FBI Trump-hater Strozk to testify publicly

#226
#226
This interview was right out of A Few Good Men.

They put “Nicholson” on the stand and goaded him into talking. And the smug bastard complied. He is most definitely cut from the same cloth as Comey that much is clear.

And the GOP interview tactics goaded him more. And the Dems desperately wanted him to STFU.

There’s no way to spin Strzok’s testimony as positive. And I’m positive he believes probably all of the crap he spewed too. And the interviewers on both sides were just as culpable. It was just another DC train wreck.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#227
#227
landscapingvol said:
I have upset you? I don’t need to cite your lunacy it is firmly on display.
Click to expand...

Upset? LOL. Wait, was that a question or a statement? Damn it man, learn some punctuation.

I love this stuff.

People like you get so twisted that you falsely attribute my position in a misguided and hollow attempt to strengthen your own. You really couldn't be more wrong about what you think I believe.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#230
#230
Matt2496 said:
If you want to express your dislike of a political candidate as an FBI agent, why the **** would you do it on a government-issued smartphone? Why not do it on your private phone?

We also know for a fact that Strzok prioritized the Trump-Russia investigation over the Weiner laptop finding. And that Hillary was given preferential treatment by allowing more than just herself (witnesses to be exact!) during her interview with the FBI. This was made clear during the Horowitz hearings that this was not typical DOJ procedure.
Click to expand...

That doesn't make any sense. The investigation into Hillary's e-mails was reopened with the discovery of the Weiner laptop finding - just 9 days out from the election. To say that Hillary received "preferential treatment" is dead wrong.
 
#232
#232
BowlBrother85 said:
You're still just talking about the content of the texts he sent to Page; not actions he took to follow through on his expressed bias. And he wasn't investigating the president specifically. He was investigating Russia's efforts to influence the election.

*If he had wanted to damage the Trump campaign, he knew about the June 9, 2016 meeting at Trump Tower well ahead of the election. He could have made that public. He didn't.
Click to expand...

This is a stupid, hypothetical argument. Just because he didn't do something illegal and against FBI procedure, doesn't mean he didn't have any bias throughout the investigations he was part of.

If he had done so, his ass would be in exponentially more hot water than it already is now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#234
#234
Take away all the partisan BS and somewhere lies the truth. I just doubt we'll ever know what the actual truth is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#236
#236
Matt2496 said:
This is a stupid, hypothetical argument. Just because he didn't do something illegal and against FBI procedure, doesn't mean he didn't have any bias throughout the investigations he was part of.

If he had done so, his ass would be in exponentially more hot water than it already is now.
Click to expand...

Name one action Strzok took to damage Trump. You can't cite anything but text messages to Page.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#237
#237
BowlBrother85 said:
That doesn't make any sense. The investigation into Hillary's e-mails was reopened with the discovery of the Weiner laptop finding - just 9 days out from the election. To say that Hillary received "preferential treatment" is dead wrong.
Click to expand...

BowlBrother85 said:
Name one action Strzok took to damage Trump. You can't cite anything but text messages to Page.
Click to expand...

There were FBI informants in Trump's campaign before the Weiner laptop revelation...
 
Last edited:
#241
#241
Matt2496 said:
Exactly. I don't understand the Democrat's response to this guy. They keep portraying him as some kind of hero, when in reality both he and his accomplice have single-handedly undermined our highest law enforcement institutions.
Click to expand...

It was as if they were trying to protect their own children rather than uncover the truth.
Our government is broken beyond repair.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#242
#242
Matt2496 said:
There were FBI informants in Trump's campaign before the Weiner laptop revelation...
Click to expand...

Who had been investigating Carter Page for quite some time. "Spygate" never gained traction because there was never anything to it.

Once again, what action did Strzok take to hurt Trump?
 
#243
#243
GAVol said:
The problem is, that's enough to delegitimize anything that he does. He handed the critics the gun to shoot him with.
Click to expand...

Yep. His whole schtick was disingenuous as hell.

“Well of course it’s easy to think that’s what those texts mean but I promise you I meant this instead.” Over and over. And they kept goading him to say more.

He had no credibility before this public freak show. He has less now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#244
#244
BowlBrother85 said:
You're still just talking about the content of the texts he sent to Page; not actions he took to follow through on his expressed bias. And he wasn't investigating the president specifically. He was investigating Russia's efforts to influence the election.

*If he had wanted to damage the Trump campaign, he knew about the June 9, 2016 meeting at Trump Tower well ahead of the election. He could have made that public. He didn't.
Click to expand...

You mean the meeting that was not illegal. You do realize it isn’t illegal to meet with a foreign official? You mean the meeting that was leaked to several different media sources as if it were something really treasonous in order to persuade public opinion
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#246
#246
Squints said:
I don’t give two damns about who was claiming what and when they claimed it, I’m talking about the dims eager sanctimoniousness to squeal like pigs over Trump (and others) but nothing but crickets when it comes to one of their own.

I heard Trump tagged Stormy X times in Y minutes, though.
Click to expand...

So, as usual, you ignore anything that speaks badly toward your party and try to turn it around on others, when you were likely screaming any time Obama said hello.

You want to lecture Democrats on morality when your party and President supported a pedophile rapist in Alabama?


You are the biggest partisan, hypocritical shill on this board.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#247
#247
GAVol said:
The problem is, that's enough to delegitimize anything that he does. He handed the critics the gun to shoot him with.
Click to expand...

But he didn't do much anyway. As I have pointed out many times, Mueller removed him from the special counsel's investigation a year ago, as soon as he became aware of the texts.
 
#248
#248
BowlBrother85 said:
Who had been investigating Carter Page for quite some time. "Spygate" never gained traction because there was never anything to it.

Once again, what action did Strzok take to hurt Trump?
Click to expand...

Can you prove that he didn’t? It works both ways and his answers were very vague. Not to mention, two people he worked alongside no longer work for the FBI
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top