Washington Post: An increasing number of Americans see the FBI as biased against Trump
This is an argument you might not expect from attorneys representing Michael Cohen, the attorney who represents President Trump.
Appointing a third party to review material seized from Cohen in an FBI raid last week “will protect the integrity of the Government’s investigation from the toxic partisan politics of the day and attacks on the impartiality of the Justice Department,” a letter from Cohen’s legal team on Monday read. Earlier, the letter noted that “there is a growing public debate about whether criminal and congressional investigations by the government are being undertaken impartially, free of any political bias or partisan motivation.”
In court, Assistant U.S. Attorney Thomas McKay was incredulous: Those “toxic partisan politics” were being driven by Cohen and his client. McKay noted that there were three parties involved in the Cohen dispute — the state, Cohen and Trump — and that only two of those parties had responded to the raid with “inflammatory comments.” Cohen, he argued, was trying to “drum up media attention” and then point to that media attention as a reason to remove the government from the process of evaluating the material seized from Cohen.
Read more ....
WNU Editor: The FBI has not handled itself well since the U.S. Presidential campaign .... and I suspect that with the passage of time and with more revelations on FBI conduct (and misconduct) becoming known, these FBI poll numbers are only going to get worse.
22 comments:
A bias against the FBI in this poll simply reflects a bias of "friends of gop" and the editor here, and those who voted for Trump; the reverse applies for those voting against Trump, those in the Democratic party and voters as well as me...finally, what the results are from these investigations will count more that the biases we all have on such and all matters, recalling then the adage that we all see things as we are and not as they are
When the FBI is viewed as a partisan political tool by a good part of the population .... the result of any investigation that it involves itself with will forever be tainted.
The DoJ Inspector Generals recent report on former Acting FBI Director McCabe is incredibly scathing and an eye-opener on how the FBI conducts itself, and I suspect is just the tip of the iceberg of more reports that are going to come out. This is not a bias of "friends of GOP", me, or those who voted for Trump .... this is making public on how the FBI has conducted itself since the election, and in my opinion very difficult to defend regardless of political-party affiliation.
Editor
If we follow what you assert, then why not do away with the FBI since Trump seems to fire those who head it ? If the FBI is political, as alleged, then so too the president...do we accept the one and not the other? that is the road to fascism...you know Lock Him Up he disagrees with me so jail him
I have never been a great fan of the FBI. Their record in the past in fact is heavily leaning against the left, all the records against the left--google--going back to Jay E. Hoover and through Martin Luther King, Pete Seeger etc etc etc
Now we have FBI heads who are or were registered GOP memembers but the right does not like the current stuff so the entire group must be no good...ok, but they are just fine when they disrupt terrorism, track down high profile killers ord gang members etc...Just no good when they are rounding up guys such as Trump's lawyer or traitors like Flynn etc
What evidence do you have that Flynn was a "traitor" which the label you used.
Comey: There are things about Russia probe that public doesn’t know yet
What is your evidence that Flynn is a "traitor" an accusation YOU used.
FLYNN LIED ABOUT THIS AND INDICTED
Glad you are impartial aMD give your fellow citizens the benefit of doubt, ha ha
what is an "aMD"?
"FLYNN LIED ABOUT THIS AND INDICTED"
That was not for treason. Where is your evidence? You made the charge of treason.
Dealing with enemy nation and concealingin a lie
WASHINGTON
One of the Trump administration’s first decisions about the fight against the Islamic State was made by Michael Flynn weeks before he was fired – and it conformed to the wishes of Turkey, whose interests, unbeknownst to anyone in Washington, he’d been paid more than $500,000 to represent.
The decision came 10 days before Donald Trump had been sworn in as president, in a conversation with President Barack Obama’s national security adviser, Susan Rice, who had explained the Pentagon’s plan to retake the Islamic State’s de facto capital of Raqqa with Syrian Kurdish forces whom the Pentagon considered the U.S.’s most effective military partners. Obama’s national security team had decided to ask for Trump’s sign-off, since the plan would all but certainly be executed after Trump had become president.
Flynn didn’t hesitate. According to timelines distributed by members of Congress in the weeks since, Flynn told Rice to hold off, a move that would delay the military operation for months.
If Flynn explained his answer, that’s not recorded, and it’s not known whether he consulted anyone else on the transition team before rendering his verdict. But his position was consistent with the wishes of Turkey, which had long opposed the United States partnering with the Kurdish forces – and which was his undeclared client.
Fred,
What Michael Flynn got is chump change when one looks at what the former President Clinton and the Clinton Foundation received, and that is when she was US Secretary of State.
She was never charged nor lied under oath
It is not a matter of money
Flynn changed policy for client did Clinton do this?
Bill Clinton got $500,000 for a 30 minute speech in Moscow. Foundation got over $150,000,000 from those who paid for the speech and who benefited from Uranium One deal.
The Swedish company Ericsson paid nearly six million dollars to Bill Clinton for one speech, and after that speech Ericsson got exempted by the US government from the ban on doing business with Iran.
And then there is Comey's decision just days before the election to close the investigation on Hillary Clinton and her email server. As I had mentioned in a previous post .... questions and concerns on the politicization of the FBI are justified, and thank God no one is stopping the Inspector General in his investigation on this entire manner.
Just about any elected official who gives a speech gets a lot of money. The foundation is thus far seen as ok, with no charges made against it; not the same with Trump foundation...comey stated publicly that the Clinton thing open and that sunk her...he is bad for her and for trump, it seems. the worst thing thus far from Comey? He states in his book that impeachment should not take place but instead let the voters decide. The Mueller investigation NOT over and he says this NOW?
Money seems at the core of a lot of this, of course, but Flynn under cover took money and changed policy that was in place. Now, if he is as good as Clinton, why is it that he is indicted? Well he lied to FBI...thus far that puts him in a different category it seems. And note: we are here discussing Flynn and NOT past office holders
I hardly defend the FBI as pure souls...I have had some first-hand experience with them and got a bit suckered...But at the moment, they are using top people and coming up with many indictments And there is more, as Comey says, stuff we do not yet know because it is under wraps at this time
Nothing you have produced meets the definition of treason. A charge you have made, where is your evidence?
For those who are suspicious of Comey etc, you will like this assessment
treason?synonyms: treachery, disloyalty, betrayal, faithlessness; More
sedition, subversion, mutiny, rebellion;
the action of betraying someone or something.
plural noun: treasons
god for nothing
This is something
Just forgetaboutit
"treason?synonyms: treachery, disloyalty, betrayal, faithlessness; More
sedition, subversion, mutiny, rebellion;"
The Law of this country is not determined, defined or controlled by a dictionary rather the Constitution. YOU have accused someone of being a traitor without providing any pertinent evidence. YOU have shown what you are with your own words and this shall not change until if and when YOU can demonstrate evidence to back your charge. A charge which is the most serious offense a citizen of this country can be accused.
Post a Comment