STRZOK: ‘We’ll Stop’ Trump Presidency

Of course we know she is guilty and that the case was not referred to the DOJ is the problem..We can see what happened to General Flynn for doing considerably less when he was not even in government.

 

Blago, Nagin, Jesse Jackson jr, Jefferson...just off the top of my head

 

Jesse Jackson jr? Wow they went for the top levels eh?

 

I am not aware of any evidence of any president "using" the FBI in regard to its employees' choices in the voting booth.

Presumably, most if not all, just like other Americans, have always had personal preferences and voted accordingly.

Do you understand that?

 

Sure, I get it.

When Trump has the FBI making sure people are voting for him it'll be ok with you. Glad we finally agree on something.

 

Whether you think that's okay and need to project your opinion onto others, you should at least understand that there is no evidence whatsoever that any POTUS has ever done that.

 

Exactly we'll make sure there's no bias in our Trump-only FBI.

 

Until now, the FBI has been apolitical, not inquiring as to an employee's personal politics. Your loyalty test would be an unprecedented politicization.

 

Yes and they will be apolitical when they are spying on Trumps opponents.

 

Except for the problem that many of these FBI and DOJ Trump haters were texting their displeasure and political animous for Trump while on the job.

The Hatch Act has been around since 1939.

 

I didn't see any advocacy for murder.

 

Her released E-mails? She destroyed 30,000 of them. They know for a fact there was at least one classified one on her private server which is against the law. They know that her E-mails were compromised at least once.

 

You're right, that does come across as a generalisation, but I was really referring to the indifferent masses and their liberal fellow-travellers, whereas the thinking and pragmatic demographic is becoming restless, and I believe the EU's days are numbered - and not a moment too soon! I'm surprised it has lasted this long without imploding.

 

Again, America's intelligence services "spying" on Trump did not happen, and their infiltrating a campaign for political purposes remains unprecedented - despite Trump's fake, evidence-free, paranoid claims. For rational, objective folks, your messiah telling you such a phony tales only makes it appear that he has something to hide.

His inability to tell the truth makes it obvious that it would not be in his interests to testify under oath in the investigation by the Trump Justice Department Special Counsel into improprieties in the 2016 presidential election, but interfering in Mueller's patriotic mission to prevent his exposing the details of a hostile foreign power's subverting the US democratic process is not a good idea. Defending America is a vital matter of national security.

If the facts are allowed to be discovered, they will indict some and exonerate others as those facts dictate.

That seems to be why certain elements have a vested interest in keeping the truth hidden, and bray what they are told to in the Trump diversionary propaganda offensive.

“Mueller is simply going to continue to hunker down and do his job,” said Sol Wisenberg, a former deputy on Kenneth Starr’s independent counsel investigation into President Bill Clinton. “And the president, in the attacks on Mueller, is continuing to act like a person who has something to hide.”

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/06/15/trump-ig-report-mueller-investigation-648989​

​

 

The only one keeping facts hidden is Rosenstein by not responding to congressional oversight.

 

Ok now tell us what they did to alter the outcome of the election.

 

Missed the OIG Report did we ?

This is typical for low/no information types.

 

"Many"? I have no doubt that dedicated public servants have always held and still hold personal political preferences that vary, and it is appropriate for them not to express them in their capacities as apolitical public servants. I know of no instance where any compromised their professional duties, however. There is no evidence that even Comey's inappropriately raising the matter of Anthony Weiner's laptop at a critical stage of the campaign, while the false alarm was a major factor in Clinton falling short in the electoral college vote, was politically motivated.

 

LMAO ....

Another who didn't read the OIG Report ....

The low/no information types are all the same.

Every one of them .......

 

His discretion is proper and temporary, the Trump Justice Department Special Counsel's revelations being made public when his investigation into the intricacies of the assault upon the US democratic process by a hostile foreign power has been completed. Again, it will either indict or exonerate individuals as the facts dictate.

 

Precisely, what heinous acts do you fancy that FBI employees who preferred Trump's opponent to him perpetrated? Who were they, and what did they do?

E.g., why would they keep secret Trump's minions' clandestine meetings with Putin's agents - behaviour Trump insider Bannon labeled "treasonous"?

 

Now for a dose of reality.


