Peter Strzok Testimony Before Congress 07-12-18

Except the Electoral college( the thing that actually determines) our elections wasn't hacked nor can it be hacked.

LIAR,LIARS.

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: TDawg61

Actually more like the tail.

The face is much higher up.

Are you saying Strzok is the butthole of the deep state? Sounds about right.

Comey fired. McCabe fired. Strzok removed twice. Bruce Ohr demoted twice. Yeah...this is all on the up and up.

a reply to: neo96

That's your opinion.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Sillyolme
Goodlatte lying about there being a subpoena for today's testimony.

But when all else fails bring up thirteen angry democrats.

I am pretty sure Strzok was issued a subpoena for this public hearing....and so is almost every news outlet that reported on it last week.

Seems Strzok is the only one that didn't know this....

no he wasn't.

he WANTED this public hearing.

a reply to: Stevenjames15

Gowdy sounded frustrated to me. He keeps getting blocked from having his questions answered.

TheRedneck

a reply to: Stevenjames15

Gowdy generally appears unhinged because he's one of the few in Congress who don't pussyfoot around and use political correctness as the main ingredient in formulating a question.

But his substance is generally spot on where it needs to be, regardless of delivery.

originally posted by: knoxie

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Sillyolme
Goodlatte lying about there being a subpoena for today's testimony.

But when all else fails bring up thirteen angry democrats.

I am pretty sure Strzok was issued a subpoena for this public hearing....and so is almost every news outlet that reported on it last week.

Seems Strzok is the only one that didn't know this....

no he wasn't.

he WANTED this public hearing.

I understand he wanted it. That has nothing to do with getting a subpoena for it as well.

a reply to: knoxie

Just like a crappy husband "wants" a divorce when he catches wind that he's most likely going to be served divorce papers. That doesn't mean that the papers won't still be delivered or drawn up, though.

Does Nadler just want to hear his own voice or something? Jesus!

a reply to: Sillyolme

No, that's a fact. If you think it's wrong please show evidence.

So Strzok can't talk about an 'on going' investigation.

But those jacksnips are dropping Russia ever minute.

a reply to: TheRedneck

Little testy off the start. STRZOK doesn't see how he could be biased in any of the investigations. This isnt going to be very productive.

a reply to: knoxie

Sorry, one does not preclude the other. Both can be true.

Does anyone know for certain that firearms are prohibited in this hearing? I'm worried we're about to see a firefight if not.

TheRedneck

a reply to: pavil

We know how much of that was a lie.

The FBI is impartial and yet we've seen the BIAS expressed by congressman doing their 'jobs'.

Strzok seems super relieved that he's not being questioned right now.

so, how do you all feel - should they release the transcripts?

The subpoena was for the closed testimony. Goodlatte was lying trying to muddy the waters to make it look like Strzok is being forced to cooperate when we all know he asked first for the transcript from the other testimony to be released and when they wouldn't do that asked for this open testimony.
Goodlatte ... you'll only get the evidence i think you should have and not a scrap more.

OH MY!!!!

a reply to: neo96

Everybody is entitled to their political opinion. The question isn't whether he liked trump. The question is did his views affect his work and the IG determined that it did not.