“Obstruction of Justice” – Special Agent Strzok Text Message Highlights FBI Investigative Intent…

Since Thursday night we’ve been combing the FBI files to figure out exactly what FBI Agent Peter Strzok was referencing in one of the most recently released text messages.  We have discovered the context and the text is now damning.

House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte read this specific text message on Thursday night during an interview with Sean Hannity:

At first, the context behind the September 10th, 2016, message was elusive, however it is now clear.

On September 2nd, 2016, during the (pre-election) apex of the FBI providing the documents behind their investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of her personal email, and the subsequent decision by FBI Director James Comey not to pursue criminal charges therein, the FBI released their investigative files:

September 2nd, 2016 FBI Press Release:

“Today the FBI is releasing a summary of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s July 2, 2016 interview with the FBI concerning allegations that classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on a personal e-mail server she used during her tenure. We also are releasing a factual summary of the FBI’s investigation into this matter.

We are making these materials available to the public in the interest of transparency and in response to numerous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. Appropriate redactions have been made for classified information or other material exempt from disclosure under FOIA. Additional information related to this investigation that the FBI releases in the future will be placed on The Vault, the FBI’s electronic FOIA library.” (link)

The FBI was under pressure to release their investigative documents.  On Sept 2nd, 2016 the release included the FBI investigative notes (FD-302’s) from the questions and answers during Hillary Clinton’s interview.  This investigative release was big news at the time.

The 302’s are the specific FBI forms used to document interviews/interrogations. They detail questions asked and answers given as well as who was present during the interview.

Inside the September 2nd, 2016, FBI release were two files:

•One file was 47 pages (full pdf here) and includes a full summary of the Clinton email investigation.

•The second file is 11 pages (full pdf here) and is the actual FBI investigator notes during the Hillary Clinton interview.

This second file is the “FD-302” (embed at the bottom for reference).  This is the 302 file FBI Agent Peter Strzok is referencing in the text message to Lisa Page.  Remember, Peter Strzok was one of the FBI people who actually interviewed Hillary Clinton.

What FBI Agent Peter Strzok is admitting in the September 10th text message, is that there are details within the interview of Hillary Clinton that he (and others) intentionally withheld from the September 2nd, 2016, release.

Specifically, evidence withheld in the 302’s would be some of the FBI questions and some of the Hillary Clinton answers to those questions.   In essence, the FBI held back actually releasing the full account of the interview.

According to the Strzok text message, the reason for withholding some of the details of the Hillary Clinton interview is because there are “very INFLAMMATORY things” within it; and once congress finds out what was withheld the details will “absolutely inflame” them.

Peter Strzok then goes on to say when/if the full FOIA is released, presumably post-election, Jim, Trisha, Dave and Mike are going to have to figure out how to deal with the discrepancy:

…”I’m sure Jim and Trisha and Dave and Mike are all considering how things like that will play out as they talk among themselves.”

“Jim” is likely James Baker, the Chief Legal Counsel for FBI Director James Comey.

“Trish” is likely Trisha Beth Anderson, Office of Legal Counsel for the FBI.  [Anderson was hired for the DOJ, by AG Eric Holder, from Eric Holder’s law firm.]

“Dave” and “Mike” currently remain unknown.

So it would appear, James Baker and Trisha Anderson, the legal advisers at the top of the FBI leadership apparatus, were both aware the September 2nd, 2016, FOIA release was manipulated to conceal part of Hillary Clinton’s questions and answers.

Perhaps now we can better understand the importance of this specific text message as it was released by House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte.

This message by Strzok shows a team of FBI officials intentionally conspiring to withhold “inflammatory” Clinton investigation evidence, from congress. And the decision-making goes directly to the very top leadership within the FBI.

Peter Strzok justifies his knowledge of the intentionally withheld 302 interview material by claiming: “because they weren’t relevant to understanding the focus of the investigation”.  However, to evaluate the filter this investigative team are applying we only need to look at the wording of their public release which accompanied the material:

Today the FBI is releasing a summary of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s July 2, 2016 interview with the FBI concerning allegations that classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on a personal e-mail server she used during her tenure. (link)

They felt obligated only to release information about “classified” or “improperly stored or transmitted” information.   That’s a rather disingenuous investigation.

There’s no mention of any FBI intent to investigate action or conduct undertaken by Hillary Clinton or her team to hide the use of classified or improperly stored information; or any intent to look at a cover-up, scrubbing, or conduct that happened AFTER it was discovered that she unlawfully used a personal e-mail server during her tenure.

We can see from the wording of the FBI public release, and the overlay of the text message from interviewer Peter Strzok, a deliberate effort to inquire into only the surface issues of classified information transmission and storage.  There was no investigative intent to go beyond that, and no information released, intentionally, that might disclose any larger issues.

If the FBI was legitimately conducting an investigation, and providing the subsequent evidence from within that investigation,  the FOIA would include all material relevant to the investigation, which would include all 302 (essentially Q&A) pages. However, the set of questions and answers the FBI released on Sept. 2nd 2016 was not the full set of Questions and Answers. They withheld something, likely “inflammatory”, per FBI Agent Strzok.

FBI Agent Peter Strzok is outlining in this text message a deliberate intent to shape the Clinton interview, and then a deliberative process of filtering out only those aspects of the interview that would support their pre-determined outcome, delivered only days later.

Additionally, FBI Agent Strzok is admitting that a group of FBI officials including himself, James Baker, Trisha Anderson, Lisa Page, and likely others (McCabe, Comey) conspired together to intentionally withhold  information -derived from this interview- from congress and the American people.

REFERENCE and RESOURCES:

File #1 of Document release – Investigation Summary:

File #2 – The Summary of Interview – The 302’s:

.

 

Below is the list of things Hillary Clinton could not recall in the FBI interview, as compiled by Lifezette in 2016:

  • When she received security clearance
  • Being briefed on how to handle classified material
  • How many times she used her authority to designate items classified
  • Any briefing on how to handle very top-secret “Special Access Program” material
  • How to select a target for a drone strike
  • How the data from her mobile devices was destroyed when she switched devices
  • The number of times her staff was given a secure phone
  • Why she didn’t get a secure Blackberry
  • Receiving any emails she thought should not be on the private system
  • Did not remember giving staff direction to create private email account
  • Getting guidance from state on email policy
  • Who had access to her Blackberry account
  • The process for deleting her emails
  • Ever getting a message that her storage was almost full
  • Anyone besides Huma Abedin being offered an account on the private server
  • Being sent information on state government private emails being hacked
  • Receiving cable on State Dept personnel securing personal email accounts
  • Receiving cable on Bryan Pagliano upgrading her server
  • Using an iPad mini
  • An Oct. 13, 2012, email on Egypt with Clinton pal Sidney Blumenthal
  • Jacob Sullivan using personal email
  • State Department protocol for confirming classified information in media reports
  • Every briefing she received after suffering concussions
  • Being notified of a FOIA request on Dec. 11, 2012
  • Being read out of her clearance
  • Any further access to her private email account from her State Department tenure after switching to her HRC office.com account.

Secretary Clinton could not recall when she received her security clearance or whether it was carried over from her time in the Senate. She also could not recall any briefing or training by the State Department “related to the retention of federal records or the handling of classified information.”

Secretary Clinton said she was briefed on Special Access Programs – the top-level classification of U.S. intelligence – but could not recall the specific training or briefings on how to handle that information.  Additional discoveries from September 2016:

DISCOVERY ONE: Clinton Deleted Her Private Email Archive “A Few Weeks After The New York TimesDisclosed” The Private Server. Viser Tweet: “A few weeks after the NYT disclosed that Hillary Clinton had a private email account, her archive inbox was deleted.” (Twitter.com, 9/2/16)

DISCOVERY TWO: Clinton Did Not Know The (C) Mark Meant Classified And Did Not “Pay Attention To Diff Classification Levels.” Seitz-Wald Tweet: “Clinton said she didn’t know what (c) mark meant, didn’t pay attn to diff classification levels, treated all srsly.” (Twitter.com, 9/2/16)

DISCOVERY THREE: “There Were 17,448 Work-Related Emails That Clinton Didn’t Turn Over To The State Inspector General.” (Twitter.com, 9/2/16)

DISCOVERY FOUR: As Secretary Of State Clinton “Had 13 Mobile Devices And 5 iPads” With Her Private Email.Viser Tweet: “Hillary Clinton, who said she had her private email for convenience, had 13 mobile devices and 5 iPads, according to FBI.” (Twitter.com, 9/2/16)

DISCOVERY FIVE: Clinton’s Lawyers Could Not Locate The Mobile Devices With Her Email Address.. Viser Tweet: ‘FBI found 13 total mobile devices associated with Clinton’s 2 phone numbers. Her lawyers couldn’t locate the devices” (Twitter.com, 9/2/16)

DISCOVERY SIX: “The FBI Determined That Clinton Brought Her Blackberry Into A Secure Area At State, Which Is Prohibited.” (Twitter.com, 9/2/16)

DISCOVERY SEVEN: Clinton’s Email Archive Was Transferred Onto A Personal Gmail Address To Help Archive The Records. Zapotosky Tweet: “In 2014, in an effort to transfer an archive of Clinton emails from a laptop onto a server, someone used a personal Gmail address to help” (Twitter.com, 9/2/16)

DISCOVERY EIGHT: Clinton Deleted Her Emails Because She Thought “She Didn’t Need Them Anymore.”Cilizza Tweet: ‘Clinton told the FBI she deleted her emails because she didn’t need them anymore not to avoid FOIA”(Twitter.com, 9/2/16)

DISCOVERY NINE: Someone Tried To Hack Into Clinton’s iCloud Account. Viser Tweet: “The FBI found that someone was trying to hack into Hillary Clinton’s iCloud account. They were unsuccessful.” (Twitter.com, 9/2/16)

DISCOVERY TEN: “Hillary Clinton Sent Out An Email To All State Employees Warning Them Against Using Personal Email Addresses.” (Twitter.com, 9/2/16)

BONUS DISCOVERY: “The Phrase ‘Could Not Recall’ Or ‘Did Not Recall’ Appears 27 Times In Hillary Clinton FBI Interview Transcript.” (Twitter.com, 9/2/16)

Hillary - orange is the new black

We can only imagine what the FBI held back…

 

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Clinton(s), Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Desperately Seeking Hillary, Donald Trump, Donald Trump Transition, Election 2016, FBI, media bias, Notorious Liars, President Trump, propaganda, Secretary of State, Spying, THE BIG UGLY, Uncategorized, White House Coverup. Bookmark the permalink.

1,156 Responses to “Obstruction of Justice” – Special Agent Strzok Text Message Highlights FBI Investigative Intent…

  1. phoenixRising says:

    Liked by 1 person

  2. nigella says:

    Is it true some of these texts were given to Mueller to look at and they are being redacted?

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Is Admiral Michael Rogers (NSA) a blackhat?
    Truepundit.com has an article that says in the house memo it will say Admiral Michael Rogers (NSA) is a black hat. I will be shocked if that turns out to be true.

    The Deep State caretakers involved are familiar names: James Comey (FBI), John Brennan (CIA), James Clapper (ODNI), Loretta Lynch (DOJ), Jeh Johnson (DHS), Admiral Michael Rogers (NSA). And then-director of GCHQ Robert Hannigan who has since resigned from the esteemed British spy agency. https://truepundit.com/fisa-abuse-memo-unveiled-exactly-memo-according-intel-insiders/

    Like

  4. phoenixRising says:

    twitter thread Sundance may be interested in –

    Liked by 4 people

  5. Dogood says:

    I think Obama and Hillary’s motive, was to coverup the likely hacking of Hillary’s server by Putin’s hackers (they’re great hackers according to them). Putin would use those emails to blackmail them into appeasement and flexibility. Which explains the uranium deal, helping Russia’s allies Syria and Iran, and Obama’s public “let’s be friends” approach to resetting their relationship (until Hillary lost, then it was all Russian meddling – and I say it was but not the meddling they claimed). The knowledge of the blackmail would be limited to Obama and Hillary (and whoever they informed if anyone). Putin would have told her/him verbally (you can see the photos) or via one of the 22 times the Russian Ambassador visited Obama’s White House (that’s a lot of visits). It would explain everything, including why Obama didn’t let Hillary be prosecuted.
    The link in this article says it has something to do with the 20 emails between Obama and Clinton (making him a participant in her government security crimes) but I think Hillary was hacked by Putin, and blackmailed for their corruption. Obama claimed he learned of her server in news reports (big lie).

    Liked by 3 people

    • We know that Obama communicated with Hillary via that server.
      And we know that Hillary illegally transmitted SAP info and other stuff via that insecure server.

      What if Obama was also communicating classified info via that server? Then you’ve got foreign penetration of government communications at the very highest levels.

      What if Obama’s communication with Clinton and others, via her server and his Ameritech account – which HAS NOT BEEN INVESTIGATED – was more than just occasional?

      We have no idea how many criminal schemes he was actually involved with, but it makes sense that he’d keep them off the books via his Ameritech account.

      That one email box could be the key to everything we need to know about the last 9 years. Even though many foreign governments probably already hacked that info some time ago.

      Nobody is talking about his Ameritech account. Completely overlooked. Which tells me that it’s the key to everything.

      Like

  6. Brant says:

    I wonder if before naming names, certain technologies were prior set up so to catch the anticipated traffic? I know it was done to us/our POTUS, but dang it we need info and they aren’t giving it voluntarily.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Brant says:

      Another thought. Some folks listed worked with Mueller, Strozk, etc. Is this a way to maybe accidently get emails/communiques to/from Mueller prior to his appointment to SC?

      Like

  7. fabrabbit says:

    How can someone who has a record of “not remembering” (remember Rose Law firm) ever expect to become President. I retired ten years ago from a job with security clearance that I held for nine years and I remember my security briefing.

    How can anyone say Trump has mental problems if she cannot even remember using an iPad? And Diane Feinstein releasing Simpsom’s testimony without consulting her colleagues because she had a head cold. They must think we are VERY stupid.

    Liked by 9 people

    • bofh says:

      “They must think we are VERY stupid.”
      Hate to say it, but it’s worked for them so far… (“so far” meaning: right up until PDJT)

      Liked by 3 people

      • Plain Jane says:

        PDJT will soon be offering red pills to those sheeple who still have at least partial use of their brains and aren’t so corrupt themselves that they can’t awaken.

        Like

  8. Pingback: Totally On The Level | Western Rifle Shooters Association

  9. Watcher says:

    Well hildabeast did lose 13 mobile devices, forgetful i guess.

    Liked by 1 person

    • T.L.T. says:

      “Pingback: Totally On The Level | Western Rifle Shooters Association”

      I see this right above the Watcher post. Cliven Bundy’s probably still yelling yahooo!! 🙂

      Like

  10. phoenixRising says:

    Liked by 7 people

  11. Kent says:

    I am powerless to change any of this…but to those who can I say..

    “Cry Havoc! and release the dogs of war”

    against those who would harm our republic.

    Liked by 3 people

  12. IMO says:

    Trump calls for release of the Nunes memo | CitizensOutpost
    http://citizensoutpost.com/2018/01/27/trump-calls-for-release-of-the-nunes-memo/amp/

    Check Mate Mother Fer’s

    Liked by 1 person

    • Kent says:

      As if they haven’t had the damn thing for weeks…so…hand it to them, give them 24 hours…and then…..

      Release the Memo

      Liked by 1 person

    • Abdul Abulbul Amir says:

      Great news! Even better if it unredacted. I believe President Trump is all for total transparency, and sunlight is still the best disinfectant. I wouldn’t be surprised if he did read the four page memo at the SOTU speech.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Newt Love says:

        Trump reading the 4-page Memo at the SotU speech?
        That would be foolish.
        Trump needs to hold back and let the process work, and not be out front on publishing this.
        Trump generates some of his own “hot water” that mixes with the deluge of Fake News Media generated “hot water” that is used to abuse our President.
        President Trump needs to let Nunes and his Committee release the memo, and remain as a by-stander and witness to the event.
        Nunes is tough! He can take the heat from the Fake News over the fallout from this disclosure.

