Peter Strzok public testimony: 10:00 am ET, Thursday, July 12, 2018

[LeeOnLido]

what does russian collusion have to do with stroke using foul language in his texts?

 

[whitehall]

To paraphrase Mark Twain "if you have a weak stomach don't watch sausage making or congressional hearings". I imagine they may have had a productive 11 hour closed door session but today's extravaganza is just for show. Republicans attack for five minutes and democrats defend the indefensible.

 

[Flash]

Cummings is the male equivalent of Maxine Waters. Dumber than a door knob.

 

[LeeOnLido]

i am wondering why they didnt grill joe biden over fingers-gate,yet they are grilling peter stroke over this.

 

[boedicca]

If true, he should have stated that. He could said "I didn't interview anyone, here is why". He doesn't have to give specifics of the case, in fact, nobody should expect him to. I do think though, that the potential higher ups demanding an investigation which at some level follows down from the President is strong.

Now, I can tell you, from personal experience, that authorities outside of America are not the same. If the FBI relied on intel from Britiain, Canada, NZ, Australia they have to understand that it is extremely dangerous in the context of an election.

What I am suggesting and accusing "allies" of, is doing what is in their best interests, they couldn't give a damn about U.S laws and liberty I know this as a fact. The CIA and FBI had better understand this. I'm not saying in an ongoing investigation, where U.S intel have started that these countries can't be of value, but to BEGIN an investigation of a potential future president? It can't happen.

Let me go down a foxhole for a moment. Obama interferred in the Brexit vote. Remember his "Britain would be at the bottom of the list in trade"? Well, might the British have repaid that comment with a fraudulent dossier?

I think this is the key to this debate. If the intel came from Britain, I wouldn't trust it. If it came from the CIA or FBI, then you have a legitimate case. That is coming from a guy who KNOWS how Canada operates. If another nation sees a massive difference in their ability to exploit America in Trump vs Clinton, I wouldn't trust it.

If Dems or anyone don't understand this, you had better. This isn't your grandpas world, the whole world was against Trump, these allies care little of U.S law.

The lawyer for the FBI TOLD HIM he could not answer it. That's all that needs to be said.

Untrue. Congress has Constitutional oversight of the FBI. A lawyer at the FBI does not have the authority to override the Constitution.

Where the hell do you get that? Are you even watching? The Supreme Court ruled that a person being questioned by Congress on an ongoing investigation can be told NOT to answer the questions as it can interfere with the investigation. The Supreme Court interprets the Constitution, and that becomes the rule of law.

Congress has oversight of the Executive Branch. Goudy's question regarding teh NUMBER of interviews in no way interfered with the investigation (Strjok is not even a part of it anymore). The FBI has already publicly disclosed numbers of interviews. This objection is just a vile Kabuki Theater.


Article I, Section 8, Powers of Congress:


"To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."

ANYTHING regarding the ongoing investigation is pertinent. Even if YOU and Gowdy doesn't think it is, the FBI lawyer does and that is who's opinion matters.

The article you just posted has NOTHING to do with the Supreme Court decision that was referred to.

Are you watching or just reading this thread?

Think that if it gives you comfort. In RealityLand, the Dem's concerted effort to interfere with Goudy's questions reveals how panicked they are.

And regarding the Constitution, the clause I cited is widely recognized as the basis for Congressional over the Executive Branch, along with the rest of the Powers clause.

 

[Flash]

Strzok's Libtard girlfriend is ugly.

He is lying now about having disdain for Trump voters and that influencing his investigation.

Lying sonofabitch.

 

[Lewdog]

The lawyer for the FBI TOLD HIM he could not answer it. That's all that needs to be said.

Untrue. Congress has Constitutional oversight of the FBI. A lawyer at the FBI does not have the authority to override the Constitution.

Where the hell do you get that? Are you even watching? The Supreme Court ruled that a person being questioned by Congress on an ongoing investigation can be told NOT to answer the questions as it can interfere with the investigation. The Supreme Court interprets the Constitution, and that becomes the rule of law.

Congress has oversight of the Executive Branch. Goudy's question regarding teh NUMBER of interviews in no way interfered with the investigation (Strjok is not even a part of it anymore). The FBI has already publicly disclosed numbers of interviews. This objection is just a vile Kabuki Theater.


