(12-17-2019, 10:27 PM)MalabarJag Wrote:

(12-17-2019, 09:59 PM)mikesez Wrote: 1) You're jumbling your perspectives and narratives.
It's not the NSA's job to determine if anything untoward is occurring. If they think something untoward is occurring they have a whistleblower process, but it's not up to them to decide if something is actually a problem or not.

2) as Jim Carrey said loudly in the movie liar liar, "then stop breaking the law!"

3) agreed, but Congress has the power to impeach in case he mismanages this, or abuses it. My point here is that there's more to read than just this one "transcript". You agree but there is more to read.

4) he appointed his own FBI chief. He has his own people at other levels. Yet the people who've looked into it, Trump's people and people who came in earlier, are still saying Russia is the one who hacked the DNC server. Only unappointed clown without regular access to info like Giuliani believe that crap.  And Trump.  But that's more because Trump doesn't read.

5) your perspective shifts again. After admitting that there's more to look at than just one call, now you're narrowing down to just the one call again. Sure, if the only time Trump's people ever mentioned Biden was in this one call, that might not be worth noticing. But we have testimony now that shows it was a pattern. Trump's people talked about biden a lot whenever they were talking to Ukraine.

6) take the transcript, and cross out all references to Joe Biden or crowd strike? I don't see any remaining references to any other corrupt incident, or corruption in general.  Do you?

4) The investigation was under Obama's FBI, not Trump's, and most of the FBI are entrenched government workers who will not be replaced from aministration to administration. The IG report showed that the FBI was and still is heavily Democrat. In any case, none of the US intelligence agencies were allowed access to the DNC server, so "Russia" is only based on what Crowdstrike (specifically chosen by the DNC) said.

I could believe that some of them are in the bag for whatever hillary Clinton wants the narrative to be.
But I'm sorry, I cannot believe that they all are.
Especially not after all of the changes that have taken place at the top.
In so many other situations we know that these guys just rely on facts. You can't tell me that every single one of them is ignoring facts just because Hillary Clinton, who lost, wants them to.
Who else should have investigated the server? Who else keeps track of traffic like that if not crowd strike?

---