        Liked by 1 person

        • jello333 says:

          No, I think if he bring up the memo at all, it’ll be something “sneaky”. Like in the middle of the SOTU speech, he throws in one, single sentence that kinda stands out as not quite fitting. Everyone will be like, “What was that? No idea what that meant, but it was weird.” But anyone who has seen the memo KNOWS what it was… it was a line lifted directly from the memo itself. Donald’s way of saying, in front of the whole world, “I know who you are, I know everything about you traitors. Here’s my little present to you all. Try to just relax and get some rest over the next few days. You’re gonna need it.”

          Liked by 1 person

          • fabrabbit says:

            Agreed. I recall some months ago, Trump finishing a meeting with the Joint Chiefs and when the press came in afterward he said something like the s–t is going to hit the fan… the press talked for hours about this…what did he mean??? I think, as you say PDJT will drop something into the SOTU that will telegraph to those who have reason to be anxious that the day of reckoning is coming.

            Like

          • T.L.T. says:

            Think “you’d be in jail.”

            Anyone that doesn’t think Trump would lay ‘er out there needs to watch this again.

            Like

  13. Jan J says:

    You have to wonder how many times she said “What the eff difference does it make?”

    Liked by 1 person

  14. Another Scott says:

    if they were going to filter things to fit a narrative why did they even ask questions that could be inflammatory?

    Liked by 3 people

  15. phoenixRising says:

    interesting twitter thread dealing w/ history of intelligence surveilance

    Liked by 2 people

  16. Bill says:

    If I were President Trump, I would release the FISA 4-page memo at the SOTU address. In addition, I would deliver another surprise for Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and friends. It would be, sold proof, in support of the 4-page memo. Something, so damning, that anything Schumer’s group had constructed, would be seen a worthless and as another attempt to obstruct justice.

    In short, go for the throat of the Deep State!

    Liked by 1 person

    • Newt Love says:

      There needs to be MORE warriors battling the evil that has crept into the Deep State. More than just Trump.
      You can wait a few days for Nunes and his Committee to act, otherwise, Trump will get all of the media abuse.
      Give the (R) Party farm and major league players to grow during these battles, so that they will continue to climb in the National Polls.

      Like

      • Totally agree – leave it to others. Trump having any hands on will automatically bring righteous ( sarc.) criticism from left.

        Like

      • fabrabbit says:

        Just wait for the ugly comments from the talking heads after SOTO. I heard the memo was to be released mid-week next week. Lots of discussion on this point but my understanding is that PDJT does not have to sign off on the memo. Better he does not and stays arms length from this Nunes, et al seem to have a good strategy and are disciplined in the execution. (excuse the pun)

        Like

        • Mike says:

          Glad to have a Lakota warrior on our side Newt!

          Remember what they did to Custer.

          I have read that if American citizens enlisted during WW2 at the the rate that Native Americans did, they would not have need the draft.

          Like

  17. Does anyone have the dates for the campaign donations to Hillary made by Strzok and Page?

    Like

  18. davidij says:

    I think the Dave in Lisa Page’s test is David Bowdich who is number 3 guy after McCabe and who Wray is said to put in McCabe’s place when he leaves. https://imgur.com/a/Rqtr9

    Like

    • fabrabbit says:

      Thanks.

      Like

    • Diddian says:

      Interesting. David L. Bowditch and Michael P. Kortan both appear in to/from (as do Trish Anderson and Comey) on communications with McCabe about the LL/WJC tarmac meeting and Lynch’s decision to leave Hillary email prosecution decision to others. These docs were turned over to Judicial Watch under FOIA filing.

      http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/16-cv-02046-Release-dated-11302017.pdf

      An aside: Bowditch was at one time the Asst Dir of FBI LA field office Investigating San Bernardino terror attack at Inland Regional Center. The brother of one of those terrorists was married to a Russian immigrant. Her sister, although living with another man with whom she had a child, was involved in a sham marriage with Enrique Marquez, the man who provided rifles to the terrorist couple.

