Posted on 09/29/2020 12:32:52 PM PDT by dead
Keep talking, it's possible you'll say something intelligent!
Spying on Flynn, and some others, began before December 2015... quite a while before Hillary did this.
"Page said that he was contacted by a Wall Street Journal reporter on July 26, 2016, a week after Steele wrote the memo, about any contacts he had with Sechin and Diveykin."
!!!!!! DING DING DING.... this could be hugely important, because it suggests that someone (Fusion GPS, with strong prior contacts to the WSJ) was behind the scenes feeding info from the Steele memo to the WSJ immediately after Steele's memo would have been sent to Fusion GPS. The "dossier" was not public until many months later, so how did a WSJ reporter get the word to ask Carter Page about Sechin and Diveykin in July of 2016??? DING DING DING..... 3 posted on 11/7/2017, 2:26:40 PM by Enchante
......snip ....In a July 22, 2016, email exchange, Strzok and his boss, assistant director of the Counterintelligence Division Bill Priestap, are critical of how deferential the DOJ is being to Clinton’s legal team.
In the exchange, an associate at the law firm representing Clinton’s aides, Hal Brewster of Wilkinson Walsh, asks DOJ officials in the National Security Division (NSD) if they could schedule a meeting the following week. An unidentified NSD official notes, “It is my understanding that [deputy assistant attorney general George] Toscas may have called over to Jim [presumably FBI General Counsel Jim Baker] and Trisha [presumably FBI Office of General Counsel lawyer Trisha Anderson] regarding some high-level participation for at least the first few such calls.”
Later in the thread, an unidentified NSD official says, “In the meantime, I’ll tell Hal that we will certainly schedule a call and will get back to him as to timing. Since he knows Beth [presumably Clinton aides’ attorney Beth Wilkinson] personally, it could be useful to have Jim [Baker] on the phone if she is going to be haranguing us re: the laptops.”
Strzok then writes to an unidentified FBI OGC official, Moffa and Page: “You are perfectly competent to speak to the legal obligations and FBI policies/procedures. We should NOT be treating opposing counsel this way. We would not in any other case.”
Priestap agrees, telling Strzok: “Thank you, and I agree with you on both fronts. My guess is that George [Toscas] will not change his behavior, but thank you for trying. Let me know if it continues, as I can always try to get the DD to refer the issues to us.”
In another July 22, 2016, email exchange, Strzok and Preistap seem to be critical of Baker’s handling of the Clinton case:
Baker tells colleagues: “Got it. George asked me to participate if possible, so maybe I can join this one and then see where we are at.”
Baker’s email is forwarded to Strzok, who tells Page, Moffa and Priestap: “Lisa/Bill, can you talk to him [presumably Baker]? This is wrong.”
Page responds: “I’m planning to. I agree, I find his participation wholly unnecessary.”
Priestap writes: “Lisa: When you speak to him, please tell him that I also believe it is unnecessary, and please let me know the outcome of your conversation.”
Page replies, “I spoke with Jim a little earlier, I explained [redacted]. Anyway, he said he appreciated the call and would give it some thought. I also offered that if he felt badly about backing down from what he told George, Trisha would be acceptable, but still was entirely unnecessary. Let me know if you have any questions.”
A redacted FBI attorney then responds: “We spend entirely too much time in this case soothing [redacted’s] hurt feelings. I cannot believe that a grown man, a professional adult, continues to tattle. AND IT WORKS. Seriously … I am completely bewildered that this goes on in a professional workplace. And then he calls MY professionalism (and the FBI’s) into question.” [Emphasis in original]
Strzok responds: “I know; it’s very frustrating. I talked at length with [redacted] and as best I can tell it was his feeling out of the loop (following a week he was on leave, in an environment where a lot of new actors we don’t control are participating), coupled with a strong desire not to be yelled at by opposing counsel. Truly.”
-———source : JUDICIAL WATCH
Judicial Watch: Emails Show Involvement of Peter Strzok and Lisa Page in Launching of Crossfire Hurricane
“Could you please provide more context? What did she say, when did she say it, and on what occasion did she make such a comment.”
It was from Matt Lauer’s 2016 “Commander in Chief” special where he questions both Trump and Hillary separately. At the end of the interview with Hillary, he asked a question about the 33,000 deleted emails.
Hillary tensely answered the question, and was visibly unhappy.
Many witnesses, (Hillary allows NO cell phones in her appearances) claim that when the cameras were off Hillary exploded on Donna Brazile, screaming “You better fix this F8(!ng shi+!! If Trump Fu*&ing wins we’ll all be hanging from nooses! You better fix this sh!+!!!
Here’s one online account that reflects what I remember:
You keep evading the simple legitimate, pertinent question.
See the tagline slick.
Does your tagline have a higher rating or a priority over everyone else's?
Great taglines do NOT create TRUTH!
Are you always this stupid or is today a special occasion for you?
I am always right. Sorry. This is a fact.
YAWN!...
BUMP! Cause it’s important!
Ignore the bickering in the previous 4 replies...
Bump
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.