Posted on 03/16/2019 9:17:00 AM PDT by jazusamo
Judge Declares FBI’s Search for Peter Strzok Records Inadequate
Judicial Watch Sues for Key Anti-Trump Coup Doc
Judicial Watch Files Ethics Complaint Against Congressman Adam Schiff
Clinton Email Scandal Witness Testimony Begins
Judicial Watch is #1 on FOIA!
Judge Declares FBI’s Search for Peter Strzok Records Inadequate
A petulant child or employee will perform a task halfway and wait to see if he can get away with it. Such seems to be the strategy of the entire Deep State bureaucracy.
The FBI is particularly good at this, and we are particularly good at calling them on it. Luckily for the American people we have judges who respect the Freedom of Information Act.
A case in point: U.S. District Court Judge Christopher R. Cooper for the District of Columbia has agreed with that the FBI did not adequately search for records related to the removal and reassignment of Peter Strzok from special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigative team. He was a former deputy to the assistant director for counterintelligence at the FBI.
In granting our request, Judge Cooper ordered the FBI to further search their records. (The original, deficient search had only returned 14 pages .)
The order comes in the December 2017 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit we filed after the DOJ failed to respond to and August 17, 2017, request ( Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Federal Bureau of Investigation (No. 1:17-cv-02682)). Judicial Watch seeks:
On July 31, 2018, we released the first 14 pages of FBI documents produced in this FOIA lawsuit, showing that Strzok insisted on retaining his FBI security clearance before moving to the Mueller team and confirmed that Strzok played a pivotal role in the flawed Hillary Clinton email investigation.
In his decision, Judge Cooper called the FBI’s search “overly cramped:”
Notwithstanding that Judicial Watch’s request referred to Mueller by name … the Bureau searched only for the term “special counsel.” But surely one would expect that Agent Strzok and other FBI personnel might use the Special Counsel’s name — “Mueller” — rather than his title when discussing Strzok’s assignment to the Russia investigation, especially in informal emails. Another logical variation on “special counsel” is its commonly used acronym “SCO,” which appears to be used within the Special Counsel’s Office itself, as reflected by documents that the FBI uncovered and produced to Judicial Watch.
The ruling also stated that the FBI did not adequately respond to our FOIA lawsuit because it limited its search to only Strzok’s email account.
Judge Cooper ordered that the FBI must conduct a new search that includes “the email accounts of any of Agent Strzok’s superiors or other Bureau officials who were involved in the decision to assign him to the Special Counsel’s Office or the decision to reassign him to the FBI’s Human Resources Division after his removal from the Mueller investigation.”
The FBI must also expand its search to other forms of communication in addition to email. Given Strzok’s well-known use of text messaging, “it strikes the Court as reasonably likely that he discussed his assignment to the Special Counsel’s Office in text messages—which again is the standard for assessing an agency’s selection of search locations.”
Strzok was reportedly removed from the Mueller investigative team in August 2017 and reassigned to a human resources position after it was discovered that he and then-FBI lawyer Lisa Page exchanged text messages during the Clinton investigation and 2016 election season that raised serious questions about his anti-Trump/pro-Clinton bias. They were also engaged in an extramarital affair. Strzok infamously texted “there’s no way he gets elected — but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk.”
Strzok reportedly oversaw the FBI’s interviews of former National Security Adviser, General Michael Flynn; changed former FBI Director James Comey’s language about Hillary Clinton’s actions regarding her illicit email server from “grossly negligent” to “extremely careless;” played a lead role in the FBI’s interview of Clinton and is suspected of being responsible for using the unverified dossier to obtain a FISA warrant in order to spy on President Trump’s campaign.
The Court rightly slammed the FBI for its gamesmanship in searching for records about one of the most notorious FBI agents of all time – Peter Strzok. The FBI leadership is in cover-up mode on its abuses targeting President Trump, and we’re pleased a federal court pushed back on this stonewall.
Judicial Watch Sues for Key Anti-Trump Coup Doc
To: BiggBob
Your sad bridge analogies are pathetic...
***************
What’s pathetically sad is naive people who are disciples of Q.
36 posted on 3/17/2019, 11:36:44 AM by Starboard
To: Starboard
Says the dude still whining about stuff that happened 8 months ago but has no idea why it happened.
go stick your head back in the sand or wherever you stick it to keep yourself from seeing what is coming
later troll
37 posted on 3/17/2019, 11:50:34 AM by BiggBob
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Yup that was my response to your lame Brooklyn bridge response which hasn’t been cool since the days of Abbott and Costello
And you trying to label People that know more than you as naive..
I SEE YOU still no response about Rosenstein blocking the fisa declassification troll?
TRY HARDER...
I SEE YOU still no response about Rosenstein blocking the fisa declassification troll?
TRY HARDER...
***************
Oh oh, escalating things with ALL CAPS!
TRY SHOUTING HARDER. LOL!!!!!!
Don’t forget I called you ignorant and stubborn too.
And still no response from the sad troll
Man, you’re really hung up on that troll thing aren’t you?
Talk about sad.
And you think your lame responses
Are proving you aren’t a troll?
Even more ignorant than I suspected...
Get back to me when you have an actual comment about Rosenstein blocking the fisa released like you were whining about Mmmkay...
Are proving you aren’t a troll?
**************
Wow! Still obsessed with “trolls”. Amazing. In this a 24X7 obsession with you?
Still no response troll?
There’s no response that would satisfy a blind follower of the Q cult.
Oh no the troll called me a name again.
And tried to insult me again...
And still nothing, so pathetic.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.