      Like

  19. Tennyson says:

    If Hildebeast did as much yoga as the 33k emails she deleted stated, she certainly wouldn’t need to wear pantsuits now, would she?

    Liked by 2 people

  20. Peter P. Strzok’s visit occurred on Tuesday, April 10, 2012. Strzok made appointment number U96580 at 12:00 pm on April 9, 2012 through caller Zachary Landau. The appointment was scheduled to begin at 6:30 pm with Zach Landau in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building 430 and included a group of 20 people.

    Originally scheduled to end at 11:59 pm, this visit should have lasted approximately 6 hours and was one of Strzok’s three total visits since 2009.

    Note: End times recorded as “11:59 pm” are likely default end times and consequently may produce exceptionally long estimated visit durations.
    http://white-house-logs.insidegov.com/l/68930135/Peter-P-Strzok

    Liked by 1 person

    • bofh says:

      That information about end times would explain why one of the earlier WH visits (Nellie Ohr maybe, I don’t remember who exactly) looked like it lasted an inexplicable 14 hours with an ending time of 11:59.

      So basically, they can’t even tell you when someone left the WH (or even IF they left the WH)? Sloppy. Really sloppy.

      Liked by 1 person

  21. CraigSaunders says:

    Please write something about Rosneft/Bill Jeffress & Amy Jeffress/FISA Court. Bill Jeffress was on a contact list in the Podesta emails.

    Like

  22. phoenixRising says:

    Liked by 1 person

  23. Hemishe says:

    The David is either David Waters, David Bowdich, or David LeValley .

    Liked by 1 person

  24. ForGodandCountry says:

    Like

  25. phoenixRising says:

    Sundance has a twitter thread up

    Liked by 4 people

    • WSB says:

      “28 U.S.C. Section 144, captioned “Bias or prejudice of judge,” provides that under circumstances, when a party to a case in a United States District Court files a “timely and sufficient Motion that the judge before whom the matter is pending has a personal bias or prejudice either against him or in favor of an adverse party,” the case shall be transferred to another judge.

      The general rule is that, to warrant recusal, a judge’s expression of an opinion about the merits of a case, or his familiarity with the facts or the parties, must have originated in a source outside the case itself. This is referred to in the United States as the “extra-judicial source rule” and was recognized as a general presumption, although not an invariable one, in the 1994 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Liteky v. United States.

      At times justices or judges will recuse themselves sua sponte (on their own motion), recognizing that facts leading to their disqualification are present. However, where such facts exist, a party to the case may suggest recusal. Generally, each judge is the arbiter of a motion for the judge’s recusal, which is addressed to the judge’s conscience and discretion. However, where lower courts are concerned, an erroneous refusal to recuse in a clear case can be reviewed on appeal or, under extreme circumstances, by a petition for a writ of prohibition.”

      Is there paper trail somewhere to confirm any procedures in Contreras’ recusal? This does not say specifically that Roberts would have been involved, but other parties also may have been.

      Liked by 3 people

    • WSB says:

      Could Chuck Grassley have Contreras recused? He is chairmans of the Juduciary Committee. Oversight of FISC? He might have corroborating evidence that Contreras would be a witness in the FISA fiasco.

      Would there be any paperwork from his office?

      Like

    • WSB says:

      Maybe the DOJ, or Flynn’s attorney were responsible for having him removed. The statute states ‘a party to a case’. Someone would have to have knowledge of Contreras being on the bench for both cases. Is Flynn’s attorney privy to that info in discovery?

      Like

    • WSB says:

      Here’s another thought.

      What if the Congressional oversight committees or DOJ realized that an entire swath of judges was dirty, and Contreras somehow conveniently arranged to be on Flynn’s case…to see the whole operation through. Kind of like that insurance policy to take Flynn out (McCabe). There were a few other unexplained district judicial recusals around that same time period if I am not mistaken. All Obama appointments, and conveniently selected for certain cases.

