The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

[Pyperkub]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-fbi-in ... 1526854417

quote that includes information as to why the informant was there, and who approved it? Or just paywalled shade-throwing with zero actual information?

[Remus West]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-fbi-in ... 1526854417

More opinion. You know what opinions are like?

[LawBeefaroni]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-fbi-in ... 1526854417

Protip
When you see this: "OPINION | REVIEW & OUTLOOK", it's not a news article.

[hepcat]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-fbi-in ... 1526854417

Vox breaks it down for you.

You're welcome.

[pr0ner]

Opinion != fact, Rip.

You mean an accounting full of shortcuts like "deep state", "their narrative", and "fanciful dossier" isn't pure fact?

Classic begging the question. "There is a conspiracy because the conspiratorial deep state is involved."

But of course all the fancy far right talking points and buzzwords = fact!

[gilraen]

Opinion != fact, Rip.

You mean an accounting full of shortcuts like "deep state", "their narrative", and "fanciful dossier" isn't pure fact?

Classic begging the question. "There is a conspiracy because the conspiratorial deep state is involved."

I do find it a bit disturbing that this op-ed came from a former adviser to Pres. Clinton. WTF?

[Holman]

Opinion != fact, Rip.

You mean an accounting full of shortcuts like "deep state", "their narrative", and "fanciful dossier" isn't pure fact?

Classic begging the question. "There is a conspiracy because the conspiratorial deep state is involved."

I do find it a bit disturbing that this op-ed came from a former adviser to Pres. Clinton. WTF?

It's Mark Penn. He took a rightward turn even while he was still working for the Clintons.

In Democratic circles he's regarded as a joke.

[Rip]

You guys should be furious.

First of all if it is found to have been an improper use of investigative resources they may have just given some of the targets an out.

More importantly it opens the door for Trump, or Pence, or whoever the next person you think is Hitler that gets into office to pull the same thing.

From the article.

The informant didn’t previously know the three men but offered to help with the campaign. He also threw money at Mr. Papadopoulos, and the stories even report the exact language of the message the informant sent to Mr. Papadopoulos offering him a $3,000 honorarium to write a research paper and a paid trip to London. Media accounts differ about whether the informant asked the three men what they knew about Russia. But this sure sounds like a classic attempt to make friends for intelligence-gathering purposes.

This ought to disturb anyone who wants law enforcement and U.S. intelligence services to stay out of partisan politics. We can’t recall a similar case, even in the J. Edgar Hoover days, when the FBI decided it needed to snoop on a presidential campaign. Devin Nunes, the House Intelligence Chairman, is seeking documents to learn exactly what happened, what triggered this FBI action, and how it was justified. This is precisely the kind of oversight that Congress should provide to assure Americans that their government isn’t spying illegally.

Yet now the same people who lionized Edward Snowden for stealing secrets about metadata—which collected phone numbers, not names—claim the FBI informant is no big deal. James Clapper, Barack Obama’s Director of National Intelligence, claims it was even a “good thing” that the FBI was monitoring the campaign for Russian influence.

Forgive us if we don’t trust Mr. Clapper, who leaked details related to the notorious Steele dossier to the press, as a proper judge of such snooping. Would he and the press corps be so blasé if the FBI under George W. Bush had sought to insinuate sources with Obama supporters like Rev. Jeremiah Wright or radical Bill Ayers during the 2008 campaign?

Incredibly, Democrats and their media friends are painting Mr. Nunes as the villain for daring even to ask about all this. Mark Warner, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, is making the rounds warning that “the first thing any new” committee member “learns is the critical importance of protecting sources and methods.”

Sure, but as far as we know Mr. Nunes hasn’t disclosed the source’s name—certainly not to us—even as anonymous Justice officials all but paint a neon path of details to the informant’s door. Justice and the FBI have disclosed more to their media Boswells than they have to the people’s representatives in Congress.

As important, what are the standards for the future? Could a Trump FBI task agents to look into the foreign ties of advisers to the Bernie Sanders presidential campaign in 2020? Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein need to clear the air by sharing what they and the FBI know with the House. This is bigger than blowing a source whose identity Justice leakers have already blown. This is about public trust in the FBI and Justice.

Don't let your hate for Trump look the other way while something really questionable is done. It will almost certainly come back and bite you in the ass. The next Bush will already have a greenlight to infiltrate their next opponent who knows some questionable people like Bill Ayers or Rev. Jeremiah Wright through them. Not like it would have been hard to justify in the case of Ayers. He has an FBI file that could fill a semi-trailer.

[Isgrimnur]

Why wait until 2020?

USA Today

A 37-page indictment resulting from special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation shows that Russian nationals and businesses also worked to boost the campaigns of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and Green party nominee Jill Stein in an effort to damage Democrat Hillary Clinton.

[hepcat]

You guys should be furious.

First of all if it is found to have been an improper use of investigative resources they may have just given some of the targets an out.

And if it's found that it wasn't, will you admit it?

More importantly it opens the door for Trump, or Pence, or whoever the next person you think is Hitler that gets into office to pull the same thing.

Sticking with that whole Hitler thing, ain't ya. God love ya, when you find something that you think you can make work, you run with it.

From the article.

opinion piece worded to make it sound like another Watergate

Thanks!

Don't let your hate for Trump look the other way while something really questionable is done.

I'd say don't let your hate of the Clintons and liberals in general color your view of what's going on with Trump, but...

[Rip]

You guys should be furious.

First of all if it is found to have been an improper use of investigative resources they may have just given some of the targets an out.

And if it's found that it wasn't, will you admit it?

Sure, based on the work from the IG's office so far they seem to do thorough unbiased work.

More importantly it opens the door for Trump, or Pence, or whoever the next person you think is Hitler that gets into office to pull the same thing.

Sticking with that whole Hitler thing, ain't ya. God love ya, when you find something that you think you can make work, you run with it.

From the article.

opinion piece worded to make it sound like another Watergate

Thanks!

I didn't start the trend of liberals using Hitler/Nazi/Fascism as a rally cry against whoever they are opposing, just trying to use the language of the audience.

[hepcat]

The right's go to is "socialist".

Just trying to explain the language of all audiences.

[Rip]

The right's go to is "socialist".

Just trying to explain the language of all audiences.

Sure, or communist, marxist, or the dreaded tree hugger. Those guys are the worst.

[hepcat]

Glad you understand.

[Captain Caveman]

I can't wait for Trump to demand the DOJ investigate his 2020 opponent based on whatever cooked up fever dream conspiracy the right wing is masturbating over at the moment. What does the DOJ do then?

[Pyperkub]

You guys should be furious.

First of all if it is found to have been an improper use of investigative resources they may have just given some of the targets an out.

More importantly it opens the door for Trump, or Pence, or whoever the next person you think is Hitler that gets into office to pull the same thing.

From the article.

The informant didn’t previously know the three men but offered to help with the campaign. He also threw money at Mr. Papadopoulos, and the stories even report the exact language of the message the informant sent to Mr. Papadopoulos offering him a $3,000 honorarium to write a research paper and a paid trip to London. Media accounts differ about whether the informant asked the three men what they knew about Russia. But this sure sounds like a classic attempt to make friends for intelligence-gathering purposes.

This ought to disturb anyone who wants law enforcement and U.S. intelligence services to stay out of partisan politics. We can’t recall a similar case, even in the J. Edgar Hoover days, when the FBI decided it needed to snoop on a presidential campaign. Devin Nunes, the House Intelligence Chairman, is seeking documents to learn exactly what happened, what triggered this FBI action, and how it was justified. This is precisely the kind of oversight that Congress should provide to assure Americans that their government isn’t spying illegally.