Article I, Section 8, Powers of Congress:


"To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."

ANYTHING regarding the ongoing investigation is pertinent. Even if YOU and Gowdy doesn't think it is, the FBI lawyer does and that is who's opinion matters.

The article you just posted has NOTHING to do with the Supreme Court decision that was referred to.

Are you watching or just reading this thread?

Think that if it gives you comfort. In RealityLand, the Dem's concerted effort to interfere with Goudy's questions reveals how panicked they are.

And regarding the Constitution, the clause I cited is widely recognized as the basis for Congressional over the Executive Branch, along with the rest of the Powers clause.

Let me make this very simple for you. "Widely recognized" doesn't mean shit as the Supreme Court's opinion IS what matters. The Constitution says that.

 

[boedicca]

Untrue. Congress has Constitutional oversight of the FBI. A lawyer at the FBI does not have the authority to override the Constitution.

Where the hell do you get that? Are you even watching? The Supreme Court ruled that a person being questioned by Congress on an ongoing investigation can be told NOT to answer the questions as it can interfere with the investigation. The Supreme Court interprets the Constitution, and that becomes the rule of law.

Congress has oversight of the Executive Branch. Goudy's question regarding teh NUMBER of interviews in no way interfered with the investigation (Strjok is not even a part of it anymore). The FBI has already publicly disclosed numbers of interviews. This objection is just a vile Kabuki Theater.


Article I, Section 8, Powers of Congress:


"To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."

ANYTHING regarding the ongoing investigation is pertinent. Even if YOU and Gowdy doesn't think it is, the FBI lawyer does and that is who's opinion matters.

The article you just posted has NOTHING to do with the Supreme Court decision that was referred to.

Are you watching or just reading this thread?

Think that if it gives you comfort. In RealityLand, the Dem's concerted effort to interfere with Goudy's questions reveals how panicked they are.

And regarding the Constitution, the clause I cited is widely recognized as the basis for Congressional over the Executive Branch, along with the rest of the Powers clause.

Let me make this very simple for you. "Widely recognized" doesn't mean shit as the Supreme Court's opinion IS what matters. The Constitution says that.

Actually, it does as the Supreme Court has often recognized Congress' oversight powers. But go ahead, enjoy the spectacle. The RNC will get a lot of sound bites to show the public how corrupt the Dems are.

 

[boedicca]

Watching this hearing just reinforces my view that our government is filled with the worst creeps from high school, and that they haven't changed: Strjok, Cummings, Waters, Swalwell, Nadle....

 

[LeeOnLido]

Strzok's Libtard girlfriend is ugly.

He is lying now about having disdain for Trump voters and that influencing his investigation.

Lying sonofabitch.

when is he gonna say"This all started under the Bush Administration"?

 

[Lewdog]

Where the hell do you get that? Are you even watching? The Supreme Court ruled that a person being questioned by Congress on an ongoing investigation can be told NOT to answer the questions as it can interfere with the investigation. The Supreme Court interprets the Constitution, and that becomes the rule of law.

Congress has oversight of the Executive Branch. Goudy's question regarding teh NUMBER of interviews in no way interfered with the investigation (Strjok is not even a part of it anymore). The FBI has already publicly disclosed numbers of interviews. This objection is just a vile Kabuki Theater.


Article I, Section 8, Powers of Congress:


"To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."

ANYTHING regarding the ongoing investigation is pertinent. Even if YOU and Gowdy doesn't think it is, the FBI lawyer does and that is who's opinion matters.

The article you just posted has NOTHING to do with the Supreme Court decision that was referred to.

Are you watching or just reading this thread?

Think that if it gives you comfort. In RealityLand, the Dem's concerted effort to interfere with Goudy's questions reveals how panicked they are.

And regarding the Constitution, the clause I cited is widely recognized as the basis for Congressional over the Executive Branch, along with the rest of the Powers clause.

Let me make this very simple for you. "Widely recognized" doesn't mean shit as the Supreme Court's opinion IS what matters. The Constitution says that.

Actually, it does as the Supreme Court as often recognized Congress' oversight powers. But go ahead, enjoy the spectacle. The RNC will get a lot of sound bites to show the public how corrupt the Dems are.

