• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

FBI fires Peter Strzok, months after anti-Trump texts revealed

Renae

Renae

Banned
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
50,241
Reaction score
19,243
Location
San Antonio Texas
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
It's about time they fired that piece of ****.
 
Agreed. Him and every partisan (left or right) hack in the FBI that has abused their position needs to be purged.
 
Cardinal said:
This is well beyond the recommended penalty of a 60 day suspension and demotion, which will raise the the possibility that the firing was politically motivated.
Click to expand...

He violated policy; maybe even the law.
 
apdst said:
He violated policy; maybe even the law.
Click to expand...

“Maybe”? The IG did an investigation of Strzok. He’s the one who recommended the 60 day suspension and demotion. Why did the deputy director go further than that?
 
This from the article linked to in the OP

Goelman said the bureau’s deputy director “overruled” the FBI's Office of Professional Responsibility.

“This decision should be deeply troubling to all Americans,” the attorney said.
Click to expand...

I wonder why the recommendation of the Office of Professional Responsibility was ignored and overruled?
 
Cardinal said:
“Maybe”? The IG did an investigation of Strzok. He’s the one who recommended the 60 day suspension and demotion. Why did the deputy director go further than that?
Click to expand...

Necause Strzok is a piece of **** and is a disgrace to the FBI. He might be looking at an indictment next.
 
haymarket said:
This from the article linked to in the OP



I wonder why the recommendation of the Office of Professional Responsibility was ignored and overruled?
Click to expand...

Probably because David Bowdich believed a 60 day vacation was insufficient as a penalty.
 
Renae said:
FBI fires Peter Strzok, months after anti-Trump texts revealed | Fox News

Bout damned time.
Click to expand...

My take:

1. Strzok cooperated with the FBI/DOJ...just like Page and others. Because of that, he kept his...well, not "his" job, but "a" job with the FBI.

2. He eventually outlived his usefulness to the investigation.

3. He was put in front of Congress, where he made himself look like an evil fool.

4. Now that he is cut loose from the FBI, he is open for indictment...and he'll have to pay for his own lawyer.

He deserves everything he is going to get.
 
haymarket said:
This from the article linked to in the OP



I wonder why the recommendation of the Office of Professional Responsibility was ignored and overruled?
Click to expand...

There you go with your dishonesty again...

Your quote doesn't say the recommendation was "ignored". Just that it was "overruled".
 
Cardinal said:
This is well beyond the recommended penalty of a 60 day suspension and demotion, which will raise the the possibility that the firing was politically motivated.
Click to expand...
Indeed:
In a statement, Strzok’s lawyer Aitan Goelman said the firing was a “deeply troubling” departure from established precedent, and that “the decision to terminate was taken in response to political pressure, and to punish Special Agent Strzok for political speech protected by the First Amendment, not on a fair and independent examination of the facts.” https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/wapo-fbi-agent-peter-strzok-fired
Click to expand...
I think they've figured he doesn't have anything too damning against them doesn't have any tapes, can't pull an Omarosa, they've enough "plausible deniability". This is always a 'tricky' situation, there's a risk he'll confirm everything that's been said about him, what was meant by "insurance policy", confirm what his mistress said about these texts (that they meant what they say). Nonetheless, it will always be very difficult to objectively establish the highly biased messaging and conduct translated into specific actions affecting the investigations.
 
MrMike said:
Agreed. Him and every partisan (left or right) hack in the FBI that has abused their position needs to be purged.
Click to expand...

Why in your view is the FBI only subject to this type of scrutiny?
 
Conduct unbecoming is grounds for any FBI agent to be fired.
that is all the reason that would be needed.

anyone else that did what he did would be in jail.
again we see a two tier justice system. one for government people one for the rest of us.
Justice is not blind.
 
Mycroft said:
There you go with your dishonesty again...

Your quote doesn't say the recommendation was "ignored". Just that it was "overruled".
Click to expand...

When will you get it through your thick heads that your dumb word changing games never work. Overruling something the suggestion with some other suggestion is the same thing as that suggestion being ignored. He may have looked at it, but it is still being ignored :)
 
NeverTrumpGOP said:
Why in your view is the FBI only subject to this type of scrutiny?
Click to expand...

Because he/they are the actual subject of this thread. If you wish to include other people and other agencies, please go make a thread about it. I may (or may not) participate.

Have a nice day!
 
haymarket said:
This from the article linked to in the OP



I wonder why the recommendation of the Office of Professional Responsibility was ignored and overruled?
Click to expand...

I can think of one but the cult isn't going to like it.
 
apdst said:
He violated policy; maybe even the law.
Click to expand...

There are many investigators who thinks that the subject of their investigation is scum. They will come and unofficially say it too- To friends, colleagues, and others, as the investigation is ongoing. That’s not a violation of any policy. This firing, like so many others during this administration, was purely politically motivated.
 
ataraxia said:
There are many investigators who thinks that the subject of their investigation is scum. They will come and unofficially say it too- To friends, colleagues, and others, as the investigation is ongoing. That’s not a violation of any policy. This firing, like so many others during this administration, was purely politically motivated.
Click to expand...

I have no illusions that Strzok is an innocent (i.e. that he did nothing to instigate a disciplinary action), but in light of the circumstances of McCabe's firing (sacking him just before he could collect his pension, just as trump wanted), there does appear to be the spectre of continued political motivation here.
 
ataraxia said:
There are many investigators who thinks that the subject of their investigation is scum. They will come and unofficially say it too- To friends, colleagues, and others, as the investigation is ongoing. That’s not a violation of any policy. This firing, like so many others during this administration, was purely politically motivated.
Click to expand...

Strzok abused his authority in an attempt to affect the outcome of an election.
 
MrMike said:
Because he/they are the actual subject of this thread. If you wish to include other people and other agencies, please go make a thread about it. I may (or may not) participate.

Have a nice day!
Click to expand...

That does not answer my question, coward!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom