Peter Strzok: We will stop Trump from becoming President

Discussion of current events
User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 2193
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Peter Strzok: We will stop Trump from becoming President

Post by cassowary » Thu Jun 14, 2018 9:56 pm

Shocking test from Strzok to Lisa Page.
FBI agent Peter Strzok, who was intimately involved in the Hillary Clinton email investigation and the probe of Russian election-meddling, vowed to “stop” Donald Trump from reaching the White House in an August 2016 text message to FBI lawyer Lisa Page, the Washington Post reports.

“[Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!” Page wrote to Strzok in a text message set to be released Thursday as part of a Department of Justice inspector general’s report.

“No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it,” Strzok, who was dating Page at the time, responded.
This is a clear sign of bias for those who were investigating Clinton. Why didn't the IG not recommend reopening the investigation on Clinton?

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 2193
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

IG report; FBI agent called Trump supporters are pieces of sh..t

Post by cassowary » Thu Jun 14, 2018 10:06 pm

IG Report: FBI Agent Said Trump Voters 'Poor, Uneducated, Lazy, POS'
One FBI agent on the Hillary investigation wrote in an FBI text:

Trump’s supporters are all poor to middle class, uneducated, lazy POS.
"POS" is the agent's acronym for "Pieces Of S***."
With people like that investigating Clinton, it is no wonder she got away with crimes.

Mr. Perfect
Posts: 462
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2017 11:24 pm

Re: Peter Strzok: We will stop Trump from becoming President

Post by Mr. Perfect » Thu Jun 14, 2018 10:39 pm

Yes, we are really lucky Trump won. They never expected him to win, that's why they did all these illegal investigations, they thought no one would find out. Personally I would like to see a stack of Democrats in prison over this, but I'm not hopeful. Will probably have to settle with them all being removed from the FBI through attrition like usual.

Mr. Perfect
Posts: 462
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2017 11:24 pm

Re: Peter Strzok: We will stop Trump from becoming President

Post by Mr. Perfect » Thu Jun 14, 2018 10:42 pm

It's just weird, after 8 years of Democrat obama it's hard to find anything in DC that hasn't been corrupted.

http://dailycaller.com/2018/06/14/ig-re ... urnalists/

User avatar
Milo
Posts: 1331
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 10:14 pm

Re: Peter Strzok: We will stop Trump from becoming President

Post by Milo » Fri Jun 15, 2018 12:08 am

"And because Trump picks and chooses the pieces of news that serve his purposes, that vacuum is how the Strzok texts will be framed to the President's base. See! We told you these guys were corrupt! The "deep state'" is real!

The broader context of the 500-page report will be ignored -- no matter how many times people like me write about it or talk about it on TV. The broad conclusion that Comey and other FBI officials didn't act with any political motivation will be lost.

So, too, will be the fact that what Comey did wrong, according to the IG report -- publicly speaking about the decision not to prosecute Clinton, publicly announcing just days before the election that the investigation into Clinton's emails had been re-opened -- was, without question, beneficial to Trump's chances of winning.

If Comey-- and the broader FBI/Justice Department -- was so biased against Trump (and was actively working to keep him from winning) why would Comey break protocol to go public twice(!) with information that would cast Clinton and her campaign in a negative light?

That sort of logic, of course, has flown out the window in our modern political world. All that matters is that Strzok texted those fateful seven words -- "No. No he won't. We'll stop it." -- to Page.

Trump will make that the story his supporters hear and believe. Context? Pshaw."

https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/14/politics ... index.html

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 2193
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Peter Strzok: We will stop Trump from becoming President

Post by cassowary » Fri Jun 15, 2018 12:36 am

Milo wrote:
Fri Jun 15, 2018 12:08 am

The broader context of the 500-page report will be ignored -- no matter how many times people like me write about it or talk about it on TV. The broad conclusion that Comey and other FBI officials didn't act with any political motivation will be lost.
Milo,

It seems to me that CNN was also doing what it accuses Trump of doing - ie cherry picking parts of the IG report that suits their views.