Why do you continue to respond when you got shown to be wrong? Why can't you just accept it?

YOU wanted to keep bringing up the Constitution as your defense. Does, or does not the Constitution give the Supreme Court the power to create rule of law when interpreting parts of the Constitution? Simple yes or no?

So the Constitution is of upmost importance only if it supports your argument?

 

[boedicca]

Congress has oversight of the Executive Branch. Goudy's question regarding teh NUMBER of interviews in no way interfered with the investigation (Strjok is not even a part of it anymore). The FBI has already publicly disclosed numbers of interviews. This objection is just a vile Kabuki Theater.


Article I, Section 8, Powers of Congress:


"To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."

ANYTHING regarding the ongoing investigation is pertinent. Even if YOU and Gowdy doesn't think it is, the FBI lawyer does and that is who's opinion matters.

The article you just posted has NOTHING to do with the Supreme Court decision that was referred to.

Are you watching or just reading this thread?

Think that if it gives you comfort. In RealityLand, the Dem's concerted effort to interfere with Goudy's questions reveals how panicked they are.

And regarding the Constitution, the clause I cited is widely recognized as the basis for Congressional over the Executive Branch, along with the rest of the Powers clause.

Let me make this very simple for you. "Widely recognized" doesn't mean shit as the Supreme Court's opinion IS what matters. The Constitution says that.

Actually, it does as the Supreme Court as often recognized Congress' oversight powers. But go ahead, enjoy the spectacle. The RNC will get a lot of sound bites to show the public how corrupt the Dems are.

Why do you continue to respond when you got shown to be wrong? Why can't you just accept it?

YOU wanted to keep bringing up the Constitution as your defense. Does, or does not the Constitution give the Supreme Court the power to create rule of law when interpreting parts of the Constitution? Simple yes or no?

So the Constitution is of upmost importance only if it supports your argument?

It's not at all surprising that you neither recognize nor understand The Constitution.

You thinking I'm wrong is just an affirmation that I'm correct.

 

[ptbw forever]

Untrue. Congress has Constitutional oversight of the FBI. A lawyer at the FBI does not have the authority to override the Constitution.

Where the hell do you get that? Are you even watching? The Supreme Court ruled that a person being questioned by Congress on an ongoing investigation can be told NOT to answer the questions as it can interfere with the investigation. The Supreme Court interprets the Constitution, and that becomes the rule of law.

Congress has oversight of the Executive Branch. Goudy's question regarding teh NUMBER of interviews in no way interfered with the investigation (Strjok is not even a part of it anymore). The FBI has already publicly disclosed numbers of interviews. This objection is just a vile Kabuki Theater.


Article I, Section 8, Powers of Congress:


"To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."

ANYTHING regarding the ongoing investigation is pertinent. Even if YOU and Gowdy doesn't think it is, the FBI lawyer does and that is who's opinion matters.

The article you just posted has NOTHING to do with the Supreme Court decision that was referred to.

Are you watching or just reading this thread?

Think that if it gives you comfort. In RealityLand, the Dem's concerted effort to interfere with Goudy's questions reveals how panicked they are.

And regarding the Constitution, the clause I cited is widely recognized as the basis for Congressional over the Executive Branch, along with the rest of the Powers clause.

Let me make this very simple for you. "Widely recognized" doesn't mean shit as the Supreme Court's opinion IS what matters. The Constitution says that.

The Supreme Court should not have an "opinion", moron.

All the Supreme Court is supposed to do is use the Constitution to confirm or deny the validity of laws.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

i am wondering why they didnt grill joe biden over fingers-gate,yet they are grilling peter stroke over this.

Stop insulting doorknobs.

 

[mudwhistle]

I know this might be hard to believe... but 100% of the time, an investigation doesn't start until some kind of intelligence information has been gathered to cause a need to start it. For Gowdy to argue that Strzok had no reason to think Trump's campaign colluded with the Russians because the investigation hadn't started yet is about as dumb as it could possibly be.

The Chairman of this hearing a is a joke.

The whole Russian Collusion mess is simply a massive fraud.
Hillary wants to stay out of court and possibly prison.

 

[LeeOnLido]

the only grilling that could be funnier than this would be congress vs huma and the weener. at the same time of course

 

[Lewdog]

ANYTHING regarding the ongoing investigation is pertinent. Even if YOU and Gowdy doesn't think it is, the FBI lawyer does and that is who's opinion matters.

The article you just posted has NOTHING to do with the Supreme Court decision that was referred to.

Are you watching or just reading this thread?

Think that if it gives you comfort. In RealityLand, the Dem's concerted effort to interfere with Goudy's questions reveals how panicked they are.

And regarding the Constitution, the clause I cited is widely recognized as the basis for Congressional over the Executive Branch, along with the rest of the Powers clause.

Let me make this very simple for you. "Widely recognized" doesn't mean shit as the Supreme Court's opinion IS what matters. The Constitution says that.

Actually, it does as the Supreme Court as often recognized Congress' oversight powers. But go ahead, enjoy the spectacle. The RNC will get a lot of sound bites to show the public how corrupt the Dems are.

Why do you continue to respond when you got shown to be wrong? Why can't you just accept it?

YOU wanted to keep bringing up the Constitution as your defense. Does, or does not the Constitution give the Supreme Court the power to create rule of law when interpreting parts of the Constitution? Simple yes or no?

So the Constitution is of upmost importance only if it supports your argument?

It's not at all surprising that you neither recognize nor understand The Constitution.

You thinking I'm wrong is just an affirmation that I'm correct.

That did not discuss the conversation whatsoever, and given the fact you are wrong, I doubt you ever will.

Here let me post this for you as a good deed. Feel free to say this site is biased.

""EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"-These words, written above the main entrance to the Supreme Court Building, express the ultimate responsibility of the Supreme Court of the United States. The Court is the highest tribunal in the Nation for all cases and controversies arising under the Constitution or the laws of the United States. As the final arbiter of the law, the Court is charged with ensuring the American people the promise of equal justice under law and, thereby, also functions as guardian and interpreter of the Constitution."

The Court and Constitutional Interpretation - Supreme Court of the United States

 

[Polishprince]

Mr. Strzok perjured himself, saying that he was not biased.

I think there is enough cause to send out a couple of marshals to his home late tonight and arrest him.

 

[boedicca]

Mr. Strzok perjured himself, saying that he was not biased.

I think there is enough cause to send out a couple of marshals to his home late tonight and arrest him.

Indeed. But is it any surprise that a member of the Obabble Admin is an accomplished liar?

 

[mudwhistle]

Think that if it gives you comfort. In RealityLand, the Dem's concerted effort to interfere with Goudy's questions reveals how panicked they are.

And regarding the Constitution, the clause I cited is widely recognized as the basis for Congressional over the Executive Branch, along with the rest of the Powers clause.

Let me make this very simple for you. "Widely recognized" doesn't mean shit as the Supreme Court's opinion IS what matters. The Constitution says that.

Actually, it does as the Supreme Court as often recognized Congress' oversight powers. But go ahead, enjoy the spectacle. The RNC will get a lot of sound bites to show the public how corrupt the Dems are.

Why do you continue to respond when you got shown to be wrong? Why can't you just accept it?

YOU wanted to keep bringing up the Constitution as your defense. Does, or does not the Constitution give the Supreme Court the power to create rule of law when interpreting parts of the Constitution? Simple yes or no?

So the Constitution is of upmost importance only if it supports your argument?

It's not at all surprising that you neither recognize nor understand The Constitution.

You thinking I'm wrong is just an affirmation that I'm correct.

That did not discuss the conversation whatsoever, and given the fact you are wrong, I doubt you ever will.

Here let me post this for you as a good deed. Feel free to say this site is biased.

""EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"-These words, written above the main entrance to the Supreme Court Building, express the ultimate responsibility of the Supreme Court of the United States. The Court is the highest tribunal in the Nation for all cases and controversies arising under the Constitution or the laws of the United States. As the final arbiter of the law, the Court is charged with ensuring the American people the promise of equal justice under law and, thereby, also functions as guardian and interpreter of the Constitution."

The Court and Constitutional Interpretation - Supreme Court of the United States

A Hillary supporter demanding equal justice just tickles the hell out of me.