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.

 

FBI Agent Peter Strzok escorted out of FBI headquarters today

page: 5
56
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 06:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: burntheships
a reply to: Gryphon66

I'm sure there were things disclosed today in the classified
Sections of the I G Report that brought about his removal from the
FBI building.

Many "deleted" texts out there were recovered, perhaps
It is true that he threatened the president!?


Ah, so we're back to the pig-in-the-poke of the "Classified Sections" are we?

Fair enough. Thanks for answering.




posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 06:15 PM
link   
a reply to: RadioRobert

Didn't we know previously that IG Horowitz was looking into those matters? (Didn't he say so in the report?)

I'm looking forward to the next revelations ... we're all having so much fun with these.



posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 06:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: vinifalou

ATS should win some kind of internet forum award, if there’s any.





The "Q Badge of Honor"


+5 more 
posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 06:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: queenofswords
a reply to: RadioRobert

By the time HRC was appointed SOS, the technology had evolved and gov't email systems were a lot different. With Hillary, it wasn't just email. She had three private servers, multiple non-gov't devices in use, and multiple non-gov't email accounts in use. Several other high officials, including President Obama, were using those private systems and communicating with pseudonyms.

A bit different from the early 2000's, I think. She knew better by then and so did everybody else.



Barring the differences in technology, though ... what is the crime?

Is it mishandling of classified material?

Isn't the law in play like the Espionage Act of 1917 and/or the National Security Act of 1947?

Obviously, at least in this universe, these laws existed before computers and email was widespread, yes?

Your reply makes absolutely zero sense
You are failing and just throwing stuff out there now.
There are regulations that govern the transmittal , storage , expiration , encryption , you name it. These were put in place starting with MILNET , and get updated constantly .
You break one , you get escorted out the door . Or worse.



posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 06:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Gothmog

*trudges through the obligatory ad hominem BS*

When did the mishandling of classified material become a crime, and under what statute?



posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 06:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: burntheships
a reply to: Gryphon66

I'm sure there were things disclosed today in the classified
Sections of the I G Report that brought about his removal from the
FBI building.

Many "deleted" texts out there were recovered, perhaps
It is true that he threatened the president!?


The recovered texts revealed "the insurance policy" was more than just changing "Gross Negligence" to "extremely careless".

⚖🚬🔫



posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 06:22 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

I will say one thing ... I would not want Trey Gowdy prosecuting me.



posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 06:32 PM
link   
Gee, the guy was doing things he was not supposed to do for a while, then they want us to feel pity on him because of his years of service. Strozk must have something over some high ranking officials, enough to get them fired if he talks.

I do not feel sorry for Strozk at all, he was not doing what he was hired to do. I condone his actions, they were inappropriate. There are others there that should lose their job too.


+2 more 
posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 06:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Gothmog

*trudges through the obligatory ad hominem BS*

When did the mishandling of classified material become a crime, and under what statute?



Seriously?

Ask anyone that's been prosecuted for it.

Who's that General that was popped for it? Petraeus.

www.washingtonpost.com... oredirect=on&utm_term=.6a4189302943




posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 06:34 PM
link   
a reply to: burgerbuddy

You aren't understaning my question or my argument.

I am arguing that the mishandling of classified documents has been in place for years.

Espionage Act of 1917
National Security Act of 1947

These have been amended as needed to cover the mishandling of classified documents, right?



posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 06:35 PM
link   
The resistance is crumbling and the Stormy thing lol has been replaced with 'Obama's Cages for Kiddies' as they try to pin it on Trump. As their powerful actors get exposed and expelled their distraction attempts get more desperate.

Trump is like a steady rock as the puny waves thrash about broken and dissipated, their effect entirely futile. He cannot be shamed, he cannot be upstaged, he never tires and is relentless in pursuit of MAGA. What a vote unwasted, Trump voters are getting a show of a lifetime.


+2 more 
posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 06:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Gothmog

*trudges through the obligatory ad hominem BS*

When did the mishandling of classified material become a crime, and under what statute?


Haha! You got used to the Obama/Clinton style of accountability for so long you think it's normal to walk away freely after committing class C felonies with classified information.

