OMG... Is this creepy or what?

[Acadia]

]I find it sooooo ironic that the Trumpsters constantly attack people based on their looks[/B]. Strzok. Trudeau. Hillary. Fiorina. People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones and yet they yell at media for putting out unflattering pictures of Mr. Swampy. They yell at media for whining about Melania's high heels. They yell at comedians for constantly making fun of Eric. Then they yell at regular citizens who make fun of Mr. Swampy's hair, weight, and super genius big brain... The hypocrisy will never cease to amaze me.

Congratulation! You win the internet today.

 

[NeverTrump]

I am not a Trump supporter, and this is not one of the thousands of threads bashing Trump... So take your meds, be on time at your therapy session and move along.

.

No iit's bashing a patriotic FBI Agent who has been found to do no wrongdoing, was dragged into a congressional hearing for no reason, and destroyed the GOP CT about the deep state. Your last line of attack is to attack his looks and that one debateable motion that he made with his face in ten hours??? When the guy you support constantly makes weird motions with his hands and doesn't even know how to spell.

 

[cabse5]

Anyone who mistakenly thinks this is important or significant or telling has truly lost their harmonica.

Well, you know, he's biased and his treating of the Hillary email case was miles more lenient than his treating of the Trump Russian collusion case. And he was one of the lead investigators on both cases. You do the math.

 

[Grim17]

No iit's bashing a patriotic FBI Agent who has been found to do no wrongdoing, was dragged into a congressional hearing for no reason, and destroyed the GOP CT about the deep state. Your last line of attack is to attack his looks and that one debateable motion that he made with his face in ten hours??? When the guy you support constantly makes weird motions with his hands and doesn't even know how to spell.

Is that clip creepy, or isn't it?

Can you see past your seething anger and hatred long enough to give an honest response?

.

 

[NeverTrump]

Is that clip creepy, or isn't it?

Can you see past your seething anger and hatred long enough to give an honest response?

.

I do not judge people based on looks, it would be wise if you did the same. However, when stacked against other middle aged white guys storkz is dully average looking. I'd love to see you not do something weird in front of live TV for ten hours.

 

[Grim17]

I do not judge people based on looks, it would be wise if you did the same. However, when stacked against other middle aged white guys storkz is dully average looking. I'd love to see you not do something weird in front of live TV for ten hours.

Just as I expected... There was no chance in hell you were capable of seeing past that which controls your every waking moment.

Get help.

.

 

[calamity]

You have to see it to believe it.... It's a short video clip of Peter Strzok from Thursday's congressional hearing.

At first I thought it couldn't be real, but apparently it is, and... well...

https://twitter.com/Hollybowie/status/1017551128014225413


.

You say that as if this isn't creepy.

 

[haymarket]

Important... No. Creepy as hell... Most definitely.

That's the kind of look that can haunt a person in their nightmares. lol

.

we know a lot about your nightmares by reading your posts here every day.

 

[veritas1]

Strzok is a smarmy little twerp and is lying out his ass. His bias has been definitively established. He was kicked down to HR in the FBI because of it. He was kicked off the Mueller investigation because of it.

 

[haymarket]

Well, you know, he's biased and his treating of the Hillary email case was miles more lenient than his treating of the Trump Russian collusion case. And he was one of the lead investigators on both cases. You do the math.

Comparing the seriousness of the two was exposed by Mr. Strzoks attorney as false equivalency.

 

[Acadia]

Strzok is a smarmy little twerp and is lying out his ass. His bias has been definitively established. He was kicked down to HR in the FBI because of it. He was kicked off the Mueller investigation because of it.

I actually found it offensive when he talked about his meeting with Mueller. Am I really to believe that Robert Mueller basically said, "Look, Pete, your THOUSANDS of texts to the other FBI agent whom you're schtupping really makes us look bad, so I have to take you off the case. OK, go to the mail room now".

Seriously? Mueller yanked him for "appearances"?

 

[cabse5]

Comparing the seriousness of the two was exposed by Mr. Strzoks attorney as false equivalency.

False equivalency? I don't think so. For example, there are persons who deliberately destroyed evidence in the Hillary email case and weren't prosecuted and were allowed to go free, and Manafort, he isn't free.

 

[NeverTrump]

Just as I expected... There was no chance in hell you were capable of seeing past that which controls your every waking moment.

Get help.

.

I have no idea what you are talking about. I did not mention Mr. Swampy once in my response to you in that post that you quoted.

 

[HowardBThiname]

Who has an emotional response to people that destroyed your career and reputation without just cause.

Yeah, that's a toughy.

Oh come on. Did you see what he did?

That's a comic character move.

Didn't it creep you out? Even a little bit?

 

[Casper]

Just as I expected... There was no chance in hell you were capable of seeing past that which controls your every waking moment.

Get help.

.

You started this thread for some strange reason, so maybe you should consider taking your own advice.

 

[Casper]

Oh come on. Did you see what he did?

That's a comic character move.

Didn't it creep you out? Even a little bit?

Nope, the entire show was a joke, funny how some do not realize how badly this makes them look, desperate people do desperate things.

 

[late]

Oh come on. Did you see what he did?

That's a comic character move.

Didn't it creep you out? Even a little bit?

Your inability to recognise that he was under extreme stress is fascinating.

For a millisecond.

 

[haymarket]

False equivalency? I don't think so. For example, there are persons who deliberately destroyed evidence in the Hillary email case and weren't prosecuted and were allowed to go free, and Manafort, he isn't free.