Yet now the same people who lionized Edward Snowden for stealing secrets about metadata—which collected phone numbers, not names—claim the FBI informant is no big deal. James Clapper, Barack Obama’s Director of National Intelligence, claims it was even a “good thing” that the FBI was monitoring the campaign for Russian influence.

Forgive us if we don’t trust Mr. Clapper, who leaked details related to the notorious Steele dossier to the press, as a proper judge of such snooping. Would he and the press corps be so blasé if the FBI under George W. Bush had sought to insinuate sources with Obama supporters like Rev. Jeremiah Wright or radical Bill Ayers during the 2008 campaign?

Incredibly, Democrats and their media friends are painting Mr. Nunes as the villain for daring even to ask about all this. Mark Warner, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, is making the rounds warning that “the first thing any new” committee member “learns is the critical importance of protecting sources and methods.”

Sure, but as far as we know Mr. Nunes hasn’t disclosed the source’s name—certainly not to us—even as anonymous Justice officials all but paint a neon path of details to the informant’s door. Justice and the FBI have disclosed more to their media Boswells than they have to the people’s representatives in Congress.

As important, what are the standards for the future? Could a Trump FBI task agents to look into the foreign ties of advisers to the Bernie Sanders presidential campaign in 2020? Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein need to clear the air by sharing what they and the FBI know with the House. This is bigger than blowing a source whose identity Justice leakers have already blown. This is about public trust in the FBI and Justice.

Don't let your hate for Trump look the other way while something really questionable is done. It will almost certainly come back and bite you in the ass. The next Bush will already have a greenlight to infiltrate their next opponent who knows some questionable people like Bill Ayers or Rev. Jeremiah Wright through them. Not like it would have been hard to justify in the case of Ayers. He has an FBI file that could fill a semi-trailer.

I'm not letting my disdain and horror from what Trump is doing (hate implies irrational, and I think my stance is entirely rational).

I agree that if there were improprieties here they should be investigated (and, given the history of the FBI with regards to full on entrapment of people who may lean terrorist, I won't discount it), but I also think it is of utmost priority to find out the who, what, and how multiple foreign powers conspired to rig our elections, and make sure it doesn't happen again, while also punishing those who sold out America in the worst possible fashion, and I also think that if there was even a hint of foreign impropriety in the Trump campaign (and dear lordy, there was a metric ton of it which has already been made public), the FBI needed to be all over it.

While I think both are abhorrent, if I have to choose between domestic corrupt influence in our elections and foreign corrupt influence in our elections, I know 100% which one I'm going with.

[El Guapo]

I'm sure that this will go well. Rosenstein will no doubt use the IG referral on this to say that they are "looking into it". But at the same time I think that Trump already tweeted complaining about a previous IG referral in lieu of a direct DOJ investigation, so I'm not sure that he'll be mollified.

Should be a lot of fun for Rosenstein and Wray, no doubt. The question is if Trump isn't temporarily mollified by the IG referral, and demands a direct DOJ investigation, what happens next. Does Rosenstein resign? Does he ultimately give a straight no, and if so does Trump fire him?

Plausible crisis by the end of the week, or even the end of the day.

[LordMortis]

Plausible crisis by the end of the week, or even the end of the day.

I think that's on this administration's to do list every day.

[Pyperkub]

The right's go to is "socialist".

Just trying to explain the language of all audiences.

And usually involves the Soros boogeyman...

[Rip]

I can't wait for Trump to demand the DOJ investigate his 2020 opponent based on whatever cooked up fever dream conspiracy the right wing is masturbating over at the moment. What does the DOJ do then?

Apparently create a dossier on said dirt, insert spy into opponents circle of acquaintances, then use the threat of anything unseemly they can find to get them to roll over on the opponent.

[Rip]

You guys should be furious.

First of all if it is found to have been an improper use of investigative resources they may have just given some of the targets an out.

More importantly it opens the door for Trump, or Pence, or whoever the next person you think is Hitler that gets into office to pull the same thing.

From the article.

