Jeff Matthews Posted December 19, 2018 Share Posted December 19, 2018 3 minutes ago, Zen Traveler said: "No we don't live in a post truth world even though elected officials at the very top keep trying to promote that kind of propaganda." I agree with this statement, although there is a significant minority to whom truth matters little compared to narrative. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen Traveler Posted December 19, 2018 Author Share Posted December 19, 2018 1 hour ago, oldtimer said: 12 hours ago, Jeff Matthews said: The Deep State is whoever they don't like. Guess who doesn't care much for FB anymore. I don't. I never did. That still doesn't illuminate us on which version of "deep state" you buy into, unless you are just tossing popular buzzwords around to sound hip? The current "Deep State," theories seem to be based on fear of actual conspiracies being exposed by government and the fact-based media and the proof will be exposed by folks winning Pulitzer Prizes, while others are convicted for criminal offenses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Matthews Posted December 19, 2018 Share Posted December 19, 2018 1 minute ago, Zen Traveler said: The current "Deep State," theories seem to be based on actual conspiracies being exposed by government and the fact-based media and the proof will be exposed by folks winning Pulitzer Prizes, while others are convicted for criminal offenses. The funny thing about that is that these investigations are stemming from both sides. You have the investigations into the DOJ and FBI running in tandem with Mueller's investigation. Both sides think the other is going to jail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen Traveler Posted December 19, 2018 Author Share Posted December 19, 2018 10 minutes ago, Jeff Matthews said: I was speaking plainly. I wasn't speaking of any version. I was speaking about all of them. They will define "Deep State" to be anyone they don't like. I don't think you can lump *everyone* in this category and what oldie is trying to get across is that the percentage of the population you referred to me above IS the minority who believe facts aren't facts and that it's a global conspiracy--That can't be true because there are too many moving parts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Matthews Posted December 19, 2018 Share Posted December 19, 2018 Don't underestimate the importance of the fake dossier, who's behind it, and how it formed the illegitimate basis to wiretap Trump's power circle. Despite the Constitution, the DOJ acts and is treated akin to a 4th branch of government, and this causes problems like we are now seeing. I am not suggesting it is error to maintain that level of independence from the executive, but I am saying it is fraught with issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen Traveler Posted December 19, 2018 Author Share Posted December 19, 2018 4 minutes ago, Jeff Matthews said: You have the investigations into the DOJ and FBI running in tandem with Mueller's investigation. Both sides think the other is going to jail. You are looking at it politically rather than from what the facts coming out seem to show--The proof will be in Convictions and Pulitzer Prizes, my friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Matthews Posted December 19, 2018 Share Posted December 19, 2018 2 minutes ago, Zen Traveler said: That can't be true because there are too many moving parts. I understand, and that is why these folks throw "Deep State" around like play-dough. They can bend it and shape it to fit any mold they want. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Matthews Posted December 19, 2018 Share Posted December 19, 2018 1 minute ago, Zen Traveler said: You are looking at it politically rather than from what the facts coming out seem to show--The proof will be in Convictions and Pulitzer Prizes, my friend. 2 minutes ago, Jeff Matthews said: Don't underestimate the importance of the fake dossier, who's behind it, and how it formed the illegitimate basis to wiretap Trump's power circle. Despite the Constitution, the DOJ acts and is treated akin to a 4th branch of government, and this causes problems like we are now seeing. I am not suggesting it is error to maintain that level of independence from the executive, but I am saying it is fraught with issues. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen Traveler Posted December 19, 2018 Author Share Posted December 19, 2018 1 minute ago, Jeff Matthews said: Don't underestimate the importance of the fake dossier, who's behind it, and how it formed the illegitimate basis to wiretap Trump's power circle. Jesus, Jeff!!! There is NO WAY I could address your comment above without it leading to deletions and this thread being closed down. Just by you labeling it a "fake dossier," means you haven't really investigated what it exposed and it's ramifications....Stay tuned, *******. 👀 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted December 19, 2018 Share Posted December 19, 2018 5 minutes ago, Jeff Matthews said: Don't underestimate the importance of the fake dossier, who's behind it, and how it formed the illegitimate basis to wiretap Trump's power circle. Either sarcasm or ignorance... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Matthews Posted December 19, 2018 Share Posted December 19, 2018 What am I missing, guys? https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/12/18/steele-dossier-michael-isikoff/2347833002/ Quote But he said when "you actually get into the details of the Steele dossier, the specific allegations, we have not seen the evidence to support them, and, in fact, there's good grounds to think that some of the more sensational allegations will never be proven and are likely false." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Matthews Posted December 19, 2018 Share Posted December 19, 2018 On a similar note, why do you think the political campaigns in the US had to go to Britain to get a dossier? Do you think it might have to do with the supplier's being outside of our jurisdiction? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted December 19, 2018 Share Posted December 19, 2018 You're missing a more factual story about how Page was flagged and the timing which pre-dated the dossier. Also, it wasn't Britain the parties went to, it was a US firm that Steele worked for. Steele was paid by the firm, and didn't really know or care who was behind the contract, which ended up being factions of both major parties, as mentioned in the suspect article. There is a lot of conspiracy notions floating around about the dossier somehow being a prime driver of investigation, and as zen points out or maybe it was you---most people don't care about the truth, only about the narrative that fits what they want to think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Matthews Posted December 19, 2018 Share Posted December 19, 2018 2 minutes ago, oldtimer said: There is a lot of conspiracy notions floating around about the dossier somehow being a prime driver of investigation I thought McCabe (I think it was him) admitted as much. They had the dossier. On top of it, the law required additional corroborating evidence to get the warrant. The "corroboration" was in leaking the dossier to the press and then, citing the press's article as corroboration. Convenient, no? Or am I missing something there, too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted December 19, 2018 Share Posted December 19, 2018 Any "wiretapping" arose from intercepts of communications of known foreign agents. If 4 fisa judges signed off on warrants, do you think that makes all 4 stupid or does it form a good case that there was good cause to monitor these communications? This was not a political investigation, but it did stumble into a political campaign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Matthews Posted December 19, 2018 Share Posted December 19, 2018 11 minutes ago, oldtimer said: Any "wiretapping" arose from intercepts of communications of known foreign agents. If 4 fisa judges signed off on warrants, do you think that makes all 4 stupid or does it form a good case that there was good cause to monitor these communications? This was not a political investigation, but it did stumble into a political campaign. You are making the "no harm/no foul" argument. Let's get back to the basic premise for getting the warrant. It was the dossier. What was the corroborating evidence? It turns out it was a newspaper column written on the leaked dossier. That's not corroboration. Now, we are left with a dossier where the specific facts have not been proven and are likely false. "But hey, they got some bad guys, so it's all good!" This is the bigger picture: The process was corrupt. It's important to know who was behind it and what their motives were. Just because you can trick 4 judges into rubber-stamping a warrant based on a false story doesn't make it right. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Matthews Posted December 19, 2018 Share Posted December 19, 2018 I assume this is real news: Quote Christopher Steele, a former spy from Britain and the author of the Trump-Russia dossier, admitted in court that Democratic law firm Perkins Coie hired him in preparation for Donald Trump winning the presidency in 2016. His goal was to help Hillary Clinton challenge the results of the presidential election. https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2018/12/17/mission-accomplished-christopher-steele-admits-he-was-hired-to-cast-doubt-on-the-n2537657 Political motivation. False narratives. Now, defamation lawsuits. I wouldn't just write this off as no big deal. Our DOJ is caught up right in the middle of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted December 19, 2018 Share Posted December 19, 2018 I'm not necessarily arguing anything, except I do question the last source quoted. Don't forget who first hired Steele and friends starting that chapter. It wasn't Perkins, et al. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted December 19, 2018 Share Posted December 19, 2018 I think you are confusing the stories, and therefore perceived motivations. The feds had been monitoring foreign agents, and certain citizens were caught in the communications, leading to more monitoring. It was going on before anything else. Whatever one party did for whatever reason regarding the other major party, is completely different from a counter espionage investigation. The narrative you want to believe is that the foundation of it all was this dossier. That is simply not true, but it is the spin being put out by some. The quote in your post makes no real sense if you think about it. Who was actually expecting and expected to win? Fisa warrants are not exactly rubber stamped, either, yet you think all 4 were able to be tricked? False narratives are definitely somewhere... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Matthews Posted December 19, 2018 Share Posted December 19, 2018 12 minutes ago, oldtimer said: The narrative you want to believe is that the foundation of it all was this dossier. I see. If there is a simple timeline which puts wiretaps of the same players ahead of the dossier, then, it is what it is. I am not so sure you give enough respect to the notion that sequence actually doesn't matter. If this is the way they play using highly questionable dossiers, what other ways had they been playing that game? Enter Strzok and Page, with their titillating text messages. Both sides play this way, too! (You think I'm partisan, but I'm really not). We know the FBI and DOJ are political arms which seem to view themselves as a fourth branch of government - and not without the sanction of the Supreme Court, which has conceded to the notion that the DOJ has to operate with some barely-articulable "independence" from the Executive branch. Otherwise, nobody will be there to police the police. It's a bizarre power-play, and it's interesting to watch it play-out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts