Social Question

seawulf575's avatar

Which way do you lean on the comment of MS-13 being animals?

Asked by seawulf575 (11559points) May 18th, 2018

President Trump recently called MS-13 gang members animals. In The media and several politicians are supporting the gang members despite their history of violence. Which way do you lean on this?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

120 Answers

ragingloli's avatar

Dehumanisation is the first step on the path to a holocaust.

elbanditoroso's avatar

It isn’t a clear black and white choice the way you describe it.

MS-13 are a criminal gang. No question about that.

Calling them animals means they are not human and not in control of their actions. That’s stupid.

I absolutely think they are dangerous. I don’t support them at all. But calling them names doesn’t address the problem.

gondwanalon's avatar

Humans are animals.

I think that it is a good idea to control human animals that are involved in criminal activity.

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

I just don’t see how anyone could support gang activity.

flutherother's avatar

That was Trump backtracking. He first called all undocumented immigrants ‘animals’.

zenvelo's avatar

Trump wasn’t talking about MS-13. You need to read (or listen to) how he said what he said:

“We have people coming into the country — or trying to come in, we’re stopping a lot of them — but we’re taking people out of the country, you wouldn’t believe how bad these people are. These aren’t people. These are animals.”

This was inresponse to the Fresno County Sheriff saying he could not call ICE unless he knew they were MS-13.

No one supports letting MS_13 gang members go free. People lean towards not dehumanizing other people.

LostInParadise's avatar

Non-citizens commit crime at a lower rate. Mexican immigrants, legal and illegal, are not murderers and rapists and MS 13 represents a tiny fraction of illegal immigrants. If you are serious about reducing crime, consider going after white supremacists

elbanditoroso's avatar

@LostInParadise – when you’re a right winger hypnotized by the Trump administration, little things like facts (real facts) are not relevant,

kritiper's avatar

He should have used the word “vicious” before animals.

stanleybmanly's avatar

Unfortunately our President has relinqished all credibility when it comes to the characterization or even description of anyone or anything.

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

In The media and several politicians are supporting the gang members

That isn’t true, and saying so makes you look, at the best, foolish.

SergeantQueen's avatar

They are gang members.
Yes. They are animals.
Scum of the earth humans.
He called them what they are.
Deal with it.

Demosthenes's avatar

I lean toward not dehumanizing people, but it’s hard not to see the actions of some of these gang members as animalistic. We focus a lot on how criminals are labeled and portrayed, but we can’t forget about their victims.

Darth_Algar's avatar

No, he didn’t call MS-13 animals. He called immigrants animals. Any later talk about MS-13 was simply trying to spin it after the fact.

For someone who’s married two immigrants and is the child and grandchild of immigrants, you’d think he’d be a little less dehumanizing of immigrants.

filmfann's avatar

MS-13 are outlaws, and certainly deplorable, but animals? That is a characterization you make when you don’t want to allow them basic human rights.

KNOWITALL's avatar

Would kids join gangs if they had a safe home full of love and food and clean clothes? Maybe, maybe not. Gangs are a family that takes care of each other, so maybe our govt (regardless of the party in the WH) should focus on helping them instead of namecalling.

elbanditoroso's avatar

@KNOWITALL maybe the government is a gang as well, just a different sort with more powerful weapons.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@elbanditoroso We elected our govt gang though.

ragingloli's avatar

Not the current one.

KNOWITALL's avatar

Well yes, we the people of the US did. Guess that’s what happens when the Dems were in for eight years.

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

Guess that’s what happens when the Dems were in for eight years.

What happens?

ragingloli's avatar

The current one was appointed by the electoral college.

stanleybmanly's avatar

we’re rewarded with Trump. I’m waiting to see if the big joke can last a full term.

seawulf575's avatar

Just to set the record straight, my take on President Trump calling MS-13 gang members, as opposed to all immigrants, comes from the entire context of the conversation he was having. He was speaking with Fresno County Sheriff Margaret Mims who voiced concerns and frustrations about California’s sanctuary laws and how they impacted her ability to get the MS-13 gang members off the street for good. He responded to that question. He did not say all immigrants were animals, nor did he imply it. And that is one part of this question. I’m always fascinated in seeing how people will try to spin things. The other part is to see how people fall into this discussion….is calling these ultra violent gang members animals offensive, is it wrong to try supporting these gang members just to come up with some slam on the President….that sort of thing.

LostInParadise's avatar

@zenvelo ‘s quote from Trump makes it very clear that he was not referring to MS 13. I don’t see how you arrived at your interpretation. This is the same president that labeled illegal Mexican immigrants as killers and rapists.

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

I’m always fascinated in seeing how people will try to spin things

Says the guy dishonestly stating that others are offended and supporting the gangs.

Yellowdog's avatar

The conversation was clearly about MS-13 Gang Members.

Using your same logic, he might have been talking about Native Americans, the Chinese, or Cats and Dogs. If the discussion is about MS-13, you can be assured that every reference about the gangs is about MS-13 and the subject hasn’t changed

The other reference one of you brought up—the reference to calling Mexicans Rapists and Killers was when he said, “They’re not sending us their average citizens. They’re sending… their killers, their rapists .. their drug cartels… ”

Some of you on Fluther tried to spin this into, “They’re Killers. They’re rapists” ...
Its a really desperate mission to take every possible opportunity to spin something into something slanderous and libelous.

LostInParadise's avatar

How do you interpret Trump’s remarks on killers and rapists? He is clearly saying that illegal immigrants are killers and rapists.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@ragingloli Which is how our elections work here.

”..sometimes Presidents fail to win a majority, but still are considered successes as President, such as Bill Clinton (took less than 50% the vote in both 1992 and 1996, but remains popular today).”

