FBI Agent Peter Strzok escorted out of FBI headquarters today

a reply to: Gryphon66

To prove conspiracy in a court of law, you need a date the conspiracy started, who was involved and proof they were aware of their involvement, what overt action they took, and the criminal action they were attempting to achieve.

What is needed for sedition is a little less clear. If I had more time I'd look into it, but I'm headed out for a while. You (or anyone here) can look up the required proof.

a reply to: BlueAjah

Oh man oh man.

The IG is going to out everything soon.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
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.

The revelation that is new about the 302's is its not limited to Flynn. It includes altering 302's in the Clinton investigation as well. That might have to do with the FBI agent who noted he interviewed people in the Clinton investigation and that they lied their asses off. If he said that in his message but the 302's reflect something different there might be a problem.

a reply to: BlueAjah

Just another crazy coincidence!

a reply to: Dfairlite
In general and given all the publicly available info these are possible -

18 U.S. Code § 2384 - Seditious conspiracy

If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 808; July 24, 1956, ch. 678, § 1, 70 Stat. 623; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(N), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.)

* - 18 U.S. Code § 2382 - Misprision of treason
* - 18 U.S. Code § 2385 - Advocating overthrow of Government
* - 18 U.S. Code § 201 - Bribery of public officials and witnesses
* - 18 U.S. Code § 205 - Activities of officers and employees in claims against and other matters affecting the Government
* - 18 U.S. Code § 210 - Offer to procure appointive public office
* - 18 U.S. Code § 227 - Wrongfully influencing a private entity’s employment decisions by a Member of Congress or an officer or employee of the legislative or executive branch
* - 18 U.S. Code Chapter 19 - CONSPIRACY
* - 18 U.S. Code § 242 - Deprivation of rights under color of law
* - 18 U.S. Code § 241 - Conspiracy against rights
* - 18 U.S. Code § 610 - Coercion of political activity
* - 18 U.S. Code § 600 - Promise of employment or other benefit for political activity
* - 18 U.S. Code Chapter 41 - EXTORTION AND THREATS
* - 18 U.S. Code Chapter 47 - FRAUD AND FALSE STATEMENTS
* - 18 U.S. Code Chapter 73 - OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE
* - 18 U.S. Code Chapter 79 - PERJURY
* - 18 U.S. Code § 1905 - Disclosure of confidential information generally
* - 18 U.S. Code Chapter 96 - RACKETEER INFLUENCED AND CORRUPT ORGANIZATIONS
* - 18 U.S. Code Chapter 101 - RECORDS AND REPORTS
* - 18 U.S. Code Chapter 109 - SEARCHES AND SEIZURES
* - 18 U.S. Code Chapter 115 - TREASON, SEDITION, AND SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES
* - 18 U.S. Code Chapter 119 - WIRE AND ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS INTERCEPTION AND INTERCEPTION OF ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
* - 18 U.S. Code Chapter 121 - STORED WIRE AND ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS AND TRANSACTIONAL RECORDS ACCESS


Again a reminder. The list above is an idea of whats possible given the publicly available information. This list is for criminal prosecution and does not have anything to do with any internal policy violations nor the punishment for those policy violations. The other thing to note depends on if Strzok had anything to do with putting together warrant applications and if he lied in any of them. The consequences of that wont be restricted to just criminal statutes. It can expand beyond them to judicial repercussions and the possibility of warrants being found invalid, evidence collected being thrown out or restricted in its use,k dismissal of charges with prejudice.

Finally as someone else noted any actions against active duty FBI agents dealing with lying in affidavits / warrants / reports / etc can trigger a massive response by any persons who have been charged / prosecuted / convicted / found not guilty. It can trigger a review of all cases the agent ever dealt with and worst case scenario is invalidating any outcomes of legal proceedings. In those situations you will find the courts error on the side of the suspect / victim. Acting like an asshat on one case can ruin cases way beyond just the one.

These types of actions by agents fall under Giglio (another requirement just like Brady requirements). If a lawyer requests rundown of the agents involved it must include any information of disciplinary problems. Failure to disclose is a Giglio violation and just like a Brady violation can result in charges being thrown out.

There are possible civil violations involved but thats beyond the conversation for now.

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?

Yup - up to date -

18 U.S. Code Chapter 37 - ESPIONAGE AND CENSORSHIP

But..But..Russia!Stormy!Kid cages!I hope the left doesn't see any power in this country again after their straight out sedition...

a reply to: RadioRobert


Perfect meme opportunity to be had. Hillary pictured in a rearview mirror with the text. "Caution objectivity may appear closer without the Strokz of a pen"

a reply to: Xcathdra

THAT is a phenomenal post of information regardless of anything else.

Do you keep that handy in a text file or something?

a reply to: Xcathdra

If he altered or concealed documents for whatever reason he deserves to be tried.

God, what a dumbass.

originally posted by: TDawg61
But..But..Russia!Stormy!Kiddie cages!I hope the left doesn't see any power in this country again after their straight out sedition...

See, here's the thing. We're talking about critical matters regarding the very structure of our way of life and you're tossing in whatever political tidbits that popped into your brain.

And far from castigating you ... you're not alone. We're almost all of us doing that these days. It's a symptom of a deep illness.

We are obviously reaching the point of no return in terms of polarization, because, whatever Strzok did or didn't do, he is being CONVICTED in the minds of the Congress and many of you BASED ON HIS POLITICAL BELIEFS.

So, if Republicans are in power no Democrat can be trusted.

If Democrats accede to control, then no Republicans can be trusted.

The "divide and conquer" scenarios are almost complete at least for the good ol' US of A.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: TDawg61
But..But..Russia!Stormy!Kiddie cages!I hope the left doesn't see any power in this country again after their straight out sedition...

See, here's the thing. We're talking about critical matters regarding the very structure of our way of life and you're tossing in whatever political tidbits that popped into your brain.

And far from castigating you ... you're not alone. We're almost all of us doing that these days. It's a symptom of a deep illness.

We are obviously reaching the point of no return in terms of polarization, because, whatever Strzok did or didn't do, he is being CONVICTED in the minds of the Congress and many of you BASED ON HIS POLITICAL BELIEFS.

So, if Republicans are in power no Democrat can be trusted.

If Democrats accede to control, then no Republicans can be trusted.

The "divide and conquer" scenarios are almost complete at least for the good ol' US of A.

Sounds like we need to get rid of Democrats and republicans if they can't be trusted.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: TDawg61
But..But..Russia!Stormy!Kiddie cages!I hope the left doesn't see any power in this country again after their straight out sedition...

See, here's the thing. We're talking about critical matters regarding the very structure of our way of life and you're tossing in whatever political tidbits that popped into your brain.

And far from castigating you ... you're not alone. We're almost all of us doing that these days. It's a symptom of a deep illness.

We are obviously reaching the point of no return in terms of polarization, because, whatever Strzok did or didn't do, he is being CONVICTED in the minds of the Congress and many of you BASED ON HIS POLITICAL BELIEFS.

So, if Republicans are in power no Democrat can be trusted.

If Democrats accede to control, then no Republicans can be trusted.

The "divide and conquer" scenarios are almost complete at least for the good ol' US of A.

The old, my team lost so Imma blow up the game board so nobody can play. LOL

The agony of the Left's defeat is buttering a lot of popcorn.

a reply to: DanDanDat

George Washington's Farewell Address

In contemplating the causes which may disturb our Union, it occurs as matter of serious concern that any ground should have been furnished for characterizing parties by geographical discriminations, Northern and Southern, Atlantic and Western; whence designing men may endeavor to excite a belief that there is a real difference of local interests and views. One of the expedients of party to acquire influence within particular districts is to misrepresent the opinions and aims of other districts. You cannot shield yourselves too much against the jealousies and heartburnings which spring from these misrepresentations; they tend to render alien to each other those who ought to be bound together by fraternal affection.

a reply to: TinfoilTP

I am sorry you are so captivated by partisan nonsense.

You highlight and prove my point amazingly, however.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Gryphon66
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.

The revelation that is new about the 302's is its not limited to Flynn. It includes altering 302's in the Clinton investigation as well. That might have to do with the FBI agent who noted he interviewed people in the Clinton investigation and that they lied their asses off. If he said that in his message but the 302's reflect something different there might be a problem.

Good catch. That is seriously problematic. If he did the interview then he would be primary on the 302. Speaking of 302s---that flawed and abused practice has got to go. That would clean the FBI up significantly right there.

I have found sources that state that McCabe altered some of Strzok's 302's regarding Flynn.

Sounds like Flynn just got a reprieve; perhaps the President will consider pardoning him.

I'm unable to find references that Strzok altered any 302s ... particularly, 302s associated with the Clinton investigation.

Since this apparently came out during Horowitz's turn in the House today, and he did the investigation ... did he just miss this fact?

EDIT: Nevermind. This has been known since at least January 2018.

Strzok is finished.

Very very few people ever get back in once you are walked out.


In his case, not a chance in hell of coming back.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

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?

Where is his evidence, I provided evidence easily obtained from a legitimate legal source.

a reply to: rickymouse

I'm not even sure what we are saying to each other.

Let me try to make it simple: laws against mishandling classified materials have been around for over a 100 years.

It didn't start with email or servers.

Those who have mishandled classified info should be punished, right?

That list starts with GW Bush, Cheney and continues through Alberto Gonzales, as the IG listed in their report.

Now, what I was wondering about, in all the certainty about law and order etc. here is why we aren't upset about anyone other than Clinton not being punished.