Posted on 12/12/2019 7:04:30 AM PST by SeekAndFind
There’s no law against hating the President. Find proof it affected their work and maybe you have a reason to fire them . Do it wrong and they sue and walk away with millions.
Especially when they are mostly lawyers and know where the lines are drawn.
Everyone knows there was political bias, but they were smart enough to make it difficult if not impossible to prove it affected their work. It’s like racism - if I don’t want to rent my apartment to a black person I’d never say that was the reason, instead I’d find something like their credit history to use as the reason. They may think it was illegal racial discrimination but they’d never be able to prove it.
The fact that he wasn’t charged is not relevant to the fact that he has grounds to sue.
Whether he does or not is another thing.
You don’t find it very odd Page wasn’t attacked by Mueller? Mueller went scorched earth on anybody connected with Trump and Russia. Something really doesn’t add up there.
The Horowitz line is best understood as indicating that the culpable line FBI employees were instructed by their superiors to secretly act as they did and not leave any record of their orders. The direction to surevil Trump originally came from Obama.
The question: did this idiot allow his hatred to affect his objective judgment. I suggest, yes. Otherwise, why would he “doctor” evidence?
Remember that we all comply and follow with our system of justice and government and electoral process because we trust it. Because we trust the people who administer it. Once the folks lose confidence in the process, then the country slides into anarchy and is one step closer to Civil War.
The lawyers action were to falsify evidence to enable a bogus propaganda effort to overthrow the government. That is Treason, so put a bullet in his head and he will not sue.
There is probably a lot of information that people don’t want made public about Page as a CIA informant/asset.
Thus, Page may never sue..but he DOES have grounds.
I don’t think that an FBI person can be fired. Really!
“I think Horowitz stated they weren’t in the FiSA process so that in essence didn’t count...”
Except we know that Strzok was the “boots on the ground” guy in charge of the investigation at the FBI, and worked to prepare the FISA application in concert with McCabe. He was also intentionally keeping his boss Bill Priestap out of the loop in meetings with McCabe regarding the FISA process.
So Horowitz says “well, Strzok was biased, but he wasn’t in charge, Priestap was in charge”, yet we already know from Priestap’s congressional testimony that he admitted Strzok was really the one running the show most of the time, in tandem with McCabe on the DOJ side (with Strzok’s lover Page as a go-between).
Well it burned me up as he (sawwell sp) made more than one comment that our President Trump was a criminal. I would love to choke him and that gay guy from Rhode Island...cicillini.
Good point- I think the person who altered the document to change its meaning is going to end up indicted and hopefully found guilty.
I was mainly referring to the bias that was clear from the texts where to do more than remove them from their jobs some crime must be proven.
As for Rush,he’s just pandering to his audience, because he knows very well that no grand jury is going to indict anyone without probable cause that a crime was committed.
What is the crime? Mean-tweeting? Locker-room bragging? Trying to impress the girlfriend? Remember these things work both ways ( i.e Access Hollywood tape).
But people should realize that when you use “company's property” to communicate with a fellow love bird and discuss the undermining of a president, your future boss, then you should realize that that information is not private and might be used against you — in the court of public opinion or an actual court with a judge. Which begs the question — are they stupid? Strzok and Page seemed to think that they were smart. Their texts are oozing with arrogance.
The same thing could be said for this lawyer. Heck a lawyer of all people should know to be careful what they put in emails.
Anyway, back to your point. We all probably think and say things that we would normally keep private but now we happily document our thoughts for all posterity and all to see in emails, texts, blog posts, etc.
Thanks for that background.
In essence, my brother set up the robbery , stole the money, I wondered where he got it all , but never asked him , even though I saw a robbery on the news and everyone was talking about it.
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.