Utopia Talk - Politics - FBI and Jan. 6th, why no answers?

Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Thu Apr 25 08:43:17 2024

Utopia Talk / Politics / FBI and Jan. 6th, why no answers?

Habebe
Member Wed Jun 15 16:02:36
Serious question, why won't the FBI answer a sitting Senators questions about Jan. 6th?

He asked if any agents/informants were present.

If they committed any crimes of violence there that day.

And if they encouraged others to commit crimes.

The answer was "Im sorry we cant comment on that"

Why? Clearly the Jan. 6 committee has no respect for executive privelege. Bypassing normal channels, possibly illegally (trial pending AFAIK*)

And yet we cant know a year and a half later if the FBI Whitmered this?

Seems suspect as fuck.

nhill
Member Wed Jun 15 16:17:27
Undercover assets often do illegal things to maintain their cover. That doesn't necessarily mean they planned it (not saying you think that, just pointint it out).

I don't think they'd blow an asset's cover, and they most likely had some in some of the groups involved, I would assume.

Im better then you
2012 UP Football Champ Wed Jun 15 16:21:17
Habebe you should be listening to the hearings. This was an organized attack headed and for the benefit of Donald J Trump.

murder
Member Wed Jun 15 16:31:20

"Serious question, why won't the FBI answer a sitting Senators questions about Jan. 6th?"

Would kind of defeat the purpose of undercover agents, don't you think?

Even if they had no agents there, they wouldn't want the target groups to know that.

Habebe
Member Wed Jun 15 16:42:10
"Would kind of defeat the purpose of undercover agents, don't you think?"

Aa year and a half later? No. If its worthy of prime time hearings, and imprisoning people for not breaking executive privelege without due process. You can simply say yes or no.

Nhill, I get that, but I think this looks worse.

And encouraging/excitement should be an easy NO.

Ibty, I have skimmed, they assembled the most anti Trump senators to show edited clips and snippets of info.

Does that sound like a good way to find the truth? Apply it to any other public investigation and we would all say no.

murder
Member Wed Jun 15 16:52:39

"You can simply say yes or no."

Would kind of defeat the purpose of undercover agents, don't you think?

Whatever the intentions of the legislator who is asking, the FBI isn't there to provide free intelligence to criminal organizations.

Habebe
Member Wed Jun 15 16:56:44
Murder, After the fact? We got the details on how the FBI was responsible for the Whitmer debacle.

If a sitting Senator, like him or not, can not get the details, than why shouldn't we just figure this was another whitmer expedition?

Habebe
Member Wed Jun 15 16:57:26
Surely executive privelege is higher in respect than some FBI project.

nhill
Member Wed Jun 15 17:10:27
Even a year and a half later, it's plausible they still have active assets in organizations involved. And maybe some of them did incite the riots, would be a good way to prove their worth.

nhill
Member Wed Jun 15 17:11:31
Would you be upset to find out undercover agents played an active role in encouraging the riots?

Cherub Cow
Member Wed Jun 15 17:12:22
“This was an organized attack headed and for the benefit of Donald J Trump.”

Lol

“they assembled the most anti Trump senators to show edited clips and snippets of info. [/] Does that sound like a good way to find the truth? Apply it to any other public investigation and we would all say no.”

Yep, this is a Bolshevik show-trial to sell Bolshevik politik to the useful idiots. It is not a fact-finding mission or a truth discovery.

In an actual legal hearing wherein a chain of evidence must be procedurally admitted, they would have to sit there watching the entire un-edited videos of speeches and events. They would have to submit entire transcripts, and testimonies would include counter-claims and defense arguments.

They did not do this.

They presented fucking *movies* here — political presentations in the style of Olympia. This was heavy editing, manipulated videos, stylized transitions, and omitted defense arguments. This was designed to polarize the people who already believe the narrative and to create new audiences of propagandized citizens. It was also a false-foundation upon which the Bolshevik could justify further lies. This is a rhetorical strategy: present an argument as “true” (because the presenter allowed no counter-arguments), and then refer to that “truth” in subsequent arguments. E.g., “[As was established in the January 6th hearings…]”

The most hilarious part is that the useful idiots really think this tapped them into the raw data. These people are so far gone. Even as the Party destroys them, they trust the Party.

nhill
Member Wed Jun 15 17:16:10
>Yep, this is a Bolshevik show-trial to sell Bolshevik politik to the useful idiots. It is not a fact-finding mission or a truth discovery.

Similar to nearly every investigation performed by either party in the past two decades. Useful idiots on both sides of the aisle, cuz it's the same fking aisle.

nhill
Member Wed Jun 15 17:17:12
The real useful idiots are the one playing into party politics when both parties are branches of the same narrative. Marketing be like that.

Habebe
Member Wed Jun 15 17:42:24
"Would you be upset to find out undercover agents played an active role in encouraging the riots?"

BLM? I wholly suspect they did. But Im also very paranoid about the rolemof alphabet boys in domestic movements. I would bet 1k LUNC they were involved in atleast some of them.

Jan. 6th riot? I would also say yes, they very likely did.

nhill
Member Wed Jun 15 17:47:53
Habebe, I was wondering if it would upset you to find out undercover FBI agents played an active role in inciting the riots? Just trying to get a litmus test.

Habebe
Member Wed Jun 15 17:49:30
Upset me? I mean I wouldn't be happy about it, but I suspect. But I guess I would say yes. Upset as in displeased.

nhill
Member Wed Jun 15 17:55:41
Since that is a plausible outcome, I'm guessing they'd rather not upset people.

Habebe
Member Wed Jun 15 18:03:00
But doesn't that theory only jive if they did it?

nhill
Member Wed Jun 15 18:03:03
And before CC starts calling me a gas-light (lol my fair disclosure again), I'm not defending their actions one way or the other. Just analyzing. I don't care at all.

nhill
Member Wed Jun 15 18:04:20
>But doesn't that theory only jive if they did it?

Yeah, I think it's likely undercover agents took advantage of the riots to prove their worth to the organizations they tried to infiltrate. Pretty key moment if you're trying to earn trust. Not saying they did or didn't, just that it's a reasonable move.

nhill
Member Wed Jun 15 18:05:44
If you're undercover in an organization that is part of the riots... that is not the time to lay back and act nervous. Seize the moment and do something that a "fed" would "never" do.

