New Texts Reveal FBI Strzok Knew Odds Were Zero Mueller Would Find Wrongdoing

a reply to: SlapMonkey

"Fix and Finish" is more of an alarm to me.

What was meant by that?

a reply to: burntheships

Are they setting Strzok up as the future trigger man?

This is a bit worrisome.

Just exactly how is it being implied he will "fix" "this"?

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Oh good. I see I'm not alone.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Though y'all have no standing to evoke the comparison to the Salem Witch Trials after 10+ investigations into Hillary Clinton that have turned up nothing.

You have a funny way of conflating "turned up nothing" and an unwillingness to indict.

The two are not synonymous, and if you're pretending that Hillary investigations turned up "nothing" that is an indictable offense, then you don't know the law.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: burntheships

Actually I'm just ignoring all of you posters' crazy reasons why I should take this conversation as anything more than just a personal opinion between two agents.

I'm not worried about anything though. Mostly because ATS seems to function outside of reality these days with how pro-Trump crazy it has gotten.

Pro TRUMP crazy? How quickly we forget.....

That's a small rectangular picture with more crazies in it than there are members that post on ATS...maybe even member period...all wearing pink pu$$y hats to resist Trump...and that's just a tiny smidgen of what's actually around them and around the entire country.

Now THAT is crazy.

Still a larger crowd than the inauguration. ......

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: burntheships

Do what you got to do, but I've maintained since day 1 of this investigation that I'm withholding my judgement on guilt one way or the other until the investigation finishes.

Well, I wouldn't really expect Trump haters to get onboard
with finding the truth. You can't see how this compromises
Muellers investigation?

And for,the record, Strozk was using a burner phone.
Charles Grassley is onto it and wrote the DOJ.

That is where the really bad stuff is.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: burntheships

Are they setting Strzok up as the future trigger man?

This is a bit worrisome.

Just exactly how is it being implied he will "fix" "this"?

I will link the story here. For the record, True Pundit
Has been batting a good average in the stuff they put out.

truepundit.com...

However, the only solid proof I can is in a letter from
Charles Grassley to The DOJ.

I am trying to get that link too.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Oh, I completely agree, my stance in all of this is the we don't have the conversations in context--in some sort of complete, chronologically ordered conversation that would show a bigger picture.

I'm not naïve enough to say that what they're saying shouldn't lead to concern, I'm just saying that after years of dealing with this type of stuff, I know that things can be and often are taken out of context purposefully.

a reply to: ketsuko

Ok, found the Grassley letter to DOJ

See page 2 under number 6

Grassley raised serious concerns in his letter to the DOJ addressed to Rosenstein, as just two of over 10,000 (!?) text messages referred to an "insurance policy" against a Trump presidency, and a special phone they used "when we talk about hillary because it can't be traced."

Gov Grassley PDF

www.judiciary.senate.gov...(Strzok%20Page%20McCabe%20Insurance%20Policy).pdf

a reply to: SlapMonkey


He should be arrested and interrogated.

Then we wouln't have to guess...

a reply to: burntheships

Then it’s big..

Not in the “The fbi is corrupt and out to get trump “ way, but in the “The FBI either doesn’t or didn’t have enough evidence where even this agent was confident” way.


And this agent was definitely not a trump fan looking at the evidence with rose colored glasses.

Barring this being totally out of context or whatever. This is the first Pro-trump evidence I have seen that wasn’t propaganda.

a reply to: burntheships

Thank you for linking to that true pundit article. It seems that Chuck Schumer was correct when he told president Trump that the FBI could take him out if he didn't play ball with them.

The article is also correct in stating that a special prosecutor is needed to investigate all things related to the Obama Administration. And there are a lot of them.

a reply to: dragonridr

All this means is at the point of this text message , this FBI agent thought they didn’t have great evidence.

That could have changed as the investigation continued....

HOWEVER, it is the first pro trump info to hit that wasn’t blantant propaganda... assuming it’s “as sold”.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Strozk was the senior counter-intel officer at the Bureau who didn't see any meat on the bone after months of investigating. Same guy is leaking stories to the media and has touched every investigation related to HRC-Trump. Says he has an insurance plan discussed in Andy McCabe's office just in case Trump manages to win. Says his personal mission started in the HRC email investigation and now he has a chance to fix and finish it on Mueller team.

Is it adding up yet? It's not about "Trump is a douche" texts. (I think he's a touch douchey myself).

a reply to: JoshuaCox

I think that is good you are looking at it objectively

a reply to: carewemust

That angle sure does fit with Schumer and his comments.
No doubt someone let Chuckie in on the secret.

Second Special Counsel is needed.
Now Is The Time!

a reply to: burntheships

I think when the house intelligence committee document is released, that will be the final straw and a special prosecutor will be appointed. Actually there's no need to wait that long because sessions already knows what is in that four-page document.

a reply to: carewemust

They're waiting for the OIG to drop. Cross all the It's. Dot every i before moving on a special prosecutor. If you really want the big fish, you've got to be patient.

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: burntheships

I think when the house intelligence committee document is released, that will be the final straw and a special prosecutor will be appointed. Actually there's no need to wait that long because sessions already knows what is in that four-page document.

The document is iffy apparently it's just things that he believed needed to be highlighted from FBI documents that were released. Meaning there is not anything in there that hadn't been seen before by the committee

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: burntheships

Well this is confirmation bias if I've ever seen it. Two agents are musing about their personal opinions and the ATS right wingers take that as gospel truth? Color me surprised... Not.

Listen, man, you don't have to like what's going to happen to the Democratic Party after this, you don't even have to watch what will happen to them, but it's going to happen. They're finished. This is corruption on another plain.

How you can sit there and deny, deny, deny tells me A LOT about you. Anyone with any common sense can see this is not going to end well for the Hillary/Obama corrupt machine.

There is another reason you're turning a blind I to this and I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that I don't think it has anything to do with politics. I'll keep it at that.