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

a reply to: soberbacchus

People familiar with the matter.... So his affair was public knowledge ?

Not buying it...

The Clock "Strzok" Noon and we saw the "Page(s)"

🔑

a reply to: theantediluvian

The is most assuredly talking about circumventing discovery. Your own quote as much as says so. Did they? That's up to a court to decide.

A grand jury would indict. I certainly would.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Which is why it needs, desperately, to go before a judge. Sooner, rather than later.

originally posted by: xuenchen
The Clock "Strzok" Noon and we saw the "Page(s)"

🔑

You'll love this.

Apparently, these two had some kind of a fall out after Comey was fired.

In May 2017, after Mr. Trump fired Mr. Comey, citing his handling of the investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s email server, Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page wrestled with whether to join Mr. Mueller’s team. Mr. Strzok overcame his initial reluctance and struggled to convince Ms. Page to do the same. “You haven’t asked but I think you should go,” he wrote on June 3. “It is an experience unlike any other you’re going to get. Life changing.”

Two weeks later, Ms. Page texted that she was having second thoughts despite the special counsel’s office taking steps “to have me fully integrated” into the team. By June 21, she wrote Mr. Strzok that she was “thinking I might leave” the special counsel’s office. She would soon return to her work at the bureau.

Over the next few days, their relationship appeared to deteriorate. The last text is from Ms. Page, arriving in Mr. Strzok’s inbox on a Sunday morning in late June.

“Please,” she wrote, ”don’t ever text me again.”

www.wsj.com...

a reply to: burntheships

And Page left 2 weeks before they found out and dumped Strozk, so we have a "firm" mid-July date for Strozk leaving Mueller. I'm not sure they've ever released when that occurred other than "this summer".

a reply to: RadioRobert

No exact date.

I did notice it when it happened, hoping it was the first glimmer of
a crack in the armor. Did a thread on it.

TOP FBI Investigator Leaves Russia Probe

originally posted by: burntheships
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.

The fact that we have all their texts shows that they didn't circumvent anything.

The best you all have from their exchanges is that: "i asked my parents for a walkie talkie so we can talk to each other without our parents knowing."

originally posted by: Butterfinger

you sound like a right bell end

Wow, thanks for that insult.

I just work here, I didnt make the rules.

Would you want to pay for someones phone and data, just to have them waste it on flirting and porn?

Since the data is most likely on an unlimited plan, personal communication likely cost nothing. The problem comes when saving the communications and you have to weed out personal calls.

a reply to: sligtlyskeptical

Thats what I'm saying, it shouldn't be mixed because personal use on a company phone is a no-no.

Regardless of cost, companies dont want you using it regardless if it aggregates to percentages of pennies. Same thought process when schools and workplaces block social sites.

originally posted by: FawnyKate

originally posted by: Butterfinger
a reply to: Moresby

They need to get their own phones for their affairs.

I work in IT and have handed over alot of instances of people misusing company devices for personal use, some minor like accessing youtube on cell data, all the way to emailing server IPs by accident to home email.

Everyone of them were fired.

you sound like a right bell end

I just realized what you meant.

I didnt find the issues and tattle tale on the users, its actually my job to run reports on internet usage and vulnerabilities in the network.

I guess you would be right if it wasnt 75% of requests that I get through managers and supervisors.

originally posted by: sligtlyskeptical

originally posted by: burntheships
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.

The fact that we have all their texts shows that they didn't circumvent anything.

The best you all have from their exchanges is that: "i asked my parents for a walkie talkie so we can talk to each other without our parents knowing."

The reason we have their texts is because Trump saw to their release, not because they were trying to prove that they weren't hiding anything. Remember, the Democrats we’re doing everything they could to keep these from being released. There must’ve been a reason for that.
It’s one thing to use Wilkie talkies to circumvent the rules of your parents. It’s an entirely different ball game when you’re a U.S. Official that is LEGALLY persuant to every individual in America and upholding Constitutional Law. A child to parent example is a small example of the same behaviour, yes...but you must remember, that (at least the way things used to be) when parents from the past would find out that you circumvented their rules, many ended up with welts on their @$$es for breaking those rules, or try8ng to find loopholes. At any rate, your scenario is hardly comparable to a high level FBI and DOJ Government corruption scandal.

Oh Strzok? You mean the FBI agent that spearheaded re-opening the investigation into HRC...just before the election?

Great theory. Bravo.

You really exposed the "deep state" with that one.

Or let me guess....they #ed up HRC's election just to throw people off the trail of their larger plan to remove DT after he's elected because they #ed up HRC's chances?


I can't keep up with the mental gymnastics it must require for you traitors to even imagine this bull#, much less type it into some kind of semi-coherent thought.

a reply to: MrPlow

No, I mean that Strzok who took the investigation so he could "fix" it.

If he did nothing wrong, why was he demoted to HR?

originally posted by: burntheships
a reply to: MrPlow

No, I mean that Strzok who took the investigation so he could "fix" it.

If he did nothing wrong, why was he demoted to HR?

These people are slimeball hacks. It's bothersome how they got into such influential positions of power go be able to steal justice for political purposes. The FBI nonetheless. A complete disgrace.

a reply to: burntheships

Think it ended because her husband found out about the afair. Judging from her text she wanted to put it behind her and didn't want further contact. So after months she developed a conscience which I find unlikely. Or her husband made threats if she didn't break it off he was going to the FBI.

Oh and for trying to avoid monitoring they did a crappy job. I don't think they tried to avoid it or they would have been alot smarter about hiding their affair.

originally posted by: burntheships
a reply to: MrPlow

No, I mean that Strzok who took the investigation so he could "fix" it.

If he did nothing wrong, why was he demoted to HR?

For fraternizing with a coworker and using the company phone for personal business. That is about the limit of wrongdoing here. They may have fantasized about taking Trump down, but what are two low level cops going to do against a billionaire backed by Congress?

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: burntheships
a reply to: MrPlow

No, I mean that Strzok who took the investigation so he could "fix" it.

If he did nothing wrong, why was he demoted to HR?

For fraternizing with a coworker and using the company phone for personal business. That is about the limit of wrongdoing here. They may have fantasized about taking Trump down, but what are two low level cops going to do against a billionaire backed by Congress?

We are seeing the answer to that unfold

a reply to: DJW001

two low level cops 

Understating just a tad.


Because calling them that is laughable.
Edit to add:

 Strzok was the Chief of the Counterespionage Section during the FBI's investigation into Hillary Clinton's use of a personal email server.[3][5] Strzok rose to become the Deputy Assistant Director of the Counterintelligence Division, which is the number two position in that division, and led the FBI's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections.

In June and July 2017, Strzok was the top FBI agent working on Robert Mueller's Special Counsel investigation into any links or coordination between Donald Trump's presidential campaign and the Russian government

Peter Strzok
Lisa Page was one of Mueller's lawyers on his hit team

originally posted by: Butterfinger
a reply to: Moresby

They need to get their own phones for their affairs.

I work in IT and have handed over alot of instances of people misusing company devices for personal use, some minor like accessing youtube on cell data, all the way to emailing server IPs by accident to home email.

Everyone of them were fired.

We all show off a bit when we're first involved in a romantic relationship.

Especially when it's in those early stages. And we're using any means to get closer.