Bribery is a loser

[Oldstyle]

I notice you're not quoting the IG's report anymore, Slade! Did you finally read it and discover it doesn't say what you claimed it did? Now you've switched to yet another unnamed "report" you think does? What report might that be?

You actually have the balls to accuse me of talking about things I don't know about? It's obvious that you were talking about something you'd never read when you spoke about the IG's report. I read it. You never did. So who's the person talking about things they don't know about?

Notice how you didn’t address or refute any of my points. All you did is accuse me of not reading the report because I didn’t quote it. Weak argument man, you can do better than that

Did you read the report?

 

[Slade3200]

The FBI leadership, Comey, Page, Strozek and McCabe are all chastised for their actions or non actions.

Nothing illegal or relevant to the validity of the russia investigation there. Comey’s big crime was releasing his memos to the press after he was fired but guess what, Barr isn’t indicting, why’s that?

NONE of the kinds of actions that Trumpers have claimed...nothing that affected anything

Their actions didn't affect anything? FBI leadership waiting a month to take action after Anthony Weiner's lap top was found to have tens of thousands of State Department emails on it? Deciding that they should spend the majority of their time looking into Russian "collusion" that they knew was based on Fusion GPS's phony dossiers...paid for by the Clinton campaign while not doing anything with the newly discovered emails?

Both those are baseless accusation of nothing. You don’t know the operations of the investigation, you are just repeating a talking point and making up impropriety... you also haven’t seen the fisa warrants and are assuming they were based of the dossier. The IG literally just looked into this and does not agree with your assessment. Neither did Chris Wray, FBI director. You don’t know what you are talking about

 

[Oldstyle]

I notice you're not quoting the IG's report anymore, Slade! Did you finally read it and discover it doesn't say what you claimed it did? Now you've switched to yet another unnamed "report" you think does? What report might that be?

You actually have the balls to accuse me of talking about things I don't know about? It's obvious that you were talking about something you'd never read when you spoke about the IG's report. I read it. You never did. So who's the person talking about things they don't know about?

That funny oldstyle, critic me for not quote of a report that you haven’t quoted once. Help me out for a sec and tell me the meaning of this word... hypocrite

I criticized you for not reading the report. I criticized you for relying on what someone ELSE told you the report said! You don't have to quote the report to know what was in it...BUT YOU DO HAVE TO READ IT!!!

 

[Slade3200]

I notice you're not quoting the IG's report anymore, Slade! Did you finally read it and discover it doesn't say what you claimed it did? Now you've switched to yet another unnamed "report" you think does? What report might that be?

You actually have the balls to accuse me of talking about things I don't know about? It's obvious that you were talking about something you'd never read when you spoke about the IG's report. I read it. You never did. So who's the person talking about things they don't know about?

Notice how you didn’t address or refute any of my points. All you did is accuse me of not reading the report because I didn’t quote it. Weak argument man, you can do better than that

Did you read the report?

Yes I did... I read the executive summary and the recommendations. Nowhere which it was recommended to pursue criminal charges for anything... but that report was regarding the Clinton investigation.... we were talking about the russia investigation and all the false accusations the right wing has been throwing out which are all about to be officially rebutted when horowitz’s next report drops.

 

[Slade3200]

I notice you're not quoting the IG's report anymore, Slade! Did you finally read it and discover it doesn't say what you claimed it did? Now you've switched to yet another unnamed "report" you think does? What report might that be?

You actually have the balls to accuse me of talking about things I don't know about? It's obvious that you were talking about something you'd never read when you spoke about the IG's report. I read it. You never did. So who's the person talking about things they don't know about?

That funny oldstyle, critic me for not quote of a report that you haven’t quoted once. Help me out for a sec and tell me the meaning of this word... hypocrite

I criticized you for not reading the report. I criticized you for relying on what someone ELSE told you the report said! You don't have to quote the report to know what was in it...BUT YOU DO HAVE TO READ IT!!!

Well then refute anything that I said and I’ll gladly show you why your full of shit. Point to something you think is not true

 

[Oldstyle]

Where pray tell was that mentioned in the Horowitz report?

well it’s being reported that the IG report says that the origins of the Mueller investigation were justified and proper procedure followed and that a low level lawyer may be pursued for tampering with a page in the FISA application.

Do you have intel that says otherwise? Or do you not believe what I’m saying for some reason?

For god's sake, Slade! Go read the damn report! I don't know who it is that's "reported" that but the IG report doesn't come to those conclusions! Proper procedures were not followed. The FBI leadership, Comey, Page, Strozek and McCabe are all chastised for their actions or non actions. The Attorney General Lynch is also rebuked for her meeting with Bill Clinton and her subsequent actions or non actions.

Page and strozek were demoted for Talking shit about Trump via text. Nothing illegal or relevant to the validity of the russia investigation there. Comey’s big crime was releasing his memos to the press after he was fired but guess what, Barr isn’t indicting, why’s that? Lastly is McCabe who is accused of lying about a leaking intel about the Clinton email investigation to the Wall Street journal. The leak was a procedural to make himself look good and Comey to look bad. It had nothing to do with the substance of the investigation. He corrected the record a few days after the interview saying he was thinking about a different article... wanna put some money down on whether Barr goes after him? And again, nothing to do with the Russia investigation.

The most recent report that’s coming out implicates a low level lawyer for altering a form in the FISA application. That’s it. Nothing else to show that the investigation was a hoax or anything but a valid investigation. And nobody besides possibly that lawyer is going to be charged with any crimes.

face it man, you are on your heels. Your narrative is going from an illegal hoax witch hunt to some improper procedures that weren’t effective to the actual case.

learn the facts and look at both sides of the argument before you dive into these debates and make yourself look like somebody who doesn’t know what they are talking about.

So let me get this straight...

You think that Strozek "talking shit" about Trump doesn't do anything to the "validity" of the FBI's investigation of collusion? You've got one of the people heading up the FBI's investigation of Trump, telling his lover that he's going to stop Trump from becoming President but that doesn't make you question his handling of the Russia investigation?

no of course not, unless he broke protocol or did something illegal I don’t give a shit if an investigator doesn’t like the subject of his investigation. I’d bet that most cops have some bias against the thugs they are investigating in most cases. Personal feelings are not significant, their actions are.

It's not that Strozek didn't "like" Trump, Slate...it's that the FBI agent in charge of both applying for the FISA court warrants to get phone taps on Carter Page and in investigating Hillary Clinton's emails was telling people that he had a plan to keep Trump from winning the White House! There is a serious issue if the FBI's upper echelon starts playing political "kingmakers"!

 

[Oldstyle]

I notice you're not quoting the IG's report anymore, Slade! Did you finally read it and discover it doesn't say what you claimed it did? Now you've switched to yet another unnamed "report" you think does? What report might that be?

You actually have the balls to accuse me of talking about things I don't know about? It's obvious that you were talking about something you'd never read when you spoke about the IG's report. I read it. You never did. So who's the person talking about things they don't know about?

Notice how you didn’t address or refute any of my points. All you did is accuse me of not reading the report because I didn’t quote it. Weak argument man, you can do better than that

Did you read the report?

Yes I did... I read the executive summary and the recommendations. Nowhere which it was recommended to pursue criminal charges for anything... but that report was regarding the Clinton investigation.... we were talking about the russia investigation and all the false accusations the right wing has been throwing out which are all about to be officially rebutted when horowitz’s next report drops.

You now claim to know what's going to be in the report that won't be issued until the 9th of December? I suppose you've read that one as well? (eye roll)

 

[Oldstyle]

I want to know who was involved in obtaining the FISA warrant to tap Carter Page's phones. I want to know who it was that signed off on the claim that they had exhausted all other methods of obtaining information regarding what Carter Page was doing! I want to know who it was in the FBI that certified that they had verified the allegations made in the FISA warrant! I want to know who it was from the FBI that used an article in a media source as corroborating evidence against Page and if that person knew the article was based on information provided to that media outlet by Richard Steele...which would constitute circular intelligence reporting!

