• FishFace@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    Because ever since Kissinger the national security advisor has been the conduit between the president and intelligence agencies. And Bolton was in that position when the FBI opened the safe at Epstein’s place.

    The “conduit”? Correct me if I’m wrong but the National Security Advisor isn’t out kicking in doors when the FBI go on raids. The FBI is not an intelligence agency (it has an intelligence branch) and being the “conduit” doesn’t mean he has the ability, inclination, foresight or skullduggery to gather such “insurance policies.”

    If I said a rectangle was a square, would you say that’s only possible if every rectangle was a square?

    If you said that on a specific day the sun rose because you had prayed really hard for it to pray the previous day, I would be asking you what about all the other days when it rose without your apparent intervention.

    Reality…

    Not good enough.

    What about America in 2025 makes you write off every conspiracy as fake?

    I’m calling out your conspiracy theory thinking. Target John Bolton with an FBI investigation is a conspiracy, is a fascist abuse of power and is not, in any way, giving Trump “the benefit of the doubt.” But it’s not conspiracy theory thinking, because there’s no super secret bullshit that only a select few are smart enough to work out - it’s the regular kind of secret stuff that we can infer based on facts and evidence.

    To believe your story I have to believe that there’s a high chance John Bolton has “the Epstein list” and has kept it as insurance. You have given me no reason to believe this except that Bolton was head of - not the FBI, not the DoJ, but the National Security Council. So what? On the basis of such weak evidence you’d be saying that thousands of government officials have Epstein related “insurance”.

    You’re not, though, because you’re not actually basing this on any thought process which takes evidence into account.

      • FishFace@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Why are you joining this comment thread to do something other than offer an actual reason to believe that Bolton has an Epstein-based insurance policy, when this investigation is adequately explained the same way all of Trump’s other retaliatory abuses of power are explained?

          • FishFace@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 hours ago

            If OP is saying that the likelihood of John Bolton having snagged a copy of the Epstein files in 2019 and used them as an insurance policy against them one day being released in modified form is in the same region as that of some random sheriff, then there’d be less contention.

            It’s not obtuse to point out the distance between John Bolton and a particular FBI raid. Indeed, it’s being obtuse to say how they’re linked in some game of six degrees of Richard Bacon when the point is that the mere fact of their being in slightly overlapping circles doesn’t in the slightest way imply that Bolton both was able to and actually did make copies of evidence.

            • Madison420@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 hours ago

              No one said that has to be the scenario, you literally just made that up.

              It is, it’s literally his job to know what effects national security and that includes compromat in fact that’s the historical basis of the FBI’s intelligence involvement. There’s no six degrees, it was his job and history has taught us incidentally and accidentally withholding classified documents is fairly common with cabinet and committee members.