Stop Overselling the Importance of the Strzok Texts
I did not watch the Strzok partisan shoutfest. But Phillip Bump at the #FAKENEWS Bezos Post has a point about the evil Peter Strzok:
In a written statement offered before he testified before the House Oversight Committee on Thursday, Strzok pointedly noted that there was no effort on his part to keep Trump from winning the White House — and, further, that he was one of only a few people who could have potentially leaked details from the investigation in an effort to block Trump’s victory.
“In the summer of 2016,” Strzok wrote, “I was one of a handful of people who knew the details of Russian election interference and its possible connections with members of the Trump campaign. This information had the potential to derail, and quite possibly, defeat Mr. Trump. But the thought of exposing that information never crossed my mind.”
This is a nearly impossible point to rebut.
Before Election Day, there were rumblings that Russia was engaged in the campaign in nefarious ways and that Russian President Vladimir Putin sought to see Trump win. There were rumors — theories, really — that Trump was more than happy to have Russia’s help or even might be aiding that effort. In the closing days of the campaign though, the two most important stories about the Clinton and Trump investigations were ones that solely worked to the eventual winner’s advantage.
On Halloween 2016, the New York Times detailed what was known about the investigation into Russian interference (an effort addressed earlier that month in an unusual public statement from the government). The headline, though, summarized the good news for Trump’s effort: “Investigating Donald Trump, F.B.I. Sees No Clear Link to Russia.”
“None of the investigations so far have found any conclusive or direct link between Mr. Trump and the Russian government,” the article read. Since Trump was inaugurated, of course, we’ve learned much more about links between the campaign and Russia — involving even members of Trump’s family. The effect of the story, though, was to quash those rumors about Trump’s motivations.
Paul Waldman expands on this concept:
This is the core of what makes the Republican effort to discredit the Russia investigation so utterly insane. They want us to believe there was an FBI conspiracy to prevent Trump from being elected president, and what did that conspiracy do? First, it mounted a cautious investigation of what nearly everyone now acknowledges was a comprehensive effort by Russia to help Trump get elected, an effort that people on the Trump campaign and even in Trump’s own family tried to cooperate with. But then it kept that investigation completely secret from the public, lest news of it affect the outcome of the investigation in any way.
You will notice that Republicans have not been able to produce any evidence that Strzok or anyone else took any official action that was biased, unfair or inappropriate in their investigation of Russian interference and the Trump campaign.
The view of the FBI as a hotbed of partisan leakers is indeed difficult to reconcile with the fact that this stuff was not leaked at the most critical time. Also, these were private messages, and nobody would like having their private messages aired to the country.
That said, unlike the #Resistance, I’m not ready to canonize Strzok. The messages were written on government devices. He is an adulterer. While the conclusions he came to about Trump’s personality are similar to the conclusions many of us came to, having a guy this openly and emotionally partisan involved in these investigations feels very inappropriate and disturbing.
But it’s not enough for me to decide that the FBI and Mueller are involved in a #WitchHunt. That’s what Donald Trump wants me to think, but no sale.
[Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.]
it’s important to know how corrupt and slimy the hot and horny men and women of the clown-show fbi have become, and how blatantly so
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/13/2018 @ 7:39 amtruth be told the sleazy fbi’s joke investigation of the mandalay bay massacre is every bit as amusing as their mueller comey coup on democracy, but you can’t get CNN Jake Tapper fake news to cover that one at all not even a little
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/13/2018 @ 7:42 amHe didn’t need to So, Steele was briefing Reid and isikoff and ioffe and a boatload more of official, the bureau got three different copies of the dossier.
Narciso (cbfddb) — 7/13/2018 @ 7:42 amReporter’s, officials one is sleeping with the other at any one time.
Narciso (cbfddb) — 7/13/2018 @ 7:45 amNo bump doesn’t have a point, if they nailed it to his head they wouldn’t have a point.
Narciso (cbfddb) — 7/13/2018 @ 7:49 amThe view of the FBI as a hotbed of partisan leakers is indeed difficult to reconcile . . . .
Strozk took the same approach yesterday by lumping himself in with the overall positive history of the FBI.
All law enforcement offices have the bulk of their manpower staffed by good people. The problem is that they also have their political climbers too. Jack Dunphy wrote about this problem and I recommend his column.
AZ Bob (09743f) — 7/13/2018 @ 7:54 amThey paid greenberg and hamper and the grits probably paid mifsud to create a trail an impression.
Narciso (cbfddb) — 7/13/2018 @ 7:54 amThis is the fellow who Coney sent over to interrogate general Flynn, a man strzok isn’t fit to clean his shoes, they all conspired to protect Hillary from the get go, because Obama was hip deep in this Hillary matter.
Narciso (cbfddb) — 7/13/2018 @ 7:57 amI was one of a handful of people who knew the details of Russian election interference and its possible connections with members of the Trump campaign.
he’s a lying piece of fbi sh!t
if they had evidence of collusion they wouldn’t have had to invent the coward-pig McCain urinating hooker dossier
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/13/2018 @ 7:58 amWord:
http://thefederalist.com/2018/07/12/the-russia-investigation-is-a-puzzle-designed-never-to-be-solved/#.W0inlE5lPBY.twitter
Narciso (cbfddb) — 7/13/2018 @ 8:00 amWhat has not been explained is the difference in the DOJ prosecution of the EMAIL scandal and the Russian Collusion Scandal…..
jason stewart (34ab70) — 7/13/2018 @ 8:07 amThere has been plenty of accusation but no public information that connects the Trump campaign with Russian Collusion. Most the “public” information paints the Russian Collusion firmly in the DNC bucket, but of course that has been ignored by Mueller.
Laughed out loud at the Waldman quote. What utter hog wash. “Comprehensive effort by Russia” my ass. He seems to think that by pretending it happened it did.
What Strozk & the Fibbies were obligated to do was GO TO THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN & warn them if they were so effing concerned. To PREVENT the problem from becoming a problem. End of story.
Daiwa (2a0965) — 7/13/2018 @ 8:08 amGohmert gave it away — that there was no “there” there — when he started talking about Strzok’s wife. Sound and fury signifying little. The IG’s report is as good as it’s going to get for Deep State conspiracists.
Whether LBJ killed Mahatma Ghandi is still an open question, though.
nk (dbc370) — 7/13/2018 @ 8:09 amThat report redacted five times what it left in, consider That, but this is like that snipe hunt conducted against Warren hastings in the 18th century.
Narciso (cbfddb) — 7/13/2018 @ 8:11 amBasically, the most significant thing I find in all this is that “Strzok” is pronounced “struck”.
nk (dbc370) — 7/13/2018 @ 8:11 amNow when does a side by side with matteen who was not investigated because his father was an fbi snitch, maybe that was also why the rifka Barry went nowhere, the incident in Columbus, off the Seattle coast and anchorage it’s not dark humor anymore like Corley romano.
Narciso (cbfddb) — 7/13/2018 @ 8:16 amgood post.
Time123 (457a1d) — 7/13/2018 @ 8:17 amThe view of the FBI as a hotbed of partisan leakers is indeed difficult to reconcile with the fact that this stuff was not leaked at the most critical time.
people don’t understand what the insurance policy was
the dirty FBI sluts were confident that Hillary would win
but they were nevertheless concerned by Mr. Trump
because he’d already signaled his willingness to question the legitimacy of both the election and Hillary, and he’d already demonstrated a grasp of just how dirty Hillary was, and his extensive inquiries into Obama’s birthplace had demonstrated that he was willing to devote the time and effort into undermining a dirty fascist american president
and Hillary was much more vulnerable on many levels than Obama was, and the slutty FBI knew this more than anyone because they knew the full measure of the illegal and unethical things they had done to protect her
and so the dirty fbi trash *felt* vulnerable on a visceral level, and they also knew that a defeated Trump could cause considerable trouble, and that it was very much in his nature to do so
the insurance policy was meant to neuter him after Hillary ascended to the throne
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/13/2018 @ 8:22 amThe only time the bureau came close was with the Chapman ring (the details of which are reasonably relayed in red sparrow)
Narciso (cbfddb) — 7/13/2018 @ 8:25 amWrong question:
https://althouse.blogspot.com/2018/07/what-was-strzok-thinking.html
Narciso (cbfddb) — 7/13/2018 @ 8:32 amThis is a nearly impossible point to rebut.
Another point nearly impossible to rebut: The Post has been unremittingly hostile to Mr Trump since the day he announced. So it occasionally posts truth about Trump, but only when that truth is harmful.
Kevin M (5d3e49) — 7/13/2018 @ 8:52 amYawn. Predictable and expected post.
mg (0d66b4) — 7/13/2018 @ 8:57 amStrozok’s body language, his conflicting statements and the Dem’s full court press to obstruct the hearings told everyone what was going on.
They thought the fix was in. They were wrong.
NJRob (b00189) — 7/13/2018 @ 8:58 amhf has a point.
That Strzok didn’t leak anything was because Strzok didn’t HAVE anything save accusations and innuendo. If he had leaked it, it would have backfired badly as the Trump camp called foul and they couldn’t back it up.
So, it’s not at all a hard point to rebut (unless you have your Russia-stole-the-election blinders on).
UNLIKE the Clinton dirt that Wikileaks posted that was all true and has never been challenged, let alone refuted.
Kevin M (5d3e49) — 7/13/2018 @ 8:58 amWhy is it impossible, we know McCabe was running interference through strzok to prevent wieners laptop be examined, we know he was coordinating crossfire hurricane which read in risenstein as yates and mccabe.
Narciso (cbfddb) — 7/13/2018 @ 8:58 amOTOH, Trump is a poor diplomat.
Kevin M (5d3e49) — 7/13/2018 @ 9:01 amI think an important thing to remember is that “everyone” knew Hillary was going to win in June 2016. If the FBI, or in this case Strzok, was to leak the information he had, then it would have tainted Hillary’s whole Presidency because the full investigation would have come up with the same zilch it has come up with to now. He didn’t release because he was acting professionally, it was because he thought it was unnecessary and would taint Hillary’s eletion.
burnth (0bf8f2) — 7/13/2018 @ 9:06 amWhen your security service is in the business of undermining the incoming administration, you wouldn’t be gladhanding
Narciso (cbfddb) — 7/13/2018 @ 9:07 amEither.
“Republicans have not been able to produce any evidence that Strzok or anyone else took any official action that was biased, unfair or inappropriate in their investigation of Russian interference and the Trump campaign.”
This is a sensible observation, but it suggests a few follow-up questions that might, I think, be worth asking:
– What makes an “official action,” whatever that might be, “biased, unfair or inappropriate”, as opposed to explicitly illegal? Are the standards of an official action’s “fairness” or “appropriateness” written down anywhere?
– What would count as probative, or even just strongly indicative, evidence for the allegation any given official action was biased, unfair or inappropriate?
– What are the legal and professional consequences of being shown to have executed a merely “biased” or “unfair” official action? What should they be?
– Stipulating that even the most professional government agents will still have personal political opinions and the right to express and act on them, what volume and type of evidence would be required before Strzok’s evident bias can no longer be considered merely a random outlier that can be ignored, but an indicative example of an agency-wide trend that shouldn’t be?
I agree that overselling any single point of data when constructing a thesis is a bad idea, but when a government agent asserts to a colleague through an official agency channel that they will take action to render an election victory impossible (and phrasing it as an “insurance policy”, suggesting very strongly actions to be taken after a disaster, such as an electoral loss, rather than actions taken to prevent it), the degree to which I, at least, can shrug that off as irrelevant bloviation is pretty limited.
Stephen J. (f77922) — 7/13/2018 @ 9:09 amMelania is gorgeous.
mg (0d66b4) — 7/13/2018 @ 9:11 amI’ve read here over and over that words have meaning and language is important and I know that for lawyers, wordcraft is indeed important precisely because people are weasels.
Yesterday I watched Trey Gowdy correct himself on a question where he almost made a rookie mistake and asked about the week prior to a certain date and immediately corrected himself to ask about 8 days.
I watched the person being questioned shave answers, shave words, answer questions not asked, answer the least precise and immaterial part of questions. The hf registered trademark dirty fbi sluts Rosenstein and Stryok smirk when they think they are winning at playing the word weasel games. ha ha ha.
Lawyers may look at it and think: They did win that round, questions were poorly framed, language imprecise etc. but most Americans live and work in the real world of language where we understand that our wife is asking us the days previous to last Sunday and whether we made the phone call or not. We know that if we shave our answer and answer truthfully that we did not make the call last week, but do not tell her we indeed did make the call, but it was on the last day of the preceding week, she will feel misled, distrustful and suspicious of us and our motive. Things may be tense around the household for a while and rightfully so and I’d have only myself to blame and good luck trying to put it back on her for asking an imprecise question.
If my wife asked me to pick up the kids at 3 and I said Ok, so she calls me and asks if I picked them up at 3 like we’d discussed and I say no because I picked them up at 2:50, my wife would be suspicious, hurt, angry and possibly wondering how I’d look in that shirt with a steak knife stuck in my shoulder.
The dirty fbi sluts look like smirky guilty assholes to people like me. Lawyers see the game and its their game and they like the challenge. Lay people get it and hate everyone who acts like this, so maybe the texts mean not much, but the derisive language towards the great unwashed masses coupled with this type of smarmy, smirky gamesmanship smells wonderful to the peerage, but to the jury of peers it says “guilty asshole trying to hide the truth”.
the dirty fbi slut lawyers advising these guys should realize that they are destroying the fbi not saving it
steveg (a9dcab) — 7/13/2018 @ 9:13 amWhat is being under sold is the importance of the lack of certain Strzok texts.
Here is the guy that signed the orders to start the Russian Collusion investigation in July-August of 2016 and come November, after Trump won, he has zero to say to his “lover” regarding Russia handing Trump a victory. How did those “facts” slip his mind in his private conversations? He doesn’t even suggest it to his lover through hyperbole. He is silent on the matter.
I have not seen a single text where he blames Russia for Trump’s victory. Wouldn’t something of that nature be consistent with the persona of Strzok that we are supposed to believe? Yet it doesn’t cross his mind that is “filled with details from the investigation.”
I find that odd.
BuDuh (ea27e6) — 7/13/2018 @ 9:14 am“That said, unlike the #Resistance, I’m not ready to canonize Strzok.”
Lol
Harkin (56a257) — 7/13/2018 @ 9:18 am“nearly everyone now acknowledges was a comprehensive effort by Russia to help Trump get elected,”
Horse hockey. If Russia was really engaging in such an effort, all they had to do was publicize Uranium One and Hillary’s complicity while laughing and pointing. To say nothing of releasing her emails.
Nobody acknowledges anything more than some goofy websites thrown up for a few pennies.
Ingot9455 (68bf96) — 7/13/2018 @ 9:30 amIf the “private” text messages were NOT sent and responded to using FBI-issued devices that were to be used for official FBI “business” only, then yes, I’m inclined to agree, perhaps they should have remained “private”.
Colonel Haiku (5fd258) — 7/13/2018 @ 9:32 amI read Strzok is a former Army Ranger. I found it difficult to reconcile that with this: https://youtu.be/914HDFpqx_g
Colonel Haiku (5fd258) — 7/13/2018 @ 9:37 amThe investigation was based on Hillary Clinton opposition research. But hey, bias never impacted the FBI investigation.
AZ Bob (09743f) — 7/13/2018 @ 9:41 amBreaking:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/13/us/politics/mueller-indictment-russian-intelligence-hacking.html
One the one hand, I’m surprised. OTOH, since none of these cases will ever see the inside of a courtroom, I’m also cynical.
Kevin M (5d3e49) — 7/13/2018 @ 9:46 amNote 1 — I miss Beldar.
Note 2 — It seems the host’s theory of Strzok’s testimony is as likely as any of the one’s I have seen speculated here. His self-presentation as someone appalled by Trump’s performance strikes me as reasonable. People have a bad habit of forgetting past Trump outrages when in the midst of a new Trump outrage, or folks have been effectively gaslit in just expecting it. But Trump going after a vet’s dad who dared criticize him was just the sort of disgusting that generates utter contempt in people.
Note 3 — I know it’s more comforting to think of Trump’s problems as the result of some big “deep state” conspiracy. But could it be that, when career law enforcement and prosecutors look at Trump, they see someone who reminds them of all the criminals they have prosecuted and all the people they thought were criminals, but could not prosecute? I think this mindset can lead to abuses (Mark Fuhrman and the infamous bloody glove from the OJ Simpson trial), but how on earth do you avoid it?
Note 4 — I do believe we dodged a bullet with Clinton (and dodged into another bullet, alas). Gohmert, to my mind, stepped on his own revelation by going tabloid on Strzok’s adultery. Still, this is important:
http://www.dailycaller.com/2018/07/13/gohmert-defends-shots-strzok/
Appalled (96665e) — 7/13/2018 @ 9:48 amIf the Dec server was never examined by the bureau, how can they know any of this?
narciso (d1f714) — 7/13/2018 @ 9:59 am“Overselling the Importance of the Strzok Texts” is an issue, yes. Rather reminds me of the issue of using Iraq’s WMD as grounds to invade. “Over-egging the pudding” as Brit papers put it regarding Tony Blair’s analysis of that risk. Clearly Strzok was behaving in a fashion that can be perceived to have benefitted Hillary’s campaign and endangered The Donald’s. It is not at all clear that an overt official abuse of FBI power resulted from Strzok’s preference.
That said, the whole special prosecution arises from the similarly over-egged pudding. The Russians did not “Hack the Election”, (nor did Pakistani IT aides in Debbie Wassermann Schulz’s Congress) by changing the results on voting machines, or in any other fashion. Yes, the machines are vulnerable. No, they were not “hacked”. Nor did the Trump campaign “collude” with Russia, Brazillian Nazis, or Mars — nor is “collusion” a violation of Federal Campaign Law. No collusion, no harm, no foul. Trump did not seek the office for the sake of profiting from emoluments. There is apparently no verifiable scandal in the “pee dossier” that makes The Donald more susceptible to blackmail than any other celebrity. We aren’t even hearing about any traditional scandals of the “Teapot Dome” variety where certain investors in certain industries are profiting from, say, manipulation of solar panel subsidies, carbon tax credits, grants of rights-of-way along federally controlled corridors to favored pipeline companies … all the sorts of things a land grabber like Trump might honestly be EXPECTED to exploit. It just isn’t the kind of pudding that needs the number and variety of eggs we keep hearing about.
pouncer (915d55) — 7/13/2018 @ 10:05 amAppalled,
#3:
Kevin M (5d3e49) — 7/13/2018 @ 10:10 amAnswer 1: Either Clinton would fill that bill adequately.
Answer 2: The full court press against the Trump ADMINISTRATION involves rather more than the invested state actors. It involves the expected (the “loyal” opposition) but also the bulk of the press, media and cultural apparatus. Why? Because Trump is a buffoon? No, if that were the case all they’d have to do is stand and watch. It’s because he threatens their hold on power and long-standing arrangements that serve them well, but the people poorly. In short, paranoids can have enemies and fools can be slandered.
fbi turd-wipe bobby mueller spent hundreds of millions of dollars and couldn’t find a single spam email sent to a Republican?
his indictment is a farce
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/13/2018 @ 10:19 am38… Russians 5 Narrative 0…
“There is no allegation in this indictment that any American citizen committed a crime. There is no allegation that the conspiracy changed the vote count or affected any election result.”
—-
Colonel Haiku (5fd258) — 7/13/2018 @ 10:28 amArnold StangRosensteinThis harangue just makes sense.
Dave (445e97) — 7/13/2018 @ 10:28 amKevin M
I don’t think Hillary got the FBI investigation she deserved. She should have faced charges, or had her security clearance revoked. I have a theory that the FBI hates FOIA as much as Clinton, and this is why they might not have treated this as seriously as they should have done. If I recall correctly, Strzok wanted a more intense investigation, but was overruled.
As for your second point, the bias of the media cultural complex is very evident, and the #Resistance has exploited that. But, just fools can be slandered and paranoids have enemies, the would-be slanderers and enemies can also be right that the paranoiacs are evil, and the fools are corrupt.
Appalled (96665e) — 7/13/2018 @ 10:32 amThey don’t give a farthing about foia, this is also true of the atf in fast and furious, they had a program to arm the cartels, they had a cover story already to go to the posts grimaldi, holder provided cover same with the IRS and treasury collaborating against the tea party, same with arming the pro islamist Syrian rebels while openly supporting assad because of Iran, who are in bed with russia
narciso (d1f714) — 7/13/2018 @ 10:39 amwhat does “this stuff” refer to exactly
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/13/2018 @ 10:56 amStrzok was one of a few people who knew of Trump’ s campaign colluding with the Russians in the summer of 2016 but here we are two years later and millions of dollars poorer and no evidence has been produced. He should have shared his knowledge with mueller.
Jim (5e1e7d) — 7/13/2018 @ 11:00 amAll they had to do to improve their prospects was not be crazy, but they couldn’t do it:
https://pjmedia.com/michaelledeen/fall-forecast-an-anti-leftist-electoral-rout/
Colonel Haiku (5fd258) — 7/13/2018 @ 11:08 amNote 3 — I know it’s more comforting to think of Trump’s problems as the result of some big “deep state” conspiracy. But could it be that, when career law enforcement and prosecutors look at Trump, they see someone who reminds them of all the criminals they have prosecuted and all the people they thought were criminals, but could not prosecute? I think this mindset can lead to abuses (Mark Fuhrman and the infamous bloody glove from the OJ Simpson trial), but how on earth do you avoid it?
Do you think it is perfectly understandable and maybe even acceptable for law enforcement to plant evidence if their heart is in the right place?
I don’t.
AZ Bob (09743f) — 7/13/2018 @ 11:50 amDoesn’t Hillary remind you of a criminal?
AZ Bob (09743f) — 7/13/2018 @ 11:51 am#51 & #52 Y’know, thinking Hillary deserves prosecution for her actions on the server, and noticing Trump can seem kind of like a criminal aren’t mutually exclusive. (See my #46) It’s sorta like thinking that a mindset that can lead you to an abuse is understandable, but committing the abuse is not acceptable.
And that gets to another point. People have political viewpoints, and if they are committed enough to give to a campaign, it is very easy to find out those opinions by looking at their giving history. Nonetheless, it is part of their job not to let bias influence their decisions. They are not required by their job to be political eunuchs.
Appalled (96665e) — 7/13/2018 @ 12:18 pmWhat did he do that was criminal appalled. That was the predicate for this investigation?
Narciso (cd8823) — 7/13/2018 @ 12:20 pmCompletely agree the Strozk-Page texts are overblown largely because they reflect what many others in the beltway were also saying at the time and probably still are.
The idea that the Trump-Russia-Clinton story was all kept quiet prior to the election is easily refuted by contemporaneous reporting such as:
Investigating Donald Trump, F.B.I. Sees No Clear Link to Russia
Russian government hackers penetrated DNC, stole opposition research on Trump
A Veteran Spy Has Given the FBI Information Alleging a Russian Operation to Cultivate Donald Trump
Strozk isn’t counting pencils in HR as a reward for his exceptional service but he also isn’t likely to be the biggest offender either. His smugness comes from the likely knowledge everything he did was known to and approved of by POTUS – just like Hillary.
crazy (5c5b07) — 7/13/2018 @ 12:22 pmMost of this came from the fusion dossier paid for by the Clintons, leaked to isikoff and corn and other parties, fandos Barrett entous
Narciso (cd8823) — 7/13/2018 @ 12:25 pm39 Note 3, how could any law person see a criminal in Trump and then turn around and support Hillary? Trump has many short comings, none of them even begin to come close to the criminal disgusting human being that Hillary is. In law enforcement speak Trump was small time criminal, Hillary was a king pin.
Nate Ogden (223c65) — 7/13/2018 @ 12:26 pmWho knows but appalled did vote for Obama despite being apprised of the fraud that Ayers and Obama wrought with the Annenberg fund.
Narciso (cd8823) — 7/13/2018 @ 12:29 pmhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxeFMHyOx3I
“People have got to know whether or not their president’s a crook. Well, I’m not a crook.” – The Big Dick, November 17, 1973
DCSCA (797bc0) — 7/13/2018 @ 12:30 pm#54
Let’s be precise, here. When I say Trump might look like a criminal, I am looking at Trump University (which looks like and talks like a scam), the self-dealing associated with the Trump Foundation, the serial bankruptcies, the involvement in the casino industry, and his out loud and proud libertine behavior. Looking like a criminal is not actually being one, but let’s say there is a correlation to the behaviors exhibited by Trump over the years, and the behavior of a criminal.
When you ask, what crime is associated with Russia? I honestly have no idea — Mueller isn’t telling. Is there a feeling that there is not something quite right with Trump’s relationship with Russia? Well, his admiration for Putin is often expressed, and Trump is at least rumored to have substantial business connections with Russian oligarchs. Again, note above. I am open to the idea that the FBI let their suspicions run away with their professional caution, and there may really be nothing except Hillary Clinton generated smoke. But the Trump supporter’s cry that there was no basis for suspicion, and how dare you, is silly.
Appalled (96665e) — 7/13/2018 @ 12:33 pm1. There were two acts (Comey’s news conference and his letter to Congress) and one non-act (the non-leaking of the FBI investigation on the Trump campaign), all of which hurt the Hillary campaign and helped Trump. So it’s a little odd that Trump would be on such a warpath against the FBI, the very agency that helped him cross the finish line. He should’ve thanked Comey for his efforts, not sacked him.
Paul Montagu (91b6ad) — 7/13/2018 @ 12:34 pm2. What Strzok testified under oath yesterday is hardly different from what was in the recent IG report, which notably concluded that there was no bias in how the Hillary probe was handled.
3. The fireworks between Strzok and House Republicans were overshadowed by today’s news that Mueller indicted twelve Putin’s agents.
He had to pretend to reopen the investigation into the server because of pressure from the nypd(I say pretend because of what judicial watch subsequently turned up)
Narciso (cd8823) — 7/13/2018 @ 12:38 pmdisgraced fbi slicky-slut Jim Comey thought Hillary was a sure thing he’s already said as much
so none of his acts were to help Trump but to shore up the legitimacy of hillary both in real time and prophylactically
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/13/2018 @ 12:39 pmBased on what evidence, without a server to examine, unlike the weiner laptop, where he got the equivalent of a jay walking charge.
Narciso (cd8823) — 7/13/2018 @ 12:40 pmsleazy gestapo-turd Mueller’s just trying to ass-jack the summit with Putin
he’s got nothing that would hold up in court
this is how FBI trash do
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/13/2018 @ 12:42 pm#61 — I got to say that the 12 indictments of non-citizens who are not living in this country feels like either grandstanding or some means to another end. It does not impress, in and of itself.
Appalled (96665e) — 7/13/2018 @ 12:48 pm@56. Exactly, narciso and from the US and allied intelligence reporting of US persons with Russian or Russian related contacts. Whether there was any significance to the contacts or not once US intelligence began to monitor/investigate them there had to be lawful authority to unmask and/or follow those contacts. Whatever the predicate was for opening a formal counter-intelligence investigation was once opened that provided the authority to scoop up all the “inadvertent” and allied-provided information on the target, the target’s contacts and the target’s contact’s contacts they already had. IOW a whole campaign full of people.
IMHO this entire exercise has always been less about putting the Trump team behind bars and more about managing Trump’s control of DOJ and the IC while obscuring the last administration’s liberal interpretation of spying on US persons through unmasked incidental collection. If it produced prosecutable crimes all the better from the beltway’s POV but it’s always been about protecting the status quo. Brennan ran the Op and put Comey in a no-win position from which he did just as bad a job with this as he did with the Hillary matter.
crazy (5c5b07) — 7/13/2018 @ 12:49 pmThey were not even among the expelled in 2016, but this is another crowdstrikes derived exercise.
Narciso (cd8823) — 7/13/2018 @ 12:50 pmAny spin to smear this guy with the scarlet letters ‘F.B.I.’ is immature. Strzok spent ten hours bombing Republican congressional azzes back into the Roger Stone Age.
Well done, sir.
“Paint it with iodine and mark it fit for duty, Doc.” – Frank Savage [Gregory Peck] ‘Twelve O’Clock High’ 1949
DCSCA (797bc0) — 7/13/2018 @ 12:50 pmThat last part of the last piece was right from Steele but also the second dossier relayed by cody shearer, who created that phony Berlin handoff to cover it.
Narciso (cd8823) — 7/13/2018 @ 12:52 pmso dirty bob mueller and his simpering tea boy rod rosytwat are still doing everything they can to help the democrats
would you really expect the corrupt sessions doj or the gestapo clownshow fbi to behave any differently
they’re all a bunch of dirty cowardly obama-fellating slut-slut lick-licks
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/13/2018 @ 12:55 pmspeaking of cowards today’s John McCain’s cancerversary
if you haven’t been following along, the disgraced ex-naval aviator was diagnosed with “cancer” soon after his highly problematic and borderline treasonous role in disseminating the phony urinating hooker dossier was revealed
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/13/2018 @ 1:03 pmOkay, Patterico, this video of Strzok on Twitter deserves its own post.
AZ Bob (09743f) — 7/13/2018 @ 1:05 pmI watched nbc and msdnc before the election say they would no longer report the contents of leaked e-mails because the russians were behind it.
wendell (b69c0f) — 7/13/2018 @ 1:22 pm73… beat you to it, AZ Bob https://patterico.com/2018/07/13/stop-overselling-the-importance-of-the-strzok-texts/#comment-2135805
Colonel Haiku (5fd258) — 7/13/2018 @ 1:39 pmIt’s relevant that there are 26 Putin nationals and three PutinLand businesses under indictment, which points to a broad and unprecedented conspiracy by Putin to put his thumb on the 2016 electoral scale, and the investigation has a ways to go. Earlier this week, Trump could not bring himself to say that Putin has been hostile to our interests or is a foe, just a “competitor”, which is a joke when PutinLand is only our 30th largest trading partner.
Paul Montagu (91b6ad) — 7/13/2018 @ 1:40 pmwe know the filthy FBI trash-clowns framed Mr. Flynn
why would we think they’re not framing Russia now?
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/13/2018 @ 1:42 pmI would bet everything that the SC refusing to close out the investigation as to direct involvement by DJT is, in fact, a with hunt. it is about politics. It is about staining and delegitimizing DJT. It is about creating a plausible narrative to help the Dems win this November.
Mueller has gone for an nexus possible to ensnare DJT associates. Where in hell is the similar expansion into the hack of the DNC computers?! If electoral interference is the true point of it all, where are the subpoenas of Dem pols and operatives?
I do agree too much is being made of Strzok’s bias. I WANT an enthusiastic investigation by criminal prosecutors and their agents! PS is not the issue. The problem is an absolute refusal within DOJ to properly constrain PS and Comey when it turned out there was no there, there. It’s the systemic bias which MUST be identified and purged.
Ed from SFV (6d42fa) — 7/13/2018 @ 1:46 pmInfluence elections. What country doesn’t? If it were a crime netanyahu and his party would be in jail. Remember when america tried to “influence” an election in the dominican republic by sending in the marines. Tell this to mosadek. allende and numerous others we have “influcened out of power!” You can’t do for trump what we did for boris yeltsin.
wendell (b69c0f) — 7/13/2018 @ 1:50 pmhis highly problematic and borderline treasonous role in disseminating the phony urinating hooker dossier was revealed
Paul Montagu (91b6ad) — 7/13/2018 @ 1:51 pmYeah, that’s slander. He gave his copy to the FBI, which had already had a copy in their possession for months. And I’m pretty sure that McCain has cancer, not “cancer”.
Hence the word “unprecedented”, as in unprecedented in kind and scope.
Paul Montagu (91b6ad) — 7/13/2018 @ 1:52 pmwe’ll see
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/13/2018 @ 1:54 pmThe Clinton administration failed to shutdown acts of terror against the US by fighting it with lawfare and the Rosenstein administration will be no more successful against state acts of cyber intrusions.
crazy (5c5b07) — 7/13/2018 @ 1:57 pmLove the animated gif Surber has up of smirkboy Strzok in this piece.
https://donsurber.blogspot.com/2018/07/kavanaugh-vs-strzok.html
Anon Y. Mous (acdecf) — 7/13/2018 @ 1:58 pmThere’s one important point to realize:
WhenLisa Page texted Peter Strzok saying that Trump is
And Strzok replied:
HE WAS LYING.
He was just trying to keep his mistress happy.
Naturally, Strzok did not explain it that way.
Instead, this is how he handled it:
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/07/12/peter_strzok_explains_well_stop_it_text_message.html
He doesn’t recall writing that text. He wote it late at night. It in no way means that he, and otehrs in the FBI would stop Trump from becoming president.
Of course it means precisely that.
But he was lying.
Sammy Finkelman (02a146) — 7/13/2018 @ 2:14 pmStrzok’s real plans are reflected in another, later, text where he talks about prioritizing the Trump investigation as an insurance policy.
Sammy Finkelman (02a146) — 7/13/2018 @ 2:15 pmHow did russians influced the voting machines in detroit to not read 70.000 ballots for clinton? How did russia influcene 100,000 voters in wisconsin to not vote because they lost or no longer had proper voting ids. same for pennsylvania and floridah. How did russia prevent enough ballots being available in north carolina so they ran out?
wendell (b69c0f) — 7/13/2018 @ 2:17 pm5 Key Takeaways From The House Hearing With FBI Counterintelligence No. 2 Peter Strzok
http://thefederalist.com/2018/07/13/5-key-takeaways-from-strzok-hearing/
harkin (56a257) — 7/13/2018 @ 2:28 pmYes three copies of the same document made it seem legit, as in that yahoo story.
Narciso (3e2868) — 7/13/2018 @ 2:29 pmAnd now they indict a bunch of people who will never stand trial, while the allegations will stand forever. Tainting has been the objective from the beginning, because they’ve known from the outset that collusion never occurred. Mind you, I have no problem with indicting these Russians if there is evidence of their alleged ‘crimes of interference’, but nothing will ever come of it. Unless they actually have the DNC server, this is all kabuki BS. My guess is the hard evidence, such as there is, will be classified as a matter of national security, of course, so us peons will just have to trust them. Okay.
Daiwa (2a0965) — 7/13/2018 @ 2:42 pm55. crazy (5c5b07) — 7/13/2018 @ 12:22 pm
Hillary Clinton, in the third Presidentialdebaste Wednesday, October 19, 2016 said Vladimir Putin wanted Donald Trump to be president because he would a puppet.
Excerpt:
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=119039
Sammy Finkelman (02a146) — 7/13/2018 @ 2:44 pm#88: Congress has the power of the purse. They could, for example, cut the DoJ’s medical and dental benefits, halve vacation days, and cut everyone’s pay by a third so long as the department obstructs oversight. BEt you there are changes toot suite.
Kevin M (5d3e49) — 7/13/2018 @ 2:52 pmLet’s say that Putin wanted Trump to win. Why?
The answer will depend on your view of Trump and/or Hillary, of course.
It is reasonable to assume that Putin had utter contempt for Clinton and Obama as weaklings, and Hillary as a crook to boot. He may have seen Trump as a kindred spirit. He may have felt that having weaklings in charge of the USA had been bad for Russia (forcing them to intervene in Syria and Iraq). It’s not clear what the refugee crisis in the -stans has been like, but Putin would know, and care.
OR…
It is reasonable to assume that Putin thought that Trump was an utter moron who could be easily controlled, and feared Clinton’s steely resolve.
No, wait. It isn’t.
Kevin M (5d3e49) — 7/13/2018 @ 3:00 pmNow, the real questions is, if it wasn’t Russia, which state actor was reading all of Hillary’s emails? My money is on the Chinese, doing it in such a way it blew back on their friends in Russia.
Kevin M (5d3e49) — 7/13/2018 @ 3:03 pmworking in concert with Mueller, Rosytwat and the assorted hot and horny trash at the FBI, coward-pig navy slut John McCain explicitly tries to sabotage the upcoming summit
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/13/2018 @ 3:07 pmGet up on teh downstrzok
Colonel Haiku (5fd258) — 7/13/2018 @ 3:07 pmEve’ybody get up
Strzok didn’t leak the info not because he’s a great patriot, just doing his job professionally, but because he and his superiors within the department of Justice, and at the White House didn’t want it leaked before the election, because they assumed Hillary would win easily, and they didn’t want her election tainted.
The dossier leaked, it was being shopped all over the place, and the FBI and the DOJ did nothing about it. Until after the election, when Comey helped give CNN and others cover to finally release it as news.
Evan3457 (550dba) — 7/13/2018 @ 3:11 pmbingo Mr. Evan you win free instapot
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/13/2018 @ 3:12 pmI said up (strzok)
Colonel Haiku (5fd258) — 7/13/2018 @ 3:14 pmDown (strzok)
Oh people comin’ from miles around
I said up (strzok)
Down (strzok)
In (strzok)
Out (strzok)
I said if you (if you)
If you wanna (ifyouwanna)
If you wanna feel real nice
Just ask the rockn’roll doctor’s advice
“By learning to appreciate soccer, I have also learned to appreciate the limits of American exceptionalism. Yes, we are a great nation, but that doesn’t mean that it’s our way or the highway. In fact, we become even greater if we learn to treasure the customs and attitudes of other lands. I suppose, in the end, my change of heart about sports is related to my change of heart about politics. In both fields I eschew the Trump Doctrine: “We’re America, b*tch.” No, we’re part of the world.”
—- Max Boot 👢
* ESAD, Max Boot !!!
*Eschew Sucking A D*ck
Colonel Haiku (5fd258) — 7/13/2018 @ 3:22 pmsoccer’s the one where everyone writhes on the ground at strategic moments pretending to be stricken
maybe that’s where Johnny got the idea
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/13/2018 @ 3:23 pm“He’s an adulterer
TomM (ffe711) — 7/13/2018 @ 3:36 pmHow do we know he’s strayed since 11/17?
According to many on this blog If he has not slept with a woman not his wife since then, he’s not an adulterer. Right?
if you bang a pass-around girl like dirty Lisa you’re an adulterer and you need to get that thing checked it could fall off
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/13/2018 @ 3:41 pm“He is an adulterer.”
BFD. The crocodile tears of Reps. Gohmert and Handle were hilarious, considering who also sat on the panel. Republicans have put their beliefs in morality in a box hidden in a warehouse for the duration of the Trump presidency. They are the last party that should be self-appointed morality police. Tsk-tsking about someone’s private behavior is the last refuge after all else fails:
And of course there is Trump himself:
Yes, it was stupid to exchange texts with someone on a government phone. But whether it was a co-worker or mistress is immaterial. Unless, you advocate for making adultery a crime, in which case many of those listed above would be in jail.
