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.

 

Peter Strzok Testimony Before Congress 07-12-18

page: 40
66
<< 37  38  39    41  42  43 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 12 2018 @ 07:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Kryties

How exactly is this derailing Muellers investigation? Strzok is no longer a part of it (cause he's innocent....?).




posted on Jul, 12 2018 @ 07:19 PM
link   
This is a strange tidbit from the emails:


Text2016-11-02
INBOX: Hey big dummy you were supposed to stop by and unlock you computer so I could finish self assessment.


From the context of surrounding messages, this seems to be From Page to Strzok.

1. I am fairly certain it would be against the rules for an FBI agent to open their computer for someone else to use.
2. Why would Page need to use Strzok's computer for a self-assessment? It seems likely this would be so that she could complete this on his behalf, since it would look like he did it if done from his computer. A self-assessment sounds like something that should be completed by... "self". Did he think he could not pass it on his own?




edit on 7/12/18 by BlueAjah because: spelling



posted on Jul, 12 2018 @ 07:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Total conjecture.



posted on Jul, 12 2018 @ 07:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Jonjonj

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Kryties

Really? They didnt leak it?

Explain Hillary Clinton's 3 tweets up to October 31st referencing Trump and Russia then. If it wasnt leaked to her campaign then how did she know anything about it?

Maybe because she paid for it and knew what the dossier contained.


Do I look like Hillary?

Is Hillary the FBI?

Is Hillary Peter Strzok?

If the answers to these is "no" then I fail to see what that has to do with what I said? Hillary could have been making it up at the time, or acting on suspicion (of which there was plenty to go around ever since Trump publicly asked the Russians to hack Hillary - remember that?). Why is it that everyone jumps to knee jerk conclusions that seem based more on there own personal bias than actual facts?


So basically you could shut the f*** up and nobody would be any the wiser.



I thought you weren't going to "engage" with me any more, to which I said I was thrilled at that prospect?

That clearly didn't last long. Clearly the urge to abuse people was too great for you to resist.




posted on Jul, 12 2018 @ 07:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Xcathdra

Total conjecture.


Folks in glass houses........you know the rest.




posted on Jul, 12 2018 @ 07:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Kryties

How exactly is this derailing Muellers investigation? Strzok is no longer a part of it (cause he's innocent....?).



Try to prove Strzok bias ----> claim FBI bias -------> use those claims to demand access to Muellers files or use claims to disparage the investigation.

It's not hard for anyone with two eyes and half a brain to see that is what the Republicans are doing.




posted on Jul, 12 2018 @ 07:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Kryties

It has everything to do with what you said and I never said you were her.

I pointed out the flaw in your claim the russia stuff was never leaked when in reality it was.



posted on Jul, 12 2018 @ 07:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kryties
a reply to: BlueAjah

Which clearly didn't happen. Nor did he, or the FBI, leak info that Trump was being investigated back during the campaign - which would have clearly damaged Trump. Why didn't they do this if the intent, that you're apparently deriving from the text messages, was to do the opposite? I've asked that twice now.


If he used his position as lead investigator in the Clinton investigation to withhold evidence or change 302's, then he certainly affected the outcome of the investigation. There are many signs of other things he did in that investigation that made it a farce.

Strzok was the main one who started the Russia investigation. He admitted today that they got the dossier from Ohr and thus Fusion GPS. If the entire investigation was started under false pretenses, then he certainly used his position in an attempt to remove Trump. There is mention in other threads of things he did, such as altering 302's in the Flynn case.

He did not get to finish that mission, because he was found out and removed from the case. Otherwise he would still be working from inside. It came out in the hearing today that he was still working on the Russia investigation after removal from Mueller's group.


edit on 7/12/18 by BlueAjah because: fixed



posted on Jul, 12 2018 @ 07:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Xcathdra

Total conjecture.


supported by facts and the actions of the democrats.



posted on Jul, 12 2018 @ 07:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Kryties

It has everything to do with what you said and I never said you were her.

I pointed out the flaw in your claim the russia stuff was never leaked when in reality it was.


You're assuming, or insinuating, that Hillary got the information from the FBI when it could simply have come as a result of Trump publicly asking the Russians to hack her. Why make that assumption or insinuation?



posted on Jul, 12 2018 @ 07:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Kryties

You actually have no concern about the Justice Department being weaponized to overthrow the will of the people and influence an election?

What if this was reversed? Everyplace in this thread replace "Trump" with "Clinton" and vice versa. Then how would you feel?



posted on Jul, 12 2018 @ 07:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Kryties




Try to prove Strzok bias ----> claim FBI bias -------> use those claims to demand access to Muellers files or use claims to disparage the investigation.


Ah, so even though R's haven't unilaterally declared the FBI has bias, you're going to run with that?

It's been over a year and Mueller has operated without oversight. It may be high time to do as such regardless of Strzok.




It's not hard for anyone with two eyes and half a brain to see that is what the Republicans are doing.


I would say that it's not hard for anyone with two eyes and half a brain to see that the IC's have become politicized.



posted on Jul, 12 2018 @ 07:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: Kryties

You actually have no concern about the Justice Department being weaponized to overthrow the will of the people and influence an election?

What if this was reversed? Everyplace in this thread replace "Trump" with "Clinton" and vice versa. Then how would you feel?



If it can't be proven, and the hearings are clearly witch hunts designed to derail the investigation then yes, it wouldn't matter who was President.

Prove the allegations, then we can talk. Supposition, conspiracy and "Chinese whispers" prove nothing.



posted on Jul, 12 2018 @ 07:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Kryties

It has everything to do with what you said and I never said you were her.

I pointed out the flaw in your claim the russia stuff was never leaked when in reality it was.


You're assuming, or insinuating, that Hillary got the information from the FBI when it could simply have come as a result of Trump publicly asking the Russians to hack her. Why make that assumption or insinuation?


Because her tweets have nothing to say about what you just suggested.

If the info didnt come from the FBI then how did she get it?
edit on 12-7-2018 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2018 @ 07:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Kryties

It has everything to do with what you said and I never said you were her.

I pointed out the flaw in your claim the russia stuff was never leaked when in reality it was.


You're assuming, or insinuating, that Hillary got the information from the FBI when it could simply have come as a result of Trump publicly asking the Russians to hack her. Why make that assumption or insinuation?


Because her tweets have nothing to say about what you just suggested.


Any chance you could post said tweets then and then clearly point out how she could only have obtained that information from the FBI and no other source?



posted on Jul, 12 2018 @ 07:35 PM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah

Did you not read the IG report. No bias was found in their work.



posted on Jul, 12 2018 @ 07:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Kryties

Interesting... To bad you dont extend the same standard to Trump.

Dont look now but your bias is showing.



posted on Jul, 12 2018 @ 07:36 PM
link   
a reply to: vinifalou

What I’m excited about is when Trump decides to have HIS FBI, HIS CIA and HIS DOJ do ALL OF THIS to whoever is going to run against him in 2020. Gonna be great. Leaks about stuff that they make up while eating cheese burgers and ice cream TWO SCOOPS (wink wink CNN)

Can’t wait. It’s all fair game now. The fake liberals and anti American Dems can have their own taste of it.


We all know if Bush had done this to Obama they would be convulsing and rioting en masse across America.

And no I’m not a conservative or a Republican. I’m just a left wing guy with common sense and BS meter that rings true. Thanks to my Chicago upbringing...we smell lies and spin a mile away.



posted on Jul, 12 2018 @ 07:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Kryties

It has everything to do with what you said and I never said you were her.

I pointed out the flaw in your claim the russia stuff was never leaked when in reality it was.


You're assuming, or insinuating, that Hillary got the information from the FBI when it could simply have come as a result of Trump publicly asking the Russians to hack her. Why make that assumption or insinuation?


Because her tweets have nothing to say about what you just suggested.


Any chance you could post said tweets then and then clearly point out how she could only have obtained that information from the FBI and no other source?


go to twitter, clintons twitter account page and then do a search.



posted on Jul, 12 2018 @ 07:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Kryties

Fella. We have seen the months of texts. Do yourself a service and stop trying to pretend Strzok didn't act with bias. It's pretty obvious.



new topics

top topics



 
66
<< 37  38  39    41  42  43 >>

log in

join