      Is it possible that they removed Contreras first, which is why Jordan demanded that the memo be declassified, and only the announcement was made afterward?

      Liked by 1 person

  26. Ackman420 says:

    When the FISC mandate bill was renewed it opened all the chicanery to review via 702. Don’t know if the queries were re activated after Rodgers shut it down, though.
    I feel there is enough evidence out there just from what we know about U1 and British IC involvement to draw “warrants” where possible and sink them all.

    Liked by 1 person

  27. South Col says:

    AG Jeff Sessions can’t / won’t even get the FBI / DoJ to turn over all the emails and “other documents” demanded by Congress. Jeff’s in charge of FBI DoJ. Jeff doesn’t seem to have any control over the agencies he heads.

    Like

    • WVNed says:

      When you are put in charge of the pack of foxhounds and find out half of them are rabid and trying to bite you.

      Liked by 2 people

      • South Col says:

        Then you sack them, at the speed of light. It hasn’t happened. Why?

        Like

        • WVNed says:

          Interesting question. My best answer is trying to minimize collateral damage and maintain some appearance of functionality.

          I have no idea why.

          Like

        • bunkers says:

          My thought – it hasn’t happened for the following reasons:

          If Sessions starts rounding these people up and firing them the entire focus would shift to Sessions “obstructing justice” by firing the very people who are currently/previously part of the “small group” investigating Trump and his administration – this could include Sessions who was recently interviewed by Mueller. (IMO, Mueller interviewed Sessions for just this reason)

          That media outrage (and the resulting court cases) would lead to further delays which would take us further from our goal of justice to those who have committed these crimes. It reminds me of the old joke….

          There are hundreds of cows grazing below. The young bull says, “Let’s run down there and screw a cow!”

          The old bull says, “No young bull – why don’t we walk down and screw them all.”

          Liked by 4 people

        • Plain Jane says:

          They are all now bait for the bigger fish. Patience, love, patience.

          Liked by 1 person

        • South Col says:

          Congress has HAD TO GO TO COURT to get the DoJ, of which Sessions is the chief, to release documents.
          Sessions could simply tell them to do it.
          Why didn’t he??

          Like

          • WSB says:

            You were given that answer in Bunker’s analogy upthread.

            One, most of the DOJ staff were turned into career Government Service union members right before he left office, many of those are sitting on the documents or information needed. They cannot be fired without cause, and if you are investigating them, best to keep them in place as you are investigating.

            One, you have leverage over their careers, two you can monitor them, and three, when the time is right they can be prosecuted. By allowing the bad guys to react to outside pressures, they expose themselves.

            Like

    • Cathy Carver says:

      They “must” have something on Sessions. If they do It’s going to come out.

      Like

  28. BREAKING: NOW FBI Says They Can’t Find Deputy Director Andrew McCabe’s Text Messages!
    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/01/breaking-now-fbi-says-cant-find-deputy-director-andrew-mccabes-text-messages-video/

    Tom Fitton: We sued back in September for the text messages of the number two at the FBI, Andrew McCabe. And they just told us this week, they gave us everything they’re going to give us, and not one text message was turned over. They lost all of Andrew McCabe’s text messages! I don’t believe it. There’s still gamesmanship going on.

    Liked by 2 people

    • phoenixRising says:

      NSA has everything…
      These criminals just keep diggin’ their hole deeper. If they’re “lost” then AT&T will again have to retrieve them.

      Of course you believe it…liars don’t change…

      Liked by 2 people

      • Newt Love says:

        But NSA is prevented by 702 (17) from unmasking them and revealing them without a lot of steps. Besides, Adm Rogers cancelled all “about” inquiries, which would make it really hard to find them in the search results.

        The cellular network provider is the best bet. They are required under their provider contracts to retain all messages and emails for 5 years.

        Liked by 1 person

        • They weren’t normal SMS text messages.
          They were using some dark web encrypted chat app. So cellular provider no use, but quite possible NSA sees EVERYTHING.

          Like

          • WSB says:

            This also looks like a private threat to Tom Fitton, who has decided to publickly respond. Andy will not like being exposed as one who might be obstructing justuce. Migh affect his retirement and pension.

            Like

    • Plain Jane says:

      Bet white hats have McCabe himself, they don’t need no stinkin’ texts.

      Liked by 1 person

    • fabrabbit says:

      I didn’t check the GP story but we know they have them. We know they can get them, nothing to worry about. The point to take is that they are slow walking discovery. Making that a storyline for the white hats continues to build how uncooperative they are with the rule of law, or in other words corrupt.

      Liked by 1 person

  29. WVNed says:

    Deja Vu

    Those that forget history are doomed to repeat it.

    in 1996 when it was discovered that the Clinton White House illegally
    obtained FBI files on adversaries, and used them to smear them,
    continues to this day. Strangely, although Mrs. Clinton is the principal
    defendant, and although there is sworn testimony, obtained during
    earlier discovery that Mrs. Clinton was the mastermind of this illegal
    scheme, the Court has never granted Plaintiffs requests to depose her —
    perhaps fearing a political backlash in the scandal ridden and
    “politically correct” cesspool known as Washington, D.C.

    It’s so much easier now with all that newfangled computer surveillance stuff. You dont get caught with boxes of files in the basement.

    Liked by 2 people

  30. Abdul Abulbul Amir says:

    This all goes back to O wanting to ‘fundamentally transforming America’. If there was any way to destroy our culture, he would employ it.

    Liked by 1 person

  31. fabrabbit says:

    Oh, ye of little faith.

    Like

  32. Let’s understand this. Clinton and Obama and the FBI justice dept. Used phony propaganda to spy on Trump and start a phony investigation on him, and now are going o indict him for obstruction or recommend impeachment, for fighting back against that phony investigation. So in other words. We are going to falsely investigate you, but if you try to stop it you will commit obstruction. Will the people allow this!?

    Like

  33. Lunagirl says:

    I think the inflammatory stuff removed, based on the dates surrounding the huge redactions, are probably related to Benghazi.

    Liked by 1 person

  34. Mike says:

    Byron York is reporting DOJ only gave up 14% of the Strzok Page texts to congress. The rest are “personal.”
    Of what Congress got there are redactions. AND BELIEVE IT OR NOT, TEAM MUELLER IS BEING ALLOWED TO MAKE SOME OF THE REDACTIONS!!!

    If it is an invasion of privacy for the congressional investigators to see all the texts, un-redacted, HOW COME MUELLER GETS TO SEE THEM?

    If congress hasn’t started subpoenaing this data from private carriers by now they naive beyond belief.

    Like

  35. litenmaus says:

    Dennis Montgomery, Whistleblower

    Of all the judges in all the world……

    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
    FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

    DENNIS L. MONTGOMERY, ::Plaintiff, : Civil Action No.: 16-00126 (RC):v. ::JAMES RISEN,
    et al.
    ::Defendants. :
    ORDER
    Plaintiff Dennis L. Montgomery originally filed this action against Defendants JamesRisen, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company, and HMH Holdings, Inc. in February, 2015 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

    The order in which the Court should address the pending motions; and
    A joint proposed schedule to govern further proceedings in this case.

    SO ORDERED
    Dated: February 3, 2016 RUDOLPH CONTRERAS
    United States District Judge

    https://www.scribd.com/document/297857508/Montgomery-v-Risen-257-ORDER-Re-Jt-Status-Report

    Like

  36. MR52 says:

    I don’t know if anyone is reading this thread anymore, but one my friends that is closer to intel is telling me that the Peter Strzok/Page affair is likely cover for the treasonous secret meetings and not an affair.

    Like

  37. Ed says:

    Wow, there’s no telling where this is going to end up. I thought all along that it was funny how everyone involved with this scandal is always mentioned , except for one key figure, Obama. He had to know what was going on. Holy Chit, it’s no wonder the democrats don’t want the public to see the memos.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s