• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Team Mueller

So let's say there was an independent investigation into Roy Moore, and they uncovered information that proved him to be a pedophile. Are they no longer independent if suddenly they're disgusted by him?
 
Demonwolverine said:
So let's say there was an independent investigation into Roy Moore, and they uncovered information that proved him to be a pedophile. Are they no longer independent if suddenly they're disgusted by him?
Click to expand...

Apparently due to sailor logic.
 
Hate to break it to President Dipshit and the GOP Congressional Dipshits, but I'm pretttttttty sure the federal government can't fire its employees for expressing political opinions in their individual capacities (let alone merely HAVING political opinions). I think maybe there's an Constitutional amendment about that, so I'm surprised the GOP isn't aware of this, being all about the Constitution and all. Freedom of something or other.
 
Say Hey Deac said:
Hate to break it to President Dipshit and the GOP Congressional Dipshits, but I'm pretttttttty sure the federal government can't fire its employees for expressing political opinions in their individual capacities (let alone merely HAVING political opinions). I think maybe there's an Constitutional amendment about that, so I'm surprised the GOP isn't aware of this, being all about the Constitution and all. Freedom of something or other.
Click to expand...


There is a difference between firing a federal official from his or her position entirely and having him or her not serve on a special investigation team that is investigating very politically charged matters. The "optics" don't look good. The optics are also bad when two people on an investigation team are having an affair.
 
Deaconblue said:
There is a difference between firing a federal official from his or her position entirely and having him or her not serve on a special investigation team that is investigating very politically charged matters. The "optics" don't look good. The optics are also bad when two people on an investigation team are having an affair.
Click to expand...

Why? Aside from cheating being bad. Do you think it invalidates the investigation in some way?
 
An affair that is not out in the open involves some amount of lying about activities, whereabouts etc. It is also can be grounds for terminating a federal security clearance. Lack of a security clearance can have an impact on an investigation.
 
Sure but does it invalidate the investigation?
 
PhDeac said:
Sure but does it invalidate the investigation?
Click to expand...


Lying, especially when done by someone who expressed a strong dislike for the subject of the investigation, does not make for good optics in the investigation. It is an open question as to whether they can conduct the investigation in an impartial manner but it doesn't look good.
 
So I'll ask you the same question nobody else has answered. Who should be conducting this investigation?
 
PhDeac said:
So I'll ask you the same question nobody else has answered. Who should be conducting this investigation?
Click to expand...


People who aren't involved in cheating and lying in a significant aspect of their lives. People who don't have expressed views that the subject is guilty before the investigation begins, who are more holding to the idea of "innocent until proven guilty" as opposed to "let's find enough evidence to convict this guilty person."

Someone who views the evidence and follows where it leads, not someone who either:

Believes the subject of the investigation is a guilty POS and needs to find evidence to support that view

or

Believes the subject can't possibly have done whatever is being investigated and therefore is looking to find evidence to support that view.
 
Deaconblue said:
People who aren't involved in cheating and lying in a significant aspect of their lives. People who don't have expressed views that the subject is guilty before the investigation begins, who are more holding to the idea of "innocent until proven guilty" as opposed to "let's find enough evidence to convict this guilty person."

Someone who views the evidence and follows where it leads, not someone who either:

Believes the subject of the investigation is a guilty POS and needs to find evidence to support that view

or

Believes the subject can't possibly have done whatever is being investigated and therefore is looking to find evidence to support that view.
Click to expand...

None of this is particularly true.
 
It's amazing how far people are going to delegitimize this investigation. The mental gymnastics is incredible. I don't remember hearing anything like this when House Republicans were investigating Hillary.
 
Or when praising Mueller like 6 months ago.
 
Makes you wonder why they praised him in the first place. Did they think he wasn't going to do a real investigation?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top