The informant didn’t previously know the three men but offered to help with the campaign. He also threw money at Mr. Papadopoulos, and the stories even report the exact language of the message the informant sent to Mr. Papadopoulos offering him a $3,000 honorarium to write a research paper and a paid trip to London. Media accounts differ about whether the informant asked the three men what they knew about Russia. But this sure sounds like a classic attempt to make friends for intelligence-gathering purposes.

This ought to disturb anyone who wants law enforcement and U.S. intelligence services to stay out of partisan politics. We can’t recall a similar case, even in the J. Edgar Hoover days, when the FBI decided it needed to snoop on a presidential campaign. Devin Nunes, the House Intelligence Chairman, is seeking documents to learn exactly what happened, what triggered this FBI action, and how it was justified. This is precisely the kind of oversight that Congress should provide to assure Americans that their government isn’t spying illegally.

Yet now the same people who lionized Edward Snowden for stealing secrets about metadata—which collected phone numbers, not names—claim the FBI informant is no big deal. James Clapper, Barack Obama’s Director of National Intelligence, claims it was even a “good thing” that the FBI was monitoring the campaign for Russian influence.

Forgive us if we don’t trust Mr. Clapper, who leaked details related to the notorious Steele dossier to the press, as a proper judge of such snooping. Would he and the press corps be so blasé if the FBI under George W. Bush had sought to insinuate sources with Obama supporters like Rev. Jeremiah Wright or radical Bill Ayers during the 2008 campaign?

Incredibly, Democrats and their media friends are painting Mr. Nunes as the villain for daring even to ask about all this. Mark Warner, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, is making the rounds warning that “the first thing any new” committee member “learns is the critical importance of protecting sources and methods.”

Sure, but as far as we know Mr. Nunes hasn’t disclosed the source’s name—certainly not to us—even as anonymous Justice officials all but paint a neon path of details to the informant’s door. Justice and the FBI have disclosed more to their media Boswells than they have to the people’s representatives in Congress.

As important, what are the standards for the future? Could a Trump FBI task agents to look into the foreign ties of advisers to the Bernie Sanders presidential campaign in 2020? Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein need to clear the air by sharing what they and the FBI know with the House. This is bigger than blowing a source whose identity Justice leakers have already blown. This is about public trust in the FBI and Justice.

Don't let your hate for Trump look the other way while something really questionable is done. It will almost certainly come back and bite you in the ass. The next Bush will already have a greenlight to infiltrate their next opponent who knows some questionable people like Bill Ayers or Rev. Jeremiah Wright through them. Not like it would have been hard to justify in the case of Ayers. He has an FBI file that could fill a semi-trailer.

I'm not letting my disdain and horror from what Trump is doing (hate implies irrational, and I think my stance is entirely rational).

I agree that if there were improprieties here they should be investigated (and, given the history of the FBI with regards to full on entrapment of people who may lean terrorist, I won't discount it), but I also think it is of utmost priority to find out the who, what, and how multiple foreign powers conspired to rig our elections, and make sure it doesn't happen again, while also punishing those who sold out America in the worst possible fashion, and I also think that if there was even a hint of foreign impropriety in the Trump campaign (and dear lordy, there was a metric ton of it which has already been made public), the FBI needed to be all over it.

While I think both are abhorrent, if I have to choose between domestic corrupt influence in our elections and foreign corrupt influence in our elections, I know 100% which one I'm going with.

Apparently you have seen something I haven't.

multiple foreign powers conspired to rig our elections

Who has even alleged that? I don't know of a single thing that has indicated multiple foreign powers were conspiring.

[Pyperkub]

We've got Russia (duh) as well as the Saudis (Erik Prince, DT Jr and the Seychelles meetings).

[LordMortis]

Who has even alleged that? I don't know of a single thing that has indicated multiple foreign powers were conspiring.

According to the president's latest round of Nixon? The FBI. At least I assume he means the FBI. He's using They're so perhaps he means MS-13?

