- Joined
- Jun 22, 2013
- Messages
- 20,271
- Reaction score
- 28,078
- Location
- Mid-West USA
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
There may be More To the Strzok Issue than Simply "Blowing Smoke."
I am appalled, but not surprised, by the hypocrisy of those "NeverTrumpers" who keep playing down the significance of the Strzok emails/texts, and the other evidence concerning the Clinton email server investigation, as "smoke screens" and attempts to derail the Russian Collusion investigation.
Members are saying "FBI agents are allowed to have personal political stances," and "The comments were just political back and forth and had nothing to do with anything." It's all "hot air" and we need to ignore it for the real crimes Trump committed to get elected.
Why care?
How about this email comment which seems to have missed repeating in all the MSM reports lately in favor of those that demonstrate "mere political bias?"
That was from that CNN "trusted source" back on 12/13/17. Since then, the emphasis in story after story in the MSM is about the other biased, but less volatile comments.
Yet I'm willing to bet if a major figure in the FBI had been discovered emailing something like that about Obama back in 2008, there would have been hell to pay.
If that quoted text is true it shows more than simply political "stances." It shows willful intent to do something about it.
Now all past reports also indicate that Strzok was not only the principal investigator for the Clinton email issue, but also signed off on the collusion investigation based on the Fusion GPS "dossier."
Peter Strzok responsible for Comey memo change about Clinton, Russia probe - Business Insider
So yeah, if this evidence is true, there is definitely more than just an issue over his "political stance."
I've always wondered just who it was who violated all standards of search and seizure to okay the unsupervised "deleting and scrubbing" of the contents of Hillary's email server before turning it over to the FBI.
An investigation into this "smoke screen" might just uncover that, among other things.
Meanwhile, according to the report in that Business Insider citation "Strzok was also the FBI agent who officially signed off on the bureau's decision to launch its Russia investigation in July 2016."
On less evidence than this, NeverTrumper's have been supporting an investigation of the Trump campaign's alleged "collusion;" one not actually investigating a specific crime...but rather SEEKING a crime to charge him with.
Please explain why one allegation on pretty much no evidence aside from innuendo is valid while the other is just "blowing smoke?"
I don't know if Mr. Strzok is guilty of anything, as intent to exercise "an insurance policy" of unknown type is not in an of itself a crime.
But if it is possible that the basis for starting the Trump investigation is a pack of lies ignited as a "Nuclear Option" if against all odds he actually won the election...then isn't that worth investigating too?
I am appalled, but not surprised, by the hypocrisy of those "NeverTrumpers" who keep playing down the significance of the Strzok emails/texts, and the other evidence concerning the Clinton email server investigation, as "smoke screens" and attempts to derail the Russian Collusion investigation.
Members are saying "FBI agents are allowed to have personal political stances," and "The comments were just political back and forth and had nothing to do with anything." It's all "hot air" and we need to ignore it for the real crimes Trump committed to get elected.
Why care?
How about this email comment which seems to have missed repeating in all the MSM reports lately in favor of those that demonstrate "mere political bias?"
FBI agent's anti-Trump text messages released to Congress - CNNPoliticsOn Aug. 15, 2016, Strzok wrote: “I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in*[Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe’s] office that there’s no way he gets elected – but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40 …”
That was from that CNN "trusted source" back on 12/13/17. Since then, the emphasis in story after story in the MSM is about the other biased, but less volatile comments.
Yet I'm willing to bet if a major figure in the FBI had been discovered emailing something like that about Obama back in 2008, there would have been hell to pay.
If that quoted text is true it shows more than simply political "stances." It shows willful intent to do something about it.
Now all past reports also indicate that Strzok was not only the principal investigator for the Clinton email issue, but also signed off on the collusion investigation based on the Fusion GPS "dossier."
Peter Strzok, the second-highest ranking counterintelligence agent at the FBI, was involved at key junctures in the Hillary Clinton email investigation and the Trump-Russia probe.
Peter Strzok responsible for Comey memo change about Clinton, Russia probe - Business Insider
So yeah, if this evidence is true, there is definitely more than just an issue over his "political stance."
I've always wondered just who it was who violated all standards of search and seizure to okay the unsupervised "deleting and scrubbing" of the contents of Hillary's email server before turning it over to the FBI.
An investigation into this "smoke screen" might just uncover that, among other things.
Meanwhile, according to the report in that Business Insider citation "Strzok was also the FBI agent who officially signed off on the bureau's decision to launch its Russia investigation in July 2016."
On less evidence than this, NeverTrumper's have been supporting an investigation of the Trump campaign's alleged "collusion;" one not actually investigating a specific crime...but rather SEEKING a crime to charge him with.
Please explain why one allegation on pretty much no evidence aside from innuendo is valid while the other is just "blowing smoke?"
I don't know if Mr. Strzok is guilty of anything, as intent to exercise "an insurance policy" of unknown type is not in an of itself a crime.
But if it is possible that the basis for starting the Trump investigation is a pack of lies ignited as a "Nuclear Option" if against all odds he actually won the election...then isn't that worth investigating too?
Last edited: