- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The OIG reports is already bad. No Political bias ...sorry left
Posted on 6/14/18 at 12:03 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
Posted on 6/14/18 at 12:03 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
Sure, they're suspicious. And they were investigated and the IG didn't find the attitudes portrayed in those texts tainted their involvement in the case. Maybe that's BS, maybe it isn't, but if you're going to accept the things in the report that suit your bias, and reject the things that don't, that's your choice.
This thing looks bad for Comey, and that's about it. Attempts on either side to spin it any other way is bad faith partisanship.
This thing looks bad for Comey, and that's about it. Attempts on either side to spin it any other way is bad faith partisanship.
3
Posted on 6/14/18 at 12:32 pm to The Spleen
quote:
Sure, they're suspicious. And they were investigated and the IG didn't find the attitudes portrayed in those texts tainted their involvement in the case. Maybe that's BS, maybe it isn't, but if you're going to accept the things in the report that suit your bias, and reject the things that don't, that's your choice.
This thing looks bad for Comey, and that's about it. Attempts on either side to spin it any other way is bad faith partisanship.
Strzok was the one who told Comey to change his language from "Gross Negligence" (a crime) to "Extreme Carelessness" (not a crime).
We all know she is guilty of Gross Negligence. Like droves of counts of massive unadulterated Gross Negligence.
So how in the blue frick can anyone suggest Strzok's texts showing clear bias didn't effect his actions?
He was clearly trying to help get Hillary off so that Trump wouldn't become President (believing that if she wasn't found to have committed a crime, that she would win.)
And we haven't even gotten into the 302 handling for Flynn, the slew of Hillary folks getting immunity for literally nothing, them essentially bragging about having a friendly judge in their pocket, the honey-pot setup and entrapment of PapaD and Page, their crazy handling of the Steele Dossier, material omissions on the FISA applications, and all the obvious one-sided aggressive attention towards Team Trump vs the obvious passive attention towards Team Hillary.
I mean Jesus Christ, anyone who doesn't see the massive double-standard in handling between the different investigations is either blind or just completely dishonest.
Posted on 6/14/18 at 12:47 pm to The Spleen
I’m sorry. How can you spin an express admission that “we” will “stop” Trump from being president as anything other than agreement btwn on or more persons to prevent Trump from becoming President?
That in fact is smoking gun evidence of a conspiracy. No collusion. Actual. Criminal. Conspiracy.
That in fact is smoking gun evidence of a conspiracy. No collusion. Actual. Criminal. Conspiracy.
Posted on 6/14/18 at 1:17 pm to The Spleen
quote:
Sure, they're suspicious. And they were investigated and the IG didn't find the attitudes portrayed in those texts tainted their involvement in the case. Maybe that's BS, maybe it isn't, but if you're going to accept the things in the report that suit your bias, and reject the things that don't, that's your choice.
This thing looks bad for Comey, and that's about it. Attempts on either side to spin it any other way is bad faith partisanship
I don't put faith in anything that I haven't seen all the facts in. I asked YOU specifically about YOUR opinion of those texts though.
Page 1 of 1
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News