I think it has to with the UAE

May 20, 2018 12:13:47 PM The Witch Hunt finds no Collusion with Russia - so now they’re looking at the rest of the World. Oh’ great!

May 20, 2018 08:29:32 AM Now that the Witch Hunt has given up on Russia and is looking at the rest of the World, they should easily be able to take it into the Mid-Term Elections where they can put some hurt on the Republican Party. Don’t worry about Dems FISA Abuse, missing Emails or Fraudulent Dossier

May 20, 2018 08:04:21 AM Things are really getting ridiculous. The Failing and Crooked (but not as Crooked as Hillary Clinton) @nytimes has done a long & boring story indicating that the World’s most expensive Witch Hunt has found nothing on Russia & me so now they are looking at the rest of the World!

[Rip]

We've got Russia (duh) as well as the Saudis (Erik Prince, DT Jr and the Seychelles meetings).

OK, if we accept that those meeting were nefarious, where does SA and Russia conspiring come in?

[Rip]

Who has even alleged that? I don't know of a single thing that has indicated multiple foreign powers were conspiring.

According to the president's latest round of Nixon? The FBI. At least I assume he means the FBI. He's using They're so perhaps he means MS-13?

I think it has to with the UAE

May 20, 2018 12:13:47 PM The Witch Hunt finds no Collusion with Russia - so now they’re looking at the rest of the World. Oh’ great!

May 20, 2018 08:29:32 AM Now that the Witch Hunt has given up on Russia and is looking at the rest of the World, they should easily be able to take it into the Mid-Term Elections where they can put some hurt on the Republican Party. Don’t worry about Dems FISA Abuse, missing Emails or Fraudulent Dossier

May 20, 2018 08:04:21 AM Things are really getting ridiculous. The Failing and Crooked (but not as Crooked as Hillary Clinton) @nytimes has done a long & boring story indicating that the World’s most expensive Witch Hunt has found nothing on Russia & me so now they are looking at the rest of the World!

Same question. I have seen nothing to suggest that even if the UAE(or SA) and Russia were trying to influence the election to suggest they conspired with each other?

[Pyperkub]

We've got Russia (duh) as well as the Saudis (Erik Prince, DT Jr and the Seychelles meetings).

OK, if we accept that those meeting were nefarious, where does SA and Russia conspiring come in?

Russia conspiring with Trump Campaign
SA conspiring with Trump Campaign

We could also throw in Turkey with Flynn, if you like.

I can see the confusion implying that Russia was conspiring *with* SA and/or Turkey, but that's not what I'm saying (or trying to say), just funky wording

[LordMortis]

Same question. I have seen nothing to suggest that even if the UAE(or SA) and Russia were trying to influence the election to suggest they conspired with each other?

Back up the backhoe (or is that pull forward?) Where did each other come from? I haven't seen that come from anyone either, except you. And that was just now.

[Holman]

I can't wait for Trump to demand the DOJ investigate his 2020 opponent based on whatever cooked up fever dream conspiracy the right wing is masturbating over at the moment. What does the DOJ do then?

Apparently create a dossier on said dirt, insert spy into opponents circle of acquaintances, then use the threat of anything unseemly they can find to get them to roll over on the opponent.

"Anything unseemly." I love it.

So your belief is that the FBI (apparently laying the groundwork before Trump had even announced his candidacy) worked to generate dirt on Trump and his circle, entrapped them into [something somehow TBA], made everything worse than it was, all in an effort to hurt Trump, and then... they said nothing at all about it until after Trump was elected? While also over-hinting quite strongly that Clinton was up to no good?

Rip, I really want to know if you're going to be able to accept the findings if they show that things are as bad, or even half as bad, as most people who follow this story now expect.

Or let's start with a simple question: if there was nothing going on with all of these foreign contacts, why has everyone involved with them lied and lied and lied again, hundreds of lies, except where they finally have to admit it when confronted by evidence or when under oath (and even, it has been demonstrated, not always then)? Why the lies?

[LawBeefaroni]

We've got Russia (duh) as well as the Saudis (Erik Prince, DT Jr and the Seychelles meetings).

OK, if we accept that those meeting were nefarious, where does SA and Russia conspiring come in?

Russia conspiring with Trump Campaign
SA conspiring with Trump Campaign

We could also throw in Turkey with Flynn, if you like.

I can see the confusion implying that Russia was conspiring *with* SA and/or Turkey, but that's not what I'm saying (or trying to say), just funky wording

Because the new normal is multiple single nations conspiring with US campaigns to influence an election. But woe be if two nations conspire together with a US campaign to influence an election.

Rip has merely raised his bar of acceptance.

[Rip]

I can't wait for Trump to demand the DOJ investigate his 2020 opponent based on whatever cooked up fever dream conspiracy the right wing is masturbating over at the moment. What does the DOJ do then?

Apparently create a dossier on said dirt, insert spy into opponents circle of acquaintances, then use the threat of anything unseemly they can find to get them to roll over on the opponent.

"Anything unseemly." I love it.

So your belief is that the FBI (apparently laying the groundwork before Trump had even announced his candidacy) worked to generate dirt on Trump and his circle, entrapped them into [something somehow TBA], made everything worse than it was, all in an effort to hurt Trump, and then... they said nothing at all about it until after Trump was elected? While also over-hinting quite strongly that Clinton was up to no good?

Rip, I really want to know if you're going to be able to accept the findings if they show that things are as bad, or even half as bad, as most people who follow this story now expect.

Or let's start with a simple question: if there was nothing going on with all of these foreign contacts, why has everyone involved with them lied and lied and lied again, hundreds of lies, except where they finally have to admit it when confronted by evidence or when under oath (and even, it has demonstrated, not always then)? Why the lies?

They lied because they knew the meeting would be used as clickbait to attack them no matter what they met for. There is a reason these types of meeting aren't public. Even regular business people lie about who they meet with all the time.

Trump announced on June, 16 2015. Halper didn't contact Carter until July of 2016. What is this groundwork you are referring to?

[LordMortis]

Because the new normal is multiple single nations conspiring with US campaigns to influence an election. But woe be if two nations conspire together with a US campaign to influence an election.

Rip has merely raised his bar of acceptance.

I get where he's coming from. Putin + Mohammed bin Zayed + Prince + Trump = Multinational Oligarchy Obscenity.

It's a huge eye brow through the roof final stage Illuminati claim. Of course, Rip is the literally the first person I've seen make that claim.

[Pyperkub]

I can't wait for Trump to demand the DOJ investigate his 2020 opponent based on whatever cooked up fever dream conspiracy the right wing is masturbating over at the moment. What does the DOJ do then?

Apparently create a dossier on said dirt, insert spy into opponents circle of acquaintances, then use the threat of anything unseemly they can find to get them to roll over on the opponent.

"Anything unseemly." I love it.

So your belief is that the FBI (apparently laying the groundwork before Trump had even announced his candidacy) worked to generate dirt on Trump and his circle, entrapped them into [something somehow TBA], made everything worse than it was, all in an effort to hurt Trump, and then... they said nothing at all about it until after Trump was elected? While also over-hinting quite strongly that Clinton was up to no good?

Rip, I really want to know if you're going to be able to accept the findings if they show that things are as bad, or even half as bad, as most people who follow this story now expect.

Or let's start with a simple question: if there was nothing going on with all of these foreign contacts, why has everyone involved with them lied and lied and lied again, hundreds of lies, except where they finally have to admit it when confronted by evidence or when under oath (and even, it has demonstrated, not always then)? Why the lies?

They lied because they knew the meeting would be used as clickbait to attack them no matter what they met for. There is a reason these types of meeting aren't public. Even regular business people lie about who they meet with all the time.

