• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Justice IG sends criminal referral of Andrew McCabe to US attorney

vesper said:
No I said Flynn was just one who came forward at the Bureau on Gritz's behalf. Gritz had an excellent reputation until McCabe destroyed her.
https://spectator.org/the-real-andrew-mccabe/
Click to expand...

So you agree she's the only woman who criticized McCabe out of the many, many thousands who would have worked for him in his tenure. Sounds to me (and any thinking person) that she was talking because of sour grapes. Having a confirmed liar be the only one who comes to your defense doesn't help your cause, either.
 

How the F would anyone know if she was the only woman? G-d Almighty you are something else.

Read the damn article you kept hounding about and then come back here and tell me what a great guy McCabe is. Geesh!
 
vesper said:
How the F would anyone know if she was the only woman? G-d Almighty you are something else.

Read the damn article you kept hounding about and then come back here and tell me what a great guy McCabe is. Geesh!
Click to expand...

Because if there were other women, you would know about it. And have posted about it. And Fox and Friends and Sean Hannity would have informed you of it. Instead, you have one woman - one. One out of thousands who worked with him. But you believe her, because.....Flynn?

I never said McCabe is a great guy. You're the one casting judgment on his personality based on the words of a disgruntled woman. A single disgruntled woman whose only supporter was the man our President told the world was a liar.

I'm not defending McCabe. You're smearing him. You don't see the difference.

But carry on holding on to the words of one woman if it makes you feel good. I don't do that. It's dishonest.
 
Wow, so shrill.

If Mr. Obama wanted to swing the election to Clinton, he would have had the intelligence agencies issue their report on Russia using their intelligence services to back Trump.

Anyone who is capable of digesting facts objectively (sorry that you aren't a member of that set) can easily determine that Uranium One is a non-story created by the conservative media and has been fanning the embers ever since.
 

If there were other women involved in accusations of sexual discrimination it would only be known if the women came forward publicly.

No you are the one that is dishonest. YOu wanted a link, I provided one. A link that predicted McCabe would be referred for prosecution days before today's news. It told the whole story about Gritz and more. McCabe is a vindictive creep. And now that he is facing possible prosecution for the same things he has accused others and more like the article said, losing his pension is going to be equivalent to a paper cut. Anyone not filled with TDS can read that article and see how deep the **** is and why McCabe, and others are in trouble. More shoes to drop soon.
 

Wonder if they would be saying the same thing if it involved President Trump?

Maybe McCabe is the "Target"! :doh
 

Well Vesper, none of that says Comey in any way was trying to aid Clinton's campaign like the rabid Trumpsters here want to believe. Whatever Comey was motivated by, there's no evidence he was or is involved in an anti-Trump conspiracy. In fact, that announcement, a week or so before the election, could be considered an effort on Trump's behalf. If he was neutral, he'd have put it off 'till the election was over. 'Course, there was the possibility that he'd be investigating a President, which might have been a daunting prospect. And, as it turnd out, he was right in that consideration.
 
NonoBadDog said:
I was merely asking him to point to where, as he said, "The IG report is saying that the way that FBI officials acted **against** Hillary was potentially criminal." The report didn't say that. He made a claim that was false.
Click to expand...

OK, but I think you misread the comment actually. At least I didn't read it that way - rather as two claims, 1) IG report concludes the action was criminal, and 2) the action was against Hillary.
 

I believe there were eight women involved. Senator Grassley is looking into it because of the number of them. Gritz is the one who Flynn wrote a letter of support for because of her previously outstanding performance reviews. That's why her name is more prominent than the others.
 

I don't care about that crap. I'm arguing with someone who's had the, what, lack of sophistication? (okay, that's a nice, mediocre way of putting it) to say that Comey announced the reopening of the e-mail investigation in an effort to aid Clinton's campaign. While you're debunking the fact (yes, fact) that the announcement was a positive for Trump, got anything to say to someone who asserts it was a positive for Clinton?
But you get full points for creativity in the spin-game. That game is getting more and more creative, as the inexorable tide coes in.
 

That's news to me humbolt but thanks for the tip. I will be looking for info on that one.
 

LOL, the IRS.
 

How about we not ignore the fact that the FBI knowingly relied on Democrat funded unsusbtantiated oppo- research to obtain FISA warrants to spy on Trumps campaign, and Comey's own admission to spur a Special Council investigation via leaks

Also, Comey's announcement to reopen the Email investigation was followed by another announcement that the FBI had found no criminal wrongdoing in the new emails

The reality is McCabe and Comey both thought Clinton had it in the bag, and days before the election so did every media outlet

No one prior to the election thought the emails or the leaks from McCabe were going to have any effect on Clinton chances, so spare us the hysterics.

McCabe lied under oath and will be held accountable, and he's just the beginning
 
vesper said:
That's news to me humbolt but thanks for the tip. I will be looking for info on that one.
Click to expand...

To be honest, I might have read that on NPR or the Washington Post, but I'm not sure. I am sure about the content. Gritz was nailed on some time card foolishness, which may or may not have been true, but McCabe filed his mess with FBI OPR after he found out Gritz had filed a complaint with EEOC. It sounds like McCabe is a really, really dirty guy who doesn't mind setting up or blaming anyone around him as long as he comes out looking good. His castigation of others for his leaking seems to bear that out. I hope he exhausts his Go Fund Me windfall on legal fees in short order.
 
tres borrachos said:
Can you post a link to Comey saying he re-opened the case to "help Clinton". I didn't hear him say those words.
Click to expand...

he laid out how he thought she was going to win, so, he was trying to clear the decks....he wanted this behind both of them.....
 