See this article:

Justice Department Watchdog Rips ‘Insubordinate’ Comey Over Hillary Investigation

Excerpt:
Horowitz also wrote that Strzok’s comment “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.”
But later, the IG Horowitz cleared them - sort of - by saying he could not find evidence that bias affected the conduct of the Clinton investigation. So you are right on this claim. However, this is nuanced. See this excerpt:
The inspector general did not find evidence that Page and Strzok’s political views affected any of the investigative decisions he reviewed in depth. But the inspector general did not foreclose the possibility that bias played a role in Strzok’s decision to focus on the Russian investigation over the probe into Clinton’s emails.
So the IG Horowitz is saying that he could not find evidence but that does not necessarily mean they are innocent.

In addition, the IG Horowitz also said that Comey also did the same offence as Clinton ie use private email to conduct FBI business! Would Comey want to charge Clinton when he was also guilty of the same offence?

Here is the relevant excerpt:
The report found that the former FBI Director violated department policies by using his personal email address to conduct FBI business.
The whole email investigation was botched up.

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 2193
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Peter Strzok: We will stop Trump from becoming President

Post by cassowary » Fri Jun 15, 2018 1:36 am

Wall Street Journal: The Disgrace of Comey's FBI
The long-awaited Inspector General’s report on the FBI’s handling of the Hillary Clinton investigation makes for depressing reading for anyone who cares about American democracy. Self-government depends on public trust in its institutions, especially law enforcement. The IG’s 568-page report makes clear that the FBI under former director James Comey betrayed that public trust in a way not seen since J. Edgar Hoover.

We use the Hoover analogy advisedly, realizing that the problem in this case was not rampant illegal spying. Though IG Michael Horowitz’s conclusions are measured, his facts are damning. They show that Mr. Comey abused his authority, broke with long-established Justice Department norms, and deceived his superiors and the public.

While the IG says Mr. Comey’s decisions were not the result of “political bias,” he presided over an investigating team that included agents who clearly were biased against Donald Trump. The damage to the bureau’s reputation—and to thousands of honest agents—will take years to repair.

The issue of political bias is almost beside the point. The IG scores Mr. Comey for “ad hoc decisionmaking based on his personal views.” Like Hoover, Mr. Comey believed that he alone could protect the public trust. And like Hoover, this hubris led him to make egregious mistakes of judgment that the IG says “negatively impacted the perception of the FBI and the department as fair administrators of justice.”

***
The report scores Mr. Comey in particular for his “conscious decision not to tell [Justice] Department leadership about his plans to independently announce” an end to the investigation at his July 5 press conference in which he exonerated but criticized Mrs. Clinton. And the IG also scores his action 11 days before the 2016 presidential election, on October 28, to send a letter to Congress saying the investigation had been reopened.

The decision to prosecute belongs to the Attorney General and Justice, not the FBI. And the FBI does not release derogatory information on someone against whom it is not bringing charges. Regarding the October letter informing Congress that the FBI was renewing the investigation, FBI policy is not to announce investigations. “We found unpersuasive Comey’s explanation,” deadpans the IG.

“We found that it was extraordinary and insubordinate for Comey to conceal his intentions from his superiors, the Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General, for the admitted purpose of preventing them from telling him not to make the statement, and to instruct his subordinates in the FBI to do the same,” says the report.

“Comey waited until the morning of his press conference to inform [Attorney General Loretta] Lynch and [Deputy Attorney General Sally ] Yates of his plans to hold one without them, and did so only after first notifying the press. As a result, Lynch’s office learned about Comey’s plans via press inquiries rather than from Comey. Moreover, when Comey spoke with Lynch he did not tell her what he intended to say in his statement.”

All of this underscores the case that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein made when he advised President Trump in May 2017 that he should fire Mr. Comey. The President’s mistake was not firing Mr. Comey immediately upon taking office on Jan. 20, 2017, as some of us advised at the time.

As for political bias, the IG devotes a chapter to the highly partisan texts exchanged over FBI phones between FBI personnel. The IG says he found no evidence that political bias affected investigative decisions, but the details will be fodder for those who think otherwise.

For one thing, the political opinions ran in only one direction—against Mr. Trump. Then there is the case of FBI agent Peter Strzok and his decision to prioritize the Russian investigation over following up on Mrs. Clinton’s emails. The IG concludes that Mr. Strzok’s “text messages led us to conclude that we did not have confidence that Strzok’s decision was free from bias.”

The specific Strzok message the IG cites is one in which he responded to a text from his paramour, Lisa Page, asking for reassurance that Mr. Trump was “not ever going to become president, right?” Mr. Strzok replied, “No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it.”