show deleted posts

Habebe Member	Wed Jun 15 16:02:36 Serious question, why won't the FBI answer a sitting Senators questions about Jan. 6th? He asked if any agents/informants were present. If they committed any crimes of violence there that day. And if they encouraged others to commit crimes. The answer was "Im sorry we cant comment on that" Why? Clearly the Jan. 6 committee has no respect for executive privelege. Bypassing normal channels, possibly illegally (trial pending AFAIK*) And yet we cant know a year and a half later if the FBI Whitmered this? Seems suspect as fuck.
nhill Member	Wed Jun 15 16:17:27 Undercover assets often do illegal things to maintain their cover. That doesn't necessarily mean they planned it (not saying you think that, just pointint it out). I don't think they'd blow an asset's cover, and they most likely had some in some of the groups involved, I would assume.
Im better then you 2012 UP Football Champ	Wed Jun 15 16:21:17 Habebe you should be listening to the hearings. This was an organized attack headed and for the benefit of Donald J Trump.
murder Member	Wed Jun 15 16:31:20 "Serious question, why won't the FBI answer a sitting Senators questions about Jan. 6th?" Would kind of defeat the purpose of undercover agents, don't you think? Even if they had no agents there, they wouldn't want the target groups to know that.
Habebe Member	Wed Jun 15 16:42:10 "Would kind of defeat the purpose of undercover agents, don't you think?" Aa year and a half later? No. If its worthy of prime time hearings, and imprisoning people for not breaking executive privelege without due process. You can simply say yes or no. Nhill, I get that, but I think this looks worse. And encouraging/excitement should be an easy NO. Ibty, I have skimmed, they assembled the most anti Trump senators to show edited clips and snippets of info. Does that sound like a good way to find the truth? Apply it to any other public investigation and we would all say no.
murder Member	Wed Jun 15 16:52:39 "You can simply say yes or no." Would kind of defeat the purpose of undercover agents, don't you think? Whatever the intentions of the legislator who is asking, the FBI isn't there to provide free intelligence to criminal organizations.
Habebe Member	Wed Jun 15 16:56:44 Murder, After the fact? We got the details on how the FBI was responsible for the Whitmer debacle. If a sitting Senator, like him or not, can not get the details, than why shouldn't we just figure this was another whitmer expedition?
Habebe Member	Wed Jun 15 16:57:26 Surely executive privelege is higher in respect than some FBI project.
nhill Member	Wed Jun 15 17:10:27 Even a year and a half later, it's plausible they still have active assets in organizations involved. And maybe some of them did incite the riots, would be a good way to prove their worth.
nhill Member	Wed Jun 15 17:11:31 Would you be upset to find out undercover agents played an active role in encouraging the riots?
Cherub Cow Member	Wed Jun 15 17:12:22 “This was an organized attack headed and for the benefit of Donald J Trump.” Lol “they assembled the most anti Trump senators to show edited clips and snippets of info. [/] Does that sound like a good way to find the truth? Apply it to any other public investigation and we would all say no.” Yep, this is a Bolshevik show-trial to sell Bolshevik politik to the useful idiots. It is not a fact-finding mission or a truth discovery. In an actual legal hearing wherein a chain of evidence must be procedurally admitted, they would have to sit there watching the entire un-edited videos of speeches and events. They would have to submit entire transcripts, and testimonies would include counter-claims and defense arguments. They did not do this. They presented fucking movies here — political presentations in the style of Olympia. This was heavy editing, manipulated videos, stylized transitions, and omitted defense arguments. This was designed to polarize the people who already believe the narrative and to create new audiences of propagandized citizens. It was also a false-foundation upon which the Bolshevik could justify further lies. This is a rhetorical strategy: present an argument as “true” (because the presenter allowed no counter-arguments), and then refer to that “truth” in subsequent arguments. E.g., “[As was established in the January 6th hearings…]” The most hilarious part is that the useful idiots really think this tapped them into the raw data. These people are so far gone. Even as the Party destroys them, they trust the Party.
nhill Member	Wed Jun 15 17:16:10 >Yep, this is a Bolshevik show-trial to sell Bolshevik politik to the useful idiots. It is not a fact-finding mission or a truth discovery. Similar to nearly every investigation performed by either party in the past two decades. Useful idiots on both sides of the aisle, cuz it's the same fking aisle.
nhill Member	Wed Jun 15 17:17:12 The real useful idiots are the one playing into party politics when both parties are branches of the same narrative. Marketing be like that.
Habebe Member	Wed Jun 15 17:42:24 "Would you be upset to find out undercover agents played an active role in encouraging the riots?" BLM? I wholly suspect they did. But Im also very paranoid about the rolemof alphabet boys in domestic movements. I would bet 1k LUNC they were involved in atleast some of them. Jan. 6th riot? I would also say yes, they very likely did.
nhill Member	Wed Jun 15 17:47:53 Habebe, I was wondering if it would upset you to find out undercover FBI agents played an active role in inciting the riots? Just trying to get a litmus test.
Habebe Member	Wed Jun 15 17:49:30 Upset me? I mean I wouldn't be happy about it, but I suspect. But I guess I would say yes. Upset as in displeased.
nhill Member	Wed Jun 15 17:55:41 Since that is a plausible outcome, I'm guessing they'd rather not upset people.
Habebe Member	Wed Jun 15 18:03:00 But doesn't that theory only jive if they did it?
nhill Member	Wed Jun 15 18:03:03 And before CC starts calling me a gas-light (lol my fair disclosure again), I'm not defending their actions one way or the other. Just analyzing. I don't care at all.
nhill Member	Wed Jun 15 18:04:20 >But doesn't that theory only jive if they did it? Yeah, I think it's likely undercover agents took advantage of the riots to prove their worth to the organizations they tried to infiltrate. Pretty key moment if you're trying to earn trust. Not saying they did or didn't, just that it's a reasonable move.
nhill Member	Wed Jun 15 18:05:44 If you're undercover in an organization that is part of the riots... that is not the time to lay back and act nervous. Seize the moment and do something that a "fed" would "never" do.
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: