Michael Schellenberger

Rank 25 of 47
|
Score 18
7/31/2025, 3:56:45 PM
X
In reply to:
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
42d
One of those suspicious behaviors was Lynch's meeting with Bill Clinton on a airport tarmac in Phoenix.

"As his wife is under federal investigation for her use of a private email server, former President Bill Clinton met privately with U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch at the
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
42d
What’s more, FBI General Counsel James Baker, “unlike his colleagues, did not dismiss the credibility” of the Russian reports that Obama had pressured Attorney General Loretta Lynch to pressure the FBI to drop the investigation into Hillary Clinton's emails, particularly given
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
42d
In contrast to the CIA, the FBI rejected the intelligence and invented flimsy reasons not to trust it. The FBI's dismissive attitude also contrasts sharply with the FBI's credulousness toward any evidence that implictated the Trump campaign.
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
42d
The newly declassified appendix to the Durham report is game-changing. It showed that the CIA believed Russian intelligence memos, which analyzed hacked emails and alleged a Clinton Plan to vilify Trump by linking him to Russia, were credible.

"The CIA prepared a written
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
42d
The newly declassified documents on the Trump-Russia collusion hoax are a "nothingburger," say the media. But now, newly declassified intelligence strongly suggests that the FBI helped the Clinton campaign orchestrate the hoax to distract from its investigation into her email.

The statement discusses the actions of public officials in the context of a high-profile investigation, contributing to public discourse on government transparency and accountability.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement raises concerns about potential bias and manipulation in a government investigation, which could harm public trust. [-1]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    It respects privacy by focusing on public figures and their official actions, not personal attacks. [+1]
  3. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement engages in criticism of public officials' actions, which is constructive in the context of public accountability. [+1]