It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Strzok text and why isn't anyone asking the obvious?

page: 5
57
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 09:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler



It's discussing an insurance policy with McCabe in the event that the guy they hate trump wins.

For the millionth time, this is more than just bias. As is Mueller hiring lawyers that have defended Hillary.


If it's more than just bias, what is it? What is the insurance policy?

Also, you are incorrect that he hired lawyers that defended Hillary.



But even if we overlook this alone, we still have leaks from Mueller team, stonewalling the oversight committee, and charging trumps team for lying when they let Hillary's team off for lying.


Not sure why you continue to push that narrative.

You do not know who is doing the leaking, the DoJ has been working with congress and there is a huge difference between what Trump's team has done and that of Hillary's team.

But you have been shown that before and you simply ignored it.

Again, we need a lot more context before we jump to conclusions.
edit on 14-12-2017 by introvert because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 09:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler



It's discussing an insurance policy with McCabe in the event that the guy they hate trump wins.

For the millionth time, this is more than just bias. As is Mueller hiring lawyers that have defended Hillary.


If it's more than just bias, what is it? What is the insurance policy?



But even if we overlook this alone, we still have leaks from Mueller team, stonewalling the oversight committee, and charging trumps team for lying when they let Hillary's team off for lying.


Not sure why you continue to push that narrative.

You do not know who is doing the leaking, the DoJ has been working with congress and there is a huge difference between what Trump's team has done and that of Hillary's team.

But you have been shown that before and you simply ignored it.

Again, we need a lot more context before we jump to conclusions.


Yes we need answers to this questions.

Supposedly the IG report is going to be out before the New Year. Then things will hopefully become crystal clear and every accusation is addressed with actual facts one way of the other.

Kinda odd how the IG investigation is air tight with leaks and the Mueller probe isn't.

Wonder why that is?



posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 09:35 AM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus



AS for your excerpt, it is impossible to tell without full context of the texts that preceded it and followed, but I suspect that was the point of the GOP Sub-Committee releasing just that excerpt.


Exactly.

Nunes and friends are trying to build a specific narrative about the DoJ and the FBI in order to create an air of doubt surrounding the investigation.

It began with the stonewalling claims, which Fox News was quick to jump on, but the DoJ has actually been cooperating.



posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 09:36 AM
link   
a reply to: pavil



Kinda odd how the IG investigation is air tight with leaks and the Mueller probe isn't.


We don't know where the leaks are coming from at this point.



posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 10:28 AM
link   
a reply to: introvert




Also, you are incorrect that he hired lawyers that defended Hillary.

wow
now you have decided to make statements with no research?
www.foxnews.com...



Also this week, it was reported that Rhee represented the Clinton Foundation in 2015 against a racketeering lawsuit brought by conservative legal activist group Freedom Watch in 2015. Rhee also represented former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in a lawsuit seeking access to her private emails.


there are actually more than just her
you would actually have to look into it tho



posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 10:40 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody



wow
now you have decided to make statements with no research? www.foxnews.com...


I had not seen that particular lawsuit in regards to her emails.

I stand corrected.



posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 10:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: soberbacchus

It's more than just bias.

It's discussing an insurance policy with McCabe in the event that the guy they hate trump wins.



We don't know what it is discussing, because the GOP who released that tidbit did not release texts preceding or following that text for context. Nor a time stamp.

Here, let me give you a hypothetical (since the GOP who leaked this have given us no factual context)

"With the insane caseload the FBI has right now, why are you wasting time and resources investigating whether Russia is trying to influence the election for Trump? As I explained in Andy's office, it is statistically virtually impossible that he would win! It is a waste of time, he is going to lose for the reasons I explained. If Russia is trying to mess with our elections it is failing, Trump can't win. We should be focused on other priorities!"


"I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy's office" -- an apparent reference to Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe -- "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 . . . . "


OR

"It doesn't matter if what the Dossier said is true or not. It doesn't matter if Russia has blackmail Kompromat on Trump. Why are you wasting FBI Resources to see if the Dossier is real??? As I explained in Andy's office, Trump will never be President, so any Kompromat material Russia has is useless either way"


"I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy's office" -- an apparent reference to Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe -- "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 . . . . "





edit on 14-12-2017 by soberbacchus because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 11:02 AM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus




We don't know what it is discussing, because the GOP who released that tidbit did not release texts preceding or following that text for context. Nor a time stamp. Here, let me give you a hypothetical (since the GOP who leaked this have given us no factual context)

The "GOP" didn't release anything.
www.nbcnews.com...



The Department of Justice released 90 pages of text messages late Tuesday night, many harshly critical of candidate Donald Trump, that were exchanged between an FBI lawyer and an agent who was later assigned to Robert Mueller's special counsel team.


The doj released this.



In a letter making the e-mails available to House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, the Justice Department said the text messages had been obtained by the Department's Inspector General and were being provided to the committee because of unique circumstances.




