Who knew it would be the New York Times that busted the abuses of power at the FBI wide open? And all of this time we’ve been kicking them for being hugely biased and gross when it comes to Trump.
Granted, we’re pretty sure they didn’t think they were helping the president but hey, here we are.
Byron York tweeted about the severe blowback the FBI could see after all of this:
On NYT FBI-investigated-Trump story, we're still in the credulous reporting stage of this particular Trump-Russia storm, but ultimate blowback against FBI could be pretty severe. From @jacklgoldsmith: https://t.co/ugSS4GkOGM pic.twitter.com/lZD4UUKEVR
— Byron York (@ByronYork) January 14, 2019
From the LawFareBlog:
In this light, the question arises: What turned on the step the FBI took? Did the bureau need to take that step? Was the FBI empowered to do something more and different by opening up a counterintelligence investigation against the president? Did it do so for a practical reason called for by the investigation, in order to ensure that it better understood what happened in 2016? Or was it just a formal bureaucratic step on which nothing of substance turned? This was a question that I raised on the podcast. None of my colleagues could say that anything at all of substance turned on the designation. (It was later suggested to me that the FBI’s step might have enabled enhanced investigative steps against the president; the matter is unclear.) If it is true that nothing of substance turned on the designation, then in one sense the step was meaningless, and the FBI was able to proceed to investigate the president’s connections to Russia and the 2016 election as before.
The entire article is FASCINATING and worth your time to read. Just sayin’.
As it should be. Incredible abuse of their powers.
— Sandy (@RightGlockMom) January 14, 2019
There are no words to adequately describe the absolute abuse of their power in this situation. And as we learn more it just gets scarier and scarier.
it wont be severe unless the msm decides to report on it.. they certainly have a different "take" on what this article says. they seem to be convinced that it says trump was a russian agent, despite paragraph 9, or that actions of fbi are questionable
— n longmire (@nklongmire) January 14, 2019
Fair point BUT the NYT sort of reported on it, right?
Either way, seems things are about to get lit, folks. Grab some popcorn.
To change your comments display name, click here.