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-electoral-college-history-20161219-story.html

@Call_Me_Jay After eight years of Obama and Democrats, it was obviously going to favor a Rep.
https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/historic-re-election-pattern-doesnt-favor-democrats-in-2016

seawulf575's avatar

@Call_Me_Jay before you get your panties in a wad, take a breath. I haven’t slammed anyone at all. We all spin things….that is part of being human. Spinning is nothing more than expressing your interpretation of something…an event, a statement…whatever. The only time I truly have a hard time with spinning things is when it comes to the media. If you are going to report news, then do that. If you are going to express opinion, do that. But don’t report opinion or half-truths and try passing it as fact or news.

seawulf575's avatar

@LostInParadise Do you really listen to yourself? One jelly said something so it must be true, therefore another jelly must be wrong. That is effectively what you said. Here is an article where even CNN and The Associated Press admit they took his statements out of context.

https://www.thewrap.com/cnn-took-trumps-animals-remark-immigrants-context-network-admits/

Here is a better view of how things went down:

http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/article211264649.html

As for interpreting his comments about killers and rapists, I suspect you need to go back and, again, look at the actual statement: ”“DONALD TRUMP: When do we beat Mexico at the border? They’re laughing at us, at our stupidity. And now they are beating us economically. They are not our friend, believe me. But they’re killing us economically.

The U.S. has become a dumping ground for everybody else’s problems.

Thank you. It’s true, and these are the best and the finest. When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.

But I speak to border guards and they tell us what we’re getting. And it only makes common sense. It only makes common sense. They’re sending us not the right people.

It’s coming from more than Mexico. It’s coming from all over South and Latin America, and it’s coming probably— probably— from the Middle East. But we don’t know. Because we have no protection and we have no competence, we don’t know what’s happening. And it’s got to stop and it’s got to stop fast.”

So how do YOU interpret that? And why do you interpret it that way?

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

@seawulf75 My panties are not in a wad and that’s a lame childish attempt at an insult.

You’re typing dishonest nonsense. Which is common. I just pointed it out.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@seawulf575 But that’s the part they always deny, that any of those undocumented illegals (from anywhere) would hurt anyone or be hiding anything in their background, which is a big lie.

Trump has probably made the State Dept put this up on the State website, too, for many many years it’s been the same caution. I have nothing against a legal immigrant, but we NEED TO KNOW who is here and why.

“Exercise increased caution in Mexico due to crime. Some areas have increased risk. Read the entire Travel Advisory.

Violent crime, such as homicide, kidnapping, carjacking, and robbery, is widespread.”

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

I know lots of undocumented people. They work hard. They have no criminal records.They pay a lot of taxes.

Trump’s comments are designed to stir up the fear and hysteria and confirm the prejudices of conservative whites.

It works, as we see here.

Yellowdog's avatar

A conversation or discussion of MS-13—which is a VERY serious threat to IMMIGRANTS (illegal and otherwise) will continue to be about MS-13 and does not skip over to other immigrant groups.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@Call_Me_Jay Oh mylanta….do you think my husband hasn’t had a million friends in the construction business who were good people? That doesn’t mean there aren’t a few bad apples in the mix that need handled. See below, Of 78, 62 had CRIMINAL CONVICTIONS. I mean you aren’t going to go through all these cases and deny the reality that there are bad people of every race, from China to Guatemala.

We aren’t the ones in denial. I don’t know all the jellies here, but I’m pretty certain the ones I know and care about wouldn’t defend child molesters and child pornographers.

05/15/2018

MINNEAPOLIS, MN

ENFORCEMENT AND REMOVAL
Image Icon
ICE arrests 78 criminal aliens and immigration violators in enforcement surge in 5 Midwest states
During this operation, ERO deportation officers made arrests in the following states: Iowa (25), Nebraska (25), Minnesota (15), South Dakota (10) and North Dakota (3). Of the 78 arrested, 62 had criminal convictions. Seventy-two men and six women were arrested; they range in age from 20 to 64 years old.

05/14/2018

WASHINGTON, DC

WORKSITE ENFORCEMENT
Image Icon
ICE worksite enforcement investigations already double over last year
From Oct. 1, 2017, through May 4, HSI opened 3,510 worksite investigations; initiated 2,282 I-9 audits; and made 594 criminal and 610 administrative worksite-related arrests, respectively. In comparison, for fiscal year 2017 – running October 2016 to September 2017 – HSI opened 1,716 worksite investigations; initiated 1,360 I-9 audits; and made 139 criminal arrests and 172 administrative arrests related to worksite enforcement.

05/10/2018

CORPUS CHRISTI, TX

CHILD EXPLOITATION

2 Southeast Texas men sentenced to years in federal prison for separate cases of possessing child pornography
Rogelio Castaneda, 61, and Jose Ivan Davila, 54, pleaded guilty, Jan. 23, in separate but similar cases.

05/10/2018

CORPUS CHRISTI, TX

CHILD EXPLOITATION

Southeast Texas convicted sex offender charged with possessing child pornography
The criminal complaint alleges that in July 2017, Manuel Diaz, 64, from Corpus Christi, printed photographs of nude children from a flash drive at a pharmacy. A subsequent forensic examination allegedly resulted in discovering more than 850 pornographic images and videos of children as young as 12 years old.

https://www.ice.gov/news/all

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

@KNOWITALL So five examples proves your point? Do you think I can’t find five examples of white American criminals from the past day?

Undocumented immigrants commit crimes at a lower rate than US citizens. You don’t accept that because it doesn’t play to your prejudices.

I’m pretty certain the ones I know and care about wouldn’t defend child molesters

I believe you were a Roy Moore supporter, correct?

Yellowdog's avatar

So, criminals get a pass because they are illegal aliens?

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

Nobody said give criminals a pass. It’s a straw man. Sad you would stoop to that.

Darth_Algar's avatar

@Yellowdog

Do you ever tire of boxing the scarecrow?

Yellowdog's avatar

No, Just putting it back together again But what does that have to do with MS-13

Was Knowitall supposed to list eighteen thousand examples? Or were those five not a good representative sample?

Christian Neighborhood Centers and United Methodist Neighborhood communities in my city deal with a LOT of child abuse situations and a lot of drugs flow through these “immigrant” communities. Most of the terror stays within their own communities. But crime IS rampart in the illegal immigrant communities, and the drugs are killing people beyond those who bring them in.

But this is a discussion of MS-13—who cut their enemies up slowly and rape/terrorize mostly immigrants. They aren’t strawmen and they don’t get a pass.

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

Another white teen murdered his schoolmates in a high school shooting today. They’ve killed dozens this year, more than the number of US military deaths.

@Yellowdog Your people commit most of the crime in the US. Why should good people tolerate this?

Yellowdog's avatar

Who are my “people” ? I’m a Yellow Dog

MrGrimm888's avatar

Trump doesn’t even believe lots of what he says. This is just him pandering to his base. Maybe he’ll be making another push for the stupid wall soon. So. He needs his people afraid, so they will support him.

Illegal immigrants are often the ones having crimes committed on them. They carry cash, and are usually reluctant to talk to police. It’s our good ol’ normal Americans, that are robbing, raping, and killing them.

I like how Trump repeats that Mexico is “sending” these people. His base is clueless… He talks to them like children…

seawulf575's avatar

@MrGrimm888 a couple notes: First – If President Trump is just pandering, I will say his pandering has been amazingly consistent for almost 2 years. Unusual for politicians when they are pandering. Second – you are coming off as being arrogant and condescending. Remember, the President was not a career politician. He didn’t start with “a base”. And he got elected. That means about half the country at least is “his base”. You talk about half the country as if they are mindless children. Ever wonder why Hillary was so unpopular?

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

Ever wonder why Hillary was so unpopular?
She got more votes than your hero.

MrGrimm888's avatar

I don’t support, or care about Hillary.

Yes. Trump gas been consistent. His base only has a few trigger points. It’s not hard to stay on them. The Republican party has been using the same strategy on conservatives, and Christians, for years. The consistency, is from conservatives being consistently gullible to republican manipulation.

You contradict yourself, in your own post. You say his pandering has been “unusual for ’politicians’ when they are pandering.”

Then you say that the “president was not a career ”politician.”

He is indeed a politician. And aside from his several talking points that stir his base, he changes his story ALL THE TIME. Whenever he thinks it suits him, and his base doesn’t even hold him accountable.

If you actually listenedto the idiot, you’d realize that it is he who is condescending. He talks to his base as if they are REALLY stupid. Lots of simple words, and repetition. Have you really never noticed that he says words like “strong, weak, terrible, huge, bad, good, horrible, terrific, great, etc” over and over again to his crowds? He thinks they’re stupid. Or he’s stupid, or both. Why would you respect a man who is obviously playing you?

As far as starting with a base, he started with the same people, following the same lies, and the same strategy worked. The GOP has got it’s base figured out. It isn’t hard… Fear mongering, mixed with dangling fake Christian support, gets them a good chunck of easily manipulated conservative votes.

And yes. Hillary did only lose to the Electoral College. Not to Trump, or the third of deplorable “Americans,” who support him.

Ever wonder why Trump is SO popular, with conservatives? Because he’s good at lying to them…. And they love it….

ragingloli's avatar

@Call_Me_Jay
She calls him “daddy”.

seawulf575's avatar

@MrGrimm888 So you double down on your arrogance. And you try to misquote me. You are a sad example of what is wrong with this country. Arrogant people that cannot quote others correctly in their effort to be right. Imagine how nice the world would be if there were less arrogance in the world?

si3tech's avatar

’@seawulf575 They’re animals. As are other illegal militant extremists.

Aethelwine's avatar

Trump received just under 63 million votes. That’s not half the country. Half of our country is not his base. We can barely get half of our eligible voters to turn up to vote.

seawulf575's avatar

@Aethelwine That is true. But lets be honest…Hillary did not get half either. To be fair, only about half of eligible voters turned out. It still doesn’t change the comment. Think about what was being said. Listen to the comments about “Trump supporters” and think about how those making the comments are denigrating 63 million people. Apparently denigrating anyone that supports the President is okay, but denigrating ultraviolent gang members isn’t, because they are here illegally. That is a grand answer to the original question.

Demosthenes's avatar

I think Trump does tend to focus on MS-13, even though they are a small minority of illegal immigrants, but it’s definitely dishonest to say that Trump was calling all illegal immigrants animals; it’s pretty obvious that he was referring to MS-13. Just as Trump did not call all Mexicans rapists and Hillary did not call all Trump supporters deplorables. People only hear what they want to hear.

stanleybmanly's avatar

The point is that you cannot believe him or take seriously anything he says. The pointlesss, insensitve mean things in particular distinguish this President from all others, and of course the considerable numbers of those we politely label “low information” supporters gobble that stuff up. I don’t care how arrogant or elitist it might sound, you’ll get nowhere trying to deny that the nation’s morons are solidly ensconced in the Trump camp.

MrGrimm888's avatar

@seawulf575 . Trump supporters denigrate themselves. I also fail to see how using your direct quotes, is misquoting you.

Many MS-13 members are legal citizens.

In addition, I never hear conservatives upset about the KKK, or neo nazis. Not a peep. Trump is keeping conservatives focused on a Mexican gang, because he wants his stupid wall.

seawulf575's avatar

@MrGrimm888 You take selective words or phrases and apply them to try giving a different meaning. I stated the President WAS not a career politician. He didn’t start with a base. You take the statement that he was not a career politician and say I am contradicting myself because he IS a politician. No, I’m not contradicting myself. When he first entered the presidential race, he was not a politician. That is a fact. Not being a politician means he didn’t have a “base” to play to. That is a logical conclusion. So really, everyone that voted for him could be considered his base. That is about half the people that voted…as @Aethelwine pointed out, that is about 63 million people. Now he is president, that makes him a politician by definition, don’t you think? And every time he says something you accuse him of “just pandering to his base”. That is how you misquoted me…taking phrases out of context to try saying I was contradicting myself. After all, if you can say I was contradicting myself, you can take some of the sting out of my comment. Facts are facts, sorry.
And still your arrogance lets you broadbrush 63 million people in some frantic effort to be right. You continue to make my statement hold true. Carry on, dude. It isn’t me that you are hurting…it is yourself.

