James Clapper lied under oath to Congress about collecting intelligence against American citizens.
So for an entire career you found the only instance of Clapper "lying". Here's the problem. He later realized he was talking about a different section of law and requested a closed hearing. I guess you could say since he served under presidents from both parties he only hated Republicans, so where are all the lies he told under oath under Republican presidents??? I don't know whether he intentionally misled Congress but I do know it is the only instance anyone has mentioned, and he has an explanation.
The Same could be said of McCabe and in fact he has filed suit against the FBI for wrongfully firing him which was based on his "lie". He has explained it somewhat and again it is the only instance anyone has presented. So why would someone who you alleged lied file suit to expose what you call a lie??? Makes me wonder about Mr Trump if that's the case.
Unlike you I can't say with certainty these guys lied. Their explanation could be valid. Since I have no partisan skin in this game, and since you can't produce other examples of their lying, I would have to conclude their explanation has enough credibility to say it is more likely they simply made an error in use of words, rather than trying to intentionally deceiving me. Obviously you believe they deceived you and you don't want to hear their explanation.
Flynn, however, wasn't under oath, and the agents who interviewed him (we now know) didn't actually think he lied to them, though they did (we now know) lie to him about the nature of their investigation, just as they failed to advise him of his rights, told him not to have a lawyer present, and illegally withheld exculpatory evidence.
POint by point.
1. No he wasn't under oath but he was talking to FBI agents. As a former head of DNI he knew lying to FBI was a crime. Did they have to alert him? No. They were simply trying to find out what was going on.
2. The 302 had a comment they didn't think he lied. It was only later when investigating the context of his statements and the facts of the call and his conversations with VP Pence and other top officials, they realized he had lied about his calls with Amb. Kislyak. So you want to somehow conflate a 302 comment with events later?
3. They do not have to provide any information to an interviewee. What? you are surprised? That was a reality check for the naive. That the FBI does this is well known.
4. They were not charging with a crime when they interviewed him.
5. They did not tell him he could not have an attorney present. McCabe advised him some agents wanted to talk with him. He agreed and asked if he needed an attorney. McCabe told him unless he wanted DoJ involved, he wouldn't need one. Gen Flynn said ok send them.
6. The FBI is not required to provide any information.
I like your indignation. Based on your comments every criminal in America should be released because the FBI acted like the FBI. Nice.
This was a political hit job.
Trying to find out what Gen Flynn was up to is a political hit job? Did Flynn have Russian contacts? Yep. Di Flynn do work for Russians? Yep. Did Flynn have 3 phone calls with the Russian Amb talking about sanctions imposed because of Russian interference in a US election? Yep.
Now you may not be interested in what was going on but I am. My interest is not political. It is about an existential threat to America which may have existed. I wouldn't know it didn't unless I found out. Asking Flynn to own up to the conversation is the way to do that. But he lied about it. He lied to VP Pence about his conversations. He lied to other top officials about it. (I wonder if he lied to Mr Trump???). He told the court he lied to the FBI and VP Pence. Not once but twice. Now he is saying they caused him to lie ... not that he didn't lie ... but they caught him in a perjury trap. Actually it couldn't be perjury since he wasn't under oath. Perjury may apply to what he said in court since he did take an oath in court to tell the truth. So how does the FBI get someone to lie??? I can't figure it out. You lie to deceive. So why would he try to deceive the FBI agents? Why deceive VP Pence? Could it be he told Mr Trump about the calls and didn't want the FBI to know he told Mr Trump? Because he thought he may have committed a crime???
Not a political hit job when national security was at stake.
Drone strikes are targeted killings requiring a finding and a presidential sign off.
It was in fact a major portion of the so called email scandal. Found in Sec Clinton emails were 110 threads discussing CIA targeted assassination programs. People at State were concerned when news of this program had been outed and needed State's response. A long discussion ensued. These folks thought discussing a classified program was not the same as embedding classified reports in emails. Who knew. And even more surprisingly, Republicans pointed to this as the "smoking gun" Sec Clinton was intentionally embedding classified reports in her private email server ... wait for it .... after the program had been declassified by Pres Obama!!!!!
an Administration so weaponized the nation's national security apparatus against domestic political opponents as Obama did
Here's the problem. You have confused politics and national security.
I can see how easy it is for Republicans and especially Trump supporters to believe paranoidly that the Democrats are out to get them. Conservatives think of themselves as victims. Victimized by Democrats, so anything a Democrat does is necessarily political to them.
So when say an investigation into some politician happens, it has to be political ... right? What about when it has to do with national security? Is it still political?
The Russians hacked the DNC email server. The Russians were asked by Mr Trump to hack Sec Clinton's email server. The IC had determined the Russians were meddling in an election and favored Mr trump over Sec Clinton. The Trump campaign took meetings with Russians looking for "dirt" and creating back channels. So when an American takes calls with the Amb of one of our primary enemies, the FBI stands up and takes note. And especially when they unmask that caller's name and found out it was Gen Flynn future Dir of NSC trying to undermine Congressional policy. Now if that does not register on your radar, then perhaps you should ask yourself which country you are in. Maybe you don't realize you are in America.
