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

[Flash]

Most congressional hearings are boring as hell. This one is a riot. We are seeing how desperate the Democrats are as their hate Trump agenda is evaporating.

We need to just let Gowdy do all the question. We need to shut up those hateful Moon Bat assholes.

 

[JBond]

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 genesis of the investigation was a dossier authored by Kremlin agents that was purchased by Clinton and the DNC.

 

[Flash]

It takes a real dumbshit partisan asshole to think that Strzok recorded record of hating Trump did not influence his role as a FBI investigator.

 

[Flash]

Cummings has the same IQ level as Sheila Jackson Lee and Maxine Waters.

 

[tyroneweaver]

So stroke where’s the anti Clinton text when she called trump supporters deplorable

 

[LeeOnLido]

elijah cummings is on.whats he gonna say? stroke isnt black,hispanic,or a blend of all three genders. i still cant tell who's side he's on

 

[boedicca]

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.

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. Gowdy's question regarding the NUMBER of interviews in no way interfered with the investigation (Strzok 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."

 

[LeeOnLido]

if this was hillary,we would of heard,i dont recall about 378 times by now

 

[Lewdog]

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 genesis of the investigation was a dossier authored by Kremlin agents that was purchased by Clinton and the DNC.

That argument isn't what this thread is about... but Papadopolous was caught bragging about collusion with Russia (May 2016) BEFORE the dossier was gathered

 

[Flash]

Strzok is lying when he says he follows the FBI "culture".

A traitor to the FBI and someone that used his postilion to undermine Trump and let Crooked Hillary skate.

 

[boedicca]

His citing of checks and balances, rules etc. is utter bullshit considering how Obama stifled the IG, and how he communicated outside of approved email and other communications systems to carry on the coup attempt.

 

[depotoo]

Why are the filthy ass Democrats trying to run cover for this asshole?

Have they reduced themselves to that level of scum?

I’ve seen them try to obfuscate from matters before but never to this degree. Even more evidence they do Not want the truth to be found out. It would destroy them for many elections, obviously.

 

[Lewdog]

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.

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?

 

[Flash]

If you added the IQs of all the Democrats in that room it wouldn't probably much total over 300. If you did an average it would would probably be around 40.

 

[depotoo]

I wonder if any Kremlin agents were even involved at this juncture. All we have is their word, which holds no water any more.

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 genesis of the investigation was a dossier authored by Kremlin agents that was purchased by Clinton and the DNC.

 

[tyroneweaver]

This is magnificent. Best TV entertainment I've seen in a long time.

That the Democrats are blocking for Strzok could not be more obvious. Great fodder for the campaign season.

wow
Remember the Frank Church hearings

 

[MrShangles]

Democrats fuss about election medaling unless it was someone trying to keep Trump from being President!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Flash]

That asshole Cummings is a great reason to not vote for any Democrat in November. If the Democrats were to gain control of the House that partisan shithead dumbass would be a Committee Chairman and that would be a disaster.

 

[Flash]

Why are the filthy ass Democrats trying to run cover for this asshole?

Have they reduced themselves to that level of scum?

I’ve seen them try to obfuscate from matters before but never to this degree. Even more evidence they do Not want the truth to be found out. It would destroy them for many elections, obviously.

Truth is never the friend of the Liberals.

 

[MrShangles]

Republicans: “While you were discovering rampant treason in the Trump campaign... HOW DARE YOU TEXT YOUR BOO THAT YOU LIKE HILLARY????? WITCH HUNT!!! WIIITCH HUUUUUNT!!!!!”

Rampant Treason? It’s not that he texted his boo, it’s the insurance policy, and him saying he has ways to stop it and 3 days later the Russian investigation starts.
Try to keep up old school


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk