Planet Rugby Forum

6.Jones wrote:Yes, it seems our spies are overrated. Oh well.

shanky wrote:Hilarious

Immediately prior to the Trump transition, the (aargh) MSM was full of stories about how the Obama administration was attempting to farm out or release the results of so-called ‘investigations’ into Trump (aka ‘leak’) because the published ‘fear’ was that Trump would ‘cover up’ or hide it.

Right there, in the ‘MSM’....You could google it even.

I guess, if you were interested.

shanky wrote:

6.Jones wrote:Yes, it seems our spies are overrated. Oh well.

Quite the opposite

Name three other spies who’s name has even close to the same notoriety*
- James Bond
- Sidney Reilly ‘Prince of Spies’
- Violetta Szabo
.
.
.
.
etc, daylight
.
.
- Steele





(*denotes ‘positive’ vibes rather than as a ‘traitor’, despite them being more notorious)

Santa wrote:

paddyor wrote:

Santa wrote:Yeah. I suspect the problem is not simply that they had a dodgy informant, which is surely pretty common. It's more that dodgy information from a dodgy informant was used in the way it was, to the extent that it was, and in the investigation that it was, without any kind of robust verification, which includes assessing the dodgy informant's dodginess.

As I have said before, you would think that if there is one investigation where you would try to do all the right things it would be investigating a political opponent. Not only did they not even try to do all the right things, they actually tried to do some of the wrong things.

And that's ignoring all of the intersection relationships between anti-Trump types.

When one dodgy won't do use 3! Santa rates the FBIs conduct 3 Del boys!

The FBI is never wrong though. They have huge discretion in what they do and that's why no one's been charged with wrong doing.

I guess we'll await Durham on that last point. No idea what you're talking about in the first.

Flyin Ryan wrote:

shanky wrote:Hilarious

Immediately prior to the Trump transition, the (aargh) MSM was full of stories about how the Obama administration was attempting to farm out or release the results of so-called ‘investigations’ into Trump (aka ‘leak’) because the published ‘fear’ was that Trump would ‘cover up’ or hide it.

Right there, in the ‘MSM’....You could google it even.

I guess, if you were interested.

From what I recall, it was not the Obama administration, it was the Clinton campaign (if it was the government, I doubt they'd use an ex-British agent that was less intelligent than their own intelligence staff). The dossier ranked scandalous enough no one would print it until someone else would, at which point they were all allowed to discuss it without being the primary source.

The dossier though was not mostly discredited until early this year after the investigation into the FBI.

shanky wrote:

6.Jones wrote:Yes, it seems our spies are overrated. Oh well.

Quite the opposite

Name three other spies who’s name has even close to the same notoriety*
- James Bond
- Sidney Reilly ‘Prince of Spies’
- Violetta Szabo
.
.
.
.
etc, daylight
.
.
- Steele





(*denotes ‘positive’ vibes rather than as a ‘traitor’, despite them being more notorious)

6.Jones wrote:

shanky wrote:

6.Jones wrote:Yes, it seems our spies are overrated. Oh well.

Quite the opposite

Name three other spies who’s name has even close to the same notoriety*
- James Bond
- Sidney Reilly ‘Prince of Spies’
- Violetta Szabo
.
.
.
.
etc, daylight
.
.
- Steele





(*denotes ‘positive’ vibes rather than as a ‘traitor’, despite them being more notorious)

I guess I cleave to the old fashioned view that spies should operate in secret. I bet James Bond got almost no other gigs after the books. Having Tories guffawing at you on Internet forums is even worse. Oh, the horror.

Santa wrote:I guess it comes down to whether you think it's OK to spy on your political rivals.

6.Jones wrote:

Santa wrote:I guess it comes down to whether you think it's OK to spy on your political rivals.

Surely everyone does? The Steele dossier was originally commissioned by the conservative political website The Washington Free Beacon.

Santa wrote:

6.Jones wrote:

Santa wrote:I guess it comes down to whether you think it's OK to spy on your political rivals.

Surely everyone does? The Steele dossier was originally commissioned by the conservative political website The Washington Free Beacon.

Ah so they all get the FBI to spy on eachother and get FISA warrants. Didn't know.

6.Jones wrote:

Santa wrote:

6.Jones wrote:

Santa wrote:I guess it comes down to whether you think it's OK to spy on your political rivals.

Surely everyone does? The Steele dossier was originally commissioned by the conservative political website The Washington Free Beacon.

Ah so they all get the FBI to spy on eachother and get FISA warrants. Didn't know.

That'd be worrying, if there was any evidence it happened.

Santa wrote:

6.Jones wrote:

Santa wrote:

6.Jones wrote:

Santa wrote:I guess it comes down to whether you think it's OK to spy on your political rivals.

Surely everyone does? The Steele dossier was originally commissioned by the conservative political website The Washington Free Beacon.

Ah so they all get the FBI to spy on eachother and get FISA warrants. Didn't know.

That'd be worrying, if there was any evidence it happened.

You mean like meetings about said investigations that involve say the President and or the Vice-president, perhaps where the Vice-President suggests an obscure criminal statute is used to prosecute a member of the incoming opposition regime which is then used as the pretext to investigate the member of the incoming regime?

6.Jones wrote: I believe the word you're grasping for is administration.

But yes, that'd be worrying, if there was any evidence it happened that way. In reality, what Trump was investigated for was credible evidence of collusion with a foreign power, resulting in an FBI counter-intelligence operation. We should all be grateful such investigations happen, regardless of which side of politics we're on.

Your arguments might have more weight if Trump was the only candidate being investigated by the FBI at the time.

This is just more of the cacophony of blather that accompanies Trump, wherever he goes. Yawn.

shanky wrote:

6.Jones wrote:Yes, it seems our spies are overrated. Oh well.

Quite the opposite

Name three other spies who’s name has even close to the same notoriety*
- James Bond
- Sidney Reilly ‘Prince of Spies’
- Violetta Szabo
.
.
.
.
etc, daylight
.
.
- Steele





(*denotes ‘positive’ vibes rather than as a ‘traitor’, despite them being more notorious)

shanky wrote:It’s just so UNFAIR

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2020/05/18/oba ... -says.html

paddyor wrote:Relevant IMO

https://twitter.com/TheDailyShow/status ... 04769?s=20

shanky wrote:

Flyin Ryan wrote:

shanky wrote:Hilarious

Immediately prior to the Trump transition, the (aargh) MSM was full of stories about how the Obama administration was attempting to farm out or release the results of so-called ‘investigations’ into Trump (aka ‘leak’) because the published ‘fear’ was that Trump would ‘cover up’ or hide it.

Right there, in the ‘MSM’....You could google it even.

I guess, if you were interested.

From what I recall, it was not the Obama administration, it was the Clinton campaign (if it was the government, I doubt they'd use an ex-British agent that was less intelligent than their own intelligence staff). The dossier ranked scandalous enough no one would print it until someone else would, at which point they were all allowed to discuss it without being the primary source.

The dossier though was not mostly discredited until early this year after the investigation into the FBI.

Yes, but I wasn't referring the dossier per se. I was referencing the outcome of the FISA investigations and Russigate etc. There were published concerns that the Trump administration would attempt to hide or quash the 'findings' and so the AG and others were finding legal ways to disseminate classified information so that it was 'out'. At the time, I recall this was considered fairly routine and sensible.

shanky wrote:The Collossus of Socratia will not be silenced.

6.Jones wrote:

shanky wrote:The Collossus of Socratia will not be silenced.

I want a statue.

bimboman wrote:

6.Jones wrote:

shanky wrote:The Collossus of Socratia will not be silenced.

I want a statue.

You’d only pull it down 10 minutes later.

Santa wrote:Confirmed: the problems with the Carter Page FISA applications were particular rather than structural.

But why? Why would that be?

Santa wrote:So the FBI has just released the results of its review of 29 FISA applications that the IG said were dodgy. They identified only 2 material errors across all 29 and no errors that undermined a probable cause basis.

The Carter Page FISA applications, however, contained 17 'significant errors or omissions' (material?) and an admission that 2 of the applications were legally invalid. Looks like a bit of an outlier.

6.Jones wrote:

I believe the word you're grasping for is administration.

But yes, that'd be worrying, if there was any evidence it happened that way. In reality, what Trump was investigated for was credible evidence of collusion with a foreign power, resulting in an FBI counter-intelligence operation. We should all be grateful such investigations happen, regardless of which side of politics we're on.

Your arguments might have more weight if Trump was the only candidate being investigated by the FBI at the time.

This is just more of the cacophony of blather that accompanies Trump, wherever he goes. Yawn.

zzzz wrote:

6.Jones wrote:

I believe the word you're grasping for is administration.

But yes, that'd be worrying, if there was any evidence it happened that way. In reality, what Trump was investigated for was credible evidence of collusion with a foreign power, resulting in an FBI counter-intelligence operation. We should all be grateful such investigations happen, regardless of which side of politics we're on.

Your arguments might have more weight if Trump was the only candidate being investigated by the FBI at the time.

This is just more of the cacophony of blather that accompanies Trump, wherever he goes. Yawn.

Do you actually believe that horsehit! The Steele document and it's use is a litmus test for good faith actors in US politics. It should transcend party politics.


By the way, the Steele dossier wasn't commisioned by the Washington Free Beacom. It was commisioned by the DNC.