If you believe that is political ... well you use a dictionary only Trump supporters use. The one wherein if there is any criticism of Mr trump it is both political and personal and national security can be ignored.
Peter Strzok who was foolish enough to text his mistress bragging about how they had an "insurance" plan
Yep they had one. They believed Sec Clinton would win. She was winning in the polls.
What? ... you thought 2 people in the FBI would lead a coup and overthrow a duly elected president? What kind of plan would that be? I think only a narcissist such as Mr Trump would be delusional enough to believe they could lead a coup ... but you may believe 2 FBI agents would be successful.
Strzok ... was the reason that the Flynn investigation was driven on after the Agents involved concluded there was nothing there until ...
yes until Gen Flynn took 3 calls from Russian Amb Kislyak and discussed removing Congressional sanctions ... and then lied about discussing sanctions.
All Gen Flynn had to do was say, yep we discussed sanctions ... or to put it another way ... not lie.
Why would he lie??? He intentional deceived the FBI and VP Pence. Why? What was he hiding? You may not care but I have a sense (not worth anything in court) it had to do with Mr Trump. It may have been harmless or he may have thought he committed a crime, after all he hid his efforts with the Turkish government. I dunno. I would like to waterboard him to find the truth.
I demand a full investigation into the Biden campaign for the possibility that Biden is a secret agent of Kim Jung Un and or the French. Put every single member of that campaign on oath about every event that has ever occurred in their lives, including Biden.
So you're claiming VP Biden hads DPRK agents stumbling all over each other? VP Biden is taking meetings with DPRK agents looking for "dirt" on Mr Trump? Has VP Biden had secret meetings with DPRK agents?
Basically what you want is a political witchhunt because there is no predication for an investigation .... unless you know VP Biden is colluding with Kim? You can't see the difference between what you prose and what happened during the Trump campaign???? Really????
Now, you will say "there is no evidence to justify such an investigation and it's a ludicrous idea". I agree. It's at least as stupid as the idea that Putin looked at Trump and thought him a trustworthy actor who could keep a secret and would be His Man In Washington. But, what's good for the goose is good for the gander, right?
It would be except all the IC which made judgements came to the same conclusion ... the Russians meddled in the election and favored Mr Trump as their choice. I guess you can believe Putin when he strongly denied interfering and when Mr Trump said he believed Putin as he believed the Russians had no reason to meddle.
The fact that those involved have demonstrated and said that their goals were partisan
I call BS
Please provide the evidence anyone involved both demonstrated and stated their goal was partisan.
This would be the Steele Dossier which - we now know - the administration knew at the time was B.S. and yet (lied, and) told the FISA court was the reason they had to spy on domestic political opponents?
No ... you need to read the footnotes and additional FBI commentary explaining what they thought about the dossier ... and it is nothing like what you imagine. The dossier was RAW INTEL. It was a starting point for investigation. None of it was taken as fact and only some of it was ever verified. None has been refuted and some will never be verified. It was not the basis for the FISA warrants. It was an addendum to supply emphasis ... there was something happening and no one knew for sure what was happening .... had the Russians infiltrated a campaign???? You probably don't care but the FBI did.
the FBI initially discovered she had violated, until Strzok was allowed to go back in and retroactively (and creatively) change the language
Strzok did not change by himself. His explanation was the legal team brought up the issue and suggested the change since there were legal implications in the language. He changed it and Dir Comey agreed to the change. BTW ... he didn't go back as you insinuate but simply changed the draft.
However, I'm not aware of this kind of abuse occuring under him at current.
When asked of Sen Graham what would be a quid pro quo, he responded if Mr trump asked for a favor. Later the memo was released and ques what there it was the word Sen Graham said would mean quid pro quo, "favor".
When asked of Rep McCarthy when Mr Trump asked a favor though, Rep McCarthy said he didn't say "though" meaning that would constitute a quid pro quo, and when shown the memo, Rep McCarthy changed the subject.
Two instances of obvious in your face abuse of office for personal use in a campaign. These two folks knew it. I got it, because it is obvious, and yet you do not.
I tend to assess the available evidence, including source critique.
LOL. there was no evidence i.e. the reason one has to investigate. All that was known was Russians everywhere ... reports of contacts with Russians ... a dossier alleging possible conspiracy ... Russian hacking .... Russian meddling. So your analysis is no problem ... so the Russians are coming ... big deal.
This is the reason the FBI needed to investigate ... they didn't have the answers.
The FBI chose to break the law in order to go after someone they hated for political reasons
What law was broken? The FBI IG report stated there was no political bias found in pursuing the investigation.
Based on your beliefs, no person running for office should be investigated because it would be political and yet you want to investigate Sec Clinton as non political. Really???? You don't think retroactive classification of information which was public is not political? Really???
So when VP Biden carries on his campaign, he can surround himself with Russians, Iranians, North Koreans and you will not say a peep. Correct????