"When F.B.I. director James Comey reopened the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s e-mails in the final days of the campaign, many saw it as a political move that cost Clinton the presidency. But some insiders suspect Comey had a more personal concern: his own legacy."

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/02/james-comey-fbi-director-letter
 

Yeahyeahwhatever. My point is, the poster who tried to float the idea that Comey was working on Clintons behalf when he reopened the investigation is trying to twist the facts all out of shape to fabricate some kind of deep-state left-wing conspiracy.
And whatever Comey's motivations might have been, the effect on the election can't be spun into a positive for Clinton.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
LOL! A claim for which there is absolutely zero evidence.

Yay! Fantasy games are fun!
Click to expand...
Then stop living in them.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/robert...obama-cant-blame-on-republicans/#666d5ac931f2


On The Daily Show, President Obama blamed Republicans for the IRS scandal:
“You’ve got this back office, and they’re going after the Tea Party. Well, it turned out, no, Congress had passed a crummy law that didn’t give people guidance in terms of what it was they were trying to do. They did it poorly and stupidly. The truth of the matter is that there was not some big conspiracy there. They were trying to sort out these conflicting demands. You don’t want all this money pouring through non-for- profits, but you also want to make sure everybody is being treated fairly.”
Really, Mr. President? For effect, perhaps he should reprise his testy “not even a smidgen of corruption” remark to Fox News. The President keeps claiming there is no evidence the IRS was used for political targeting. You be the judge:

U.S. President Barack Obama speaks with Jon Stewart, host of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, during a taping of the show in New York, July 21, 2015. The appearance marks Obama’s third time on the show as President, and seventh overall, with Stewart leaving the program on August 6. (SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images)

In January 2010, the Supreme Court in Citizens United held it unconstitutional to ban free speech by corporations, unions and other organizations.
In August 2010, the IRS distributed a BOLO (Be on the Lookout) list for Tea Party organizations applying for tax exempt status.

In October 2010, IRS Exempt Organization chief Lois Lerner met with the DOJ about prosecuting conservative groups.
By March 2012, amid reports of targeting, former IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman testifies there is “absolutely no targeting” by the IRS of conservative and/or Tea Party organizations. On November 9, 2012, Mr. Shulman stepped down, replaced by Steven Miller.
On May 10, 2013, during a bar meeting, Ms. Lerner admits targeting, calling it “absolutely incorrect, insensitive, and inappropriate.” Four days later, on May 14, 2013, the Inspector General issued a report confirming targeting.
On May 15, 2013, Acting IRS Commissioner Steven Miller resigned. President Obama named Daniel Werfel Acting Commissioner. Mr. Miller and Inspector General J. Russell George testified to the House Ways and Means Committee.
On May 22, 2013, Ms. Lerner professed her innocence then takes the Fifth. Next day, she is placed on administrative leave.
On June 12, 2013, the IRS finally suspends BOLO lists for Tea Party names.
On June 20, 2013, the IRS paid $70 million in bonuses. Ms. Lerner receives $42,000; former Commissioner Miller receives $100,000.
On June 24, 2013, the IRS admitted that “inappropriate criteria” were used for tax-exempt status. Next day, Democrats claim progressives were targeted too.
On September 24, 2013, Ms. Lerner’s retirement is announced, with full pension.
On February 3, 2014, President Obama tells Fox there’s “not a smidgen of corruption” at the IRS.
On March 11, 2014, the Committee on House Oversight and Reform issues a report on Lois Lerner.
On April 7, 2014, IRS Commissioner John Koskinen confirms there are six investigations: four by Congressional committees, one by the DOJ, one by the TIGTA. Over 250 IRS employees spend 100,000 hours, costing taxpayers at least $14 million.
On April 8, 2014, the Committee on House Oversight and Government Reform says it will pursue contempt charges against Ms. Lerner. On May 7, 2014, the House of Representatives holds Ms. Lerner in contempt of Congress.
On June 13, 2014 (Friday the 13th!), the IRS first says it lost Ms. Lerner’s emails from 2009 to 2011. The IRS says hard drives and backups are destroyed, for 6 other IRS employees’ too. The IRS spent $10 million trying to recover them.
On September 22, 2014, Ms. Lerner breaks silence to Politico, says she is the victim.
In November-December 2014, the Inspector General recovers 30,000 backed up Lerner emails.
On March 31, 2015, Obama Justice Department officials announce there will be no criminal charges for Lois Lerner.
For alerts to future tax articles, follow me on
 

What fun it must be to copy and paste things that don't support your contention. You're quite good at that.

A. The IRS rightfully went after groups who requested a certain status who were political in nature.
B. There is no evidence, nor can you provide any, that Obama ordered any such scrutiny.
C. No Tea party group was denied tax free status. Several liberal groups were.

Super fail!

You should check out reality and ditch that fantasy narrative.
 

LOL, what delusional projection. OD'ing on Kool aid causes partisan blindness.
 
Slingshot Bob said:
LOL, what delusional projection. OD'ing on Kool aid causes partisan blindness.
Click to expand...

It's OK that you can't back up your claim and have to run from the actual record. That, and you cant counter a single point I've made.

It's fun, but still sad, watching you run from what you post.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
It's OK that you can't back up your claim and have to run from the actual record. That, and you cant counter a single point I've made.

It's fun, but still sad, watching you run from what you post.
Click to expand...

You did not make a single point, I posted an exhaustive list that you ignored (as usual) I get more of your usual passive aggressive and ignorant drivel. I knew there was a reason I have been ignoring you.

You are not interested in debate, just whatever it is you call whatever you do, is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…