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!
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.
|
Leftists’ D.C. ‘Impeach Donald Trump’ Protests a Bust
|
(12-17-2019, 10:50 PM)mikesez Wrote:(12-17-2019, 10:27 PM)MalabarJag Wrote: 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. To answer your question in red, the FBI, and/or the NSA. The "changes ... at the top" have almost zero effect below the 2nd level from the top. This is government, nobody except upper tier political types will get fired unless cause can be proven, and rarely even if that is the case. The VA is proof of that. Of course not EVERYONE in the FBI were for Hillary and/or the Democrat Party, but enough of a super-majority to overcome any criticism by the ones who weren't. Look at the Horowitz report. Look at the massive majority of Hillary voters in DC and the DC suburbs. If you think that isn't a problem then you are in severe TDS denial land. Whether or not the FBI was in the bag, the fact is that the FBI did not actually investigate the hacking of the DNC server. It doesn't matter who was in the FBI at the time, although maybe a less partisan FBI might have been more credulous about trusting the DNC's chosen cover-up investigation company. The DNC had a strong motive for blaming an outsider rather than admitting that the E-mails were handed to Assange by an insider who copied them onto a memory stick. Assange, who does know, claims it wasn't Russia, but he's no more valid a source than Crowdstrike (although I don't see how he gained by saying that). The bottom line is: WE DON'T KNOW. The US intelligence agencies don't know for sure either, and are just repeating the story given by Crowdstrike. "Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?" |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 2 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!
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.