Trump announced on June, 16 2015. Halper didn't contact Carter until July of 2016. What is this groundwork you are referring to?

No, they lied because that's what they habitually do (as do others - or we wouldn't have the maxim, it's not the crime, it's the coverup). They were unethical because they ARE unethical. They worked with foreign powers because they value money over country.

[LordMortis]

There is a reason these types of meeting aren't public.

Hey!!! We agree on something!!! Now I can contribute positively to the How Divided Are We thread!

[Holman]

I can't wait for Trump to demand the DOJ investigate his 2020 opponent based on whatever cooked up fever dream conspiracy the right wing is masturbating over at the moment. What does the DOJ do then?

Apparently create a dossier on said dirt, insert spy into opponents circle of acquaintances, then use the threat of anything unseemly they can find to get them to roll over on the opponent.

"Anything unseemly." I love it.

So your belief is that the FBI (apparently laying the groundwork before Trump had even announced his candidacy) worked to generate dirt on Trump and his circle, entrapped them into [something somehow TBA], made everything worse than it was, all in an effort to hurt Trump, and then... they said nothing at all about it until after Trump was elected? While also over-hinting quite strongly that Clinton was up to no good?

Rip, I really want to know if you're going to be able to accept the findings if they show that things are as bad, or even half as bad, as most people who follow this story now expect.

Or let's start with a simple question: if there was nothing going on with all of these foreign contacts, why has everyone involved with them lied and lied and lied again, hundreds of lies, except where they finally have to admit it when confronted by evidence or when under oath (and even, it has demonstrated, not always then)? Why the lies?

They lied because they knew the meeting would be used as clickbait to attack them no matter what they met for. There is a reason these types of meeting aren't public. Even regular business people lie about who they meet with all the time.

Trump announced on June, 16 2015. Halper didn't contact Carter until July of 2016. What is this groundwork you are referring to?

I believe Carter Page was on the FBI/CIA radar as early as 2013. And Flynn had drawn attention before he joined the campaign. And Manafort, of course.

You might want to reconsider whether "We lied because we knew the truth looked awful!" is really a strong defense.

[LawBeefaroni]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-fbi-in ... 1526854417

Protip
When you see this: "OPINION | REVIEW & OUTLOOK", it's not a news article.

But I suppose it's fun.

Trump has set in motion a constitutional crisis, having sold American foreign policy to the highest bidder.

In response to the attacks of 9/11, the United States turned the tiny nation of Qatar essentially into a landlocked aircraft carrier. The Qatari satraps, having dedicated themselves years earlier to not working for a living, were grateful for this influx of American money and American personnel, which enabled them to hire more Filipino teenagers at slave wages.

Anyway, things were rocking along the way things will until last June, when the president* leapt onto the electric Twitter machine and excoriated Qatar for being the funder of what the president* called “Radical Ideology.” At the time, Qatar was the victim of a blockade established by Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, and the world assumed that the president* was endorsing that action, having just returned from his orb-fondling trip to the region. None of it made any sense; this was a complete reversal of more than a decade’s worth of American foreign policy, and it also was a complete sell-out of an ally that pretty much had done everything asked of it by the United States. The popular opinion at the time was that the president* did something stupid because he doesn’t know anything about anything, which is always the safe play with this crowd.

Recently, we have discovered differently. Thanks to some great reporting from The New York Times and elsewhere, we learn that American foreign policy in one of the world’s most volatile regions may have been bargained away in order to bail his son-in-law out of one of the worst New York real-estate decisions since the Lenape sold the place to Peter Minuit. And that this arrangement was part and parcel of a general scheme by the Trump campaign and various unemployables from Saudi Arabia and the UAE to ratfck the election themselves.

[hepcat]

Same question. I have seen nothing to suggest that even if the UAE(or SA) and Russia were trying to influence the election to suggest they conspired with each other?

Back up the backhoe (or is that pull forward?) Where did each other come from? I haven't seen that come from anyone either, except you. And that was just now.

