Should Eric Swallwell be removed from the Intelligence Committee?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Should Eric Swallwell be removed from the Intelligence Committee? I think so.

[TheReckoning]

The fact that there is even an option to vote “no” is an insult to this forum.

[Badger]

The fact that there is even an option to vote “no” is an insult to this forum.

What a bad post. Do better.

[MartinShkreliFan]

Yes, he’s a China puppet

[Interlocutor is just not there yet]

What did he do?

[TheReckoning]

The fact that there is even an option to vote “no” is an insult to this forum.

What a bad post. Do better.

You really think a guy who’s made it clear he might betray top secret information(if not directly, indirectly) for a quick bang should be on the intelligence committee?

[Badger]

The fact that there is even an option to vote “no” is an insult to this forum.

What a bad post. Do better.

You really think a guy who’s made it clear he might betray top secret information(if not directly, indirectly) for a quick bang should be on the intelligence committee?

Except, that's not at all what happened. Sounds like what's-her-face attempted to seduce him and it didn't work out. Nice try though.

[TheReckoning]

The fact that there is even an option to vote “no” is an insult to this forum.

What a bad post. Do better.

You really think a guy who’s made it clear he might betray top secret information(if not directly, indirectly) for a quick bang should be on the intelligence committee?

Except, that's not at all what happened. Sounds like what's-her-face attempted to seduce him and it didn't work out. Nice try though.

Except it did work out.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

He's obviously an operative for Xi.

[GeneralMacArthur]

Someone who was a Chinese spy targeted him (because he's on the intelligence committee) trying to seduce him and get information out of him.

He didn't betray any information, and the seduction didn't work.

In my eyes, that makes him an extremely GOOD fit for the intelligence committee.  He's proven that he's very much NOT vulnerable to foreign intelligence operations .

Compare to the countless Republican Congressmen who were targeted by Maria Butina and thought they might get to f--k her.  How much intelligence did they give her?  We'll never know.

But anyway, what a stupid thread.  Unfortunately, Fox News knows full well that if you say the words "Chinese spy" "Honeypot" "Extract information" in a sentence with the name of a member of congress, that's all idiot Republicans need.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Someone who was a Chinese spy targeted him (because he's on the intelligence committee) trying to seduce him and get information out of him.

He didn't betray any information, and the seduction didn't work.

In my eyes, that makes him an extremely GOOD fit for the intelligence committee.  He's proven that he's very much NOT vulnerable to foreign intelligence operations .

Compare to the countless Republican Congressmen who were targeted by Maria Butina and thought they might get to f--k her.  How much intelligence did they give her?  We'll never know.

But anyway, what a stupid thread.  Unfortunately, Fox News knows full well that if you say the words "Chinese spy" "Honeypot" "Extract information" in a sentence with the name of a member of congress, that's all idiot Republicans need.

If all this is true I change my mind on the matter.

[The Houstonian]

He should be removed and then placed on the Unintelligence Committee.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

He should be removed and then placed on the Unintelligence Committee.

That'd be a great committee for Tim Ryan to chair.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Someone who was a Chinese spy targeted him (because he's on the intelligence committee) trying to seduce him and get information out of him.

He didn't betray any information, and the seduction didn't work.

In my eyes, that makes him an extremely GOOD fit for the intelligence committee.  He's proven that he's very much NOT vulnerable to foreign intelligence operations .

Compare to the countless Republican Congressmen who were targeted by Maria Butina and thought they might get to f--k her.  How much intelligence did they give her?  We'll never know.

But anyway, what a stupid thread.  Unfortunately, Fox News knows full well that if you say the words "Chinese spy" "Honeypot" "Extract information" in a sentence with the name of a member of congress, that's all idiot Republicans need.

If all this is true I change my mind on the matter.

Swalwell should not be on the Intelligence Committee.  This isn't a "no harm, no foul" situation.  Swalwell, as well as stupid enough to be involved with this spy for years, is also a guy with oodles of student loans who isn't independently wealthy.

The Maria Butina post is "Whataboutism", is it not?  Ordinarily, I would not object strenuously, but given that the Badgers and Hindsights of the world are constantly complaining when I allegedly use this, I'll hold General MacArthur to the same standard.

[Badger]

The fact that there is even an option to vote “no” is an insult to this forum.

What a bad post. Do better.

You really think a guy who’s made it clear he might betray top secret information(if not directly, indirectly) for a quick bang should be on the intelligence committee?

Except, that's not at all what happened. Sounds like what's-her-face attempted to seduce him and it didn't work out. Nice try though.

Except it did work out.

Serious question. WTF are you talking about? See post below. You are spreading misinformation either deliberately or ignorantly. Kindly advise as to which.

Someone who was a Chinese spy targeted him (because he's on the intelligence committee) trying to seduce him and get information out of him.

He didn't betray any information, and the seduction didn't work.

In my eyes, that makes him an extremely GOOD fit for the intelligence committee.  He's proven that he's very much NOT vulnerable to foreign intelligence operations .

Compare to the countless Republican Congressmen who were targeted by Maria Butina and thought they might get to f--k her.  How much intelligence did they give her?  We'll never know.

But anyway, what a stupid thread.  Unfortunately, Fox News knows full well that if you say the words "Chinese spy" "Honeypot" "Extract information" in a sentence with the name of a member of congress, that's all idiot Republicans need.

Apparently the Reckoning is included in that latter category.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Someone who was a Chinese spy targeted him (because he's on the intelligence committee) trying to seduce him and get information out of him.

He didn't betray any information, and the seduction didn't work.

In my eyes, that makes him an extremely GOOD fit for the intelligence committee.  He's proven that he's very much NOT vulnerable to foreign intelligence operations .

Compare to the countless Republican Congressmen who were targeted by Maria Butina and thought they might get to f--k her.  How much intelligence did they give her?  We'll never know.

But anyway, what a stupid thread.  Unfortunately, Fox News knows full well that if you say the words "Chinese spy" "Honeypot" "Extract information" in a sentence with the name of a member of congress, that's all idiot Republicans need.

If all this is true I change my mind on the matter.

Swalwell should not be on the Intelligence Committee.  This isn't a "no harm, no foul" situation.  Swalwell, as well as stupid enough to be involved with this spy for years, is also a guy with oodles of student loans who isn't independently wealthy.

The Maria Butina post is "Whataboutism", is it not?  Ordinarily, I would not object strenuously, but given that the Badgers and Hindsights of the world are constantly complaining when I allegedly use this, I'll hold General MacArthur to the same standard.

I for the record did not consider the Maria Butina argument to hold much weight. The specifics of the Swalwell situation were all that really played into it. IF no intelligence was given away, in a situation in which he was targetted by Chinese intelligence services, then that at least doesn't reduce his level of worthiness for sitting in the committee.
What has the FBI said about the level of intelligence risk Swalwell posed?

[TheReckoning]

The fact that there is even an option to vote “no” is an insult to this forum.

What a bad post. Do better.

You really think a guy who’s made it clear he might betray top secret information(if not directly, indirectly) for a quick bang should be on the intelligence committee?

Except, that's not at all what happened. Sounds like what's-her-face attempted to seduce him and it didn't work out. Nice try though.

Except it did work out.

Serious question. WTF are you talking about? See post below. You are spreading misinformation either deliberately or ignorantly. Kindly advise as to which.

Someone who was a Chinese spy targeted him (because he's on the intelligence committee) trying to seduce him and get information out of him.

He didn't betray any information, and the seduction didn't work.

In my eyes, that makes him an extremely GOOD fit for the intelligence committee.  He's proven that he's very much NOT vulnerable to foreign intelligence operations .

Compare to the countless Republican Congressmen who were targeted by Maria Butina and thought they might get to f--k her.  How much intelligence did they give her?  We'll never know.