Hillary-ous!



posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 06:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: burgerbuddy

You aren't understaning my question or my argument.

I am arguing that the mishandling of classified documents has been in place for years.

Espionage Act of 1917
National Security Act of 1947

These have been amended as needed to cover the mishandling of classified documents, right?




Obviously!

It depends on who is doing the mishandling, right?




posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 06:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Gothmog

*trudges through the obligatory ad hominem BS*

When did the mishandling of classified material become a crime, and under what statute?


Gee, I googled your first part before the comma and came up with lots of articles adressing it is a crime. Here is the first one...criminal.findlaw.com... next one. www.law.cornell.edu...

That was googling that first part of your sentence, Highlight and google.



posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 06:38 PM
link   
a reply to: burgerbuddy

Yep.



posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 06:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: rickymouse

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Gothmog

*trudges through the obligatory ad hominem BS*

When did the mishandling of classified material become a crime, and under what statute?


Gee, I googled your first part before the comma and came up with lots of articles adressing it is a crime. Here is the first one...criminal.findlaw.com... next one. www.law.cornell.edu...

That was googling that first part of your sentence, Highlight and google.


See above. Perhaps the statement that Gothmog reacted to?



posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 06:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Gothmog

*trudges through the obligatory ad hominem BS*

When did the mishandling of classified material become a crime, and under what statute?


Haha! You got used to the Obama/Clinton style of accountability for so long you think it's normal to walk away freely after committing class C felonies with classified information.

Hillary-ous!


See Alberto Gonzales, GW Bush, Dick Cheny, Don Rumsfeld, Colin Powel, Condilezza Rice, et. al.
edit on 19-6-2018 by Gryphon66 because: Spelling



posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 06:41 PM
link   
Update to the CNN piece "FBI agent Strzok escorted from FBI building Friday " Could this have also been a false part of the story that was planted to flush out other leakers ????
edit on 19-6-2018 by the2ofusr1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 06:42 PM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

Thanks.

Here's the post of mine that Gothmog was reacting to.


originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: queenofswords
a reply to: RadioRobert

By the time HRC was appointed SOS, the technology had evolved and gov't email systems were a lot different. With Hillary, it wasn't just email. She had three private servers, multiple non-gov't devices in use, and multiple non-gov't email accounts in use. Several other high officials, including President Obama, were using those private systems and communicating with pseudonyms.

A bit different from the early 2000's, I think. She knew better by then and so did everybody else.



Barring the differences in technology, though ... what is the crime?

Is it mishandling of classified material?

Isn't the law in play like the Espionage Act of 1917 and/or the National Security Act of 1947?

Obviously, at least in this universe, these laws existed before computers and email was widespread, yes?



posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 07:12 PM
link   
Did Strzok have something to do with the creation of the Steele dossier?


Mr. Palmer: "Are you aware that Strzok went to London in July of 2016?"

Horowitz: "I've learned of that through various public reports"

Mr. Palmer: "Thank you. Would it be fair to say that McCabe approved that trip and approved the expenditures for that?"

Horowitz: "I don't know the answer one way or the other"

Mr. Palmer: "I just wonder what other justification there could have been for a trip to London at that particular time other than the Russia probe and what concerns me was that when he returned he almost immediately launched that probe, that McCabe approved him going to London and he came back and he launched it. Do you think that there's any possibility that Strzok had prior knowledge that Christopher Steele was assembling the dossier?"

Horowitz: "That's one of the issues that we are / have been asked to look at. So we're in the middle of that work on how that played out with regard to the FISA application."

Mr. Palmer: "I'm glad that you made that point because another question I need to ask. Was there any possibility that the dossier was at least part of Strzok's 'Insurance Policy'? Because that statement came later I believe.

Horowitz: "That's right. The insurance policy statement came up on August.."

...They go on to discuss McCabe's bias due to Clinton contributions to his wife's campaign.

Mr. Palmer: "Do you think that either of them had knowledge that the Clinton campaign paid for the dossier?"

Horowitz: "... that is something that is part of the review that we are doing"


Oversight of the FBI and DOJ Actions in Advance of the 2016 Election



new topics

top topics



 
56
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join