2) This text exchange between Peter Strzok and Lisa Page is rightfully being described as a bombshell:

August 8, 2016: In a text message on August 8, 2016, Page stated, “[Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!” Strzok responded, “No. No he’s not. We’ll stop it.”

There is really only one way to read Strzok’s reply: the FBI intended to stop Donald Trump from becoming President. But he tried to explain it:

When asked about this text message, Strzok stated that he did not specifically recall sending it, but that he believed that it was intended to reassure Page that Trump would not be elected, not to suggest that he would do something to impact the investigation. Strzok told the OIG that he did not take any steps to try to affect the outcome of the presidential election, in either the Midyear investigation or the Russia investigation. Strzok stated that had he—or the FBI in general—actually wanted to prevent Trump from being elected, they would not have maintained the confidentiality of the investigation into alleged collusion between Russia and members of the Trump campaign in the months before the election. Page similarly stated that, although she could not speak to what Strzok meant by that text message, the FBI’s decision to keep the Russia investigation confidential before the election shows that they did not take steps to impact the outcome of the election.

That might make sense, except that the FBI did not “maintain the confidentiality of the investigation into alleged collusion.” On the contrary, the “Russia investigation,” including the claim that the Trump campaign colluded with Russians, was the subject of countless leaks. To cite just one example, on November 1, 2016, NBC News headlined: “FBI Making Inquiry Into Ex-Trump Campaign Manager’s Foreign Ties.” The story–like most news stories nowadays, it seems–was based on leaks from “law enforcement and intelligence sources.”

It is reasonable to suspect that leaks about the FBI investigation from “law enforcement sources” were related to Peter Strzok’s determination to stop Trump from winning the election.

3) Further to that point, the IG’s report criticizes the FBI for leaking and for generally being too chummy with journalists:

[A]lthough FBI policy strictly limits the employees who are authorized to speak to the media, we found that this policy appeared to be widely ignored during the period we reviewed. We identified numerous FBI employees, at all levels of the organization and with no official reason to be in contact with the media, who were nevertheless in frequent contact with reporters. The large number of FBI employees who were in contact with journalists during this time period impacted our ability to identify the sources of leaks. For example, during the periods we reviewed, we identified dozens of FBI employees that had contact with members of the media. Attached to this report as Attachments G and H are link charts that reflects the volume of communications that we identified between FBI employees and media representatives in April/May and October 2016.

In addition to the significant number of communications between FBI employees and journalists, we identified social interactions between FBI employees and journalists that were, at a minimum, inconsistent with FBI policy and Department ethics rules. For example, we identified instances where FBI employees received tickets to sporting events from journalists, went on golfing outings with media representatives, were treated to drinks and meals after work by reporters, and were the guests of journalists at nonpublic social events. We will separately report on those investigations as they are concluded, consistent with the Inspector General (IG) Act, other applicable federal statutes, and OIG policy.

Evidently many FBI employees at senior levels (as reflected in Attachments G and H) were working hand-in-glove with Democratic Party reporters. It isn’t hard to deduce the purpose of these constant communications

4) The IG Report also deals with the “insurance policy” text between Strzok and Page:.....snip~

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/06/notes-on-the-ig-report.php




You now may say.....ouch!

 

First of all .....

I don't "fancy" any political bias in the FBI or any other Department of our Justice system.

And, secondly, if you read the OIG Report, the agents are referred to as Agent 1 and Agent 5, and others as well.

Their identities are not listed.

 

Then up jumps reality and shows why leftists were created as failures.


The IG’s report exposes a corrupt and politicized FBI and Department of Justice. And so far, we are seeing only half of the story, at most. No one has yet looked into the Democrats’ “Russia” tale or any partisan corruption linked to Bob Mueller’s farcical “investigation.” Given DOJ’s bitter refusal to cooperate with the Congressional committees that have constitutional oversight responsibilities over that Department–has anyone tried to justify DOJ’s stonewalling? If so, I haven’t seen it–we can assume that the damning documents that have been produced so far are only the beginning. Most likely, they provide only an inkling of the information the Justice Department, apparently still dominated by Obama holdovers, is withholding from Congress, or perhaps has already destroyed.

The unravelling of the effort to bring down President Trump has barely begun.....snip~

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/06/notes-on-the-ig-report.php

 

Oh you mean besides the misconduct?