STRZOK: ‘We’ll Stop’ Trump Presidency

Can we please stop the lie that Robert Mueller is a "well regarded" prosecutor and head of the FBI?
It's just not true. http://thehill.com/opinion/criminal...t-muellers-forgotten-surveillance-crime-spree
http://thefederalist.com/2018/02/08/robert-mueller-botching-investigations-since-anthrax-attacks/
And it's becoming very tiresome.
​

 

Wasn't part of his investigation. Your Repugnant ones had those e-mails. Guess nothing of importance was in them.

 

Evidently you have no way to prove what I say to be wrong, so who is the "babbler"?

 

What was shown in the IG report demands mass firings and a restructure of leadership down to the mid-levels of the organization (i.e. not just directorial positions). It also demands a wholesale admittance of institutionalized corruption and a vow to root it out.

How does Peter Strzok still have a job within the FBI? How has James Comey not been directly condemned by the FBI for his actions? It’s insanity at this point.

https://www.redstate.com/diary/Bonchie/2018/06/16/time-stop-soft-peddling-fbis-corruption/

 

Don't know, don't care. I do know that if 75-85,000 votes in specific areas had gone to Hillary she would now be President instead of the lying POS we have now. I also know that if the "christian" community had supported a third party candidate (as scripture said they should do) we would have seen a decent man elected instead of the trash that led the races.

 

Why hasn't Trump been impeached? How does Giuliani still have a job? How does Pruitt still have a job?

You are right in that it is insanity.

 

So before obama, when mueller ran the fbi, things were awesome? Lol

 

Which Israeli laws did he break?

 

This I.G. report is only half, or maybe only a third of the whole story. Next will be Horowitz's report on the FISA warrants, the justification of which was invented out of whole cloth by the selfsame overlords who gave Hillary a pass. These are police state operatives, reminiscent of the Soviet Union, East Germany before the wall fell, and North Korea. They freely abused their power to surveil and spy on countless private citizens who had any connection, however flimsy, to Trump and his family.

Dirty Bob Mueller and his team of hired thugs have nearly bankrupted many of the people they have targeted. There is a special place in Hell for this swarm of rats. Dirty Bob Mueller's past record of horrific ethical lapses should have seen him disbarred years ago; his mistakes have cost the taxpayers millions of dollars. The same is true of several others on his hand-picked team of hit men.

While the devious machinations of the Deep State are not new, it was the Obama administration, most likely Obama himself, who brought us to this low point, the wholesale corruption of the FBI and the DOJ leadership. Obama surrounded himself with like-minded globalist elites who thought no laws applied to them: Susan Rice, Samantha Power, Valerie Jarrett, the Podestas, Ben Rhodes, Jonathan Gruber, and more. Eric Holder was the most unprincipled attorney general, more even than John Mitchell, who served time in federal prison.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blo...uined_the_fbi_and_the_doj_.html#ixzz5IdJ0TfIr

 

Because he's awesome!

 

I heard she didn't lie to the FBI, said she didn't remember 47 times though she wasn't even sworn in.

 

I didn't hear they had those E-mails. 30,000 were destroyed.

 

To get back to Strzok, the WP reports it this way:

Page: “[Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!”
Strzok: “No. No he’s not. We’ll stop it.”

Strzok told investigators he didn’t remember the message, but that “he believed that it was intended to reassure Page that Trump would not be elected, not to suggest that he would do something to impact the investigation.” Both noted that the fact that investigation into Trump’s campaign was never revealed before Election Day suggests that there was no plan to prevent Trump from winning.

I am willing to believe that Strzok (whom I find annoying on several levels) did not necessarily mean that the FBI would engage in dark machinations to stop the election of Trump. My best and most generous guess is that it could mean that "we, the supporters of HRC, like you and me, babe. will get out and outvote the slack jawed locals."

The problem for him is that he's blabbing all this to that woman while he had power or at least influence to put Russia-gate on a fast track and ignore the HRC emails altogether. It just looks incredibly bad when you put the two together.

 

That awkward moment when the left defends Trump but doesnt realize it.

 

For what? Triggering the foamy-mouthed, TDS left is not grounds for impeachment, contrary to current, sweaty-palmed, drooloing left fantasies.

Guilliani was the best prosecutor and mayor in the history of NYC....what wouldn't he have a job?


Pruitt should be replaced.

 

A Non Sequitur..........IG report clearly states it had zero impact on the veracity of the investigation.......maybe read the report slowly?

 

The IG report clearly shows that there was bias against Trump and no bias against Hillary........maybe read the report slowly?

 

And that it had ZERO impact in the actual investigation. Context is relevant for critical thinking.

 

It absolutely did NOT say that.

The IG said he could not prove that the BIAS, which was PERVASIVE, could be PROVEN to have affected their actions in the HIllary probe.

The IG ALSO SAID that SENIOR FBI OFFICIALS appeared WILLING TO TAKE ACTION TO INTFERE IN THE ELECTION.

Page XII. Do I need to REPOST IT, again?

 

Actually yes, the report did.

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...rump-criticism-impacted-probes-report.535010/

 

Oh, it had plenty of impact on the investigation.

Anyone with half a brain would see that.

 

That's sedition! Clear as can be.
If this was pulled against the democrats unholy hell would rain fire and retribution down on the right.

Of course only the left would attempt such a thing and then have the nerve to lie about their actions.

 

Yes, you really should. I actually suspect you haven't read it all, never mind slowly;

Observe this gem, from the report’s executive summary:

We did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that improper considerations, including political bias, directly affected the specific investigative decisions. Directly affected? What does that mean? Do the FBI and Obama Justice Department have to stamp the “I’m with Her” logo on Combetta’s immunity agreement before we can say bias directlyaffected the decision? Could bias have indirectly affected the decision? Who really knows, right? [from the National Review]

In other words, lefties, they didn't find the evidence one way or the other. You are free to spin your own hypotheses, which is different from ... oh what's the use. You're with her regardless, right?

 

Try again if you can function and be rational:
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...rump-criticism-impacted-probes-report.535010/

 

Zero impact:

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...rump-criticism-impacted-probes-report.535010/