RipMurdock (1e2b6a) — 7/13/2018 @ 3:58 pmIt is indicative that they have nothing that has not already been uncovered by the IG. No law on their side, no facts on their side, so they resort to table-pounding about his affair.
And Gohmert is a nutjob. He should run away from any squirrels he sees. They might try to store him for the winter.
nk (dbc370) — 7/13/2018 @ 4:06 pmuncommonly stupid, the affair was the excuse for the 50,000 text messages, just like the yoga messages, were the excuse for conducting classified info, through a private server, just like the gay Hispanic affair with matteen was the reason to explain why they didn’t investigate the son of an fbi informant,
now you want to humor the psycho who has been tormenting Jordan’s family, buck Murdoch, go on ahead,
narciso (d1f714) — 7/13/2018 @ 4:08 pmnow we know when boston was littered with bodies thanks to bulger’s handiwork, mueller didn’t seem to note anything of consequence, including absolving two men who died in prison for a crime they didn’t commit,
@91 Another good one, Sammy. Thanks
crazy (5c5b07) — 7/13/2018 @ 4:09 pmThat’s a declaration against interest if there ever was one. Now Democrats will hate him too.
nk (dbc370) — 7/13/2018 @ 4:09 pm50,000 text messages? What could they have to say? Never mind that … when did they have the time to sabotage Trump’s campaign?
nk (dbc370) — 7/13/2018 @ 4:11 pmthere’s no reason both things can’t be equally true
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/13/2018 @ 4:14 pm@104/@105 ROFLMAO
The chubby, balding, jug-eared Texan is merely jealous that the dapper, man-about-town Strzok can get women on the side, just like our Captain can.
But wait, Louie… seems in the bad old Soviet days, you spent a summer as an “exchange student” in Ukraine, too.
Hmmmm. Texas may be more red than America knows. Congress needs to investigate. A public hearing, too, Comrade Gohmert!
Did the Ukraine girls really knock you out? Did you leave the West behind? Did Moscow girls make you sing and shout? Was Georgia always on your my, my, my, my, my, my, my, my mind? Were you shown ’round those snow-peaked mountains way down south? Were you taken to some daddy’s farm? Did you hear the balalaikas ringing out? Are you now or were you ever keeping your comrades warm?
Back In the U.S.S.R.?
DCSCA (797bc0) — 7/13/2018 @ 4:17 pmwe only have the first 500, in which they conspire to communicate with the judge on the fisa panel, where they sabotaged laufman, trying to further the investigation into the laptop, where they planned the leaks to barrett,
narciso (d1f714) — 7/13/2018 @ 4:17 pmlike Bernie sander who honey mooned in the soviet union, like deblasio who was a sandalista, or f chuck’s first boss, tom red harkin, who along with john Kerry and gary hart, was the Ortega caucus in the senate,
narciso (d1f714) — 7/13/2018 @ 4:21 pmit seems the fsb are rather incompetent, to not kill the person they targeted, but kill the one they didn’t
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/amesbury-novichok-latest-dawn-sturgess-nerve-agent-airport-investigation-container-a8444916.html
narciso (d1f714) — 7/13/2018 @ 4:28 pmyes, its sending it back the same hounds:
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/07/13/rosenstein-delivers-indictments-for-12-russians-then-buries-in-lock-box-of-doj-national-security-division/#more-151777
narciso (d1f714) — 7/13/2018 @ 4:31 pmTrue dat, nk. The reason he was “one of a handful…” was because he was supposedly the FBI liaison (can’t remember the source) to the counterintel task force Brennan formed after receiving from GCHQ a recording of a conversation about money from the Kremlin going into Trump’s campaign coffers passed by the intelligence agency of one of the Baltic States.
Somehow news of questions surrounding Trump and the Russians kept dribbling out to the international press while President Obama knew nothing about it. Imagine that.
crazy (5c5b07) — 7/13/2018 @ 4:34 pmwe feed our prey to the rancor, can’t you tell:
https://twitter.com/instapundit
someone who’s looked into the issue, Stephen McIntyre, has been able to tie this to lurk, the Russian hackers arrested in august 2016, but tying it to fsb is a stretch
narciso (d1f714) — 7/13/2018 @ 4:37 pmand that was the end of the story, not quite;
https://legalinsurrection.com/2018/07/five-years-ago-george-zimmerman-found-not-guilty/
narciso (d1f714) — 7/13/2018 @ 4:39 pmTakeaways. David French has four and JustSecurity has six, and Marcy Wheeler has some insights. She was the journalist who voluntarily appeared before a Mueller grand jury to testify about a reporter’s contacts with Trump people and Putineers right after the election.
Paul Montagu (91b6ad) — 7/13/2018 @ 4:39 pmI’m guessing the next indictments are going to involve people in the Trump campaign, starting with Roger Stone. Meantime, DNI Coats is confirming that Putin’s cyberattacks are ongoing.
there can be none of this examination, because neither the fbi nor the cia, had the server in question, the crowdstrike report was full of bad attribution for the code, ridiculous assumptions
narciso (d1f714) — 7/13/2018 @ 4:45 pm104 I seem to recall adultery has been grounds to lose your security clearance for decades.
Nate Ogden (223c65) — 7/13/2018 @ 4:49 pmnow we do know, that the fbi was negotiating with assuange back in the spring of 2017, using deripasha, (that guy) as a back channel, this was separate from warner using his atty, waldman who had contacts with deripasha, and the foreign ministry, to communicate with steele, (why did they chose waldman, because he was the fixer re the levinson matter, and perhaps was packaged as source a)
narciso (d1f714) — 7/13/2018 @ 4:51 pmthe long and the short of it, was assuange felt betrayed, and leaked the vault 7 tool kit, which on the richter scale of national security snafus, is 9.5. then cody shearer shopped that ridiculous story to the times, which wouldn’t qualify as a Dwayne Johnson spec script
DNI Coats lol
pliable geriatric buffoon
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/13/2018 @ 4:52 pmthere can be none of this examination
these silly unsupported indictments are what falls out of mueller’s dirty fbi butt when his hot-to-trot cougar wife isn’t pegging it
now you know
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/13/2018 @ 5:01 pm121: I’m assuming that it also applies to the aforementioned members of Congress, or the Trump White House? Without the publicity, a number of WH staffers would still be there with security clearances despite adulterous behavior or spousal abuse. It seems such behavior is a qualification, not a disqualification.
Ripmurdock (1d97e4) — 7/13/2018 @ 6:15 pmNow is like to know are out vital networks more secure, against real intrusion into the power grid, medical data bases
Narciso (b2eb1c) — 7/13/2018 @ 6:45 pmPoor Seth Rich. Murdered by Hillary even though he had nothing to do with leaking emails.
Davethulhu (270006) — 7/13/2018 @ 6:46 pmThe Night They Drove Old Dixie DownTeh Night That I Became a ClownPeter Strzok is the name, and I served in teh FBI
‘Til Mueller’s carnival came and gave me teh stinky eye
In the summer of 2016 we were boinkin’, like two horny teens
By August 10th, teh ax had fell, it’s a time I remember, oh so well
The night that I became a clown, and teh press were photographin’
The night that I became a clown, and the people were laughin’ they went
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha
Back with my wife in DC, when one day she called to me
Colonel Haiku (5fd258) — 7/13/2018 @ 7:05 pm“Peter, quick, come see, it burns when I take a pee”
“Now I don’t mind you screwin’ trash, and I don’t care cuz that Page is a gash”
“Just pack what ya need and ya hit teh road
And good riddance, have fun with that homely toad”
The night that I became a clown , and teh press were photographin’
The night that I became a clown, and the people were laughin’ they went
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha
I’m wondering how Peter could not remember writing a text, but then knew it was “written in shorthand”, “written late at night” and was written when he was “upset at Trump for insulting a Gold Star father”… so he didn’t remember, but has a boatload of excuses for what he doesn’t remember and evidently remembers his excuses very well, thank you for the rehearsal FBI legal team.
He’s a liar and used to getting away with lying to people who are outside the fbi, he explains the smell in Walmart he was huffing as a simple inter county rivalry. Oh. OK. He says that should have been said in private not on an fbi phone… so that would be OK then, and anyway he’d be right about that smell because he’s a highly regarded fbi agent.
So I look at him and think that he reeks of elitist privilege, with some amoral stench on top of it.. like a used car salesman with a tic tac over stale coffee and rotten tooth breath.
The FBI needs a bath from the top down.
steveg (a9dcab) — 7/13/2018 @ 8:23 pmSessions should resign and Trump should appoint someone qualified at AG who is a leader. Sessions may be qualified on multiple levels for all I know, but he’s not a strong leader. He was stung by his colleagues in his confirmation hearing and he never recovered… was he really dumb enough to think any of those people had ever really been his friends? They treated him like the kid who ran out of commissary… as soon as he runs out of Honeybuns to pass out they sell his ass.
No I think he cares too much of his personal honor to admit he was duped. The problem is the possum Senate, who can get confirmed through them, if we wait till after the midterms, the dems will come up with more tools of sabotage.
Narciso (b2eb1c) — 7/13/2018 @ 8:36 pmI’m really looking forward to all the shock and awe when this Russia nonsense is done, and it’s Hillary and her associates that are frogmarched off to Guantanamo Bay.
All this present drama is just stage management, to prevent too much civil discord when it happens. The people are paying attention. Strzok isn’t fooling anyone.
Present company excepted.
And we still won’t be tired of winning.
lee (ab26cf) — 7/13/2018 @ 8:45 pmugh our sleazy tranny-trash mattis military at “work”
these people are sick
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/13/2018 @ 9:01 pmEureka:
narciso (d1f714) — 7/13/2018 @ 10:08 pmhttp://dailycaller.com/2018/07/13/dossier-mueller-vindication
And from the other end:
http://dailycaller.com/2018/07/13/dershowitz-on-muellers-indict
Narciso (b2eb1c) — 7/13/2018 @ 10:18 pmPerhaps because the 1) the FBI/DoJ has be slow-walking the evidence to Congress and 2) the IG report on the Trump-Russia investigation hasn’t been released; we only have the Clinton email investigation report and Trump-Russia isn’t part of it. But in the Clinton email investigation the IG has zero confidence that some of Strzok’s actions were free from bias. Frankly, his actions clearly were biased, but Mr. Horowitz is overly forgiving in what constitutes evidence of bias. Unless he has “documentary or testimonial evidence,” i.e. unless the individual is stupid enough to send a text, IM, or email and put in writing that the individual is taking a particular action due to their bias, or confess the same to the IG investigators, Horowitz is not going to come right out and say it even though there is no other plausible explanation for the action.
(PP420-421)
The Clinton email investigation was politicized from the start.
http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/11/28/former-intelligence-inspector-general-hillary-clinton-email-scandal-expected-congress
Got that folks? Former ICIG Chuck McCullough failed to consider the “political ramifications” for raising the alarm about the sheer volume of classified information on Clinton’s server. Instead he put national security ahead of politics. The politicians for political purposes wanted to undersell the volume of classified information. So they circled the wagons around the entirely meaningless phrase “marked classified” which is not any sort of standard. And for failing to consider the “political ramifications” the politicians accused him of politicizing the matter. Is that Orwellian or what?
ICIG staff members met with Strzok and informed him that all but four of the 30,000+ work related emails that transited Clinton’s server were forwarded to a foreign entity not Russia. Strzok says he recalls the meeting but he doesn’t remember the substance of the meeting. I’m not the director of the FBI’s Deputy Assistant Director of the Espionage Section but I was a Naval intelligence officer, a Special Securtity Officer, and Information Security (INFOSEC) was my business. INFOSEC was Strzok’s business and he is flat lying. Nobody forgets when someone tells you that 30,000 emails, thousands containing classified information, have been transmitted to a foreign entity. Especially if you are investigating someone for violating security procedures and that individual is the one who let all that information escape. There is only one reason and one reason only Strzok would ignore that information. He had gotten the message from the Democrats in Congress hellbound to protect Hillary. You damn well consider the “political ramifications” of raising any alarms. And Strzok unlike McCullough, as his emails/IMs show, always put politics first ahead of national security.
You have got to be kidding, Pat.
(PP429-430)
The IG has profound concerns about the “volume and extent of unauthorized media contacts” i.e. leaks, the FBI’s policy that strictly limits who is authorized to speak to the media is widely ignored, journalists trade favors with FBI agents for information, and the IG says the FBI has a culture of leaking. How do arrive at your conclusion that the FBI isn’t a hotbed of partisan leakers?
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/14/2018 @ 7:32 amthank you Mr. 57
this stuff is documented for a reason
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/14/2018 @ 5:12 pmLooks like the Strozk texts meant exactly what their plain English meant, according to their recipient.
Daiwa (2a0965) — 7/21/2018 @ 5:39 pm