Can American conservatism survive intact & unadulterated?

[Lewkowski]

I think that neither Congress nor bureaucrats are above the law, and one consequence of that is that Congress may not compel bureaucrats to break laws and regulations, you ridiculous little wannabe stormtrooper. Really, you've been exceptionally dense these past few months.

Yes submitting documents to the committees that already have security clearance is clearly illegal. Try again.

[Aimless]

Yes submitting documents to the committees that already have security clearance is clearly illegal. Try again.

Those shady-as-fuck circus-clowns have requested upwards of 1,000,000 documents, and have been provided with 800,000 so far. DoJ has complied to the best of its ability and continues to comply. The DoJ has withheld some information on national security grounds, arguing that that information would endanger lives, eg. of confidential informants and other sources. Your Fox-news sourced opinions to the contrary notwithstanding, DoJ lawyers & other high-ranking officials have determined that this is permissible and appropriate even in some cases that involve dodgy Congressmen with oversight authority. Even so, they have tried to comply by sharing as much of that information as possible under their regulations.

Now I understand that you're quite taken with Nunes, Goodlatte, Gowdy etc. because they're acting just like you so often do (ie. as if their shenanigans aren't ridiculously transparent to anyone with even half a brain) but it's pretty obvious they know they don't have a leg to stand on, because they're pursuing this matter as if they were indeed legally legless. You should acknowledge the information their behaviour gives us: these people are full of shit.

[Lewkowski]

Those shady-as-fuck circus-clowns have requested upwards of 1,000,000 documents, and have been provided with 800,000 so far. DoJ has complied to the best of its ability and continues to comply. The DoJ has withheld some information on national security grounds, arguing that that information would endanger lives, eg. of confidential informants and other sources. Your Fox-news sourced opinions to the contrary notwithstanding, DoJ lawyers & other high-ranking officials have determined that this is permissible and appropriate even in some cases that involve dodgy Congressmen with oversight authority. Even so, they have tried to comply by sharing as much of that information as possible under their regulations.

Now I understand that you're quite taken with Nunes, Goodlatte, Gowdy etc. because they're acting just like you so often do (ie. as if their shenanigans aren't ridiculously transparent to anyone with even half a brain) but it's pretty obvious they know they don't have a leg to stand on, because they're pursuing this matter as if they were indeed legally legless. You should acknowledge the information their behaviour gives us: these people are full of shit.

Redaction is obviously an option to shield agents and such. The issue is being able to pick and choose what documents you give in order to slant the perspective. The bottom line is that there was clear and obvious bias within the FBI and the DOJ and you really don't care because it hurts a political opponent.

I want you to answer this question honestly.

If Trump is innocent of collusion with Russia would you want the investigation be wrapped up right now if it meant that the mid-terms would keep the Republicans in power in both parts of congress. Or would you want the investigation to continue because you think Democratic victories will be better for the country?

[Aimless]

Okay is there some sort of handy summary of which Trump admin officials, GOP congressmen and state GOP lawmakers have been indicted or are expected to be indicted or have been otherwise disgraced by legal shenanigans this past year? I'm having difficulties keeping track of them all.

Redaction is obviously an option to shield agents and such. The issue is being able to pick and choose what documents you give in order to slant the perspective. The bottom line is that there was clear and obvious bias within the FBI and the DOJ and you really don't care because it hurts a political opponent.

I want you to answer this question honestly.

If Trump is innocent of collusion with Russia would you want the investigation be wrapped up right now if it meant that the mid-terms would keep the Republicans in power in both parts of congress. Or would you want the investigation to continue because you think Democratic victories will be better for the country?

This is a stupid question. The investigation should take however long it must take if it's conducted properly. We have no reason to believe it's taking an unreasonably long time. The claim in the first paragraph is a stupid claim; it's clear that there was a strong bias against Clinton in at least one major FBI office, and this had a direct impact on the election coverage. It's stupid for another reason: if there is any anti-Trump sentiment among the US's intelligence agencies, it's becoming increasingly clear that such sentiment is fully justified.