He's moving the goalpost:

[malchior]

Trump has set in motion a constitutional crisis, having sold American foreign policy to the highest bidder.

Excellent piece - has the exact right level of contempt and connects a lot of obvious dots. Well obvious unless you are the Republican-led Congress that is.

[LordMortis]

Trump announced on June, 16 2015. Halper didn't contact Carter until July of 2016. What is this groundwork you are referring to?

So you're saying his resume worked? and the same things that presumably started his investigation were the same things that Trump hired him for?

http://time.com/5132126/carter-page-russia-2013-letter/

“Over the past half year, I have had the privilege to serve as an informal advisor to the staff of the Kremlin in preparation for their Presidency of the G-20 Summit next month, where energy issues will be a prominent point on the agenda,” the letter reads.

In January 2013, Page met a Russian diplomat named Victor Podobnyy at an energy conference in New York City, according to court documents. The two exchanged contact information, sent each other documents on energy policy and met several more times to discuss the topic, the documents allege. Two years later, in January of 2015, Podobnyy was charged in absentia — along with two other Russians — with working as a Russian intelligence agent under diplomatic cover.

In June 2013, the FBI interviewed Page regarding his contacts with the Russians, Page says. The FBI believed that Russian intelligence services had attempted to recruit Page as an agent with promises of business opportunities in Russia, according to the 2015 court documents.

This is what we do, in lieu of waiting for the investigation to finish, right?

[Grifman]

You guys should be furious.

We are, just not for the reasons you think we should be.

This ought to disturb anyone who wants law enforcement and U.S. intelligence services to stay out of partisan politics. We can’t recall a similar case, even in the J. Edgar Hoover days, when the FBI decided it needed to snoop on a presidential campaign. Devin Nunes, the House Intelligence Chairman, is seeking documents to learn exactly what happened, what triggered this FBI action, and how it was justified. This is precisely the kind of oversight that Congress should provide to assure Americans that their government isn’t spying illegally.

This opinion piece is by Kimberly Stassel, who has been in the tank for Trump for quite a while now. The thing is she acts like this was all done in a vacuum, that there was absolutely no legitimate reason for the FBI to "snoop" on a presidential campaign. Well, let's look at the evidence. Stassel says she can't recall a similar case - well maybe because there hasn't been a similar case:

1) Never before have we had a presidential candidate who has consistently sought business in Russia
2) Never before have we had a president's son say that the Russians had heavily invested in his businesses
3) Never before have we had a Republican candidate change his party platform to be favorable to the Russians
4) Never before have we intercepted communications between a candidates' campaign and Russian officials while monitoring Russian communications
5) Never before have we had Russia steal emails from a political party and release them in the middle of a campaign to embarrass one party/candidate
6) Never before have we had a candidate publicly call for the Russians to do it again
7) Never before have we had a candidate's son meet with Russian officials because they promised dirt on an opponent
8) Never before have we had numerous meetings between a candidate's campaign and Russian officials
9) Never before have we had the Russians interfere in our elections to favor one candidate over another
10) Never before has that same candidate favored improved relations with Russia (even while they were hacking our election) and who has also been unable to say anything negative about the Russian leader
11) Never before has a president's son-in-law sought to establish a secret 'back channel" to the Russians

As important, what are the standards for the future? Could a Trump FBI task agents to look into the foreign ties of advisers to the Bernie Sanders presidential campaign in 2020?

If a Democratic campaign does what Trump's campaign has done under the same circumstances, I'd be all for it. Again, Stassel writes as if there was absolutely no legitimate reason for any investigation. Of course, she's not totally ignorant (and neither are you for that matter) of the above series of facts. So why is she and you being so obtuse? Trump derangement syndrome is the only answer I can think of

[malchior]

So why is she and you being so obtuse? Trump derangement syndrome is the only answer I can think of

My opinion - it is deliberate obtuseness. Each knows what they are doing...but maybe not the why of it. But still they do this intentionally.