But anyway, what a stupid thread.  Unfortunately, Fox News knows full well that if you say the words "Chinese spy" "Honeypot" "Extract information" in a sentence with the name of a member of congress, that's all idiot Republicans need.

Apparently the Reckoning is included in that latter category.

Alright, so maybe she wasn’t successful in her attempts.

[Badger]

The fact that there is even an option to vote “no” is an insult to this forum.

What a bad post. Do better.

You really think a guy who’s made it clear he might betray top secret information(if not directly, indirectly) for a quick bang should be on the intelligence committee?

Except, that's not at all what happened. Sounds like what's-her-face attempted to seduce him and it didn't work out. Nice try though.

Except it did work out.

Serious question. WTF are you talking about? See post below. You are spreading misinformation either deliberately or ignorantly. Kindly advise as to which.

Someone who was a Chinese spy targeted him (because he's on the intelligence committee) trying to seduce him and get information out of him.

He didn't betray any information, and the seduction didn't work.

In my eyes, that makes him an extremely GOOD fit for the intelligence committee.  He's proven that he's very much NOT vulnerable to foreign intelligence operations .

Compare to the countless Republican Congressmen who were targeted by Maria Butina and thought they might get to f--k her.  How much intelligence did they give her?  We'll never know.

But anyway, what a stupid thread.  Unfortunately, Fox News knows full well that if you say the words "Chinese spy" "Honeypot" "Extract information" in a sentence with the name of a member of congress, that's all idiot Republicans need.

Apparently the Reckoning is included in that latter category.

Alright, so maybe she wasn’t successful in her attempts.

Well then, genius, didn't you just now answer your own question?

[GeneralMacArthur]

Someone who was a Chinese spy targeted him (because he's on the intelligence committee) trying to seduce him and get information out of him.

He didn't betray any information, and the seduction didn't work.

In my eyes, that makes him an extremely GOOD fit for the intelligence committee.  He's proven that he's very much NOT vulnerable to foreign intelligence operations .

Compare to the countless Republican Congressmen who were targeted by Maria Butina and thought they might get to f--k her.  How much intelligence did they give her?  We'll never know.

But anyway, what a stupid thread.  Unfortunately, Fox News knows full well that if you say the words "Chinese spy" "Honeypot" "Extract information" in a sentence with the name of a member of congress, that's all idiot Republicans need.

If all this is true I change my mind on the matter.

Swalwell should not be on the Intelligence Committee.  This isn't a "no harm, no foul" situation.  Swalwell, as well as stupid enough to be involved with this spy for years, is also a guy with oodles of student loans who isn't independently wealthy.

The Maria Butina post is "Whataboutism", is it not?  Ordinarily, I would not object strenuously, but given that the Badgers and Hindsights of the world are constantly complaining when I allegedly use this, I'll hold General MacArthur to the same standard.

It's only a whataboutism if the entire counter-argument is "you have no right to be concerned about A, because you weren't also concerned about B, which is equivalent to A.  SO let's change the subject to B."

Which isn't the point I was making.  I gave a very clear argument about why Swalwell did absolutely nothing wrong, and wanting him off the intel committee is ridiculous.  My point with Butina was just the point out that your faux-outrage over Swalwell is entirely performative.  You don't actually give a damn about congressmen being in contact with foreign spies.

You're just pretending to, in this one specific case, so you can take shots at Swalwell, the Democratic Party, and any red avatars on here who defend him.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Someone who was a Chinese spy targeted him (because he's on the intelligence committee) trying to seduce him and get information out of him.

He didn't betray any information, and the seduction didn't work.

In my eyes, that makes him an extremely GOOD fit for the intelligence committee.  He's proven that he's very much NOT vulnerable to foreign intelligence operations .

Compare to the countless Republican Congressmen who were targeted by Maria Butina and thought they might get to f--k her.  How much intelligence did they give her?  We'll never know.

But anyway, what a stupid thread.  Unfortunately, Fox News knows full well that if you say the words "Chinese spy" "Honeypot" "Extract information" in a sentence with the name of a member of congress, that's all idiot Republicans need.

If all this is true I change my mind on the matter.

Swalwell should not be on the Intelligence Committee.  This isn't a "no harm, no foul" situation.  Swalwell, as well as stupid enough to be involved with this spy for years, is also a guy with oodles of student loans who isn't independently wealthy.

The Maria Butina post is "Whataboutism", is it not?  Ordinarily, I would not object strenuously, but given that the Badgers and Hindsights of the world are constantly complaining when I allegedly use this, I'll hold General MacArthur to the same standard.

It's only a whataboutism if the entire counter-argument is "you have no right to be concerned about A, because you weren't also concerned about B, which is equivalent to A.  SO let's change the subject to B."

Which isn't the point I was making.  I gave a very clear argument about why Swalwell did absolutely nothing wrong, and wanting him off the intel committee is ridiculous.  My point with Butina was just the point out that your faux-outrage over Swalwell is entirely performative.  You don't actually give a damn about congressmen being in contact with foreign spies.

You're just pretending to, in this one specific case, so you can take shots at Swalwell, the Democratic Party, and any red avatars on here who defend him.

In a properly moderated forum I would not have made that argument.  But it's been (wrongly) applied to me a number of times, so there's a part of me that will not allow double standards to go unchecked.

Swalwell should not be on the Intel Committee, period. 

And, yes, I do very much give a damn about Members of Congress and their involvement with foreign spies.  That Swalwell was the stupid one isn't of my doing.

[GeneralMacArthur]

In a properly moderated forum I would not have made that argument.  But it's been (wrongly) applied to me a number of times, so there's a part of me that will not allow double standards to go unchecked.

Swalwell should not be on the Intel Committee, period. 

And, yes, I do very much give a damn about Members of Congress and their involvement with foreign spies.  That Swalwell was the stupid one isn't of my doing.

Did you care about any of the congressmen who tried to get in Maria Butina's pants?  Or any of the Congressmen who were not only in contact with, but literally being funded by, Russian spies?  Or any of the Congressmen who went to Russia to meet with Putin and Russian intel?

The committee report describes an April 2016 meeting that Rohrabacher and Behrends had in Moscow with Vladimir Yakunin, the former president of Russian Railways and a close confidant of Putin. Yakunin at the time was under US sanctions. The committee said that Yakunin “is significantly involved in Russian influence activities, including those targeting elections.” Much of the report’s information on Yakunin is redacted.

Rohrabacher told the committee that Yakunin asked him to look at material Russian prosecutors had assembled related to the Magnitsky Act, a 2012 law imposing sanctions on Russian officials. Rohrabacher and Behrends then met with another man, Konstantin Kosachev, the chair of the Council of the Federation Committee on Foreign Affairs. Kosachev was later sanctioned by the United States, and the committee says that he is “significantly involved in Russian influence activities, including those targeting the United States.”

Of course you didn't.  Which is how we know that you don't actually care about Congressmen meeting with foreign intel officers.  This supposed "principle" of yours is something you just discovered a week ago because Fox News started pounding into your brain that Swalwell is a liability and/or a traitor.

Back when Dana Rohrabacher was literally sharing documents with FSB agents, Fox News told you it was just Democratic Russia Hoax Hysteria, so that was your position.  Because you don't actually use your brain and think for yourself.  You just watch Fox News, then launder their opinions through your personality and present them as your own views.



Also, I bet Fox News didn't tell you the actual details of this story, which not only exonerate Swalwell but make him look really good.  But this is something Robert Cialdini in Influence calls the 3-legged stool.  Once you convince someone to take a position or make a decision, they're going to stick with it no matter what.  And if you pull away a "leg" of that decision making process, so that the decision/opinion is no longer justified, they'll substitute their own "leg" to keep propping it up.

So here we have a story where Fox told you (or heavily, heavily implied) that Swalwell was in bed with a Chinese spy and sharing information with her.  Now on this thread you find out that the worst Swalwell did was take on one of her friends as an intern, and then 100% cut her off once he was informed she was a spy, which is 100% the right thing to do.

So the "leg" Fox gave you -- that he was an intel vulnerability -- turns out to be a complete lie.  But you still want to hate Swalwell.  So you replace that "leg" with your own justification, your own phony principles, that you literally just made up on the spot.  But since it's your coming up with your own stuff, instead of borrowing it from Fox News, it's obviously transparent malarkey and everyone can see right through you.  But you don't care.  And thus the cycle will continue with the next Fox News outrage talking point.  On and on and on and on.  This is your life.

[Interlocutor is just not there yet]

There's two threads about expelling Swalwell with both featuring drawn-out arguments between Fuzzy & Phil.

Why not merge them instead of creating redundancy?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

There's two threads about expelling Swalwell with both featuring drawn-out arguments between Fuzzy & Phil.

Why not merge them instead of creating redundancy?

There is no redundancy. The poll questions are different.

[Badger]

Someone who was a Chinese spy targeted him (because he's on the intelligence committee) trying to seduce him and get information out of him.

He didn't betray any information, and the seduction didn't work.

In my eyes, that makes him an extremely GOOD fit for the intelligence committee.  He's proven that he's very much NOT vulnerable to foreign intelligence operations .

Compare to the countless Republican Congressmen who were targeted by Maria Butina and thought they might get to f--k her.  How much intelligence did they give her?  We'll never know.

But anyway, what a stupid thread.  Unfortunately, Fox News knows full well that if you say the words "Chinese spy" "Honeypot" "Extract information" in a sentence with the name of a member of congress, that's all idiot Republicans need.

If all this is true I change my mind on the matter.

Swalwell should not be on the Intelligence Committee.  This isn't a "no harm, no foul" situation.  Swalwell, as well as stupid enough to be involved with this spy for years, is also a guy with oodles of student loans who isn't independently wealthy.

The Maria Butina post is "Whataboutism", is it not?  Ordinarily, I would not object strenuously, but given that the Badgers and Hindsights of the world are constantly complaining when I allegedly use this, I'll hold General MacArthur to the same standard.

It's only a whataboutism if the entire counter-argument is "you have no right to be concerned about A, because you weren't also concerned about B, which is equivalent to A.  SO let's change the subject to B."

Which isn't the point I was making.  I gave a very clear argument about why Swalwell did absolutely nothing wrong, and wanting him off the intel committee is ridiculous.  My point with Butina was just the point out that your faux-outrage over Swalwell is entirely performative.  You don't actually give a damn about congressmen being in contact with foreign spies.

You're just pretending to, in this one specific case, so you can take shots at Swalwell, the Democratic Party, and any red avatars on here who defend him.

In a properly moderated forum I would not have made that argument.  But it's been (wrongly) applied to me a number of times, so there's a part of me that will not allow double standards to go unchecked.

Swalwell should not be on the Intel Committee, period. 

And, yes, I do very much give a damn about Members of Congress and their involvement with foreign spies.  That Swalwell was the stupid one isn't of my doing.

By every single account Eric swalwell resisted her seduction efforts. Ergo it sounds like he is exactly the type of person that should be on the intelligence committee. So in fact you don't really give a damn about members of Congress and their involvement, or more appropriate in this case lack thereof, with foreign spies, but rather simply partisan gotcha points.

Though you incessantly pat yourself on the back about supposedly being an independent mind thinker just because you are a conservative on Atlas, the fact is you mindlessly and uncritically parrot Fox News talking points more than any five other posters on this forum combined.

[Blair]

Surely if he was a threat the Trump led Justice Department & intel community would have kicked up a hell of a fuss?