Comparing emails on a server with our main foreign adversary colluding with an American candidates campaign and helping to elect him is like comparing a molehill to a mountain. And that is the error you and others make.

 

[cabse5]

Comparing emails on a server with our main foreign adversary colluding with an American candidates campaign and helping to elect him is like comparing a molehill to a mountain. And that is the error you and others make.

I agree the mandate of the current Mueller investigation is to determine collusion between Russia and the Trump administration in the meddling of the 2016 election. If you're pointing out meddling in a election is a higher crime than, for example, tampering with evidence, why isn't the main stream media constantly charged with this crime of meddling in elections?

I also point out the FBI's inquiry in Hillary's email server was to determine if said server was used improperly and did allow the destruction of data which would conflict with this investigation. So, more emphasis is placed on the Trump Russian collusion investigation than to Hillary's server.

 

[veritas1]

I actually found it offensive when he talked about his meeting with Mueller. Am I really to believe that Robert Mueller basically said, "Look, Pete, your THOUSANDS of texts to the other FBI agent whom you're schtupping really makes us look bad, so I have to take you off the case. OK, go to the mail room now".

Seriously? Mueller yanked him for "appearances"?

Exactly. Mueller got rid of him instantly when informed by OIG of the nature of Strzok's text messages and emails. Had Mueller retained confidence in Strzok's ability to remain neutral, he would have kept him. Remember, this is the Assistant Deputy Director of Counter-intelligence for the FBI. I also found it interesting reading the OIG report to see this passage in the conclusions regarding the Strzok communications with Page (pp 420-21):

We were deeply troubled by text messages sent by Strzok and Page that potentially indicated or created the appearance that investigative decisions were impacted by bias or improper considerations. Most of the text messages raising such questions pertained to the Russia investigation, which was not a part of this review. Nonetheless, when one senior FBI official, Strzok, who was helping to lead the Russia investigation at the time, conveys in a text message to another senior FBI official, Page, that “we’ll stop” candidate Trump from being elected—after other extensive text messages between the two disparaging candidate Trump—it is not only indicative of a biased state of mind but, even more seriously, implies a willingness to take official action to impact the presidential candidate’s electoral prospects. This is antithetical to the core values of the FBI and the Department of Justice. Moreover, as we describe in Chapter Nine, in assessing Strzok’s decision to prioritize the Russia investigation over following up on the Midyear-related investigative lead discovered on the Weiner laptop in October 2016, these text messages led us to conclude that we did not have confidence that Strzok’s decision was free from bias.

 

[haymarket]

I agree the mandate of the current Mueller investigation is to determine collusion between Russia and the Trump administration in the meddling of the 2016 election. If you're pointing out meddling in a election is a higher crime than, for example, tampering with evidence, why isn't the main stream media constantly charged with this crime of meddling in elections?

I also point out the FBI's inquiry in Hillary's email server was to determine if said server was used improperly and did allow the destruction of data which would conflict with this investigation. So, more emphasis is placed on the Trump Russian collusion investigation than to Hillary's server.

I am telling you point blank and without any ambiguity or nuance or evasion that the helping of a foreign power to interfere with out election and help elect their preferred candidate is a far far far far serious issue than any issues with emails.

And to pretend otherwise reduces the entire issue to Alice in Wonderland absurdity.

 

[roughdraft274]

It does look very odd. But if you put me on camera for 10 hours I'm sure you could find worse.

Someone brought in scratch made biscuits warm out of the oven in for breakfast at work today with some home made strawberry jam. The face I made when I came in my pants was probably priceless.

 

[Mach]

Exactly. Mueller got rid of him instantly when informed by OIG of the nature of Strzok's text messages and emails. Had Mueller retained confidence in Strzok's ability to remain neutral, he would have kept him. Remember, this is the Assistant Deputy Director of Counter-intelligence for the FBI. I also found it interesting reading the OIG report to see this passage in the conclusions regarding the Strzok communications with Page (pp 420-21):
[Iinvestigative lead discovered on the Weiner laptop in October 2016, these text messages led us to conclude that we did not have confidence that Strzok’s decision was free from bias.

That was a conclusion *at that time in the investigation*. Keep reading. They then thoroughly investigated that belief from that time and found:

page 424, the end of that particular discussion.

we found no documentary or testimonial evidence directly connecting the political views these employees expressed in their text messages and instant messages to the specific Midyear investigative decisions we reviewed in Chapter Five

What they did find was that he used the government phone to send messages that may violate the FBIs offense code of conduct. He referred it to the FBI.

 

[OscarLevant]

You have to see it to believe it.... It's a short video clip of Peter Strzok from Thursday's congressional hearing.

At first I thought it couldn't be real, but apparently it is, and... well...

https://twitter.com/Hollybowie/status/1017551128014225413


.

Well we will put that clip up against a Litany of longer clips of trump being the creepiest president in history and see who wins that pissing contest

 

[veritas1]

That was a conclusion *at that time in the investigation*. Keep reading. They then thoroughly investigated that belief from that time and found:

page 424, the end of that particular discussion.


What they did find was that he used the government phone to send messages that may violate the FBIs offense code of conduct. He referred it to the FBI.

The "midyear" investigation is the Hillary email probe. The passage in question speaks of Strzok prioritizing the Russia investigation by dragging his feet on the Weiner laptop issue.