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.

 

Latest Strzok / Page text messages and emails from people involved - 500+ pages

page: 3
44
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 03:21 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

And who sends hundreds of thousands of emails right?

I mean, Hillary and then she deletes 33,000 yoga emails too?

Well they were just creating a ruse, right?

Come on, your smarter than this....

You know the facts added together are evidence of corruption,
and a top level cover up.




posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 03:25 PM
link   
a reply to: burntheships

Special counsel as soon as possible, before they can destroy more evidence, and Witnesses begin disappearing.



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 03:48 PM
link   
Narrative busting stuff in here folks. Remember that "insurance policy?" It was them talking about planning the staffing changes after the election.



But wait, here's an exclusive! They were "worried about what happens if HRC is elected!" Clearly proof serious bias and a massive conspiracy to stop HRC from being elected.



I'm half-joking (really mostly just making point here) but if that idiot Ron Johnson wanted to spin a yarn that Strzok was in the bag for HRC, he could have a statement like that out of context, adding a some stuff about how Strzok reopened the Clinton investigation and drafted the announcement that was made a week before the election to sink Hillary Clinton's campaign.



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 03:59 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Hi Ante,

I was wondering when you were going to show up.
Was waiting for the other side of the argument to arrive as I always enjoy reading both sides..

Couple of genuine questions:

Can you explain to me how the first highlighted portion shows that they were talking about staffing changes? It just says that he wants to believe that there's "no way he gets elected" (how is that not proof positive of bias btw?) and that "it" is an "insurance policy" but doesn't say what "it" is.

Also, what is your opinion of the assertion from earlier in the thread that Comey drafted his statement re: Hillary's emails months before the investigation was finished and before he'd even interviewed key witnesses?

Thanks



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 04:00 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Nice try Ante,

But we have texts from Strzok saying unimaginable expletives
about how he hated Trump, and Hillary had to win.



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 04:10 PM
link   
a reply to: burntheships

I don't need text messages to tell me the government is corrupt, its actions speak for themselves. These people literally spent weeks at a time texting each other daily even though they most likely worked together, in person, almost every single one of those days. Were they sitting next to each other texting instead of talking to each other? If they were lovers, were they texting each other while having sex?

Come on, I know you're smarter than that.



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 04:20 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Does it really matter if they were having sex? I'm not convinced
of that yet, but it really does not matter because they were
using Gov Issued phones and everything is supposed to
be preserved. We have them texting about how to get
around preservation protocols, texting about how
they are more than biased against Trump, on
and on ad nauseous.

All on time being paid from taxpayer money. Well,
we the people have a right to see their texts and
make up our own mind about whether they were
colluding together in a conspiracy, which would
be highly illegal.

Why do these two still have a job?



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 04:30 PM
link   
a reply to: burntheships

Using government issued phones to text about incriminating things that they knew would be preserved? I could go down to my local Wal-Mart, buy a pay as you go phone without it being linked to my name in any way and it work just as well as these government issued phones. Were they really that dumb? Why are all these criminals so damn sloppy these days?

Hundreds of texts per day, on days that they were in person together. Are they mute that they couldn't talk about it in person instead of using phones where they knew everything could and would be preserved to be used against them?
edit on 2/7/2018 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 04:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
Were they really that dumb? Why are all these criminals so damn sloppy these days?

Hundreds of texts per day, I days they were in person together. Are they mute that they couldn't talk about it in person instead of using phones where everything in preserved?


It does appear they were not the smartest tools in the shed.

I think the reason for so many texts is they did not actually work together
in the same office. Page worked for the DOJ, Strzok worked with The FBI.



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 04:34 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Ok, I'm going to ask again because you never did answer before:


What exactly are you suggesting is going on here then?

That all these text messages are totally fabricated and that everyone involved is going along with it?

To what end?

You don't have to answer obviously but I am genuinely interested in hearing what it is you think is actually going on here...



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 04:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Indrasweb



You don't have to answer obviously but I am genuinely interested in hearing what it is you think is actually going on here...


Bread and circus.



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 04:38 PM
link   
a reply to: burntheships

Yet they chose to use government issued phones instead of their personal ones or even secondary ones. I doubt they'd that dumb but it does serve the narrative pretty nicely.



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 04:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: Indrasweb



You don't have to answer obviously but I am genuinely interested in hearing what it is you think is actually going on here...


Bread and circus.


FYI...I don't think it's out of the realm of possibilities. To paraphrase something you said earlier today (I think), here we are....and Clinton still has never been charged and Trump is still in office. I starred that comment.

Sometimes I feel like screenwriters for Breaking Bad found new jobs in D.C.



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 04:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Indrasweb

Its beyond credulity.

How many of you, while at work, spend your busy days completing various "what if" drafts of your work?

I mean, i may do a "what if" if i am analyzing financial viability, or laying out a budget. Its how you make decisions. But to create several drafts of a memo to account for multiple possibilities....is an utter waste of time.

The only way I'd buy that nonsense is if they produce the "what if" memo for if they were going to indict.


Great post.

I am totally willing to believe that Comey and others would have what if conversations about what they might include in a statement, but to actually write it out is absurd.

Did he also write a what if statement about her being guilty?

Its just so funny how all of these things are supposedly coincidences; the memo saying shes innocent months before she is interviewed, Strzok and Pages text showing Lynch knew that Comey would suggest not to indict, the changing of language from using language that showed she violated the law to other language.

Thats in addition to the clear bias in the texts from strzok favoring hillary, all of the immunity deals given out with nothing in return, stzrok interviewing Mills and abedin and knowing they lied to him but not pressing charges, smashing evidence from hillarys team for them, not charging anyone for destroying subpeanaed evidence, and so on.

We are to believe this is all just one big coincidence, and that Comey was just writing a what if memo.

It defies belief.



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 04:42 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Haha.. sufficiently vague that dude


Well, thanks for answering anyway, even though I'm non the wiser for it



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 04:46 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

As I mentioned on the other thread, I believe you are reading the insurance policy statement wrong.

Show me anywhere in that where they are discussing their positions.

I read they were in McCabes office for some reason discussing how there is no way Trump would get elected, and then they are discussing an insurance policy in case trump gets elected.

No where in any of that do I see anything remotely suggesting they are discussing an insurance policy about what positions they will hold if trump gets elecetd, and having an insurance policy to maintain a good position

As for the bottom text, I know you are joking, but that text is saying they are worried about hillary get elecetd because the smelly hillbilly trump voters may doing something bad.

More bashing of trump and his supporters.



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 04:49 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Well, it might have served their narrative nicely.

Why was she buying a copy of All The Presidents Men?
Needing to brush up on Watergate?

Trump wasn't even in office yet, so there was no
"obstuction". Think about that....



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 04:51 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian




Narrative busting stuff in here folks.


Keep clinging to that sinking ship.



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 04:53 PM
link   
a reply to: burntheships




Why was she buying a copy of All The Presidents Men? Needing to brush up on Watergate?


I wonder if that makes Guccifer. Deep Throat.

And Assange .Bernstein.




posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 05:07 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96



The truth is just too inconvenient for them.

We already know from Podesta's emails they
were planning the Russian Collusion story way
back when Trump was still in the Primaries.

How quickly they forget!



new topics




 
44
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join