The Role of Anti-Clinton FBI Agents

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I can name several actions, and have already, that raise a lot of suspicion about whether or not there was a valid reason to start investigating Trump for colluding with Russia. And that's what matters at this point, because the election is long over, yet the quest to find evidence of the Trump campaign's collusion carry on and on. It began on bogus grounds.

The investigation into the Trump campaign absolutely did not begin on bogus grounds. You have to be willfully ignorant of a considerable number of facts to suggest as much. You have Manafort who has committed an laundry list of crimes involving Russians and pro-Russia Ukrainians acting as campaign manager, George Papadopoulos drunkenly telling an Australian diplomat that the Russians have the DNC's emails, and a host of contacts between campaign officials and Russian intelligence figures. The FBI would have been delinquent not to investigate.

Also, keep in mind that the IG report was about the Clinton email investigation, not the Trump investigation. So, you are actually going off-topic.

Nothing that Manafort is in jail for relates to or shows any link to anything he did while working for Trump for 49 days. Many people believe that the Papadopoulos situation was a setup to create a reason.

And like another pp said, many of the same cast of characters worked on both the Hillary investigation and the Russia investigation, namely Strzok. They are intertwined.

That is because there were TWO professors. Mifsud, who is the Russian agent who initially ensarled Papadapolous in Feb/March 2016 and Hadley, the FBI informant who interviewed Papadolous in Aug/Sept 2016.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are living in a fantasy world. The investigation shows just how biased the FBI agents were in favor of Hillary and against Trump. Those agents are Giglio impaired from here on out.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-06-15/fbi-agent-called-hillary-president-while-investigating-her-texted-screw-you-trump

And he's quoting LYNCH no less!!

Is Lynch the head of the DOJ who Hillary Clinton's HUSBAND walked on her DOJ jet and had an ex-parte discussion with her over grandchildren , which she doesn't even have any (for 30 minutes)?

I just can't remember.

And yet, that isn't nearly as egregious as Trump hauling Rosenstein to the White House on multiple occasions. Where is the outrage on that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Hilarious how you claim "whistleblower" status for this but with the leaks coming out of the White House you cry foul. Why aren't those considered whistleblowing?

Big difference between a leak and a whistleblower. The whistleblower shares the information with a government authority. A leaker usually shares it with the press. One is legal. The other is not.

So Giuliani, Prince and Stone are government? They were leaked to by the NY FBI Office.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, one thing for sure. There is one person to blame for all of this. If Clinton had not tried to evade the rules, this would not have been a problem. Weiner would likely not have had her classified emails.

The same rules that GWB and General Powell ignored? The same ones Jared and Ivanka are ignoring now?

[Anonymous]

Theres plenty of dirt around. Probably enough to cover everyone. But as an American the “We’ll stop it” text should give us all chills.

[Anonymous]

This thread from February, lays it out

https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/968775069018329088

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Theres plenty of dirt around. Probably enough to cover everyone. But as an American the “We’ll stop it” text should give us all chills.

Yeah, not really. Unless you're saying the IG isn't an American.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Theres plenty of dirt around. Probably enough to cover everyone. But as an American the “We’ll stop it” text should give us all chills.

Yeah, not really. Unless you're saying the IG isn't an American.

Did the IG say he was good with that kind of talk? Where did you learn that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Theres plenty of dirt around. Probably enough to cover everyone. But as an American the “We’ll stop it” text should give us all chills.

Yeah, not really. Unless you're saying the IG isn't an American.

Did the IG say he was good with that kind of talk? Where did you learn that?

Why are you asking if he was good with that kind of talk? The supposition was that it should give him the chills. Based on his conclusion, it did not. That's not to say he was good with it.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Theres plenty of dirt around. Probably enough to cover everyone. But as an American the “We’ll stop it” text should give us all chills.

Chills or not, actions are more important than words. Nothing about the Trump investigation was leaked or officially revealed before the election. If anyone was interested in stopping Trump, simply confirming the investigation to Harry Reid would have been enough. But, everyone in the FBI acted to protect Trump. On the other hand, NYC office FBI agents leaked information about Weiner's laptop forcing Comey to disclose its existence to Congress which led to the information being made public. The fact that rogue FBI agents had a direct affect in hurting Clinton during the campaign should give you far more chills than a simple text.

[Anonymous]

Chills or not, actions are more important than words. Nothing about the Trump investigation was leaked or officially revealed before the election. If anyone was interested in stopping Trump, simply confirming the investigation to Harry Reid would have been enough. But, everyone in the FBI acted to protect Trump. On the other hand, NYC office FBI agents leaked information about Weiner's laptop forcing Comey to disclose its existence to Congress which led to the information being made public. The fact that rogue FBI agents had a direct affect in hurting Clinton during the campaign should give you far more chills than a simple text.

Giving credence to a bogus dossier is not protecting Trump. There is some reason to consider that perhaps Strozk started this whole thing. Details are still sketchy--but, he did go to London.

As far as "rogue" FBI agents--reporting that your superiors are possibly stalling an investigation is a whistleblower--not a "rogue" agent.

