Durham investigation (Update: Sussman acquitted) (3 Viewers)

[SaintForLife]

It looks like the first shoe has dropped with the Durham investigation with the Clinesmith plea deal. Clinesmith wasn't a low level FBI employee involved in the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.

He worked with Strzok to arrange sending an FBI agent into Trump-Flynn briefing, was on the Mueller team, he took part in the Papadopoulos interviews, and he participated in the FISA process.



From the NYT article:

Ex-F.B.I. Lawyer Expected to Plead Guilty in Review of Russia Inquiry (Published 2020)

Prosecutors did not reveal any evidence of the kind of broad anti-Trump conspiracy among law enforcement officials that the president has long alleged.

www.nytimes.com

I wonder who else knew about the lies?

 

[Snarky Sack]

Wesley Hunt talks about what happens to black men who commit gun crimes like Hunter Biden did.



BTW, when Hunt calls the '94 Crime Bill, written by Biden and gleefully enforced by Harris, "one of my all-time favorites" he is being sarcastic.

 

[DaveXA]

It is lopsided in comparison to how other violent offenders have been treated in the last four four years, in particular the ANTIFA and BLM rioters, and the murderers who have been let out on no cash bail. It is disparate treatment when you see prosecutors like Alvin Bragg declining to prosecute crimes like trespassing and obstructing government administration.

Lol, just no. Comparing apples and peanuts.

No, I don't think that they should get off scot free. They deserve consequences and should have gotten them. I think they should not have been denied bail and I think the sentences for many have been excessive.

I completely disagree. If anything, the penalties haven't been strong enough. They've generally been sentenced to prison terms at about half of what the prosecution requested. The penalties for sedition and attempting to stop a government proceeding has to be severe, not to mention the damages to the Capitol building and physical assaults on federal officers and police attempting to secure the building.

They've been in jail awaiting trial, so that has been a pretty severe consequence. For anyone there more than three months before trial, not guilty of assaulting or injuring any person, time served would have been more than enough consequences.

Again, I disagree. Punishment for participating in a riot and knowingly entering a secure building illegally has to have severe consequences. If they didn't want to get in trouble, they should have stayed outside.

Not at all. A pardon just means that you did the crime, but there are circumstances warranting a pardon.

I'm not seeing any circumstances warranting a pardon, but i don't expect well agree on this.

What about commuting their sentences to time served? Commuting their sentences to time served might be more appropriate than pardons, but many others who are guilty of worse crimes have been pardoned in order to get a fresh start.

It would have to be a unique situation, but ordinarily, I don't see any justification for pardons or commuting.

 

[Snarky Sack]

Lol, just no. Comparing apples and peanuts.

I completely disagree. If anything, the penalties haven't been strong enough. They've generally been sentenced to prison terms at about half of what the prosecution requested. The penalties for sedition and attempting to stop a government proceeding has to be severe, not to mention the damages to the Capitol building and physical assaults on federal officers and police attempting to secure the building.

Again, I disagree. Punishment for participating in a riot and knowingly entering a secure building illegally has to have severe consequences. If they didn't want to get in trouble, they should have stayed outside.

I'm not seeing any circumstances warranting a pardon, but i don't expect well agree on this.

It would have to be a unique situation, but ordinarily, I don't see any justification for pardons or commuting.

Sure, we could argue for years about that.

Main point is to answer your claim of Reps first condemning the rioters and then praising them, which did not happen. There was no change of attitude about what they did. Only additional condemnation of their disparate treatment - real or not.

 

[LA - L.A.]

Some peop

Main point is to answer your claim of Reps first condemning the rioters and then praising them, which did not happen.

Some Republicans in Congress have referred to some of the insurrections from Jan 6th true Americans, heroes and patriots. That is in fact praise and it did in fact happen on multiple occasions.

 

[DaveXA]

Sure, we could argue for years about that.

Main point is to answer your claim of Reps first condemning the rioters and then praising them, which did not happen. There was no change of attitude about what they did. Only additional condemnation of their disparate treatment - real or not.

You must be mistaking me for someone else because I never made that claim.

 

[Snarky Sack]

You must be mistaking me for someone else because I never made that claim.

You're right, you did not. The poster I originally responded to made that claim.

I'm still not used the MAP convention of one poster starting an exchange and another poster picking it up and the first poster dropping out.

I find it weird, but when in Rome . . .

 

[Snarky Sack]

Some Republicans in Congress have referred to some of the insurrections from Jan 6th true Americans, heroes and patriots. That is in fact praise and it did in fact happen on multiple occasions.

I'd have to see what you mean in particular to intelligently comment.

 

[MT15]

Wait, aren’t you a medical professional? So then I guess I can’t expect an answer as to what a woman is from a medical professional?

You say that only one side is trying to control women’s bodies, but I am asking you what a woman is because only one side is trying to change the description of what a woman is.

You are being a troll in this case. You have no answer for anything I said, other than to what-about so hard you probably got whiplash. Nobody is changing the description of what a woman is, and if you think that you’re worse off than I thought.

What is happening is that a lot of people have recognized that there are people who have a disconnect between physical sex and gender. These people suffer great anguish and are at high risk for suicide. What helps them to not kill themselves is a little bit of understanding and empathy. A little bit of respecting their wishes on pronouns and such. Appropriate treatment, when warranted.

You love to act like you’re above politics but you are playing team politics so hard here that it makes you look like an arse.

 

[MT15]

It is lopsided in comparison to how other violent offenders have been treated in the last four four years, in particular the ANTIFA and BLM rioters, and the murderers who have been let out on no cash bail. It is disparate treatment when you see prosecutors like Alvin Bragg declining to prosecute crimes like trespassing and obstructing government administration.


No, I don't think that they should get off scot free. They deserve consequences and should have gotten them. I think they should not have been denied bail and I think the sentences for many have been excessive.

They've been in jail awaiting trial, so that has been a pretty severe consequence. For anyone there more than three months before trial, not guilty of assaulting or injuring any person, time served would have been more than enough consequences.

Not at all. A pardon just means that you did the crime, but there are circumstances warranting a pardon.

What about commuting their sentences to time served? Commuting their sentences to time served might be more appropriate than pardons, but many others who are guilty of worse crimes have been pardoned in order to get a fresh start.

The only people who didn’t get bail were the violent offenders who beat up policemen. I don’t think anybody who merely trespassed was denied bail. You can actually prove me wrong, if you can. Otherwise you’re making a false statement.

There were literally thousands of rioters from the George Floyd protests who were arrested and charged. According to USA Today, nearly 10,000 were arrested over that summer. A whole lot of them for trespassing and such. So this would seem to be another false claim, commonly made by those on the right who don’t ever fact check anything.

 

[Snarky Sack]

The only people who didn’t get bail were the violent offenders who beat up policemen. I don’t think anybody who merely trespassed was denied bail. You can actually prove me wrong, if you can. Otherwise you’re making a false statement.

If you are accusing me of making a false statement, you are welcome to prove it. Since you only said, "I don't think," then of course I have no obligation to provide evidence.

Since providing sources for claims is rare on this board, I don't want to be an "outsider" coming in and not doing it the way you all are used to. I believe that you advised me to take some time to see how the board goes. I did, and that was one of my observations. Links are rare compared to other boards that I've been on.

There were literally thousands of rioters from the George Floyd protests who were arrested and charged. According to USA Today, nearly 10,000 were arrested over that summer. A whole lot of them for trespassing and such. So this would seem to be another false claim, commonly made by those on the right who don’t ever fact check anything.

Praise Allah that local and state police did that. I hope that even after they were arrested, they were not denied bail. In fact, I know they were not because so many funding efforts were dedicated to raising their bail.

 

[MT15]

If you are accusing me of making a false statement, you are welcome to prove it. Since you only said, "I don't think," then of course I have no obligation to provide evidence.

Since providing sources for claims is rare on this board, I don't want to be an "outsider" coming in and not doing it the way you all are used to. I believe that you advised me to take some time to see how the board goes. I did, and that was one of my observations. Links are rare compared to other boards that I've been on.

Praise Allah that local and state police did that. I hope that even after they were arrested, they were not denied bail. In fact, I know they were not because so many funding efforts dedicated to raising their bail.

When requested, people on here provide proof for their claims. I will assume you cannot back up that claim.

And just like the Jan 6 rioters, those arrested for rioting over the Floyd murder were denied bail if they were deemed to be a flight risk, or be likely to commit more violence. One example found very quickly:

Atlanta Riots: 4 of 6 suspects arrested denied bond

ATLANTA RIOTS: Two of the six suspects arrested during the violent riot in downtown Atlanta over the weekend have been granted bond and will wear ankle monitors until their trial.

www.fox5atlanta.com

This idea that the Jan 6 rioters are being treated too harshly is just whining from the right, mostly because they don’t think they should be treated like common criminals.

So basically your assertions that Floyd rioters were let off and Jan 6 rioters were treated more harshly is unsupported.

 

[Snarky Sack]

When requested, people on here provide proof for their claims. I will assume you cannot back up that claim.

And just like the Jan 6 rioters, those arrested for rioting over the Floyd murder were denied bail if they were deemed to be a flight risk, or be likely to commit more violence. One example found very quickly:

Atlanta Riots: 4 of 6 suspects arrested denied bond

ATLANTA RIOTS: Two of the six suspects arrested during the violent riot in downtown Atlanta over the weekend have been granted bond and will wear ankle monitors until their trial.

www.fox5atlanta.com

This idea that the Jan 6 rioters are being treated too harshly is just whining from the right, mostly because they don’t think they should be treated like common criminals.

So basically your assertions that Floyd rioters were let off and Jan 6 rioters were treated more harshly is unsupported.

As I told the other poster, we could argue this point endlessly.

It seems that sounded like fun to you, but that wasn't what I meant.

 

[MT15]

As I told the other poster, we could argue this point endlessly.

It seems that sounded like fun to you, but that wasn't what I meant.

Incapable of just admitting you are mistaken in your feelings that the Jan 6 defendants are being mistreated? That’s fine we will drop it.

 

[SFIDC3]

Visiting them in jail, and supporting pardoning them is not the same as praising their actions on Jan 6.

Like many people, I was horrified at the actions of the rioters who entered the Capitol and committed violent acts. Like many people I was and am horrified at the lopsided treatment they have since been given by the DOJ since then.

Actually you are correct, it is not the same as praising, it's even worse, it's legitimizing their actions.....your response, like the vast majority of your posts, is an absolute joke.....

 

[CoolBrees]

The only one who was punished appropriately is that loser Ashli Babbitt - that is the correct punishment for being a traitor.

The rest should have gotten the same.

 

[el caliente]

Maybe you missed the whole Jan 6th thingy, where a good portion of the R's condemned then wait....praised the actions of insurrectionists, to the extent where some visited them in prison and fully support pardoning them if their wannabe tin pot white so-called christian nationalist dictator is elected (be it Trump, DeSantis, etc).....

The side that has filled the SC with dishonorable right wing religious nut job zealots putting untold numbers of women at risk, because, god really thinks that politicians should dictate what a woman can and can't do with their own body.....

But, yeah, both sides.....

You will get no argument from me regarding spineless Republicans who supported the Jan. 6th insurrection. People tied to the support of that “thingy” should be pulled from their seats, and never be allowed to run again.

The surprising thing to me were those who didn’t support it.

Full list of Republicans to speak out against Tucker Carlson's Jan. 6 show

The Fox News host has been condemned for trying to portray the storming of the Capitol as "peaceful."

www.newsweek.com

To your final point, what is a woman?

 

[el caliente]

Wesley Hunt talks about what happens to black men who commit gun crimes like Hunter Biden did.



BTW, when Hunt calls the '94 Crime Bill, written by Biden and gleefully enforced by Harris, "one of my all-time favorites" he is being sarcastic.

Oddly enough, guys like Hunt and Scott are being called disparaging terms by those those who love crying racism, and being told that their truth isn’t true

 

[el caliente]

You are being a troll in this case. You have no answer for anything I said, other than to what-about so hard you probably got whiplash. Nobody is changing the description of what a woman is, and if you think that you’re worse off than I thought.

What is happening is that a lot of people have recognized that there are people who have a disconnect between physical sex and gender. These people suffer great anguish and are at high risk for suicide. What helps them to not kill themselves is a little bit of understanding and empathy. A little bit of respecting their wishes on pronouns and such. Appropriate treatment, when warranted.

You love to act like you’re above politics but you are playing team politics so hard here that it makes you look like an arse.

If nobody is trying to change the description of what a woman is, then it should be pretty easy for you to answer.

Do both sides agree on the definition of what a woman is? I don’t think so, but maybe (once again) I am wrong. It’s odd to me that while one side is trying to strip away women’s rights, the other is looking to change the description of what a woman is, or not giving a definitive answer as to what a woman is.

I’m not above anyone or anything. I just get drawn to the hypocrisy like a moth to the flame. Don’t ever change MT, I wouldn’t come back otherwise.