and witch hunt.

For a political party that loves to accuse others of holding witch trials, they certainly love to hold them themselves. Hypocrite much?

Its been funny to watch Trump and his supporters try (and fail) to discredit the CIA based on their feelings. Blame the Dems (who have nothing to do with the CIA) as much as you want, every single prominent Senate Republican is lining up against Trump and Russia on this issue. It has nothing to do with partisanship. There will be investigations and most likely veto-proof Congressional sanctions.

Wrong, I've even implied how their actions are sketchy and I do believe it could be a political stunt but there are a few things that have me concerned about your implication though.

1. There is no political benefit to this ruse currently. Nothing will change the outcome on the 19th. If there is political motivation, what would it be?

2. By painting their investigation as a political ploy you limit it in a sense. If it is propaganda, you are also supporting it by dividing people on the issue.

I have the same view on this as I do the Clinton emails; The whole investigation is really sketchy, but regardless of that it is out in the open and it needs to follow through and end with definitive proof. Clearly they don't have definitive proof though since they aren't coming out with the fully story.

The funny part is that it has jack ***to do with Trump, that's just an inference Democrats are trying to make.

Russia has been interfering with other countries politics since the Cold War started after WWII when they became the USSR. Several other members of this website have been sarcastic and insulted me over the fact that I've pointed this out. The current Russian President also happens to be the former leader of the Russian Government Agency responsible for meddling and influencing other countries politics. Thus the probability that they were indeed attempting to influence the USA's, the most powerful and active nation in the world, internal politics and elections is a pretty resounding "no ***sherlock".

The only real question is "to what degree" and "did anyone work with them", to which there isn't any solid info due to the secret nature of spy work. To the Democrats the probability that Russia was doing the Russian thing is evidence enough to burn Mr. Trump at the stake. Every time I hear some liberal talking head or poster attempt to explain something it reminds me of this.

10 members of the electoral college want a briefing from intelligence officials on the investigation.


Should be noted the breakdown of the 10 is 9 Democrats and 1 Republican.

Also, Democrats were suspect that this was the case long before the investigation. If anything the investigation will quell their doubts and remove one divider or prove a serious ordeal.

Both scenarios should be a win-win for any American.

Never said that, but thanks for putting words in my mouth.

So, what's your solution then? Try Trump & Putin for treason? That seems like the liberal's answer for everything now.

Well, that and to go to a college and cry about how unfair life is for them.

So what if it is proven that Trump actually have a solid connection with Putin and was fully involved in the process for Russia to influence the election? Heck, even partially involved?

What do you think should happen?

It's kinda like what Joe Walsh said this weekend: I can't believe we're not looking into this investigation seriously because we benefit from not doing so.

Joe Walsh is the former Republican Congressman of Illinois who said if Trump lost he would grab his musket and exercise his 2nd Amendment rights. He's pretty pissed the Republican politicians outside of McCain and Graham aren't taking the matter seriously.

Among other things we could develop and build a fleet of LNG tankers to wean the EU from Russian fuels.

OK, that's a 10 year plan. But things we could do right now include doing leaks of our own with the target being Putin's inner circle.

The FBI doesn't play political games? What are YOU smoking?

Actually Oklahoma has, by an act of congress, salt water ports. So there have to be some beachfronts there somewhere....

Is that where the conspiracy is going now?

Nobody has proven to what degree, if any, Russia is involved in this. Highly likely doesn't hold water in court.

And now, you are making the stretch to tie Trump to it all? Might as well accuse Trump for personally hacking into battleground states' voting booths and change results to himself.

You are lumping yourself with CJ in his "try him for treason" rhetoric.

Not according to eliroo:



I doubt that.

If Trump does anything against Russia, you and the liberals will decry that it wasn't enough. Anything short of starting WWIII isn't enough for liberals....

I hereby petition the mods to rename this thread "Bizarro Politics and Religion #16"