"This extraordinary accommodation of providing the enclosed documents is unique to the facts and circumstances of this particular matter."



posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 11:13 AM
link   
Almost sounds like some one is asking for/about a modern day Lee Harvey Oswald!



posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 11:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: soberbacchus




We don't know what it is discussing, because the GOP who released that tidbit did not release texts preceding or following that text for context. Nor a time stamp. Here, let me give you a hypothetical (since the GOP who leaked this have given us no factual context)

The "GOP" didn't release anything.
www.nbcnews.com...


YES they did.

DOJ released it to the House Judiciary Committee, GOP gave edited excerpts to press.
From your link:

In a letter making the e-mails available to House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte,

edit on 14-12-2017 by soberbacchus because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 11:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Strzok text and why isn't anyone asking the obvious?

Not for nothing, but the "obvious" is..

What was the text that preceded or followed it.



posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 11:34 AM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus

so the doj did not release these?
lol
your version of this is the doj gave these to the house judiciary COMMITTEE then the COMMITTEE gave "edited" versions of the texts to the press?
Even if that were the case there are dems on the COMMITTEE as well so it still would not be the "GOP" releasing this it would be the COMMITTEE


whatever you say



posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 11:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: soberbacchus


your version of this is the doj gave these to the house judiciary COMMITTEE then the COMMITTEE gave "edited" versions of the texts to the press?


That is reality's version.

can't help you if you don't get that.



posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 11:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: soberbacchus


your version of this is the doj gave these to the house judiciary COMMITTEE then the COMMITTEE gave "edited" versions of the texts to the press?


That is reality's version.

can't help you if you don't get that.


Huh?

Splain this then

Justice Dept. releases text messages from anti-Trump FBI agent, lawyer who were having affair

link



posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 12:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: soberbacchus

so the doj did not release these?
lol
your version of this is the doj gave these to the house judiciary COMMITTEE then the COMMITTEE gave "edited" versions of the texts to the press?
Even if that were the case there are dems on the COMMITTEE as well so it still would not be the "GOP" releasing this it would be the COMMITTEE


whatever you say



It is my understanding that the DoJ released the info to congress, not the press or to the public.

It's also important to note that apparently the emails also contained disparaging comments about people on the Left as well. Specifically Bernie Sanders.



posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 12:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: pavil

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: soberbacchus


your version of this is the doj gave these to the house judiciary COMMITTEE then the COMMITTEE gave "edited" versions of the texts to the press?


That is reality's version.

can't help you if you don't get that.


Huh?

Splain this then

Justice Dept. releases text messages from anti-Trump FBI agent, lawyer who were having affair

link[ /quote]


A series of text messages exchanged between top FBI employees referring to then-presidential candidate Donald Trump as an "idiot" and "d*uche," while fearing his potential victory as "terrifying," were released to lawmakers Tuesday evening on Capitol Hill amid increasing demands to see them, according to documents reviewed by CNN.


www.cnn.com...



posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 12:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: [post=22954307]pavil


Huh?

Splain this then

Justice Dept. releases text messages from anti-Trump FBI agent, lawyer who were having affair


Already did.
If you watched the hearings with Rosenstein on Wed. you would be aware that the committee got the texts Tuesday Night after repeatedly asking DOJ for them. They actually were reading through the texts right before the hearing and taking notes and making comments.

The texts were NOT released to the press. They were released to the committee. The Chairman of the committee or his lackeys shared selected excerpts with the press to further their theme.

* Put another way, if you believe all the texts have been "released" to the press, please direct me to the complete compilation of texts.
edit on 14-12-2017 by soberbacchus because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 12:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: soberbacchus

so the doj did not release these?
lol
your version of this is the doj gave these to the house judiciary COMMITTEE then the COMMITTEE gave "edited" versions of the texts to the press?
Even if that were the case there are dems on the COMMITTEE as well so it still would not be the "GOP" releasing this it would be the COMMITTEE


whatever you say



It is my understanding that the DoJ released the info to congress, not the press or to the public.

It's also important to note that apparently the emails also contained disparaging comments about people on the Left as well. Specifically Bernie Sanders.


And Eric Holder



posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 12:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: [post=22954307]pavil


Huh?

Splain this then

Justice Dept. releases text messages from anti-Trump FBI agent, lawyer who were having affair


Already did.
If you watched the hearings with Rosenstein on Wed. you would be aware that the committee got the texts Tuesday Night after repeatedly asking DOJ for them. They actually were reading through the texts right before the hearing and taking notes and making comments.

The texts were NOT released to the press. They were released to the committee. The Chairman of the committee or his lackeys shared selected excerpts with the press to further their theme.

* Put another way, if you believe all the texts have been "released" to the press, please direct me to the complete compilation of texts.


So this NBC report is not accurate?

The Department of Justice released 90 pages of text messages late Tuesday night, many harshly critical of candidate Donald Trump, that were exchanged between an FBI lawyer and an agent who was later assigned to Robert Mueller's special counsel team.



posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 12:22 PM
link   
a reply to: pavil

Holy crap.

Can't tell if this a mental thing or trolling.

DOJ "Released" the texts to the Congressional Investigative Committee...NOT the press.

Nothing you keep posting says any different.



new topics

top topics



 
57
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join