And, lest we forget: there is one person to blame for the email situation---Hillary Clinton. We now know that foreign government did hack into her computer --and, it is likely Russia. There is reason to believe that this happened while she was in Russia and used her email. She also emailed with Barack Obama on this unsecured server.
Don't blame the "rogue" agent.

Read the report.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

Chills or not, actions are more important than words. Nothing about the Trump investigation was leaked or officially revealed before the election. If anyone was interested in stopping Trump, simply confirming the investigation to Harry Reid would have been enough. But, everyone in the FBI acted to protect Trump. On the other hand, NYC office FBI agents leaked information about Weiner's laptop forcing Comey to disclose its existence to Congress which led to the information being made public. The fact that rogue FBI agents had a direct affect in hurting Clinton during the campaign should give you far more chills than a simple text.

Giving credence to a bogus dossier is not protecting Trump. There is some reason to consider that perhaps Strozk started this whole thing. Details are still sketchy--but, he did go to London.

As far as "rogue" FBI agents--reporting that your superiors are possibly stalling an investigation is a whistleblower--not a "rogue" agent.

And, lest we forget: there is one person to blame for the email situation---Hillary Clinton. We now know that foreign government did hack into her computer --and, it is likely Russia. There is reason to believe that this happened while she was in Russia and used her email. She also emailed with Barack Obama on this unsecured server.
Don't blame the "rogue" agent.

Read the report.

You continue to live in fantasy land. By the time the FBI received the dossier, they had already been investigating the Trump campaign. Nunes was not the superior of the FBI agents who went to him within a couple of days of the discovery of the laptop. There is no way that you can argue that the NYC office needed to whistleblow almost immediately. Moreover, even if you can rationalize leaking to Nunes, you can't excuse leaking to Giuliani. These were indeed rogue agents who actually took direct actions that impacted the election. I know that you want to excuse that, but doing so only highlights your partisanship.

Please provide proof that a foreign government hacked her computer. That is simply not supported by evidence. This is another example of your stating your wishful thinking as fact.

While you wish to excuse the actors who actually influenced the election with their unauthorized activities, I am going to continue to blame those who are guilty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Chills or not, actions are more important than words. Nothing about the Trump investigation was leaked or officially revealed before the election. If anyone was interested in stopping Trump, simply confirming the investigation to Harry Reid would have been enough. But, everyone in the FBI acted to protect Trump. On the other hand, NYC office FBI agents leaked information about Weiner's laptop forcing Comey to disclose its existence to Congress which led to the information being made public. The fact that rogue FBI agents had a direct affect in hurting Clinton during the campaign should give you far more chills than a simple text.

Giving credence to a bogus dossier is not protecting Trump. There is some reason to consider that perhaps Strozk started this whole thing. Details are still sketchy--but, he did go to London.

As far as "rogue" FBI agents--reporting that your superiors are possibly stalling an investigation is a whistleblower--not a "rogue" agent.

And, lest we forget: there is one person to blame for the email situation---Hillary Clinton. We now know that foreign government did hack into her computer --and, it is likely Russia. There is reason to believe that this happened while she was in Russia and used her email. She also emailed with Barack Obama on this unsecured server.
Don't blame the "rogue" agent.

Read the report.

LOL. "Details are sketchy"

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:While Trump and his supporters are hyping IG report disclosures about anti-Trump statements by Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, despite the report's findings that the agents didn't act is a biased manner, much clearer anti-Clinton bias among FBI agents is being largely ignored.

Here is testimony of former Attorney General Lynch about a conversation she had with Comey six days before the election:



They are discussing a group of FBI agents in the New York office who have "a deep and visceral hatred of Secretary Clinton". This is important because Comey has explained his letter to Congress about the emails on Weiner's laptop as being necessary because he feared leaks would make it look like he was covering it up. It is pretty clear that Comey feared these anti-Clinton agents would be the source of the leak. Moreover, Devin Nunes says in this Fox News interview that "whistleblowers" from the FBI told him about the laptop in late September:

https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1007720437692891137

The same information was apparently leaked to Rudy Giuliani.

The story here is not the one Trump would have you believe -- that anti-Trump FBI agents engaged in a witch hunt -- but rather the opposite. Anti-Clinton FBI agents leaked information about Weiner's laptop to Nunes and Giuliani, forcing Comey to disclose that information to Congress (knowing it would be immediately publicized) just days before the election. In fact, the emails on the laptop were not new and proved irrelevant, something else Comey eventually announced (though the damage of his first announcement had already been done).

The bottom line with regard the FBI is that both Clinton and the Trump campaign were being investigated. The Trump investigation was kept secret despite pressure from Harry Reid to reveal it. The Clinton investigation was repeatedly publicized because of leaks and the fear of leaks by anti-Clinton FBI agents. To the extent political bias within the FBI played a role in the election, it completely favored Trump.

Jeff so sad for you. To stoop to whataboutism when you decry it’s use in the political forums. Such a dark day for this forum.

[Anonymous]

Jeff is such a jerk. This forum sucks because of his constant banning and deleting of anyone who disagrees with him