Mueller probes nude selfies

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
This bizarre investigation by Bungling Bob Mueller is an anti-American attempt to bring down a duly elected president. Mueller's Soviet-style tactics (minus the torture of course) has show the power of the Deep State to cavalierly ruin lives. It is eye-opening and jaw-dropping.

And farcical. Mueller's inquisition went so far astray that he investigated a nude photo from a 1981 Playboy magazine.

Mueller is investigating Guccifer 2.0 which allegedly hacked into DNC's computers. He discovered Miss Young, 63, dug this skulduggery, and sent fan messages including cybersex.


Mueller probes nude selfies



:lmao:
 

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
This Mueller thing has gone on long enough.
How can even the Democrats try to justify what is has cost and what it has done to the country.

It's time Mueller put up or shut up.
 

limblips

Well-Known Member
PREMO Member
Might I suggest that we convene a special investigation in to Mueller. Uncover every time he has purposely taken irrelevant roads in his attempt to bring down Trump, determine the cost of each vindictive dead end and require him to personally reimburse the government.
 
Reactions: BOP

Lurk

Happy Creepy Ass Cracka
And farcical. Mueller's inquisition went so far astray that he investigated a nude photo from a 1981 Playboy magazine.
. . .and look who knows all the details. [video=youtube;JHwaKNh1SGA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHwaKNh1SGA[/video]
 

Kyle

Having a Beer while the world burns!
PREMO Member
Just think of all the poor agents that stumbled upon Hillarys beaver shots!
 
Reactions: BOP

Yooper

Up. Identified. Lase. Fire. On the way.
PREMO Member
Bumping an old thread.


Binney is an interesting character who's been saying some of this since this since the various bits and pieces of this story came out.

Those who don't want this to be true will poo-poo it, those who want it to be true will promote it. My take is (from my limited experience in this area of skullduggery) that this (i.e., the mimicry) rings true. Just what is actually true (i.e., was it the CIA, if so who in the CIA, and what was the strategic purpose?) is a different story.

FWIW

--- End of line (MCP)
 
Makes sense. I assumed wikileaks, Assange, and Snowden alike (among others) were/are all CIA assets. I've met Bill before at a conference he spoke at regarding not too long after he whistle blew on what the NSA was up to. He's pretty genuine and believable, not a lot of hyperbole.
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
I've never doubted since the days of J. Edgar and the Kennedy administration that the FBI and CIA have interfered with politics either at the direction of or unknown to the White House or Congress.

The only thing that makes it a little more disturbing is that now that more is coming out - the outrage is, well - not there. At least not from the left, who when I was growing up, the CIA and the FBI were perennial boogeymen along with NSA and DIA.
 

PsyOps

Pixelated
I've never doubted since the days of J. Edgar and the Kennedy administration that the FBI and CIA have interfered with politics either at the direction of or unknown to the White House or Congress.

The only thing that makes it a little more disturbing is that now that more is coming out - the outrage is, well - not there. At least not from the left, who when I was growing up, the CIA and the FBI were perennial boogeymen along with NSA and DIA.
Who are you expecting outrage from? The government that oversees the FBI and CIA? My belief is, they are in on it too. They don't want it come out because it will expose many of them. I said it when Comey came out with his recommendation to not prosecute Hillary that doing so would expose him and a plethora of people in congress and the Obama administration. Hell, I'm convinced Hillary has all of them by the balls. If she's going down, she's taking all of them down with her. I think there are dozens (if not hundreds) in our government (every agency, and congress, and the Obama admin) that are terrified about what Durham is going to expose. I'm actually surprised Durham hasn't committed suicide by now.
 

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
Who are you expecting outrage from? The government that oversees the FBI and CIA? My belief is, they are in on it too. They don't want it come out because it will expose many of them. I said it when Comey came out with his recommendation to not prosecute Hillary that doing so would expose him and a plethora of people in congress and the Obama administration. Hell, I'm convinced Hillary has all of them by the balls. If she's going down, she's taking all of them down with her. I think there are dozens (if not hundreds) in our government (every agency, and congress, and the Obama admin) that are terrified about what Durham is going to expose. I'm actually surprised Durham hasn't committed suicide by now.
It's funny ------I think Durham is just another Boogey man and won't expose anything.
 

BernieP

Resident PIA
I've never doubted since the days of J. Edgar and the Kennedy administration that the FBI and CIA have interfered with politics either at the direction of or unknown to the White House or Congress.

The only thing that makes it a little more disturbing is that now that more is coming out - the outrage is, well - not there. At least not from the left, who when I was growing up, the CIA and the FBI were perennial boogeymen along with NSA and DIA.
that's before they were able to put their people in place.
8 years of being salted with Obama appointees. Make no mistake, most of these are low level appointees, and political hires made via relaxing CS hiring rules.
But the CS rules have always been political, preventing qualified individuals from getting hired in place of preferential treatment for certain groups.
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
But the CS rules have always been political, preventing qualified individuals from getting hired in place of preferential treatment for certain groups.
I'm not sure I would deem it "political". They do have hiring processes that are - involved, and lean heavily on Affirmative Action-like principles.
For many positions - I've talked with many people who have hired staff outside the agency - they find they can't hire the people they want. They have to restrict the interview process to the list they get, which is why they often make job requirements VERY SPECIFIC.
 

BernieP

Resident PIA
I'm not sure I would deem it "political". They do have hiring processes that are - involved, and lean heavily on Affirmative Action-like principles.
For many positions - I've talked with many people who have hired staff outside the agency - they find they can't hire the people they want. They have to restrict the interview process to the list they get, which is why they often make job requirements VERY SPECIFIC.
More or less saying the same thing.
The people doing the hiring often have to work with a list, that someone else has generated
Some agencies have more latitude.
I found it interesting that a lot of the people you talk to at the Pentagon are not military or government, they are contractors.
When it comes to hiring contractor support I have seen all kinds of games played.
In one case, when his buddies company didn't win the contract, a senior level official canceled the contract award.
A lawsuit reinstated the winner, so the official just didn't fund the contract, instead he let a services contract to his favorite group of retired sailors.
Then we all probably have witnessed the eye candy that gets hired on some of the support contracts.
The next thing you know, that eye candy is a government employee. At NAVAIR it seems the easiest jobs to do that with are "program managers" since no particular degree or experience is required.
 
Top