Florida State Seminoles

[Professor Tiger]

It wasn’t very long ago that Kim was testing nuclear devices, launching missiles capable of hitting the US every few days, and threatening to attack Guam. In return, we were rehearsing air strikes on their missiles launch sites and their senior leadership. My how times have changed. At least for now, we are talking, not shooting. Millions of lives just got a reprieve. That is much better.

[hedge]

Not if one of them is yours...

[Cletus]

Nazis marching in the streets last year. Concentration camps for kids this year. Can't wait to see what's coming in 2019. The US under Trump is going great.

[Professor Tiger]

The American experiment is over.

[BigRedMan]

Low unemployment, liberals all in a tizzy...

Yup, good times.

[Cletus]

That’s quite a trade you are willing to make.

[crashcourse]

"Concentration camps for kids this year"

seriously retarded statement

they have a choice of not crossing the border illegaly. they know they will have their kids detained

hell 75% of detained kids were unaccompanied to begin with

those parents could turn there ass around they take their kids with them

where was all your angst 4 years ago?

oh yeah it wasn't there til trump took over

[crashcourse]

you want to discuss deep state Nazi shit--read over the testimony of the house intelligence committees interview with the IG and specifically Lindsay grams quotes

[sardis]

Concentration camps...yup, that's what they are.

Most of the kids detained didn't come with their parents. They were stolen or sold by their parents to exploiters to get adults in the country.

[Jungle Rat]

I feel sorry for crash

[Cletus]

Concentration camps...yup, that's what they are.

Most of the kids detained didn't come with their parents. They were stolen or sold by their parents to exploiters to get adults in the country.

Yes, concentration campos are exactly what they are.

Most of the kids didn't come with their parents? That's quite an assertion. I wonder where you heard that. Forgive me for being very skeptical about that one.

[Professor Tiger]

you want to discuss deep state Nazi shit--read over the testimony of the house intelligence committees interview with the IG and specifically Lindsay grams quotes

Along those lines, here's Trey Gowdy (Peace be upon him) slicing and dicing Horowitz (pardon the all caps; they are the original):

GOWDY: THANK YOU. THERE IS A TEXT EXCHANGE FROM AUGUST THE 8th OF 2016. IN THAT TEXT EXCHANGE SHE WROTE TRUMP IS NOT EVER GOING TO BECOME PRESIDENT, RIGHT, WITH A QUESTION MARK AND THEN RIGHT WITH A QUESTION MARK AND AN EXCLAMATION POINT IN CASE ANYBODY READING IT MAY HAVE MISSED THE POINT OF HER EMPHASIS. PETER STRUCK RESPONDED NO, NO, HE'S NOT. WE'LL STOP IT. DO I HAVE THAT TEXT EXCHANGE RIGHT?

HOROWITZ: YOU DO.

GOWDY: NOW, LISA PAGE WAS AN FBI LAWYER WHO WORKED ON THE CLINTON E-MAIL INVESTIGATION?

HOROWITZ: THAT'S CORRECT.

GOWDY: DID SHE ALSO WORK ON THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION?

HOROWITZ: SHE DID.

GOWDY: HOW ABOUT THE MUELLER SPECIAL COUNCIL TEAM?

HOROWITZ: SHE DID FOR A PERIOD OF TIME.

GOWDY: ALL RIGHT. SO WE'RE THREE FOR THREE ON HER WORKING ON THE TWO MOST IMPORTANT BURREAU INVESTIGATIONS IN 2016 AND BEYOND. NOW, IS THIS THE SAME LISA PAGE THAT ANDY McCABE USED TO LEAK INFORMATION TO A NEWS OUTLET?

HOROWITZ: SHE WAS THE INDIVIDUAL THROUGH HIM HE PROVIDED THAT INFORMATION.

GOWDY: WASN'T THERE ALSO TEXT ABOUT AN INSURANCE POLICY IN CASE TRUMP WON IN A MEETING IN ANDY'S OFFICE? SHE WAS PART OF THAT TEXT STRAIN, TOO, WASN'T SHE?

HOROWITZ: CORRECT. THAT WAS ON AUGUST 15th.

GOWDY: ALL RIGHT. SO THIS AUGUST 8 TEXT WAS NOT THE ONLY TIME FBI LAWYER LISA PAGE WAS ABLE TO USE THE TEXT FEATURE ON HER PHONE. THIS IS THE SAME LISA PAGE WHO ADMONISHED THE AGENT INTERVIEWING HILLARY CLINTON NOT TO GO INTO THAT INTERVIEW LOADED FOR BEAR BECAUSE FOREBEAR BECAUSE CLINTON MIGHT BE THE NEXT PRESIDENT AND THE SAME LISA PAGE WHO SAID TRUMP WAS LOATHSOME, AWFUL, THE MAN CANNOT BECOME PRESIDENT, CLINTON JUST HAS TO WIN IT. AND THAT TRUMP SHOULD GO "F" HIMSELF. NOW MOST OF THOSE COMMENTS WERE BEFORE THE CLINTON INVESTIGATION WAS OVER AND WE ARE SOMEHOW SUPPOSED TO BELIEVE THAT SHE DID NOT PREJUDGE THE OUTCOME OF THAT INVESTIGATION BEFORE IT WAS OVER? SHE ALREADY HAD HILLARY CLINTON WINNING. I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU CAN WIN IF YOU'RE GOING TO WIND UP GETTING INDICTED AND/OR PLEAD GUILTY OR BE CONVICTED OF A FELONY. . I THINK WE UNDERSTAND THE FIRST HALF OF THAT TEXT PRETTY WELL. SHE DIDN'T WANT TRUMP TO WIN AND WANTED CLINTON TO WIN. NOW FOR THE RESPONSE. SENIOR FBI AGENT PETER STRZOK WROTE NO, HE'S NOT, WE'LL STOP IT. NOW I THINK THIS IS THE SAME PETER STRZOK WHO WORKED ON THE CLINTON E-MAIL INVESTIGATION DO I HAVE THAT RIGHT?

HOROWITZ: THAT'S CORRECT.

GOWDY: THE SAME PETER STRZOK WHO NOT ONLY WORKED ON THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION WHEN IT BEGAN BUT WAS ONE OF THE LEAD INVESTIGATORS AT THE INCEPTION OF THE RUSSIA PROBE, DO I HAVE THE RIGHT PETER STRZOK?

HOROWITZ: THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING.

GOWDY: IS IT THE SAME PETER STRZOK WHO WAS PUT ON THE MUELLER SPECIAL COUNSEL TEAM?

HOROWITZ: YES.

GOWDY: THIS IS NOT THE ONLY TIME HE MANAGED TO FIND THE TEXT FEATURE ON HIS PHONE EITHER. THIS IS THE SAME PETER STRZOK WHO SAID TRUMP IS AN IDIOT, HILLARY SHOULD WIN, 100 MILLION TO 0. MR. INSPECTOR GENERAL, THAT ONE IS INTERESTING TO ME BECAUSE HE'S SUPPOSED TO BE INVESTIGATING HER FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE ESPIONAGE ACT AT THE TIME HE WROTE THAT IN MARCH OF 2016. HE'S SUPPOSED TO BE INVESTIGATING HER FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE ESPIONAGE ACT AND HE CAN'T THINK OF A SINGLE SOLITARY AMERICAN THAT WOULDN'T VOTE FOR HER FOR PRESIDENT. I MEAN, CAN YOU SEE OUR SKEPTICISM? THIS SENIOR FBI AGENT NOT ONLY HAD HER RUNNING, HE HAD HER WINNING 100 MILLION TO NOTHING. SO WHAT IF THEY HAD FOUND EVIDENCE SUFFICIENT TO INDICT HER? WHAT IF THEY HAD INDICTED HER? IS THIS THE SAME PETER -- HE WASN'T PART OF THE INTERVIEW OF SECRETARY CLINTON, WAS HE?

HOROWITZ: HE WAS PRESENT FOR THE INTERVIEW.

GOWDY: HUH. FOUR MONTHS BEFORE THAT INTERVIEW HE HAS HER RUNNING WINNING 100 MILLION TO 0, HE WROTE THE BIGOTED NONSENSE OF TRUMP, TRUMP IS A DISASTER, I HAVE NO IDEA HOW DESTABILIZING HIS PRESIDENCY WOULD BE, "F" TRUMP, TRUMP IS AN F'ING IDIOT, ON THE PROSPECTS OF TRUMP WINNING THIS IS AN F'ING TERRIFYING. IN ADDITION TO LIKE THE "F" WORD I THINK WE HAVE THE SAME FBI AGENT, LISA PAGE, AND THE SAME FINISH AGENT PETER STRZOK WORKING ON THE CLINTON E-MAIL INVESTIGATION, THE RUSSIA PROBE, AND ON MUELLER'S TEAM. SO WE HAVE THE RIGHT TEXT AND WE HAVE THE RIGHT PEOPLE AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE THE CHRONOLOGY RIGHT. COMEY ANNOUNCES NO CHARGES FOR SECRETARY CLINTON, RIGHT?

HOROWITZ: CORRECT.

GOWDY: JULY 28th, 2016, THE FBI INITIATES A COUNTERINTELLIGENCE INVESTIGATION INTO RUSSIA AND THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN. AND STRZOK IS NOT ONLY ON THAT RUSSIA INVESTIGATOR TO TEAM, HE'S ACTUALLY LEADING IT. THAT'S THREE WEEKS AFTER CLINTON IS EXONERATED BY COMEY, STRZOK IS LEADING AN INVESTIGATION INTO RUSSIA AND POSSIBLE CONNECTIONS WITH THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN. THAT'S ON THE 28th OF JULY. ON THE 31st OF JULY, THREE DAYS AFTER THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION BEGAN, STRZOK WROTE, DAM, THIS FEELS MOMENTOUS. THE OTHER ONE DID TOO, BUT THIS WAS TO ENSURE WE DIDN'T "F" THINGS UP. THIS ONE MATTERS BECAUSE IT MATTERS. AND IF YOU HAPPEN TO NOT KNOW NOW IMPORTANT IT IS, HE WENT AHEAD AND PUT MATTERS IN ALL CAPS, IN CASE YOU HAPPEN TO NOT FOCUS ON THE IMPORTANCE OF WHY THIS MATTERS. NOW HER INVESTIGATION WAS JUST TO MAKE SURE THEY DIDN'T "F" THINGS UP. THIS ONE, WE'RE THREE DAYS INTO IT, INSPECTOR GENERAL HOROWITZ, THREE DAYS INTO AN INVESTIGATION, BUT THIS ONE REALLY MATTERS. I WONDER WHAT HE MEANT BY SAYING THE PURPOSE OF THE CLINTON INVESTIGATION WAS TO MAKE SURE THEY DIDN'T "F" THINGS UP. BUT THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION, NO, THAT ONE WAS DIFFERENT. THAT ONE REALLY MATTERED. IT ALMOST SOUNDS, INSPECTOR GENERAL HOROWITZ, LIKE THEY WERE GOING THROUGH THE MOTIONS WITH THE CLINTON INVESTIGATION. BUT BOY, THEY SURE WERE EXCITED ABOUT THE RUSSIA ONE. THEN WE GET TO AUGUST 6th, LESSTHAN TEN DAYS AFTER THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION BEGINS AND PAGE SAYS, YOU ARE MEANT TO PROTECT THE COUNTRY FROM THAT MENACE. AND THEN WE GET TO AUGUST 8th, 2016, LESS THAN TWO WEEKS AFTER THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION EVEN BEGAN, THE LEAD FBI AGENT SAYS, HE WILL STOP TRUMP FROM BECOMING PRESIDENT. THIS IS TWO WEEKS INTO AN INVESTIGATION AND HE'S ALREADY PREJUDGED THE OUTCOME AND WE'RE SOMEHOW SUPPOSED TO BELIEVE THAT THAT BIAS WAS NOT OUTCOME DERM NATIVE. I CAN'T THINK OF ANYTHING MORE OUTCOME DETERMINATIVE THAN MY BIAS AGAINST THIS PERSON I'M INVESTIGATING WITH ONLY TWO WEEKS WORTH OF INVESTIGATING. I HAVE ALREADY CONCLUDED HE SHOULD NOT BE THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. THEN WE GET TO AUGUST 15th, JUST OVER TWO WEEKS INTO THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION, STRZOK SAYS I WANT TO BELIEVE THE PATH YOU THREW OUT, THAT THERE'S NO WAY HE GETS ELECTED BUT I'M AFRAID WE CAN'T TAKE THAT RISK. IT'S LIKE AN INSURANCE POLICY. MR. INSPECTOR GENERAL, THAT IS TWO WEEKS INTO AN INVESTIGATION AND HE IS TALKING ABOUT TAKING OUT AN INSURANCE POLICY BECAUSE HE CAN'T PHANTOM THE TARGET OF HIS INVESTIGATION POSSIBLY BECOMING THE PRESIDENT. SO I WANT TO GO BACK TO THE NO, NO HE'S NOT GOING TO BE PRESIDENT, WE'LL STOP IT. WHAT DO YOU THINK THE "IT" IS IN THAT PHRASE "WE'LL STOP IT".

HOROWITZ: I THINK IT'S CLEAR FROM THE CONTEXT WE'RE GOING TO STOP HIM FROM BECOMING PRESIDENT.

GOWDY: THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT TOO. I WONDER WHO THE "WE" IS IN THE "WE'LL STOP IT," WHO DO YOU THINK THE WE IS?

HOROWITZ: THAT'S SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE INTERPRETATIONS.... WE FOUND THREE ADDITIONAL FBI AGENTS AS WE DETAIL IN THE REPORT.

GOWDY: AND WERE ANY OF THEM WORKING ON THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION?

HOROWITZ: I'M SORRY. LET ME -- TWO AGENTS AND ONE ATTORNEY.

GOWDY: TWO OTHER AGENTS, ONE OTHER ATTORNEY, WERE THEY WORKING ON EITHER THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION OR THE MUELLER PROBE?

HOROWITZ: I BELIEVE TWO OF THE THREE WERE, BUT I WOULD HAVE TO JUST DOUBLE CHECK ON THAT.

GOWDY: THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. HOW ABOUT "FINISH IT" WHEN HE SAID, I UNLEASHED IT AND NOW I NEED TO FIX IT AND FINISH IT.

HOROWITZ: I THINK IN THE CONTEXT OF THE E-MAILS THAT OCCURRED IN AUGUST AND THE PRIOR AUGUST THAT YOU OUTLINED, I THINK A REASONABLE EXPLANATION OF IT OR REASONABLE INFERENCE OF THAT IS, THAT HE BELIEVED HE WOULD USE OR POTENTIALLY USE HIS OFFICIAL AUTHORITY TO TAKE ACTION.

GOWDY: THERE'S NO WAY HE POSSIBLY COULD HAVE PREJUDGED THE OUTCOME OF THE INVESTIGATION 24 -- MAYBE HE DID. MAYBE THAT'S THE OUTCOME DETERMINATIVE BIAS THAT MY DEMOCRAT FRIENDS HAVE SUCH A HARD TIME FINDING. IF ONE OF YOUR INVESTIGATORS TALKED ABOUT LISA PAGE AND PETER STRZOK THE WAY THEY TALKED ABOUT DONALD TRUMP WOULD YOU LEFT THEM ON THE INVESTIGATION?

HOROWITZ: NO.

GOWDY: DID YOU HAVE AN AGENT WHEN YOU WERE A PROSECUTOR WITH THIS LEVEL OF BIAS?

HOROWITZ: AS I'VE LAID OUT HERE I THOUGHT THIS THIS WAS TO THE CORE VALUES OF THE DEPARTMENT AND EXTREMELY SERIOUS.

Yet we're all supposed to believe that the FBI's investigation of Trump is fair and untainted.

[aTm]

Concentration camps...yup, that's what they are.

Most of the kids detained didn't come with their parents. They were stolen or sold by their parents to exploiters to get adults in the country.

Yes, concentration campos are exactly what they are.

Most of the kids didn't come with their parents? That's quite an assertion. I wonder where you heard that. Forgive me for being very skeptical about that one.

This problem has been an ongoing problem for most of this decade. And it involves many, many children who didn't come with their parents. There are many articles about this from 2014, the last time that this apparently became a political touchstone with the media. The mix of people showing up at the border is affected by US policy, and how best to strategically get the best result, or on perceptions of the migrants or on the part of human smuggling operations. No idea if there is something like that happening now to help get adults in, as sardis claims, but it could be true.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/20 ... l-america/

https://www.aclu.org/news/unaccompanied ... -detention

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nat ... /11423695/

etc

I am not sure, how exactly the total numbers are working out at this point, but Im fairly certain that a significant amount of the kids showing up at the border have not been separated from their families, but actually did not show up with family at all, as they have been for a good while now.

[eCat]

Concentration camps...yup, that's what they are.

Most of the kids detained didn't come with their parents. They were stolen or sold by their parents to exploiters to get adults in the country.

Yes, concentration campos are exactly what they are.

Most of the kids didn't come with their parents? That's quite an assertion. I wonder where you heard that. Forgive me for being very skeptical about that one.

We can't deport them, we can't separate them, we can't detain them, we can't prosecute them.

[Cletus]

Let them in.

[eCat]

fuck that

[Cletus]

fuck that

right, I forgot, they're brown.

Anyway, I don't know how many of these kids are showing up by themselves. I don't what is done with those kids but, given that we are dealing with the Trump admin, I'm sure they handle it in the worst possible way like, for example, the concentration camps we see popping up. That said, I'm not really sure they can handle unaccompanied minors in a much better way. The kids do need to go somewhere while their situation gets sorted out.

Setting that aside for the moment, the current outrage is about the policy of separating kids from their parents. I think these people who are seeking asylum should all be let in but I also acknowledge that there needs to be some time to process them. Taking their kids away while they do that is cruel. But, maybe these kids are being used as pawns in which case, getting the kids out of that situation would be for the best. I know that's what the admin wants people to think (and based on this thread, it looks like the message has made it to crash and sardis) but this analysis of the data seems to refute that.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pol ... ics&wpmm=1

[Professor Tiger]

for aTm:

I see the Saudi Arabian soccer team's plane had one of its engines catch fire as they left Russia, but thankfully thy landed safely. That the Russian team manhandled them is the only reason just one of the engines caught fire.

Regarding this whole children at the border thing, let's all clearly understand what is really going on here: This is all just the latest shiny object intended to distract people from the fact that the Trump economy is booming, Trump's diplomacy with North Korea has been successful so far, and the Trump-Russia collusion investigation is being methodically exposed as the criminal cabal it has always been.

That said, I am okay with making every effort to keep illegal alien families together while they are awaiting deportation. I would:

1. Bring in lots of those FEMA trailers to the border to house the illegal alien families together while their asylum paperwork is being processed before swiftly deporting them. Give them plenty of food, water, cots, porta-potties, fans, books, playgrounds, etc, but surround those new giant trailer parks with concertina wire, guard towers and guard dogs. The families will stay together and be treated humanely, which is what all the fuss is supposedly about, but none of them are going anywhere inside the United States.
2. Hire and bring in lots of DHS judges to look at their asylum paperwork before deporting them as quickly as possible. I think that's in Cruz's proposed bill.
3. Take out ads in every Mexican tv, radio and newspaper explaining that, if they try to enter America illegally with their children, they will be arrested and quickly deported with their children. US immigration will be rigorously enforced, with or without children. Quit using their children as human shields trying to get a quick and easy entrance into the United States because it will not work. It will only traumatize the children.
4. Build the Wall to make illegal entry into the US so daunting a task that only a small number of them, and nobody with children, will even try it. It's the humane thing to do.

Let them in.

Why? The United States of America cannot be the only country in the world that is not allowed to have borders and legal mechanisms to control who comes in. The idea that we should allow anyone to come in to the US, no matter who they are, at any time, and for any reason, is lunacy.

[hedge]

I wish you hadn't been allowed to come in. To life...

[hedge]

" Build the Wall to make illegal entry into the US so daunting a task that only a small number of them, and nobody with children, will even try it. It's the humane thing to do."

I'm 100% sure that you don't give a shit about what is the most humane thing to do, in any situation...