So now we know the Justice Dept/FBI Set Up Papadopoulos....

[sanford12]

Whell how did that kool-aid taste. You're beyond a reasonable discussion and have fallen back to defending the indefensible. how does it feel to be a Defender of the biggest attack on democracy we've known. he's doing everything you thought Obama was going to do and you'll believe anything they feed you to rationalize his behavior.

[finnbow]

Now that Spygate has crashed and burned, the Dotard is trying out his next conspiracy theory via Twitter:

The 13 Angry Democrats (plus people who worked 8 years for Obama) working on the rigged Russia Witch Hunt, will be MEDDLING with the mid-term elections, especially now that Republicans (stay tough!) are taking the lead in Polls. There was no Collusion, except by the Democrats!

Now, it's Mueller meddling with the forthcoming election, as opposed to the Russians meddling in 2016 (with the Trump campaign's enthusiastic approval). Typical right-wing projection and co-opting of terms (they want meddling to now describe Mueller's investigation as opposed to the Russians campaign interference). We'll see how long it takes Whell to pick up on this and parrot the conspiracy theory.

[whell]

Originally Posted by sanford12

Whell how did that kool-aid taste. You're beyond a reasonable discussion and have fallen back to defending the indefensible. how does it feel to be a Defender of the biggest attack on democracy we've known. he's doing everything you thought Obama was going to do and you'll believe anything they feed you to rationalize his behavior.

Really? I'm still waiting for anyone to post any information - other than semantics - that is contrary to the reporting that an FBI informant was used to gain information from inside the Trump campaign.

I was first told that the idea that the suggestion there was such an informant was a "conspiracy theory". I was then told that the story was "debunked", which was nothing more than an exaggeration of a CNN article and an extension of the game of semantics. But of course, I'm a moron because I don't want to play the game of semantics.

And, as if to reinforce the point, here you come telling me that I'm incapable of a "reasonable discussion", while you suggest I'm "drinking Kool-Aid" and defending an "attack on democracy". Sheesh!

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

Really? I'm still waiting for anyone to post any information - other than semantics - that is contrary to the reporting that an FBI informant was used to gain information from inside the Trump campaign.

I was first told that the idea that the suggestion there was such an informant was a "conspiracy theory". I was then told that the story was "debunked", which was nothing more than an exaggeration of a CNN article and an extension of the game of semantics. But of course, I'm a moron because I don't want to play the game of semantics.

And, as if to reinforce the point, here you come telling me that I'm incapable of a "reasonable discussion", while you suggest I'm "drinking Kool-Aid" and defending an "attack on democracy". Sheesh!

You are the one who posted that the "FBI set up Papadopolous" by placing someone "inside the campaign." Neither are true (and you're the one playing semantics trying to cover for your bogus OP).

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

You are the one who posted that the "FBI set up Papadopolous" by placing someone "inside the campaign." Neither are true (and you're the one playing semantics trying to cover for your bogus OP).

There's still much we don't know about what Stefan Halper did, and what motivated him to approach members of the Trump campaign. I don't buy the "informant" characterization, particularly given who Halper is.

The details of Halper’s work still are largely unknown. We know that the FBI carried out an investigation targeting Trump campaign officials with surveillance, document demands, and at least one informant. All of this was done through national security powers, where warrants are easily obtained and kept secret. We know this investigation began, at the latest, in July 2016 and that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act application was based in part on a dossier paid for by the Clinton campaign.

We also know that key Justice Department officials expressed hostile views of Trump in emails, and that key Justice Department officials have been subjects of demotions and one criminal referral. Does this mean the use of Halper was improper or that the investigation was conducted in bad faith? No. Yet, there is a legitimate reason for an investigation into, as Rosenstein instructed, whether “anyone did infiltrate or surveil participants in a presidential campaign for inappropriate purposes,” adding “we need to know about it and take appropriate action.”

So, no, this has not been "debunked" or proven untrue. George P, among others, appears to have been targeted by Halper. Why? George P didn't plea to "collusion". He copped a plea to "lying to the FBI". So, why was he targeted?

It also it starting to look like whatever the FBI / Halper might have been after in targeting Papadopolous isn't going to be useful anyway. If so, Mueller and company destroyed the kid's life for nothing.

It's also possible that the filing is a sign that the investigation has progressed to the point that prosecutors have concluded Papadopoulos's testimony would not be useful in any future cases.

"It means they're pretty much done with him, or they don't need him testifying," said former federal prosecutor Sol Wisenberg. "It may mean they've taken a look at the others in the campaign and decided they cannot charge them, or they're going to charge them without him. ... It means things are moving along."


But, I'm sure it doesn't matter to you and your fellow Dems who gets destroyed in this process.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

There's still much we don't know about what Stefan Halper did, and what motivated him to approach members of the Trump campaign. I don't buy the "informant" characterization...

Trey Gowdy, Trump supporter, Nunes partner-in-crime, and House Oversight Committee chairman, saw the evidence relative to "Spygate" and personally debunked Trump's lie live on Fox News (see above). In your continuing efforts to verify your claim that an informant was placed "inside" the campaign to "set up" Papadopolous, you just continue to demonstrate that you're impervious to facts and logic and are eager to believe and defend any lie that Trump throws your way. Sad.

For a guy who frequently shrieks "fake news," you sure are quick to buy into the ridiculous conspiracy theories spewed forth by your Dear Leader. I'm anxious to hear your defense of Trump claims that Obama is a Muslim born in Kenya, Ted Cruz's father killed Kennedy, and Trump neither screwed nor paid off Stormy Daniels.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Trey Gowdy, Trump supporter, Nunes partner-in-crime, and House Oversight Committee chairman, saw the evidence relative to "Spygate" and personally debunked Trump's lie live on Fox News (see above).

No, they did not. Can't get past the WaPo pay wall to see your linked article from the transcript Gowdy confirmed the use of the "informant", and said that the FBI used the information as part of their investigation. Gowdy also said that if there's evidence that the use of the informant was inappropriate, it should be investigated, and Rod Rothstein as said the same.

We still know that the "informant" - Halper - started making contact with Trump campaign folks BEFORE the so-called FBI "collusion" investigation started. It still looks like the purpose of the informant was to plant information within the campaign (i.e., Papaopolous didn't have info about the Russians having Hillary's emails until he was "randomly" asked about them by Halper). And, of course, it now looks like Mueller is moving forward to "dispose" of Papadopolous because he's no longer of use to the investigation. In other words, Papadopolous doesn't know anything material to so called "collusion". So, Papadopolous never had any credible info about the Russians had Clinton's emails to start with.

But, hey, if you're going to take Gowdy's word as gospel, here are some of his other comments from the transcript:

Schiff said he had evidence of collusion before we even began the investigation, and 60 Democrats have voted to impeach him before Bob Mueller has come up with a single solitary finding.

Gowdy's description of Schiff....sounds like Gowdy could be taling about you too.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

No, they did not. Can't get past the WaPo pay wall to see your linked article from the transcript Gowdy confirmed the use of the "informant", and said that the FBI used the information as part of their investigation. Gowdy also said that if there's evidence that the use of the informant was inappropriate, it should be investigated, and Rod Rothstein as said the same.

We still know that the "informant" - Halper - started making contact with Trump campaign folks BEFORE the so-called FBI "collusion" investigation started. It still looks like the purpose of the informant was to plant information within the campaign (i.e., Papaopolous didn't have info about the Russians having Hillary's emails until he was "randomly" asked about them by Halper). And, of course, it now looks like Mueller is moving forward to "dispose" of Papadopolous because he's no longer of use to the investigation. In other words, Papadopolous doesn't know anything material to so called "collusion". So, Papadopolous never had any credible info about the Russians had Clinton's emails to start with.

But, hey, if you're going to take Gowdy's word as gospel, here are some of his other comments from the transcript:

Schiff said he had evidence of collusion before we even began the investigation, and 60 Democrats have voted to impeach him before Bob Mueller has come up with a single solitary finding.

Gowdy's description of Schiff....sounds like Gowdy could be taling about you too.

You're too full of shit to even warrant a response.