Darth_Algar's avatar

@seawulf575

On the contrary, Trump had been building up a base for years with birther nonsense.

seawulf575's avatar

@Darth_Algar you are missing the point of a “base”. It is the core group of voters for a candidate. He was not a candidate until he ran for president, hence my comment that he was not a career politician. If you are claiming that the common thread his base has is that they believe the thought that Obama’s birth certificate was a fake or that he was not a natural born citizen AND that they fully supported him solely for that reason, that may not be as big a group as you think. That is what your comment would imply you were saying. So to make claims like he is “pandering to his base” is just foolishness designed to try ridiculing Likewise, saying it took him years to attract voters that felt that way is equally foolish. Orly Taitz started with the birther movement long before Trump did. Those people that fall into your definition of “birther” were there long before Trump was a candidate.

So what is it…you and @MrGrimm888 are worried about a base that really is insignificant or doesn’t exist or are you both just trying to find some way to slam the President?

stanleybmanly's avatar

Here’s the deal about this discussion on base in this era of heated factionalism. When it comes to Trump supporters and detractors, both camps have their logical adherents. For example, the friend or relative of any undocumented alien is likely to be a Trump detractor. On the other hand, all birthers, pseudo fascists, conspiracy theorists, birthers, Obama as Muslim proponents, Hillary as the devil propheciers, survivalists, misogynists, illiterates, slow thinkers, secessionists, rapture enthusiasts, bible thumpers —get the picture? Those numbers add up. And if Trump is not pandering to these people—that is if he truly BELIEVES (as he says) that Obama was born In Kenya or bugged his hotel, he is clearly delusional. So which is it to be? Either the man has so distorted a relationship with the truth that he doesn’t know when he’s clearly lying, or he’s crazy as a bedbug. Either way, he’s CLEARLY unfit for public office.

Darth_Algar's avatar

@seawulf575

Spin it however you like, regardless he is a politician now, he does have a base that he panders to, whether you wish to accept that or not.

Yellowdog's avatar

Trump WAS bugged and wiretapped. That information was revealed early in the Trump presidency. How do you think Flynn was accused / apprehended?

There also was a mole in the Trump campaign. That was in a NYT article also. Many in the FBI and DOJ have discussed it now, even on CNN.

seawulf575's avatar

@Darth_Algar make statements all you want. Care to define that base that Trump is pandering to? That sort of is at the heart of my comment to @MrGrimm888. From the best I can gather from jellies on this site, such as yourself, the Trump base is enormous, but their actual make up is nebulous. From the usage in sentences, I gather that you all view “Trump supporters” and “Trump’s base” to be synonymous and that you view them all to be Neanderthals. Please…enlighten us all…describe Trump’s base. Odds are that you will exhibit all the same arrogance as @MrGrimm888 OR you will entirely dodge the challenge.

seawulf575's avatar

@stanleybmanly from that comment I gather you are in the side of the original question that it facts don’t really matter…that it doesn’t matter what is on the other side of the debate, you will always be against Trump. So I assume you are offended that anyone would call another human being an animal. Thank you.

stanleybmanly's avatar

@Yellowdog So Obama either bugged Trump’s house or planted a mole there?

Yellowdog's avatar

The New York Times this week disclosed that the FBI made a conscious effort to use secret counterintelligence powers to investigate Trump officials and may have had a confidential informant who was used in connection with key Trump figures long before the November 2016 election. (Officials stated anonymously that this was a longstanding source who worked with both the FBI and CIA for years.)

In early 2017, President Trump was widely ridiculed for alleging that the Obama administration placed his campaign under surveillance. The response from experts on CNN and other sites was open mockery. Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper came forward to assure the media that he could categorically deny the allegation and stated, “There was no such wiretap activity mounted against the president, the president-elect at the time, or as a candidate, or against his campaign.” The range of media analysis seemed to run from whether Trump was a clinical paranoid or a delusional demagogue.

We now know there was, indeed, surveillance ordered repeatedly on Trump campaign figures before and after the election. Rather than acknowledge the troubling implications of an administration investigating the opposing party’s leading candidate for president, the media shifted to saying that there was ample reason to order the surveillance.

That remains to be seen but much of the coverage brushes over the fact that no charges were brought against the principal target, Carter Page, or that the secret warrants for surveillance were based in part on a dossier paid for by Hillary Clinton’s campaign, a fact known but not fully disclosed by the FBI to the secret FISA court. The documented Russian interference, thus far, has been largely a Russian operation out of St. Petersburg that special counsel Robert Mueller’s team has said was carried out without the knowledge of Trump campaign officials.

Now the plot has thickened even further with the added disclosure of not just national security letters to gather documents related to Trump figures but also at least one confidential informant who met with campaign figures like Page and George Papadopoulos to gather information. In response to the New York Times report, Trump declared that the FBI planted “at least one” spy in his campaign to frame him. Trump counsel Rudy Giuliani ratcheted up the rhetoric and said, if the story is true, that former FBI Director James Comey should be prosecuted.

The record does not currently support such a criminal conspiracy. However, if Trump and his counsel can be accused of overplaying the known facts, the media can be equally accused of ignoring the implications of the known facts. It should be a serious concern that the Obama administration used secret counterintelligence powers to target officials in the campaign of the opposing party. That is a practice we have widely criticized in other countries from Turkey to Russia to Iran.

Worse yet, the New York Times wrote that the decision was made to use the secret FISA court and counterintelligence personnel to conceal the operation for political purposes. According to the report, FBI officials consciously decided not to seek conventional criminal warrants or pursue a criminal investigation because it might be discovered and raised by Trump during the campaign. Thus, as Trump campaigned against the “deep state,” FBI officials hid their investigation deeper inside the state. FISA was not designed as a convenient alternative for the FBI and the Justice Department to avoid political costs or scrutiny.

The added problem with using a counterintelligence operation is that it is easier to launch and conceal than a criminal investigation. While there is a “probable cause” requirement under FISA, it is not the same as the one contained in the Fourth Amendment. Virtually every FISA application ever filed by the Justice Department has been granted, with a couple of exceptions. The FISA investigation was based on loose claims of foreign influence and a little cognizable evidence of actual crimes.

For his part, Page continues to maintain that he accepted standard contracts to work with the Russians, as have hundreds of people in Washington. Clearly, the FBI should investigate any serious criminal conduct linked to Trump figures or the campaign. However, the publicly released FISA material describes interactions with Russians that could have applied easily to myriad other “Beltway bandits” who regularly cash in on foreign contracts, including leading figures of both parties. The still unresolved question is why these particular allegations of foreign contacts merited the extraordinary decision to target an opposing party’s campaign or campaign figures before a major election.

There may have been legitimate reasons to investigate Russian influence before the election. Yet, very serious concerns are raised by the targeting of an opposing party in the midst of a heated election. These concerns will be magnified by the use of a confidential source to elicit information from Trump campaign associates, though officials deny that the FBI actually had an informant inside the campaign.

As shown by many of the emails and later criminal referrals and disciplinary actions at the FBI, an open hostility to Trump existed among some bureau figures. Moreover, the extensive unmasking of Trump figures and false statements from FBI officials cannot be dismissed as irrelevant.

As a nation committed to the rule of law, we need a full and transparent investigation of these allegations. All of the allegations. That includes both the investigation of special counsel Mueller and the investigation of these latest allegations involving the FBI. For many Trump supporters, this new information deepens suspicions of the role of the “deep state.” If we ever hope to come out of these poisonous times as a unified nation, the public must be allowed to see the full record on both sides.

stanleybmanly's avatar

@seawulf575 Before assuming (again) what I think, read what I SAID. I’m not offended that Trump calls people animals. I’m not offended that he of all people calls Hillary crooked or Obama a Kenyan national. What would be the point?

flutherother's avatar

@Yellowdog The Mueller investigation is ongoing and it seems premature to claim it to be biased before it presents its evidence and reports its findings. I can understand why Trump might want to pre-emptively discredit the FBI but why would you as an American citizen want to?

seawulf575's avatar

@flutherother I don’t know about @Yellowdog, but for me it would be that the Mueller investigation is tainted from the start. The investigation team is all Democrats, the lead FBI agent on the team has a documented hatred of Trump, there has been ample evidence of wrongdoing on the part of Hillary Clinton and the DNC…possibly all the way to Obama…and it has purposely ignored that evidence. It uses a broad brush to paint the interpretation of the focus of its creation to allow investigation into anything and everything, yet shies away from anything that points towards all the wrongdoing that is popping up at every turn, including all the shady dealings of the FBI. In other words, it’s a witch hunt and cannot reasonably be expected to produce a single hint at anyone other than President Trump.

stanleybmanly's avatar

Mueller is a life long registered Republican

Yellowdog's avatar

Rosenstein advised Trump to fire Comey, the Mueller, a close friend of Comey, is commissioned to investigate Trump.

There has never been any crime to investigate, yet they are going after anything to get those close to Trump to “cooperate”

Everyone on the Mueller team has demonstrated and written about a profound hatred of Donald Trump and support for Hillary Clinton. At least five were attending Hillary’s “Victory” event on election night.

I think a lot will be revealed in the upcoming Inspector General’s report. Hillary had cooperation with Russians and Ukraine sources through Fusion GPS, then there’s that glaring Christopher Steele Dossier thing that isn’t going away that involves a link between Hillary and Russia— Mueller has had no interest in that, even though the paper trail is undeniable

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

@Yellowdog Just to set the record straight, according to you:

1)
Donald Trump is an honest, honorable man

2)
You trust Donald Trump speaks the truth

Correct? Yes or no? Not a trick question, simply state your beliefs.

Yellowdog's avatar

What I believe about (A) and (B) is largely irrelevant, probably to you even more than me.

What IS relevant is, for the first time in American history, we had a sitting president (Obama) surveilling and spying on the opposing political party, using our tools of intelligence, put into place for national security and terror suspects. This is far more serious than anything alleged about Trump and Russia, which is obviously going nowhere because it was a lie from the beginning.

I have suspected this for a long time. The soon-to-be-released Inspector General’s report I hope will reveal more.

Its time for Trump to declassify everything and lay bare just what’s been going on. Its time for some high ranking Government and F.B.I. officials to go to prison.

What Trump says that you say are “lies” don’t matter because HE won’t be the judge over the misconduct

Darth_Algar's avatar

An individual with the campaign being investigated is not the same as the campaign itself being investigated.

Yellowdog's avatar

A LOT of private individuals were illegally surveilled, spied upon, unmasked, and leaked.

MrGrimm888's avatar

Uugh… SMH. Trump was exactly the type of person that the FBI should have been investigating. A big part of their purpose, is to track such people. They didn’t force him to have multimillion dollar deals with Russian oligarchs. Trump had burnt many financial bridges, and in his desperation was in business with VERY shady people. Time to investigate him. Period….

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

@Yellowdog Thanks for confirming in an evasive weaselly way that you know Trump is dishonest. Also for confirming the value of your word.

Darth_Algar's avatar

@Yellowdog

When a judge signs off on the warrant it is, by definition, not illegal.

Yellowdog's avatar

It is illegal if false information was used to obtain the warrant.

It was presented as legitimate intelligence collected by the FBI

It was in fact a product of an organization named Fusion GPS—written by a former British spy, Christopher Steele, in collusion with Russia.

It was paid for by Hillary Clinton.

seawulf575's avatar

Isn’t it interesting that I asked a question about how the jellies stand on a topic between Trump calling MS-13 animals and the media and liberal politicians sticking up for MS-13 just to slam Trump…and we all end up in a Mueller/FBI/Trump/Hillary debate? Does that not speak volumes about how we view things we see in the media? We get polarized on one side or the other to the point that it really doesn’t matter what the topic is, we will debate just to show Trump is an ass or that he isn’t.

Yellowdog's avatar

What I think is odd is that the glaring corruption and illegalities on the Obama / Hillary side have reached a level unheard of in American government. There are dozens of people who should and possibly will be indicted and go to prison.

And yet there are STILL those who think Trump is the real criminal and everything else is just a distraction.

tinyfaery's avatar

That’s offensive to non-human animals. The beings we share our planet with are by far more humane than most people.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@Call_Me_Jay I’m not in Alabama, nor was I ever a Roy Moore supporter.

And I linked you to the ICE site so you could read all the examples for yourself.

Here’s another, illegal versus autistic girl. These things happen with all races, i’m sure, but anyone who denies that some illegals could be criminals is delusional.
http://www.ozarksfirst.com/news/trial-date-set-for-2017-kidnap-and-rape-case/1190751398

*And just fyi, I think implying I’m in any way a supporter of child molestation is below the belt and low brow. You are no longer worth talking to as far as I’m concerned. Everything I said was respectful to all races, factual with link provided. Shame on you.

MrGrimm888's avatar

I’ve never heard anyone denying that some portion of illegals are criminals. That would indeed be delusional.

Trump goes out of his way to represent the majority of them, as being criminals. He also seems to indicate that Mexico is somehow organizing all of their criminals, and sending them here. Another completely ridiculous, and baseless claim.

@KNOWITALL . For the record. I can’t recall seeing anything in any of your posts, suggesting that you support child molestation, or any other sexual misconduct.

I suppose I could say Trump supporters overlook, what is likewise a past of being a sexual predator. But I don’t consider that “support.” Especially since Trump has not been found guilty in a court of law, of anything (yet.) As with most of my beliefs about Trump, it is what comes from his own mouth, that makes him a likely sexual predator.

Yellowdog's avatar

MrGrimm: Someone called her a Roy Moore supporter. The implication is that she supports child molesters.

Roy Moore, when he was in his mid thirties, dated and inappropriately touched teenaged girls. Or so the story goes. This was many decades ago. His excuses really embarrassed his supporters..Like, he had their parents permission to date the girls.

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

I was wrong to say @KNOWITALL was a Moore supporter. That is not true. My mistake.

However, in the Alabama Senate race, Roy Moore won the votes of :

89% of Trump supporters
– and -
80% of self-described evangelical and/or born again voters
– and -
97% percent of Moore voters said one reason was to “express support for Donald Trump”.

That’s your team, conservatives. Child molesters, torch-carrying white supremacists, and Russian assets are all welcome and celebrated in your party.

You’re doing more damage to America than any group that you’ve been trained to hate and demonize.

Yellowdog's avatar

Call Me Jay:

Can you give any examples of Republicans who are child molesters? Every Anthony-Weiner style sexting ring on government computers or latest Hollywood / News Media child molesting or inappropriate touching of women scandal has been on the Democrat side. Sorry.

Torch Carrying White Supremacists—well, they seem to be extinct, But the KKK was a Democrat organization when they did those things. I know that the current Democratic party has abandoned the White Supremacist position, but the modern Democrat party only exists because it stands on their shoulders. David Duke pledged support of Trump, but look at the alternatives and it is understandabe

Russia—well, the American Left was in love with the Soviet Union, Ortega;s Nicaragua, Cuba, and other Soviet enclaves in South and Central America—and many still DO defend Communism in Africa and have done so on even on Fluther The Left was quite cozy with Russia until it became a convenient scapegoat to blame loosing the election, still there has been no evidence on the Trump side but a lot from when Hillary was Secretary of State, right up through the Steele dossier which was from Russian sources.

I am at least honest about Roy Moore’s dating and touching girls in their mid to late teens when he was in his thirties. Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh never thought he was a good pick—it was Hannity that exposed this to the world. but Moore talked the talk so he got the nomination, and not many Trump supporters would vote. That’s why he lost.

Although I would never be so low as to call you a supporter of the things you accuse me of, it is quite disingenuous to accuse someone when your own side is quite steeped in history of these things—child porn, sexting of minors, and Russia extending into comparatively recent times.

Your apology to Knowitall is likewise disingenuous with the context that followed.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@Yellowdog That’s about as good as it gets on this site, buddy. Sad but true. What’s worse is many of these people believe every word they’re saying, then still wonder why Trump was elected. smh

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

Just for one of the ridiculous “arguments” above, the American left wasn’t in love or supporting the Soviet Union. That is a dumb, baseless claim. It shows real ignorance.

In comparison:
Trump’s National Security advisor and his campaign manager have been indicted for bringing Russians into their circle. His personal lawyer will certainly be indicted soon.

Trump Jr. is known to have met with Russians to collaborate on opposition research. And Trump himself publicly asked Russia to hack into American email accounts.

But I know that will not shake your beliefs. You’re an authoritarian follower.

Here’s some reading and some more if you are interested in gaining some self awareness.

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

@KNOWITALL

What bothers you about “people believe every word they’re saying”?

You don’t believe Roy Moore had overwhelming support of conservatives?

You don’t believe torch-carrying Trump supporters marched in Charlottesville last year?

You don’t believe high-level Trump campaign and administration people met with the Russians for help with the 2016 election?

You want to deny any of that? Show your work if you do.

seawulf575's avatar

@Call_Me_Jay Might be a good story, except what you said was “That’s your team, conservatives. Child molesters, torch-carrying white supremacists, and Russian assets are all welcome and celebrated in your party.” Conservatives did support Roy Moore. Beyond that, please fill us in, as @Yellowdog challenged, on the child molesters and torch carrying white supremacist. I would suggest that as child molesters go, the liberals have NAMBLA on their side so you might want to rethink that. As for white supremacists, they are the fringe right and are not embraced by most conservatives, including President Trump. If you know of something else, please enlighten us. Not just claims…actual facts. You do know what a fact looks like, right? You cite Charlottesville, but if you remember, there was another side to that whole story. It was that the white supremacists actually followed the law and got a permit to hold a rally. It was the liberal Antifa and BLM idiots that showed up with weapons and no permit, trying to cause trouble and get headlines, that really sparked the whole thing off. Think about it…if it was just the idiot white supremacists and no one showed to cause trouble…would you have heard about it at all? Nope. So while you are making accusations, you might want to think about the whole story.
But that is your party….Antifa and BLM. embrace it.

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

@seawulf575

Good to see you acknowledge that you see the white supremacists in Charlottesville as the your side. Your man Trump in fact called them “very fine people”.

BLM in contrast was not armed.

The people you admire were there in full-drag army-man costumes with rifles and body armor.

And the only person firing a gun was the very fine Ku Klux Klan leader found guilty for firing gun at Charlottesville rally

And your fellow proud conservative ran a car at full speed into a peaceful crowd in a terrorist attack.

Funny that you’re not honest enough to mention those things.

Yellowdog's avatar

Trump said he was sure there were very fine people on both sides—

He was referring to those to protest and counter-protest the removal of a Civil War memorial in Charlottesville..
You’ve tried to spin this many times on Fluther.

You still owe Knowitall an apology

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

He was referring to those to protest and counter-protest the removal of a Civil War memorial in Charlottesville.

Those there to protest, the torch-carriers chanting “The Jews will not replace us!”

They are loud and proud conservatives. And Republican voters. And Trump supporters.

You should step back and wonder why you are aligned with them. What does that say about your beliefs?

Darth_Algar's avatar

@Yellowdog “Can you give any examples of Republicans who are child molesters?”

Dennis Hastert.

Darth_Algar's avatar

@Call_Me_Jay

To be honest, that list reads like tabloid sensationalism. And including names like Ted Bundy or claiming that Tim McVeigh acted on an anti-gay agenda (he didn’t) and was gay himself (speculative) makes it hard to take seriously.

Demosthenes's avatar

This “which side is worse” stuff is just stupid. You’re always going to find bad people on both sides. It’s the fact that neither side will own it that bothers me. Excuses, deflections, lies…anything to not have to admit there are bad eggs among your “brethren”.

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

@Darth_Algar OK, I retract that. I got excited and copied and pasted without checking every reference.

I don’t know the process on Fluther for requesting a deletion but I request a deletion.

seawulf575's avatar

@Call_Me_Jay I acknowledge the white supremacists are fringe right. I also acknowledged that most on the right, including President Trump, don’t embrace them. But your all or nothing is amusing. So what about NAMBLA? That is left wing so that’s your group, right? What about Antifa? Again…left wing so that’s your group, right?
I notice in your excitement you completely dodged other parts of my statements. In Charlottesville…who had the legal permit to be there? Who didn’t? As for Antifa and BLM being armed, I suggest you go back and look at the pictures. You want to say BLM wasn’t armed? Then why were they marching lock step with Antifa? Not much difference there, in my book. And armed does not mean only “having a gun”. They showed up with clubs and shields and God only knows what else, carrying signs that stated they wanted to kill nazis. So which side was the provocateurs here? One group exercising their legal right to assemble, doing it within the laws of the state and city in which they were. Another group showing up to attempt to infringe on the other group’s right to assemble. Again…liberals believe they are above the law. What fine role models your side has.
Did some idiot fire a gun or run a car into the crowd? Yep. And they were condemned for those crimes. But stop and ask yourself…if Antifa and BLM had actually followed the law, would any of that happened?
So let’s recap…you can’t be honest enough to admit wrongdoing by liberals when it is painfully obvious. You can’t be honest enough to admit a whole organization of child molesters in the liberal ranks. You can’t be honest enough to even answer questions that are put to you.

@Demosthenes is exactly correct. There are bad eggs on both ends of the political spectrum. I think the difference is that conservatives don’t immediately dredge those up and say they represent the entirety of liberals. But you can’t be honest enough to even give that concession.

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

Nambla is not a left wing organization. Baseless statement, really dumb thing to type.

And in Charlottesville Nazis were marching, militias were marching, a klansman fired into the crowd, a right-wing terrorist slammed his car into a crowd…

And you see it as a Black Lives riot.

Your prejudice is clear, to put it in polite terms.

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

conservatives don’t immediately dredge those up and say they represent the entirety of liberals

Look above where a handful of crimes are listed to “prove” Mexicans are a menace.

This thread is based on a bigoted ignorant question, which repeats the racist fear and hysteria being stoked by Republicans and the right-wing media.

It hits a nerve and resonates with the prejudices of overly-emotional under-informed conservatives.

You’re being manipulated if you buy into it. And you’re contributing if you vote Republican and by typing racist nonsense here.

stanleybmanly's avatar

@seawulf575 whatever convinced you that NAMBLA is on the liberal agenda?

Yellowdog's avatar

NAMBLA is a left-wing political Civil Rights group and a part of the LGBT community. It generally gets a pass among LGBT;s because the relationships are consensual

From Wikipedia: NAMBLA’s website states that it is a political, civil rights, and educational organization whose goal is to end “the extreme oppression of men and boys in mutually consensual relationships”. According to NAMBLA, some of the organization’s positions are:

Supporting and promoting man/boy relationships: the organization says that when consensual, these relationships are not harmful or amount to child sexual abuse. They cite a controversial paper by Rind et al.
Age of consent reform: what NAMBLA describes as “empowerment of youth in all areas, not just the sexual”;

Opposition to corporal punishment, kidnapping and rape
In achieving these goals, NAMBLA aims to co-operate with the mainstream LGBT community and women’s liberation movements

Onell R. Soto, a San Diego Union-Tribune writer, wrote in February 2005, “Law enforcement officials and mental health professionals say that while NAMBLA’s membership numbers are small, the group has a dangerous ripple effect through the Internet by sanctioning the behavior of those who would abuse children”

Yellowdog's avatar

Antifa instigated the violence in Charlottesville.

The protest was over the removal of a Civil War memorial commemorating the Battle of Charlottesville, VA. Considering that the monument was commemorating an historic event, and was in its proper place and historical/educational context, removal of the monument was really stupid,

I am sure a LOT of people would protest if they weren’t afraid of violent clashes. I’m sure there WERE lots of fine people on both sides.

And I understand that liberals and black supremacists really feel good or like they’re doing something noble when they remove monuments commemorating historic events. They find them offensive and want to remake America into their own brand of Utopia,

Charlottesville is a reminder that in addition to having good people on both sides there are also those who will do violence—especially if they come with chemical torches and clubs and shields and chains and knives and signs to kill “nazis” and “fascists” — and violence leads to hysterically violent results that culminate in deaths.

Yellowdog's avatar

,And whatever you’re writing, ANTIFA instigated the violence that resulted in deaths at a peaceful protest over the REMOVAL of a MONUMENT.

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

NAMBLA is a left-wing political Civil Rights group and a part of the LGBT community.

NAMBLA is not supported by anybody but themselves.

Equating gays with pedophiles is just another piece of ignorant bigotry.

Yellowdog's avatar

I don’t think anyone does that—but NAMBLA is a Man/boy relationship advocacy group so yes, they happen to be gay and liberal.

I don’t think ANY said groups are part of a political party per se’ Its who they SIDE with politically,

seawulf575's avatar

@Yellowdog, thanks for doing their research for them. It seems @Call_Me_Jay and @stanleybmanly are really just in denial. I purposely chose NAMBLA because they are a group, like the neo-nazis, that are on one end of the political spectrum, but are pretty much shunned by others on that side of the political spectrum. The difference I have pointed out, with their support, is that those on the right can acknowledge the loons on their end, and the those on the left cannot. They just go into denial.

Darth_Algar's avatar

And yet crickets when the child molesting Republican Speaker of the House is mentioned…

Demosthenes's avatar

@Yellowdog The only death at Charlottesville was caused by a conservative, but you aren’t owning it. You’re blaming Antifa for “instigating” yet the driver of the car identified with the Right and that’s all that really matters. “But they started it!” doesn’t excuse the death that that man on your side deliberately caused. OWN IT.

This is the kind of thing I’m talking about. Neither side will own anything when someone on their side does something wrong. They find some way to blame the other side. Even as they demand that the other side do the very thing that they won’t do. How can anyone heed the demands of a hypocrite?

Yellowdog's avatar

I have never denied that someone on the “right” killed someone with an automobile at Charlottesville—but the extreme violence that escalated began with a weaponed, extremely violent assault by Antifa.

When people are coming at you every which way, like blocking a bridge and smashing your car as in the case of Black Lives Matter did in my city, you drive through the crowd and get yourself out of there. If anyone stands in your way, its you or them.

The girl killed was an innocent bystander and her mother a Trump supporter. But Antifa was swinging clubs and chains. The Klan fired a bullet. Instinct says get out of there.

Yellowdog's avatar

Also, I can’t let it get by how offensive it is that you use this girl’s death as a political commentary.

The sex stuff—what I said was in response to what YOU said about another user, whom you never apologized to except to exacerbate and add to the insult. Hollywood and your entertainment / political commentary, of which Donald Trump was once an integral part of, is full of examples of your media and Hollywood exploiting sex and perversion for ratings and entertainment. Porn and Perversion are everywhere and are not ‘sides’ —but look at the political agenda of those who proliferate it.

Darth_Algar's avatar

“Porn and Perversion are everywhere and are not ‘sides’ —but look at the political agenda of those who proliferate it.”

Like Donald Trump?

Yellowdog's avatar

Yes, Trump was a part of the culture of the Hollywood Left. You guys LOVED him and he made you a lot of money, for many years.

seawulf575's avatar

@Demosthenes You are correct. However there are two sides to this event at Charlottesville and both have fault. As I have pointed out the idiot with the gun and the other with the car were not embraced by the right. In fact, their actions were condemned. Yet in a situation such as this, you also have to account for those that showed up to cause trouble. I see no one from the left accepting fault there. I hear no one condemning them showing up with weapons, no permit, and signs calling for killing neo-nazis. So while you are pointing towards the fault of the right, you, yourself, are falling into the blame game and the avoidance of admission of fault. Slippery slope, isn’t it?

Darth_Algar's avatar

@Yellowdog

“You guys”

LOL. Yes,exactly. Everyone to the left of you politically are all part of one huge, single-minded monolithic group. Seriously, you do yourself no favors with this kind of reductionist, overly simplistic thinking.

Personally I’ve always regarded Donald Trump as an idiot and an absolute scumbag since I became aware of him back in the 1980s.

Demosthenes's avatar

@seawulf575 I’m not denying that Antifa was there to spark violence; of course they were. They wanted a violent confrontation (and I’m sure there were people on the other side who did too) and they got it. None of that is an excuse for the death that occurred though, neither is the crowd. People are more interested in scoring points for their political “team” than they are with examining the facts of what happened.

I don’t care about determining which side is worse. I only care about people acknowledging when “their own” do something wrong and not trying to transfer blame to the other side and make excuses.

KNOWITALL's avatar

This whole thing is such BS @All.

All liberals are not <Box A>, all conservatives are not <Box B>. We have got to stop thinking like that, let alone speaking it, because it’s simply not true.

When I voted for Bill Clinton it didn’t make me a cheating pervert, so maybe we should be mature adults and stay calm.

Thank you @Yellowdog for your support and decency.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther