New FBI Strzok Texts Reveal Massive Top Level Conspiracy To Evade Security & Monitering

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: burntheships

They did "join in failure"

These people, our government, our institutions, those charged with sacred duties, those asked to be noble custodians of something bigger than themselves, have failed us all.

Please do something about it if can.

amen

a reply to: MotherMayEye

I am not convinced they were having an affair.

Ditto.

Cause there would have been sexting between the two.

a reply to: theantediluvian

One other point, if your nearly implausible theory holds water, there will
be gov issued iphones that texts were preserved on.

I wont be holding my breath.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: MotherMayEye

I am not convinced they were having an affair.

Ditto.

Cause there would have been sexting between the two.

Just some warmth and flirting, even. There's none of that.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: tigertatzen

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: ketsuko
...nothing we've seen sounds the least bit lover-like to date, that's a bit of a hard sell, particularly given some of the other things their released texts have said.

I could not agree more with this and have said it myself. They don't talk like they are carrying on an affair.

(And, not to be superficial, but they don't look like they go together.)

I am so suspicious of the claim they are/were having an affair.

I have to say, I'm not buying it either. It reads more like they're pretending to have an affair just in case anyone starts questioning why they're communicating so closely with each other.

Of course, they could simply have been one of those seemingly weird, awkward couples. But I don't think so.

And why are they always calling Page Strizok's "paramour"? I swear I've never heard that word used so much until recently.

Yes! I've wondered the exact same thing.

originally posted by: carewemust
Strzok also co-wrote the letter to Congress announcing the FBI's re-opening of the Hillary Clinton investigation, a few days before the 2016 election.

Source: CNN dtd 2.1.2018

He must have been very torn between doing his job, and protecting Hillary.

I have another thought here; they take the cases so they can "fix" them.

a reply to: burntheships

Here's the link to the letter on Scribd.

And I disagree entirely. Let me remind you of what you alleged right off the bat:

In a smoking gun text message exchange released by the Senate Homeland Security committee today, FBI officials Lisa Page and Peter Strzok are found discussing methods to evade federal security monitoring and preservation laws.

That's not the same thing as them remarking about widespread issues with phones at all. I'm going to help you out some more because I'm a nice guy. Who is Turgal?

Information and Technology Branch

Executive Assistant Director – James L. Turgal, Jr.

He's the head of the FBI's IT branch. The whole thrust of your OP was that "smoking gun" texts showed Strzok and Page talking about trying to "evade federal security monitoring" (also, I'm not sure they were laws as opposed to OMB policy and that makes a difference so you might want to tighten up on the language).

That's not what these texts show. Not only does it not appear that you were wrong in the OP, Strzok and Page aren't responsible for IT issues with phones so...

The sad thing is that even though this didn't hold up under scrutiny, a lot of people will never get this far into the thread. So when this ends up at the top of the front page and a lot of people read your OP, they're going to be misinformed.

originally posted by: Moresby
All those texts reveal is how two people act when they just start dating.

Embarrassing? Yes. But only in a human (we've all done it) way.

Politically significant? Nah.

Not to a neutral party, only to a partisan hack would it seem human to want to cheat the country out of their choices.....

a reply to: theantediluvian

Ante,

Again, your seeing it through your own filter.

Clearly, the language is "getting around" ..not "fixing the issue".

They have no intention of following laws, nor protocol.

The big question is why?

originally posted by: RickinVa
I don't think I would want to be in their shoes right now.

Somebody has a lot of explaining to do.

The question is: will anyone be made to explain anything? Or will we let our elected officials pull their back-and-forth shenanigans to an ever increasing degree of ridiculousness that the whole thing will get lost in all of the political crap? It's already WAY past the point where regular folks would have been fired and jailed.

This is a sincere question: what can We the People do about this? How do hold these people accountable? It seems to me that we can't.

a reply to: theantediluvian

Clearly, if you read the entire exchange, they are intentionally circumventing
"discovery".

I'll find a source that can be pasted into ATS to further make it very clear.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

The letter from IG Horowitz to Sens Grassely and Johnson can be seen here on DocumentCloud (PDF).

The OIG has been investigating this matter and, this week, succeeded in using forensic tools to recover text messages from FBI devices, including text messages between Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page that were sent or received between December 14, 2016 and May 17, 2017. Our effort to recover any additional text messages is ongoing. We will provide copies of the text messages that we recover from these devices to the Department so that the Department's leadership can take any management action it deems appropriate.

a reply to: theantediluvian

OK, then FBI is not able to comply with requirements and at least that IT guy should be fired ...

originally posted by: DAVID64
Ladies and Gentlemen....meet the first 2 scapegoats that are about to be thrown under the bus by the Democrats.

Those won't be by the Dems hands. That is their own fault that freedom of information exposed. I expect a Donna Brazile type from the D's if were going to see one thrown under the bus.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Where was it first reported that there was an affair?

I've been wondering that same thing. Maybe one of the "believers" will post a link?

And why are they always calling Page Strizok's "paramour"?

It's only my wild speculation but it could be that a host of publicly-education people of a certain age will have no earthly idea what that word means. Or have I missed its common usage in New Age, Post-Modern, Women's Studies literature? (Admittedly, my education was more of the classical literature and I've not been able to get through what is required reading these days.)

a reply to: burntheships

circumventing discovery

Mr. Strzok: I’m not convinced short of OPR, that text capture capability really deters anything.



Mr. Strzok: If I want to copy/take classified, I’m sure as hell not going to do it on this phone.




Ms. Page: I thought it was more from a discovery perspective.

www.hsgac.senate.gov...

originally posted by: six67seven
a reply to: burntheships

Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse...

IT DOES!

These two deserve a cell. The evidence is going to be overwhelming.

I know why they still have a job/security clearance... because apparently everyone else is complicit... the whole agency should be DRAINED!

Ummm...Interesting choice of words...it seems we now know what President Trump was referring to when he repeatedly stated..."drain the swamp"...

It's obvious now..."The swamp"...is the federal bureau of instigation...and the department of injustice...




YouSir

a reply to: burntheships

No, they're not talking about circumventing discovery, but thanks for finding the statement which has even more of the texts the letter.

Here's the texts:

Mr. Strzok: No doubt.

Mr. Strzok: I’m not convinced short of OPR, that text capture capability really deters anything.

Mr. Strzok: If I want to copy/take classified, I’m sure as hell not going to do it on this phone.

Ms. Page: I thought it was more from a discovery perspective.

Mr. Strzok: Probably. So just make a rule no texts of a discoverable nature. Like you said, what are CBP, DEA, others doing?

They're not talking about how to circumvent discovery. They're bitching about how the phones don't work because of the text capture software and how the software is pointless anyway because it doesn't really deter anything because people aren't dumb enough to use their phones for what it's supposed to deter.

This went went from a cherry-picked text message that was seemingly alarming to a really rather innocuous gripe session about work phones.

a reply to: YouSir

Might even be bigger than that..

I say fire everybody above a certain pay grade and move the younger people up, then hire only real patriots that have the intelligence to perform the work. (no pun intended). That should get rid of most of the riff raff...

a reply to: theantediluvian

no texts of a discoverable nature...

Mr. Strzok: Probably. So just make a rule no texts of a discoverable nature. Like you said, what are CBP, DEA, others doing?

in your filter, what do you see there?

Also, this again proves the point of the OP.

I’m told – thought I have seen – that there is an IG report that says everyone is failing. But one has changed anything, so why not just join in the failure.

No way to get around that, this = massive failure to preserve information.