Ultimate College Softball
Register Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 1 of 10      1   2   3   4   Next   »
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 10,016
Reply with quote  #1 
Someone touched on this the other day, about FBI agent Peter Strzok being removed from Mueller's investigation, but I'm not sure what thread, and in any case, the growing scrutiny into the conduct of the DOJ and FBI before and after the 2016 election deserves it's own thread.

Strzok was removed in August, without explanation. We recently learned his was dismissed due to an exchange of virulent anti-Trump / pro-Clinton text messages with his girlfriend Lisa Page, a lawyer, also with the FBI, also working the Trump case, also since removed.

No question Mueller was right to dismiss both of them, and if it ended with that, all well and good. But...

There seems to be more - much more - to all of this.  

(I'll be adding to this shortly, but posting in bits because my laptop is acting up and I don't want to lose anything)
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 10,016
Reply with quote  #2 
Strzok is a former Director of FBI counterintelligence, and in that capacity worked frequently with CIA Director John Brennan, (who famously lied about CIA spying on Congress  back in 2014.)

Strzok was integral to the FBIs investigation of Hillary Clinton's email, and was present when Clinton was questioned, a meeting during which she wasn't placed under oath, and curiously, no records were kept, no one even bothered to take notes. Strzok concluded that Clinton was "careless" in mishandling email, but found no "proof of intent" of wrongdoing. Sound familiar? Right, James Comey used this phrasing when he publicly explained why the FBI would not recommend charges against Clinton.

So we have the FBI Director relying on the recommendation of a rabid pro-Clinton / anti- Trump agent regarding the handling of her case, and most notably, not to prosecute.

Strzok's conduct during the Clinton case, and other politically charged cases, is now under investigation by the DOJ. Worth noting here, but more on it later, that the DOJ is also under currently under investigation for it's handling of the Clinton case. 

(more coming...)
 
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 10,016
Reply with quote  #3 

Following his handling of the Clinton case, Strzok was chosen by top FBI officials to lead the FBI investigation into Trump - Russia collusion. We already know the FBI had their own investigation, ongoing prior to Mueller's investigation, which was started when? At about the same time Christopher Steele briefed the FBI on his developing "dossier" on Trump.

Stroke's investigation, just weeks before the election, agreed to pay Christopher Steele $50,000 for his work on the now infamous and largely discredited "Steele dossier." Note that Fusion GPS, funded by the Clinton campaign and the DNC, paid Steele $168,000 for the dossier.

The FBI later refused to pay Steele when he was unable to corroborate the claims made in the dossier. But by that time, the claims in the dossier had already for months been the driving force behind the collusion investigation - even though they could not be corroborated by it's author, and was paid for by Clinton and the DNC.

Anything fishy about that? We'll see, as that is also under investigation by the DOJ.

ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 10,016
Reply with quote  #4 
I didn't have time to look into this when I first saw the story, and don't think i commented when it was posted here, but it did get me thinking... why are we finding out only now about the reason for Strzok's dismissal from Mueller's investigation. Why didn't they tell us back in August, when he was dismissed?

(As a side note, the House Intel Oversight committee is pursuing answers this very question from Rod Rosenstein at DOJ and FBI Director Christopher Wray.)

Back on point, remember back when Lois Lerner told a conference that the IRS had targeted certain groups based on their political affiliation, notably the Tea Party? We learned later that her admission was prompted by a desire to get out ahead of a damaging OIG report that was about to be released and revealed the targeting.

Well, it just so happens that the DOJ OIG investigation, now in it's 11th month, into the FBI's handling of the Clinton investigation is due to file it's report soon, perhaps as early as next week. It's entirely plausible that those involved are trying to get out ahead of the report, in an effort to limit any damage it might cause. 

In any case, Strzok's central role in both the Clinton and Trump investigations, as well as the Steele dossier, needs to be further explained. When people talk about the deep state, highly-partisan authorities with outsized influenced over how government functions, and how cases are handled, they're referring to people like Strzok. It's imperative that we know how he influenced the investigation into Clinton, how he influenced Comey's decisions, and how he used the Steele dossier to influence the Trump investigation.