 

[Slade3200]

well it’s being reported that the IG report says that the origins of the Mueller investigation were justified and proper procedure followed and that a low level lawyer may be pursued for tampering with a page in the FISA application.

Do you have intel that says otherwise? Or do you not believe what I’m saying for some reason?

For god's sake, Slade! Go read the damn report! I don't know who it is that's "reported" that but the IG report doesn't come to those conclusions! Proper procedures were not followed. The FBI leadership, Comey, Page, Strozek and McCabe are all chastised for their actions or non actions. The Attorney General Lynch is also rebuked for her meeting with Bill Clinton and her subsequent actions or non actions.

Page and strozek were demoted for Talking shit about Trump via text. Nothing illegal or relevant to the validity of the russia investigation there. Comey’s big crime was releasing his memos to the press after he was fired but guess what, Barr isn’t indicting, why’s that? Lastly is McCabe who is accused of lying about a leaking intel about the Clinton email investigation to the Wall Street journal. The leak was a procedural to make himself look good and Comey to look bad. It had nothing to do with the substance of the investigation. He corrected the record a few days after the interview saying he was thinking about a different article... wanna put some money down on whether Barr goes after him? And again, nothing to do with the Russia investigation.

The most recent report that’s coming out implicates a low level lawyer for altering a form in the FISA application. That’s it. Nothing else to show that the investigation was a hoax or anything but a valid investigation. And nobody besides possibly that lawyer is going to be charged with any crimes.

face it man, you are on your heels. Your narrative is going from an illegal hoax witch hunt to some improper procedures that weren’t effective to the actual case.

learn the facts and look at both sides of the argument before you dive into these debates and make yourself look like somebody who doesn’t know what they are talking about.

So let me get this straight...

You think that Strozek "talking shit" about Trump doesn't do anything to the "validity" of the FBI's investigation of collusion? You've got one of the people heading up the FBI's investigation of Trump, telling his lover that he's going to stop Trump from becoming President but that doesn't make you question his handling of the Russia investigation?

no of course not, unless he broke protocol or did something illegal I don’t give a shit if an investigator doesn’t like the subject of his investigation. I’d bet that most cops have some bias against the thugs they are investigating in most cases. Personal feelings are not significant, their actions are.

It's not that Strozek didn't "like" Trump, Slate...it's that the FBI agent in charge of both applying for the FISA court warrants to get phone taps on Carter Page and in investigating Hillary Clinton's emails was telling people that he had a plan to keep Trump from winning the White House! There is a serious issue if the FBI's upper echelon starts playing political "kingmakers"!

you are correct and if there was evidence of him doing anything of the sort then he should be arrested... Thats a big reason why they investigated the situation. McCabe was fired for lying about a Wall Street journal article. Strozek was simply demoted because of an appearance of impropriety. Something in your narrative is not lining up with the evidence

 

[Slade3200]

I notice you're not quoting the IG's report anymore, Slade! Did you finally read it and discover it doesn't say what you claimed it did? Now you've switched to yet another unnamed "report" you think does? What report might that be?

You actually have the balls to accuse me of talking about things I don't know about? It's obvious that you were talking about something you'd never read when you spoke about the IG's report. I read it. You never did. So who's the person talking about things they don't know about?

Notice how you didn’t address or refute any of my points. All you did is accuse me of not reading the report because I didn’t quote it. Weak argument man, you can do better than that

Did you read the report?

Yes I did... I read the executive summary and the recommendations. Nowhere which it was recommended to pursue criminal charges for anything... but that report was regarding the Clinton investigation.... we were talking about the russia investigation and all the false accusations the right wing has been throwing out which are all about to be officially rebutted when horowitz’s next report drops.

You now claim to know what's going to be in the report that won't be issued until the 9th of December? I suppose you've read that one as well? (eye roll)

Ive read what’s been reported about it and have prefaced that fact.

you can keep claiming that this report is going to take down all these deep staters but I think you know that it’s all bullshit. We shall see on the 9th

 

[Oldstyle]

For god's sake, Slade! Go read the damn report! I don't know who it is that's "reported" that but the IG report doesn't come to those conclusions! Proper procedures were not followed. The FBI leadership, Comey, Page, Strozek and McCabe are all chastised for their actions or non actions. The Attorney General Lynch is also rebuked for her meeting with Bill Clinton and her subsequent actions or non actions.

Page and strozek were demoted for Talking shit about Trump via text. Nothing illegal or relevant to the validity of the russia investigation there. Comey’s big crime was releasing his memos to the press after he was fired but guess what, Barr isn’t indicting, why’s that? Lastly is McCabe who is accused of lying about a leaking intel about the Clinton email investigation to the Wall Street journal. The leak was a procedural to make himself look good and Comey to look bad. It had nothing to do with the substance of the investigation. He corrected the record a few days after the interview saying he was thinking about a different article... wanna put some money down on whether Barr goes after him? And again, nothing to do with the Russia investigation.

The most recent report that’s coming out implicates a low level lawyer for altering a form in the FISA application. That’s it. Nothing else to show that the investigation was a hoax or anything but a valid investigation. And nobody besides possibly that lawyer is going to be charged with any crimes.

face it man, you are on your heels. Your narrative is going from an illegal hoax witch hunt to some improper procedures that weren’t effective to the actual case.

learn the facts and look at both sides of the argument before you dive into these debates and make yourself look like somebody who doesn’t know what they are talking about.

So let me get this straight...

You think that Strozek "talking shit" about Trump doesn't do anything to the "validity" of the FBI's investigation of collusion? You've got one of the people heading up the FBI's investigation of Trump, telling his lover that he's going to stop Trump from becoming President but that doesn't make you question his handling of the Russia investigation?

no of course not, unless he broke protocol or did something illegal I don’t give a shit if an investigator doesn’t like the subject of his investigation. I’d bet that most cops have some bias against the thugs they are investigating in most cases. Personal feelings are not significant, their actions are.

It's not that Strozek didn't "like" Trump, Slate...it's that the FBI agent in charge of both applying for the FISA court warrants to get phone taps on Carter Page and in investigating Hillary Clinton's emails was telling people that he had a plan to keep Trump from winning the White House! There is a serious issue if the FBI's upper echelon starts playing political "kingmakers"!

you are correct and if there was evidence of him doing anything of the sort then he should be arrested... Thats a big reason why they investigated the situation. McCabe was fired for lying about a Wall Street journal article. Strozek was simply demoted because of an appearance of impropriety. Something in your narrative is not lining up with the evidence

Appearance of impropriety? Strozek sat on the Anthony Weiner emails for a month...declining to even look into them while he pushed HARD for an announcement that Trump was being investigated for collusion with the Russians!

 

[Oldstyle]

I notice you're not quoting the IG's report anymore, Slade! Did you finally read it and discover it doesn't say what you claimed it did? Now you've switched to yet another unnamed "report" you think does? What report might that be?

You actually have the balls to accuse me of talking about things I don't know about? It's obvious that you were talking about something you'd never read when you spoke about the IG's report. I read it. You never did. So who's the person talking about things they don't know about?

Notice how you didn’t address or refute any of my points. All you did is accuse me of not reading the report because I didn’t quote it. Weak argument man, you can do better than that

Did you read the report?

Yes I did... I read the executive summary and the recommendations. Nowhere which it was recommended to pursue criminal charges for anything... but that report was regarding the Clinton investigation.... we were talking about the russia investigation and all the false accusations the right wing has been throwing out which are all about to be officially rebutted when horowitz’s next report drops.

You now claim to know what's going to be in the report that won't be issued until the 9th of December? I suppose you've read that one as well? (eye roll)

Ive read what’s been reported about it and have prefaced that fact.

you can keep claiming that this report is going to take down all these deep staters but I think you know that it’s all bullshit. We shall see on the 9th

It's not going to put anyone in jail. I've never claimed it would! What it will do is shed light on what was going on at the FBI and the Justice Department leading up to that election! What people like Strozek were doing with their positions of power and how he and others in the Obama Justice Department abused the FISA court system to get phone taps that gave them access to the Trump campaign!

 

[Slade3200]

Page and strozek were demoted for Talking shit about Trump via text. Nothing illegal or relevant to the validity of the russia investigation there. Comey’s big crime was releasing his memos to the press after he was fired but guess what, Barr isn’t indicting, why’s that? Lastly is McCabe who is accused of lying about a leaking intel about the Clinton email investigation to the Wall Street journal. The leak was a procedural to make himself look good and Comey to look bad. It had nothing to do with the substance of the investigation. He corrected the record a few days after the interview saying he was thinking about a different article... wanna put some money down on whether Barr goes after him? And again, nothing to do with the Russia investigation.

The most recent report that’s coming out implicates a low level lawyer for altering a form in the FISA application. That’s it. Nothing else to show that the investigation was a hoax or anything but a valid investigation. And nobody besides possibly that lawyer is going to be charged with any crimes.

face it man, you are on your heels. Your narrative is going from an illegal hoax witch hunt to some improper procedures that weren’t effective to the actual case.

learn the facts and look at both sides of the argument before you dive into these debates and make yourself look like somebody who doesn’t know what they are talking about.

So let me get this straight...

You think that Strozek "talking shit" about Trump doesn't do anything to the "validity" of the FBI's investigation of collusion? You've got one of the people heading up the FBI's investigation of Trump, telling his lover that he's going to stop Trump from becoming President but that doesn't make you question his handling of the Russia investigation?

no of course not, unless he broke protocol or did something illegal I don’t give a shit if an investigator doesn’t like the subject of his investigation. I’d bet that most cops have some bias against the thugs they are investigating in most cases. Personal feelings are not significant, their actions are.

It's not that Strozek didn't "like" Trump, Slate...it's that the FBI agent in charge of both applying for the FISA court warrants to get phone taps on Carter Page and in investigating Hillary Clinton's emails was telling people that he had a plan to keep Trump from winning the White House! There is a serious issue if the FBI's upper echelon starts playing political "kingmakers"!

you are correct and if there was evidence of him doing anything of the sort then he should be arrested... Thats a big reason why they investigated the situation. McCabe was fired for lying about a Wall Street journal article. Strozek was simply demoted because of an appearance of impropriety. Something in your narrative is not lining up with the evidence

Appearance of impropriety? Strozek sat on the Anthony Weiner emails for a month...declining to even look into them while he pushed HARD for an announcement that Trump was being investigated for collusion with the Russians!

Can you quote where it says that in the IG report?

 

[Slade3200]

Notice how you didn’t address or refute any of my points. All you did is accuse me of not reading the report because I didn’t quote it. Weak argument man, you can do better than that

Did you read the report?

Yes I did... I read the executive summary and the recommendations. Nowhere which it was recommended to pursue criminal charges for anything... but that report was regarding the Clinton investigation.... we were talking about the russia investigation and all the false accusations the right wing has been throwing out which are all about to be officially rebutted when horowitz’s next report drops.

You now claim to know what's going to be in the report that won't be issued until the 9th of December? I suppose you've read that one as well? (eye roll)

Ive read what’s been reported about it and have prefaced that fact.

you can keep claiming that this report is going to take down all these deep staters but I think you know that it’s all bullshit. We shall see on the 9th

It's not going to put anyone in jail. I've never claimed it would! What it will do is shed light on what was going on at the FBI and the Justice Department leading up to that election! What people like Strozek were doing with their positions of power and how he and others in the Obama Justice Department abused the FISA court system to get phone taps that gave them access to the Trump campaign!

If what you said actually happened then there were crimes committed and people should go to jail. You are either telling a distorted/false narrative or you have to be accusing the IG and Barr of being involved in a deep state cover up.

 

[Lesh]

well it’s being reported that the IG report says that the origins of the Mueller investigation were justified and proper procedure followed and that a low level lawyer may be pursued for tampering with a page in the FISA application.

Do you have intel that says otherwise? Or do you not believe what I’m saying for some reason?

For god's sake, Slade! Go read the damn report! I don't know who it is that's "reported" that but the IG report doesn't come to those conclusions! Proper procedures were not followed. The FBI leadership, Comey, Page, Strozek and McCabe are all chastised for their actions or non actions. The Attorney General Lynch is also rebuked for her meeting with Bill Clinton and her subsequent actions or non actions.

Page and strozek were demoted for Talking shit about Trump via text. Nothing illegal or relevant to the validity of the russia investigation there. Comey’s big crime was releasing his memos to the press after he was fired but guess what, Barr isn’t indicting, why’s that? Lastly is McCabe who is accused of lying about a leaking intel about the Clinton email investigation to the Wall Street journal. The leak was a procedural to make himself look good and Comey to look bad. It had nothing to do with the substance of the investigation. He corrected the record a few days after the interview saying he was thinking about a different article... wanna put some money down on whether Barr goes after him? And again, nothing to do with the Russia investigation.

The most recent report that’s coming out implicates a low level lawyer for altering a form in the FISA application. That’s it. Nothing else to show that the investigation was a hoax or anything but a valid investigation. And nobody besides possibly that lawyer is going to be charged with any crimes.

face it man, you are on your heels. Your narrative is going from an illegal hoax witch hunt to some improper procedures that weren’t effective to the actual case.

learn the facts and look at both sides of the argument before you dive into these debates and make yourself look like somebody who doesn’t know what they are talking about.

So let me get this straight...

You think that Strozek "talking shit" about Trump doesn't do anything to the "validity" of the FBI's investigation of collusion? You've got one of the people heading up the FBI's investigation of Trump, telling his lover that he's going to stop Trump from becoming President but that doesn't make you question his handling of the Russia investigation?

no of course not, unless he broke protocol or did something illegal I don’t give a shit if an investigator doesn’t like the subject of his investigation. I’d bet that most cops have some bias against the thugs they are investigating in most cases. Personal feelings are not significant, their actions are.

It's not that Strozek didn't "like" Trump, Slate...it's that the FBI agent in charge of both applying for the FISA court warrants to get phone taps on Carter Page and in investigating Hillary Clinton's emails was telling people that he had a plan to keep Trump from winning the White House! There is a serious issue if the FBI's upper echelon starts playing political "kingmakers"!

And the IG found that there was no "plan" and that no actions were taken by any of these people that were nefarious

 

[Lesh]

I want to know who was involved in obtaining the FISA warrant to tap Carter Page's phones.

And I want to know why you folks are so concerned about Carter friggin Page...who was not even a member of the Trump campaign when the FISA warrant was issued

 

[Oldstyle]

I want to know who was involved in obtaining the FISA warrant to tap Carter Page's phones.

And I want to know why you folks are so concerned about Carter friggin Page...who was not even a member of the Trump campaign when the FISA warrant was issued

Carter friggin Page was simply a means to an end by the people that wanted to spy on the Trump campaign! They accused him of criminal activity to get that FISA warrant to tap his phone and thus get a back door method to spy on the Trump campaign because Carter was still in contact with people connected to the campaign! They claimed that phone taps were the only way they could investigate him...which was a total crock of shit because Carter Page was already working with the FBI and cooperating with them fully! Why would they do that? It's obvious...they couldn't have cared less about Page...it was the phone calls they could listen to inside of the Trump campaign that interested them!

 

[Oldstyle]

So let me get this straight...

You think that Strozek "talking shit" about Trump doesn't do anything to the "validity" of the FBI's investigation of collusion? You've got one of the people heading up the FBI's investigation of Trump, telling his lover that he's going to stop Trump from becoming President but that doesn't make you question his handling of the Russia investigation?

no of course not, unless he broke protocol or did something illegal I don’t give a shit if an investigator doesn’t like the subject of his investigation. I’d bet that most cops have some bias against the thugs they are investigating in most cases. Personal feelings are not significant, their actions are.

It's not that Strozek didn't "like" Trump, Slate...it's that the FBI agent in charge of both applying for the FISA court warrants to get phone taps on Carter Page and in investigating Hillary Clinton's emails was telling people that he had a plan to keep Trump from winning the White House! There is a serious issue if the FBI's upper echelon starts playing political "kingmakers"!

you are correct and if there was evidence of him doing anything of the sort then he should be arrested... Thats a big reason why they investigated the situation. McCabe was fired for lying about a Wall Street journal article. Strozek was simply demoted because of an appearance of impropriety. Something in your narrative is not lining up with the evidence

Appearance of impropriety? Strozek sat on the Anthony Weiner emails for a month...declining to even look into them while he pushed HARD for an announcement that Trump was being investigated for collusion with the Russians!

Can you quote where it says that in the IG report?

I thought you read the report, Slade? Now you need me to quote parts of it to you? You STILL haven't read it...have you!

 

[Slade3200]

no of course not, unless he broke protocol or did something illegal I don’t give a shit if an investigator doesn’t like the subject of his investigation. I’d bet that most cops have some bias against the thugs they are investigating in most cases. Personal feelings are not significant, their actions are.

It's not that Strozek didn't "like" Trump, Slate...it's that the FBI agent in charge of both applying for the FISA court warrants to get phone taps on Carter Page and in investigating Hillary Clinton's emails was telling people that he had a plan to keep Trump from winning the White House! There is a serious issue if the FBI's upper echelon starts playing political "kingmakers"!

you are correct and if there was evidence of him doing anything of the sort then he should be arrested... Thats a big reason why they investigated the situation. McCabe was fired for lying about a Wall Street journal article. Strozek was simply demoted because of an appearance of impropriety. Something in your narrative is not lining up with the evidence

Appearance of impropriety? Strozek sat on the Anthony Weiner emails for a month...declining to even look into them while he pushed HARD for an announcement that Trump was being investigated for collusion with the Russians!

Can you quote where it says that in the IG report?

I thought you read the report, Slade? Now you need me to quote parts of it to you? You STILL haven't read it...have you!

yes, when you quote parts that aren’t there I’m going to call you on it. Pretty simple.

 

[Oldstyle]

It's not that Strozek didn't "like" Trump, Slate...it's that the FBI agent in charge of both applying for the FISA court warrants to get phone taps on Carter Page and in investigating Hillary Clinton's emails was telling people that he had a plan to keep Trump from winning the White House! There is a serious issue if the FBI's upper echelon starts playing political "kingmakers"!

you are correct and if there was evidence of him doing anything of the sort then he should be arrested... Thats a big reason why they investigated the situation. McCabe was fired for lying about a Wall Street journal article. Strozek was simply demoted because of an appearance of impropriety. Something in your narrative is not lining up with the evidence

Appearance of impropriety? Strozek sat on the Anthony Weiner emails for a month...declining to even look into them while he pushed HARD for an announcement that Trump was being investigated for collusion with the Russians!

Can you quote where it says that in the IG report?

I thought you read the report, Slade? Now you need me to quote parts of it to you? You STILL haven't read it...have you!

yes, when you quote parts that aren’t there I’m going to call you on it. Pretty simple.

"Conversely, we found that the FBI’s explanations for its failure to take immediate action after discovering the Weiner laptop in October 2016 to be unpersuasive, and we did not have confidence that the decision of Deputy Assistant Director Peter Strzok to prioritize the Russia investigation over following up on the Weiner laptop was free from bias."
Care to "call me" on that?