You mean!
You mean!
The FBI acted in a childish manner?
What are they talking about? They’ve had it out for Trump since mid 2016 when Page was ‘pillowtalking’, sexting and texting with Stroz.
Who’s kidding who here?
They acted stupidly....................
a shocking admission of abuse of power by our nation’s top law enforcement agency.
*****************
Disgusting and even frightening, but not really shocking. The #1 priority of all government bureaucracies is to defend their turf (so they can continue to expand the size and power of their agencies — which have perpetual life). They will resort to almost anything to do that. They are like colonies of fire ants.
The FBI must be proud of its pathetic poster child. The FBI has lost all of my respect.
Treason...sedition...sedition...sedition...coup de tat!
Off with their heads! Now that we have the admission of
facts” from the “ole grey lady” - the whore that she has become!
PING!
Sent this to Rush.
” FBI officials instead cited their foreign policy differences with him, his lawful firing of bungling FBI Director James Comey, and alarm that he accurately revealed to the American public that he was told he wasn’t under investigation by the FBI, when they preferred to hide that fact.”
The FBI believes it is a policy making branch of government. This clearly means they believe they can deceive him, disobey his orders, and hold information that they classify against presidential eyes.
This is pure sedition. NOT national security. The job of passing these judgments on the Presidents policies was clearly ONLY given to congress.
When security and intelligence agencies vet the elected leaders and remove them when they see fit, that is called a “police state”.
THE FBI IS NOT INDEPENDENT! DOJ IS NOT INDEPENDENT!
If a low end bureau such as the FBI thinks it can do this what does that also tell us?
Since the investigation is illegal under the constitution, that leaves the FBI/CIA (same thing) only one option for ACTING on their investigation. They believe that in some circumstances they can remove him from office. They can use blackmail, as they have in the past. They can use assassination as they did with JFK. They can use the method that the FBI did against Nixon.
The FBI is a creation of that progressive era prancing homo J. Edgar Hoover and and has a deep history of violating every law this country has.
The Church commission tried to reign them in. The FISA court was created solely for that purpose. Instead, like an infection where you only took half the penicillin, it came back stronger. Today the FISA is an FBI tool. It is a court where they can hide their activities.
It is time to utterly destroy the CIA/FBI and reconstitute their few legitimate functions in a manner that respects the US Constitution.
Obviously the cancer has spread further in the FBI than just Comey. Needs more surgery stat!
The FBI needs to be disbanded.
The FBI has an annual budget of around 9 billion with 35,000 or so employees they deign to let us to know about. I can’t see much of anything changing it at this point. It was probably too late to do anything about it 50+ years ago.
Freegards
How do we know?? The dossier for one thing....The moles that they implanted into his campaign.
Of course with firing of Comey, it was busy with meetings throughout the day. In the evening of the 9th through next morning of the 10th the following messages were sent.
Strzok to Page at 1851: Oh yes sorry, She and I talked. We were talking about whether there are things we need to do immediately.
Strzok to Page at 2000: So Sally took off but has her cell
Strzok to Page 2014: And we need to open the case we've been waiting on now while Andy is acting
Lisa Page does not respond to any of the evening messages
Strzok to Page 2056: Ack dammit I'm DYING down here
the next morning Lisa responds
Page to Strzok (10th of May) 0529: We need to lock in (REDACTED) in a formal chargeable way Soon.
Some commentors believe the redacted is POTUS.
But it was the exchange between Lisa Page during her testimony which I believe in part triggered the New York Times article. The following exchange took place during her testimony in Congress.
Unidentified Representative: “Were there discussions about opening an obstruction-of-justice case or any other case against Donald Trump prior to the firing of Jim Comey on May 9th of 2017, as reflected in the Comey memos?”
FBI legal counsel: “Congressman, to the extent that goes into the equities of the ongoing investigation that the special counsel is now conducting, I will instruct the witness not to answer.”
Normally, this line of questioning ends with inferences having to be made, but, in this case, what appears to be an honest error on the part of Page hinted firmly at the true answer:
Rep.: “I don’t want any of the details. I just want to know whether there was a discussion about the possibility of opening that prior to the firing of the director.”
Page: “Obstruction of justice was not a topic of conversation during the time frame you have described.”
Rep.: “OK. Then—”
Page: “I think. One second, sir.”
[Discussion off the record.]
Page: “Sir, I need to—I need to take back my prior statement.”
Rep.: “Which one?”
Page: “Whatever the last thing I just said was. Sorry. That there were no discussions of obstruction, yeah. That is—I need to take that statement back.”
Rep.: “So there were?”
Page: “Well, I think that I can’t answer this question without getting into matters which are substantively before the special counsel at this time.”
Rep.: “Well, I think you’ve just answered it by not answering it. Was Andy McCabe privy to those same conversations?”
Page: “I can’t answer this substantively, sir. I’m sorry.”
Rep.: “Well, were these related to some charges, whether obstruction or other charges, potentially against Donald Trump?”
Page: “I can’t—I can’t answer that question, sir, without getting into the substance of matters that are now before the special counsel.”
Rep.: “Again, I think you’re answering it by not answering it.”
At a later point in testimony, this issue was potentially further clarified:
Rep.: “Comey has admitted that he told the president, I think, that he wasn’t under investigation during that timeframe.”
Page: “That is not inconsistent, sir. … Somebody could not be under investigation, but there still could be discussions about potential criminal activity, and that is totally consistent with FBI policies and would not be unusual with respect to any investigation.”
This provides a perfect explanation as to why Comey refused to tell the press that Trump wasn’t under investigation—and the nature of the text messages.
This to me is verification criminal charges were being considered before Comey was fired. Certainly acted upon after his firing. In a warp sense of irony, was a constitutional crisis avoided by the appoinment of a special counsel??
The FBI retaliated against THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.
Is more like it.
Fox just reported that Andrew McCabe authorized it.
Before the election dirty agents at DOJ and Intel gave Hill and Bill many passes - for personal gain or political favors. After DJT was elected, the dirtballs feared being discovered and began their “insurance policy” attack-defense. Hillary’s lawyers are on the team to make sure anything implicating Hillary uncovered by accident can be summarily sent down the memory hole. Not to save Hillary, but to save their own sorry hides.
That’s how it seems to be unfolding.