Evidence suggests a massive scandal is brewing at the FBI

[TBoneTX 46,075]

They were afraid that their suicides would be inconveniently scheduled.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

18 minutes ago, TBoneTX said:

They were afraid that their suicides would be inconveniently scheduled.

I can't give you a heart because I don't really care to hear your inconvenient truth.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

On January 24, 2018 at 8:49 AM, Bill & Katya said:

It is an opinion piece, but I for one would like to learn the truth of the swamp.

 

  So would I. People seek the truth in many places, but something tells me the New York Post ain't one of them.

Edited January 26, 2018 by Steeleballz

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

15 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

  So would I. People seek the truth in many places, but something tells me the New York Post ain't one of them.

The Post will let anyone be an Opinion columnist. Goodwin is not way right of center but he is a rabid Trump defender since forever. His other hot button is anything remotely anti-Israel. 

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

I see the FBI is protesting release of the memo.  Citing concerns of national security.  I really want to see that memo now.

[Dashinka 24,778]

8 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

I see the FBI is protesting release of the memo.  Citing concerns of national security.  I really want to see that memo now.

No doubt.  Heck, let's see the Dem's memo as well.

[TBoneTX 46,075]

The mainstream media haven't seen the memo and are already soundly & roundly trashing it.

[Dashinka 24,778]

1 minute ago, TBoneTX said:

The mainstream media haven't seen the memo and are already soundly & roundly trashing it.

That is the surprising thing.  I thought the media's job was to expose government malfeasance, you know, the whole 4th estate and such, but the biased outlets are doing everything they can to promote the DNC talking points regarding the memo. 

[bcking 3,157]

11 minutes ago, TBoneTX said:

The mainstream media haven't seen the memo and are already soundly & roundly trashing it.

Sources? Excluding "Opinion" pieces of course, since they are individual viewpoints and not the opinion of entire News Agencies.

 

I admit I typically go to CNN before other places. I don't pay for the NYT or the Post so those are limited.

 

I'm looking at the headlines now. I don't see anything actually talking about the contents of the memo (appropriately, since we don't have the contents yet). The articles are about how people are reacting to it. About Democrats trying to stop it etc... That isn't trashing it, that is reporting what is going on right now in Washington with regards to the memo.

 

I honestly haven't been paying that much attention to this topic though so perhaps there were articles in previous days that I missed.

[TBoneTX 46,075]

Article in the Houston Chronicle today (meaning that it was bought from AP, the NYT, or the WaPo) went into detail about what people who haven't seen the memo are objecting to.  I read it hard-copy and thus don't have a link; sorry.

[Dashinka 24,778]

I am loving this, "the FBI has grave concerns", GOP senators saying not to release it.  What are they hiding, and why won't the elected representatives of the people do their jobs?  The media and the DNC are doing everything they can to discredit this thing before it comes out (apparently, this memo does not hit Trump otherwise the Dems would have leaked it already).  Schiff's new accusation is that it has been modified, so of course the vote to release it is null and void (I heard that the Dems on the committee asked for the modifications).  What are they hiding, and why not work at draining the swamp some more.  The DOJ and the FBI are not a world of their own, they should be held accountable period if there are issues, and it is time these issues should see the light of day (again, if present).  I am just amazed that this is not a bi-partisan effort. 

[bcking 3,157]

1 hour ago, TBoneTX said:

Article in the Houston Chronicle today (meaning that it was bought from AP, the NYT, or the WaPo) went into detail about what people who haven't seen the memo are objecting to.  I read it hard-copy and thus don't have a link; sorry.

A newspaper reporting what certain groups or politicians are objecting to doesn't mean that the Newspaper is trashing the memo.

 

It is completely valid (and important) news to hear that Democrats are objecting to it, and to hear their reasons. That is very different than a Newspaper directly saying "This memo is trash".

 

I haven't seen that Houston Chronicle article though so I don't know where it falls. From your description though it sounds like they were just reporting opinions of politicians. 

 

The bigger issue I tend to see with Newspapers is not that they outright call something trash, but that they just report opinions from a certain group more often than another. It's more of a sin of omission. They aren't going to say they hate the memo, but they'll report 10 other people who say they hate it, for every 1 person who says they like it. That practice isn't prevalent with pretty much all newspapers/websites, even the incredibly skewed extreme-left/right websites. They'll all focus on reports and interviews that support their view, often times without stating out loud what their view even is.

[bcking 3,157]

What do people here think about Christopher Wray?

 

Trump appointed him, he was vetted, and he was approved by essentially everyone. Is he supposedly in on it as well? Or is he just defending his peers? 

[Dashinka 24,778]

50 minutes ago, bcking said:

What do people here think about Christopher Wray?

 

Trump appointed him, he was vetted, and he was approved by essentially everyone. Is he supposedly in on it as well? Or is he just defending his peers? 

Personally, I think Wray is caught between a rock and hard place.  There may be issues in the FBI that he wants to try and root out quietly, but it appears that public opinion is pushing for an airing of dirty laundry if it exists.  I would imagine that any FBI director would rather handle these potential issues without public scrutiny.

[bcking 3,157]

4 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

Personally, I think Wray is caught between a rock and hard place.  There may be issues in the FBI that he wants to try and root out quietly, but it appears that public opinion is pushing for an airing of dirty laundry if it exists.  I would imagine that any FBI director would rather handle these potential issues without public scrutiny.

While I understand the concern with "closed doors" solutions (lack of accountability), I also think the case for keeping it confidential also has merits. I'm not a National Security expert by any stretch but I could imagine that, corruption or not, details about how we conduct investigations being made public may be dangerous to our national security. Key word is may there, since we don't really know what's in the memo, and most of us probably don't have that accurate of an idea of what is damaging to our national security. It's a phrase that is thrown out there a lot without a real clear definition.

 

It's hard without knowing exactly what's in the memo, and of course once we know what's in the memo then it'll be too late to retroactively reclassify it. I can see why people want it all public, but I can also imagine (again without actually having details of the memo, like all of us plebs) that the argument for keeping it in private has at least SOME valid points.

 

I have heard that the White House is cutting some things out, likely appropriately so. I'd also imagine the FBI would prefer to cut things that may not be damaging to our national security, but may be damaging to their reputation (though you could argue damaging the FBI's reputation is detrimental to our national security).

 

In general it's a sticky situation for all sides. I'm glad I'm not involved

Edited February 1, 2018 by bcking