/end

 
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 24,285
Reply with quote  #5 
Thanks as always for your work. Explains so much
__________________
"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
Fresh

Registered:
Posts: 2,996
Reply with quote  #6 
I  find, that knowing all this man knows, he feels trump is a dick and Hillary is innocent. You people don't see how a person can seperate his private and work life. As a professional, well respected investigator, he is able to do just that. His personal feelings about trump, formed from seeing how "the real trump" comports himself, believes he is a dog. Not hard to beleieve. If all you guys think was true, he would have drawn the opposite conclusion. You think he liked HC for her perky personality? The conclusion I draw is the exact opposite of yours. Imagine that.
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 24,285
Reply with quote  #7 
FIB don't let that naysayer screw up your thread, he'll torpedo it if he we allow it. He asks for substance, you laid out the substance with facts. Ignore the angry bamaturd reincarnation. This thread could be the bamaturdkpifreshyturddewillyduaine Waterloo
__________________
"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
uwApoligist

Registered:
Posts: 8,086
Reply with quote  #8 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ForeverInBlue
I didn't have time to look into this when I first saw the story, and don't think i commented when it was posted here, but it did get me thinking... why are we finding out only now about the reason for Strzok's dismissal from Mueller's investigation. Why didn't they tell us back in August, when he was dismissed?

(As a side note, the House Intel Oversight committee is pursuing answers this very question from Rod Rosenstein at DOJ and FBI Director Christopher Wray.)

Back on point, remember back when Lois Lerner told a conference that the IRS had targeted certain groups based on their political affiliation, notably the Tea Party? We learned later that her admission was prompted by a desire to get out ahead of a damaging OIG report that was about to be released and revealed the targeting.

Well, it just so happens that the DOJ OIG investigation, now in it's 11th month, into the FBI's handling of the Clinton investigation is due to file it's report soon, perhaps as early as next week. It's entirely plausible that those involved are trying to get out ahead of the report, in an effort to limit any damage it might cause. 

In any case, Strzok's central role in both the Clinton and Trump investigations, as well as the Steele dossier, needs to be further explained. When people talk about the deep state, highly-partisan authorities with outsized influenced over how government functions, and how cases are handled, they're referring to people like Strzok. It's imperative that we know how he influenced the investigation into Clinton, how he influenced Comey's decisions, and how he used the Steele dossier to influence the Trump investigation.

/end

 

The reason we are only finding out now is that have a completely dishonest media.  They only care about democrat talking points.  Never investigate democrat misdeeds.  We saw it across the board with Obama, and with Clinton.  

It took a Freedom of Information Act from Judicial Watch to get this information to surface.  It came from followup FOIA'a from the Clinton Tarmac meeting.

__________________
I'm more getting a sense that willie wynn is dewey is a F'n loser. 
TerpAlum

Registered:
Posts: 794
Reply with quote  #9 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ForeverInBlue

Strzok was integral to the FBIs investigation of Hillary Clinton's email, and was present when Clinton was questioned, a meeting during which she wasn't placed under oath, and curiously, no records were kept, no one even bothered to take notes.
(more coming...)
 


News flash: No one is sworn under oath during FBI interviews unless that instruction is officially referred to DOJ by Congress for the person.

And Yes, there are notes. The official form, reporting the notes of the Clinton interview, is available on line. It exists.

DOJ has been slow in adopting the recording of interviews. Plus not all states record their interviews either. But to blame Clinton or anyone in that investigation about this policy is ridiculous. It was not particularly about her that they did not record it.

Lastly, it was reported that about 50-100 agents were working on the investigation and many were Republicans. It is right to remove any of them for publicly stated political views related to the cases they work on. But one investigator cannot influence an entire investigation. The one for Trump is still going on and much of the investigation is being done now, not then.

Good grief. Does anyone check facts anymore?
uwApoligist

Registered:
Posts: 8,086
Reply with quote  #10 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TerpAlum


News flash: No one is sworn under oath during FBI interviews unless that instruction is officially referred to DOJ by Congress for the person.

And Yes, there are notes. The official form, reporting the notes of the Clinton interview, is available on line. It exists.

DOJ has been slow in adopting the recording of interviews. Plus not all states record their interviews either. But to blame Clinton or anyone in that investigation about this policy is ridiculous. It was not particularly about her that they did not record it.

Lastly, it was reported that about 50-100 agents were working on the investigation and many were Republicans. It is right to remove any of them for publicly stated political views related to the cases they work on. But one investigator cannot influence an entire investigation. The one for Trump is still going on and much of the investigation is being done now, not then.

Good grief. Does anyone check facts anymore?

Links please

__________________
I'm more getting a sense that willie wynn is dewey is a F'n loser. 
Will_I_Wynn

Registered:
Posts: 742
Reply with quote  #11 
Bias is not going to put people into jail.  A jury of your peers is the only group who can make that call.  Never has there been more bias against an individual than Hillary Clinton has experienced from this WH and she isn't going to jail.  I can't recall anyone serving time who got there due to bias against their politics.  This claim of bias against the FBI was predicted and is just another case of a WH claiming all the umpires are against them.

All stories make it to the public.  Talk radio, Fox News, and many other right leaning entities see to it that their stories get the attention they need.  The child sex ring, Obama being a foreigner, and Clintons murdering people have all reached the general public.  The GOP runs everything now and if a case doesn't get prosecuted, it's because there's insufficient evidence.  That said, when a WH is on full defense, as this one is today, deflection of any sort should be expected.  If President Trump has done no wrong, he will not be indicted or impeached.

__________________
A gullible nation is a vulnerable nation.  Challenge what you read on the internet.  Our nation's security is in our hands.  Don't be duped by misinformation.

The Right in here are quoting posts and changing words.  Please search for original post if accurate information is desired.




Lost_1

Registered:
Posts: 2,859
Reply with quote  #12 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Will_I_Wynn
Bias is not going to put people into jail.  A jury of your peers is the only group who can make that call.  Never has there been more bias against an individual than Hillary Clinton has experienced from this WH and she isn't going to jail.  I can't recall anyone serving time who got there due to bias against their politics.  This claim of bias against the FBI was predicted and is just another case of a WH claiming all the umpires are against them.

All stories make it to the public.  Talk radio, Fox News, and many other right leaning entities see to it that their stories get the attention they need.  The child sex ring, Obama being a foreigner, and Clintons murdering people have all reached the general public.  The GOP runs everything now and if a case doesn't get prosecuted, it's because there's insufficient evidence.  That said, when a WH is on full defense, as this one is today, deflection of any sort should be expected.  If President Trump has done no wrong, he will not be indicted or impeached.




Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey
Lost 1 - Don't ask me any questions on this subject as I know almost nothing about it.   

__________________
If we are not careful, our colleges will produce a group of close-minded, unscientific, illogical propagandists, consumed with immoral acts. - Dr. Martin Luther King


“Everyone is in favor of free speech. Hardly a day passes without its being extolled, but some people's idea of it is that they are free to say what they like, but if anyone else says anything back, that is an outrage.” Winston S. Churchill


uwApoligist

Registered:
Posts: 8,086
Reply with quote  #13 
18 months of investigation.  They have completely given up on collusion.  Trying some of Trumps associates for 10 year old rent check issues. 

Trumps lawyer lays out the case for why the president cannot be charged with obstruction.  Only thing they can do is charge him with high crimes and misdemeanors, but that can only happen in the House.  While there are some truly salty members of the house, there are not enough to impeach.

__________________
I'm more getting a sense that willie wynn is dewey is a F'n loser. 
Will_I_Wynn

Registered:
Posts: 742
Reply with quote  #14 
There is insufficient reason today to think this President will be impeached or be found to have done anything illegal.  Tomorrow?  That's another day.
__________________
A gullible nation is a vulnerable nation.  Challenge what you read on the internet.  Our nation's security is in our hands.  Don't be duped by misinformation.

The Right in here are quoting posts and changing words.  Please search for original post if accurate information is desired.




Lost_1

Registered:
Posts: 2,859
Reply with quote  #15 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Will_I_Wynn
There is insufficient reason today to think this President will be impeached or be found to have done anything illegal.  Tomorrow?  That's another day.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey
Lost 1 - Don't ask me any questions on this subject as I know almost nothing about it.   

__________________
If we are not careful, our colleges will produce a group of close-minded, unscientific, illogical propagandists, consumed with immoral acts. - Dr. Martin Luther King


“Everyone is in favor of free speech. Hardly a day passes without its being extolled, but some people's idea of it is that they are free to say what they like, but if anyone else says anything back, that is an outrage.” Winston S. Churchill


uwApoligist

Registered:
Posts: 8,086
Reply with quote  #16 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Will_I_Wynn
There is insufficient reason today to think this President will be impeached or be found to have done anything illegal.  Tomorrow?  That's another day.

18 months they have been investigating.  They have fully given up on collusion.  Moving on to obstruction, which will also fail. 

__________________
I'm more getting a sense that willie wynn is dewey is a F'n loser. 
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 24,285
Reply with quote  #17 
Quote:
Originally Posted by uwApoligist

18 months they have been investigating.  They have fully given up on collusion.  Moving on to obstruction, which will also fail. 


Dewy flailing like a kid in the deep end who forgot to wear his floaties

__________________
"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
TerpAlum

Registered:
Posts: 794
Reply with quote  #18 
Links (more added as I get them):

Numerous articles talking about what was in the notes, plus: https://vault.fbi.gov/hillary-r.-clinton

Findlaw on not being under oath during investigation:
https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/the-dumbest-most-ridiculous-conspiracy-theory-of-the-fbis-clinton-investigation-yet/

(It is a crime whether you tell the lie to the investigator or when testifying so oath does not matter.)

Everyone's favorite news site: Breitbart on "100 agents": http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2016/10/14/fbi-agents-furious-top-brass-letting-clinton-off-hook/


Only interviews when a suspect is in custody are regularly recorded: https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=bba5d9fd-a149-41ff-b1b2-985e165b74ab
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 24,285
Reply with quote  #19 
Another salty flailer
__________________
"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
uwApoligist

Registered:
Posts: 8,086
Reply with quote  #20 
More scrutiny. 

“If they used the phony dossier as the predicate for the FISA order they obtained, that could be a huge problem,” Kallstrom tells Breitbart News. “If they knew the information was phony, that is a felony. If they did not know it was phony, they were incompetent.”

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/12/04/bob-mueller-has-a-huge-conflict-of-interest-says-former-assistant-fbi-director/

__________________
I'm more getting a sense that willie wynn is dewey is a F'n loser. 
uwApoligist

Registered:
Posts: 8,086
Reply with quote  #21 
Mistrial if true.  Flynn walks.

[KnHF6So] 

__________________
I'm more getting a sense that willie wynn is dewey is a F'n loser. 
Fresh

Registered:
Posts: 2,996
Reply with quote  #22 
Quote:
Originally Posted by uwApoligist

18 months they have been investigating.  They have fully given up on collusion.  Moving on to obstruction, which will also fail. 


How do you know this? Do you have a little bird that sits in on the Mueller briefings? You assume because Mueller's investigation doesn't leak like the trump administration sieve, nothing is being pursued. Investigation into trump mafia discussions with Russians and lying about it is ongoing. You will literally believe anything you see that you want to be true. Ankles must be pretty sore after kicking that bar all the way around your house.
Fresh

Registered:
Posts: 2,996
Reply with quote  #23 
Quote:
Originally Posted by uwApoligist
More scrutiny. 

“If they used the phony dossier as the predicate for the FISA order they obtained, that could be a huge problem,” Kallstrom tells Breitbart News. “If they knew the information was phony, that is a felony. If they did not know it was phony, they were incompetent.”

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/12/04/bob-mueller-has-a-huge-conflict-of-interest-says-former-assistant-fbi-director/


Ifs and thens are not proofs and evidence.

If trump told Putin he was going to ignore any sanctions imposed by congress and we had it on a phone tap then trump will be guilty of treason and go to his deserved cell at Levenworth. 
Fresh

Registered:
Posts: 2,996
Reply with quote  #24 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TerpAlum
Links (more added as I get them):

Numerous articles talking about what was in the notes, plus: https://vault.fbi.gov/hillary-r.-clinton

Findlaw on not being under oath during investigation:
https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/the-dumbest-most-ridiculous-conspiracy-theory-of-the-fbis-clinton-investigation-yet/

(It is a crime whether you tell the lie to the investigator or when testifying so oath does not matter.)

Everyone's favorite news site: Breitbart on "100 agents": http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2016/10/14/fbi-agents-furious-top-brass-letting-clinton-off-hook/


Only interviews when a suspect is in custody are regularly recorded: https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=bba5d9fd-a149-41ff-b1b2-985e165b74ab


Crickets.
uwApoligist

Registered:
Posts: 8,086
Reply with quote  #25 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fresh


Crickets.

You must have missed the part where Strzok led the Clinton email investigation. 

They are reopening that investigation.  Once we get some impartiality in the investigation let's see where it takes us.

__________________
I'm more getting a sense that willie wynn is dewey is a F'n loser. 
Fresh

Registered:
Posts: 2,996
Reply with quote  #26 
Quote:
Originally Posted by uwApoligist

You must have missed the part where Strzok led the Clinton email investigation. 

They are reopening that investigation.  Once we get some impartiality in the investigation let's see where it takes us.


From what I've heard, the texts were to his girlfriend. His hatred stemmed from all he knew about trump. His opinion of Hillary was from the same reasoning. Regardless, he was a professional and it probably never was reflected in his work. Mueller was also correct in removing him as soon as he found out. There can't even be the slightest hint of partisanship from Mueller. 
uwApoligist

Registered:
Posts: 8,086
Reply with quote  #27 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fresh


From what I've heard, the texts were to his girlfriend. His hatred stemmed from all he knew about trump. His opinion of Hillary was from the same reasoning. Regardless, he was a professional and it probably never was reflected in his work. Mueller was also correct in removing him as soon as he found out. There can't even be the slightest hint of partisanship from Mueller. 

He was fired for it by Mueller.  Proves there was a problem with is impartiality.  Now reopen the Hillary email case, and get that properly investigated.

__________________
I'm more getting a sense that willie wynn is dewey is a F'n loser. 
Fresh

Registered:
Posts: 2,996
Reply with quote  #28 
Quote:
Originally Posted by uwApoligist

He was fired for it by Mueller.  Proves there was a problem with is impartiality.  The fact he investigated government business and ended with an unfavorable opinion of trump proves nothing. I say if he investigates trump and still likes him, he's incompetent and must be removed. People of honor can set their personal preferences aside and do their job. You're grabbing those straws again. Now reopen the Hillary email case, and get that properly investigated.


What evidence do you have that it was improperly investigated? trump's word? That and $5.00 will get you a Starbucks.
uwApoligist

Registered:
Posts: 8,086
Reply with quote  #29 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fresh


What evidence do you have that it was improperly investigated? trump's word? That and $5.00 will get you a Starbucks.

Well it is being reopened.  Time to get the rancor and partisanship out of our investigations.  Don't you think?

__________________
I'm more getting a sense that willie wynn is dewey is a F'n loser. 
Fresh

Registered:
Posts: 2,996
Reply with quote  #30 
Everybody knows Starzk was a good investigator and wouldn't allow his personal feelings about trump affect his job. Everything is not a damn conspiracy. Everybody knows that.
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.