Senator Ron Johnson’s office reports that his committee had received the first part of this exchange— Ms. Page’s question—from Justice. But somehow Mr. Strzok’s astonishing reply wasn’t included. If this was deliberate, the official who ordered this exclusion should be publicly identified and fired.

The report also chronicles a long list of other questionable judgments by the FBI and Justice. These include waiting until late October to announce that the FBI was seeking a search warrant for Anthony Weiner’s laptop, though “virtually every fact that was cited” to justify the move had been known a month before.


And the report criticizes the decision to let Mrs. Clinton’s attorneys, Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson, attend the FBI’s interview with Mrs. Clinton when they were potential witnesses to her possible offenses. This was “inconsistent with typical investigative strategy and gave rise to accusations of bias and preferential treatment,” the IG says.

***
The unavoidable conclusion is that Mr. Comey’s FBI became a law unto itself, accountable to no one but the former director’s self-righteous conscience. His refusal to follow proper guidelines interfered with a presidential election campaign in a way that has caused millions of Americans in both parties to justifiably cry foul.

This should never happen in a democracy, and steps must be taken so that it never does again. Mr. Horowitz deserves credit for an investigation that was thorough, informative and unplagued by leaks. But it is not the final word. Next week he will be testifying before Congress to flesh out and clarify his findings. Congress should also call FBI agents as witnesses.
If the IG concluded that the focus on Russia may not free of political bias, then the entire Mueller investigation is undermined. It was intended to sidetrack the investigation away from the Clinton emails to help her win because Strzok swore to his lover Lisa Page that he will make sure Trump loses.

Mr. Perfect
Posts: 462
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2017 11:24 pm

Re: Peter Strzok: We will stop Trump from becoming President

Post by Mr. Perfect » Fri Jun 15, 2018 2:52 am

I guess CNN has never heard of gaslighting

User avatar
Milo
Posts: 1331
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 10:14 pm

Re: Peter Strzok: We will stop Trump from becoming President

Post by Milo » Fri Jun 15, 2018 9:36 am

cassowary wrote:
Fri Jun 15, 2018 1:36 am
Wall Street Journal: The Disgrace of Comey's FBI
The long-awaited Inspector General’s report on the FBI’s handling of the Hillary Clinton investigation makes for depressing reading for anyone who cares about American democracy. Self-government depends on public trust in its institutions, especially law enforcement. The IG’s 568-page report makes clear that the FBI under former director James Comey betrayed that public trust in a way not seen since J. Edgar Hoover.

We use the Hoover analogy advisedly, realizing that the problem in this case was not rampant illegal spying. Though IG Michael Horowitz’s conclusions are measured, his facts are damning. They show that Mr. Comey abused his authority, broke with long-established Justice Department norms, and deceived his superiors and the public.

While the IG says Mr. Comey’s decisions were not the result of “political bias,” he presided over an investigating team that included agents who clearly were biased against Donald Trump. The damage to the bureau’s reputation—and to thousands of honest agents—will take years to repair.

The issue of political bias is almost beside the point. The IG scores Mr. Comey for “ad hoc decisionmaking based on his personal views.” Like Hoover, Mr. Comey believed that he alone could protect the public trust. And like Hoover, this hubris led him to make egregious mistakes of judgment that the IG says “negatively impacted the perception of the FBI and the department as fair administrators of justice.”

***
The report scores Mr. Comey in particular for his “conscious decision not to tell [Justice] Department leadership about his plans to independently announce” an end to the investigation at his July 5 press conference in which he exonerated but criticized Mrs. Clinton. And the IG also scores his action 11 days before the 2016 presidential election, on October 28, to send a letter to Congress saying the investigation had been reopened.

The decision to prosecute belongs to the Attorney General and Justice, not the FBI. And the FBI does not release derogatory information on someone against whom it is not bringing charges. Regarding the October letter informing Congress that the FBI was renewing the investigation, FBI policy is not to announce investigations. “We found unpersuasive Comey’s explanation,” deadpans the IG.

“We found that it was extraordinary and insubordinate for Comey to conceal his intentions from his superiors, the Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General, for the admitted purpose of preventing them from telling him not to make the statement, and to instruct his subordinates in the FBI to do the same,” says the report.

“Comey waited until the morning of his press conference to inform [Attorney General Loretta] Lynch and [Deputy Attorney General Sally ] Yates of his plans to hold one without them, and did so only after first notifying the press. As a result, Lynch’s office learned about Comey’s plans via press inquiries rather than from Comey. Moreover, when Comey spoke with Lynch he did not tell her what he intended to say in his statement.”

All of this underscores the case that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein made when he advised President Trump in May 2017 that he should fire Mr. Comey. The President’s mistake was not firing Mr. Comey immediately upon taking office on Jan. 20, 2017, as some of us advised at the time.

As for political bias, the IG devotes a chapter to the highly partisan texts exchanged over FBI phones between FBI personnel. The IG says he found no evidence that political bias affected investigative decisions, but the details will be fodder for those who think otherwise.

For one thing, the political opinions ran in only one direction—against Mr. Trump. Then there is the case of FBI agent Peter Strzok and his decision to prioritize the Russian investigation over following up on Mrs. Clinton’s emails. The IG concludes that Mr. Strzok’s “text messages led us to conclude that we did not have confidence that Strzok’s decision was free from bias.”

The specific Strzok message the IG cites is one in which he responded to a text from his paramour, Lisa Page, asking for reassurance that Mr. Trump was “not ever going to become president, right?” Mr. Strzok replied, “No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it.”

Senator Ron Johnson’s office reports that his committee had received the first part of this exchange— Ms. Page’s question—from Justice. But somehow Mr. Strzok’s astonishing reply wasn’t included. If this was deliberate, the official who ordered this exclusion should be publicly identified and fired.

The report also chronicles a long list of other questionable judgments by the FBI and Justice. These include waiting until late October to announce that the FBI was seeking a search warrant for Anthony Weiner’s laptop, though “virtually every fact that was cited” to justify the move had been known a month before.


And the report criticizes the decision to let Mrs. Clinton’s attorneys, Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson, attend the FBI’s interview with Mrs. Clinton when they were potential witnesses to her possible offenses. This was “inconsistent with typical investigative strategy and gave rise to accusations of bias and preferential treatment,” the IG says.

***
The unavoidable conclusion is that Mr. Comey’s FBI became a law unto itself, accountable to no one but the former director’s self-righteous conscience. His refusal to follow proper guidelines interfered with a presidential election campaign in a way that has caused millions of Americans in both parties to justifiably cry foul.

This should never happen in a democracy, and steps must be taken so that it never does again. Mr. Horowitz deserves credit for an investigation that was thorough, informative and unplagued by leaks. But it is not the final word. Next week he will be testifying before Congress to flesh out and clarify his findings. Congress should also call FBI agents as witnesses.
If the IG concluded that the focus on Russia may not free of political bias, then the entire Mueller investigation is undermined. It was intended to sidetrack the investigation away from the Clinton emails to help her win because Strzok swore to his lover Lisa Page that he will make sure Trump loses.
However, the IG report concluded the opposite.

User avatar
Doc
Posts: 1941
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:09 pm
Location: Cradle To Grave

Re: Peter Strzok: We will stop Trump from becoming President

Post by Doc » Fri Jun 15, 2018 11:19 am

Milo wrote:
Fri Jun 15, 2018 9:36 am
cassowary wrote:
Fri Jun 15, 2018 1:36 am
Wall Street Journal: The Disgrace of Comey's FBI
The long-awaited Inspector General’s report on the FBI’s handling of the Hillary Clinton investigation makes for depressing reading for anyone who cares about American democracy. Self-government depends on public trust in its institutions, especially law enforcement. The IG’s 568-page report makes clear that the FBI under former director James Comey betrayed that public trust in a way not seen since J. Edgar Hoover.

We use the Hoover analogy advisedly, realizing that the problem in this case was not rampant illegal spying. Though IG Michael Horowitz’s conclusions are measured, his facts are damning. They show that Mr. Comey abused his authority, broke with long-established Justice Department norms, and deceived his superiors and the public.

While the IG says Mr. Comey’s decisions were not the result of “political bias,” he presided over an investigating team that included agents who clearly were biased against Donald Trump. The damage to the bureau’s reputation—and to thousands of honest agents—will take years to repair.

The issue of political bias is almost beside the point. The IG scores Mr. Comey for “ad hoc decisionmaking based on his personal views.” Like Hoover, Mr. Comey believed that he alone could protect the public trust. And like Hoover, this hubris led him to make egregious mistakes of judgment that the IG says “negatively impacted the perception of the FBI and the department as fair administrators of justice.”

***
The report scores Mr. Comey in particular for his “conscious decision not to tell [Justice] Department leadership about his plans to independently announce” an end to the investigation at his July 5 press conference in which he exonerated but criticized Mrs. Clinton. And the IG also scores his action 11 days before the 2016 presidential election, on October 28, to send a letter to Congress saying the investigation had been reopened.

The decision to prosecute belongs to the Attorney General and Justice, not the FBI. And the FBI does not release derogatory information on someone against whom it is not bringing charges. Regarding the October letter informing Congress that the FBI was renewing the investigation, FBI policy is not to announce investigations. “We found unpersuasive Comey’s explanation,” deadpans the IG.

“We found that it was extraordinary and insubordinate for Comey to conceal his intentions from his superiors, the Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General, for the admitted purpose of preventing them from telling him not to make the statement, and to instruct his subordinates in the FBI to do the same,” says the report.

“Comey waited until the morning of his press conference to inform [Attorney General Loretta] Lynch and [Deputy Attorney General Sally ] Yates of his plans to hold one without them, and did so only after first notifying the press. As a result, Lynch’s office learned about Comey’s plans via press inquiries rather than from Comey. Moreover, when Comey spoke with Lynch he did not tell her what he intended to say in his statement.”

All of this underscores the case that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein made when he advised President Trump in May 2017 that he should fire Mr. Comey. The President’s mistake was not firing Mr. Comey immediately upon taking office on Jan. 20, 2017, as some of us advised at the time.

As for political bias, the IG devotes a chapter to the highly partisan texts exchanged over FBI phones between FBI personnel. The IG says he found no evidence that political bias affected investigative decisions, but the details will be fodder for those who think otherwise.

For one thing, the political opinions ran in only one direction—against Mr. Trump. Then there is the case of FBI agent Peter Strzok and his decision to prioritize the Russian investigation over following up on Mrs. Clinton’s emails. The IG concludes that Mr. Strzok’s “text messages led us to conclude that we did not have confidence that Strzok’s decision was free from bias.”

The specific Strzok message the IG cites is one in which he responded to a text from his paramour, Lisa Page, asking for reassurance that Mr. Trump was “not ever going to become president, right?” Mr. Strzok replied, “No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it.”

Senator Ron Johnson’s office reports that his committee had received the first part of this exchange— Ms. Page’s question—from Justice. But somehow Mr. Strzok’s astonishing reply wasn’t included. If this was deliberate, the official who ordered this exclusion should be publicly identified and fired.

The report also chronicles a long list of other questionable judgments by the FBI and Justice. These include waiting until late October to announce that the FBI was seeking a search warrant for Anthony Weiner’s laptop, though “virtually every fact that was cited” to justify the move had been known a month before.


And the report criticizes the decision to let Mrs. Clinton’s attorneys, Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson, attend the FBI’s interview with Mrs. Clinton when they were potential witnesses to her possible offenses. This was “inconsistent with typical investigative strategy and gave rise to accusations of bias and preferential treatment,” the IG says.

***
The unavoidable conclusion is that Mr. Comey’s FBI became a law unto itself, accountable to no one but the former director’s self-righteous conscience. His refusal to follow proper guidelines interfered with a presidential election campaign in a way that has caused millions of Americans in both parties to justifiably cry foul.

This should never happen in a democracy, and steps must be taken so that it never does again. Mr. Horowitz deserves credit for an investigation that was thorough, informative and unplagued by leaks. But it is not the final word. Next week he will be testifying before Congress to flesh out and clarify his findings. Congress should also call FBI agents as witnesses.
If the IG concluded that the focus on Russia may not free of political bias, then the entire Mueller investigation is undermined. It was intended to sidetrack the investigation away from the Clinton emails to help her win because Strzok swore to his lover Lisa Page that he will make sure Trump loses.
However, the IG report concluded the opposite.
DO you know what else it concluded? It concluded that Comey's firing was legitimate Mueller was appointed special counsel based on the idea that Comey's firing was an "Obstruction of Justice" by Trump. But it wasn't Cased Closed. No longer a need for a special counsel. SHUT IT DOWN
“"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros

Post Reply