Create Account


Board Performance Issues We are aware of performance issues on the board and are working to resolve them! The board may be intermittently unavailable during this time. (May 07) x


The Jungle is self-supported by showing advertisements via Google Adsense.
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show significantly less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Questions or concerns about this ad? Take a screenshot and comment in the thread. We do value your feedback.
Ex-FBI Lawyer’s Testimony Is Hugely Damaging

#1

Ex-FBI Lawyer’s Testimony Is Hugely Damaging to Media’s ‘There Was No Deep State Spying’ Narrative

Former FBI lawyer James Baker gave two testimonies to the House Judiciary Committee that are extremely damaging to the establishment media’s narrative that the deep state didn’t spy on President Donald Trump’s campaign.

https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/ex-fbi...bJHoG0saHo
Wants to join the "cereal box" dating service. I've dated enough flakes and nuts...all I want is the prize now.
[Image: mds111.jpg]
Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!


#2

(04-11-2019, 05:39 PM)The Drifter Wrote: Ex-FBI Lawyer’s Testimony Is Hugely Damaging to Media’s ‘There Was No Deep State Spying’ Narrative

Former FBI lawyer James Baker gave two testimonies to the House Judiciary Committee that are extremely damaging to the establishment media’s narrative that the deep state didn’t spy on President Donald Trump’s campaign.

https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/ex-fbi...bJHoG0saHo

From reading the article you cite, it really doesn't say much except the guy's lawyer kept telling him not to answer certain questions.  There could be a million different reasons why.  I don't see how it's "hugely damaging" at all.
Reply

#3

(04-12-2019, 09:14 AM)The Real Marty Wrote:
(04-11-2019, 05:39 PM)The Drifter Wrote: Ex-FBI Lawyer’s Testimony Is Hugely Damaging to Media’s ‘There Was No Deep State Spying’ Narrative

Former FBI lawyer James Baker gave two testimonies to the House Judiciary Committee that are extremely damaging to the establishment media’s narrative that the deep state didn’t spy on President Donald Trump’s campaign.

https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/ex-fbi...bJHoG0saHo

From reading the article you cite, it really doesn't say much except the guy's lawyer kept telling him not to answer certain questions.  There could be a million different reasons why.  I don't see how it's "hugely damaging" at all.

Yep. After what happened to Flynn and Scooter Libby, why would anyone answer any question? This just shows that he's not stupid.



                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"
Reply

#4

If there was reasonable suspicion that people involved in the Trump campaign were committing federal crimes, then the FBI could reasonably "spy" on them, except they would call it investigating. It's still gathering information about a target without the target being aware.

The only thing that would be improper is if they allowed a political opponent of Trump to find out some confidential information.

There's no indication that anything from the Trump investigation was shared with Hillary, and there's no indication that Obama asked for anything more then a summary of what laws may have been broken. If Obama had asked Comey to tell him what the Trump campaign was planning to talk about at their next rally, that would be a big problem. If Obama just asked Comey things like, "do you need more time or more people to prevent future hacking or investigate hacking that already took place?" that would be fine.
My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.
Reply

#5

It's never even been alleged that team Trump was in on the hacking.

Trump campaign officials were SOLICITED by us and British intelligence assets. Those solicitations constitute targetti g on the absence of reasonable cause. How do we know? Because all previous evidence to support the investigations was based on those interactions!
Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!





Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)

The Jungle is self-supported by showing advertisements via Google Adsense.
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Questions or concerns about this ad? Take a screenshot and comment in the thread. We do value your feedback.


ABOUT US
The Jungle Forums is the Jaguars' biggest fan message board. Talking about the Jags since 2006, the Jungle was the team-endorsed home of all things Jaguars.

Since 2017, the Jungle is now independent of the team but still run by the same crew. We are here to support and discuss all things Jaguars and all things Duval!