Sunday Talks: Bob Goodlatte Discusses Upcoming Peter Strzok Deposition….

House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte discusses the latest issues surrounding the ongoing congressional review of DOJ and FBI corruption.  Within the interview Chairman Goodlatte outlines the upcoming deposition of “former(?)” FBI Agent Peter Strzok which is scheduled to take place on Wednesday June 27th, 2018.

.

Initial letter from Goodlatte to DOJ and their response yesterday below:

Original request:

.

Response from FBI:

.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in AG Jeff Sessions, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Clinton(s), Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Donald Trump, Election 2018, FBI, IG Report Clinton Investigation, IG Report FISA Abuse, IG Report McCabe, Legislation, media bias, Notorious Liars, President Trump, Spygate, THE BIG UGLY, Uncategorized, White House Coverup. Bookmark the permalink.

201 Responses to Sunday Talks: Bob Goodlatte Discusses Upcoming Peter Strzok Deposition….

  1. DMWT says:

    Strok will plead the 5th just like McCabe or be Arkancided before he can talk. Either way, it is a net zero for the People.

    Liked by 16 people

    • frankie says:

      On the immigration portion of Rep. Goodlatte’s concerns, there is a post called “The Truth About Ellis Island” on the website howtobeyourowndetective.com
      I read it and was amazed.
      The author said more than 95% of all aliens in the Ellis Island era were admitted, but only about half of all immigrants today would qualify under Ellis Island rules.

      Does this mean the immigrant people back in the day were better than they are now?
      That’s the conclusion I drew.

      Liked by 16 people

      • svenwg says:

        The people that came from Europe to Ellis Island were more than 98% White. Remember that immigration to the USA was changed in the 1960s to completely ban immigration from Europe and have 90%+ of those admitted to the USA had to come from 3rd World countries thereby reducing the average IQ of the American citizen.

        The result of this Demoncrap experiment can now be seen in the massive groundswell of Leftist violence that believes in Government looking after them and that the ends justify the means.

        Liked by 26 people

        • Cuppa Covfefe says:

          The DEMONcRAT tactic of collecting and harvesting votes by any means possible goes back to Teddy Kennedy and LBJ, the latter of which was one of the biggest crooks to walk the halls of Washington D.C. The law in question is the Hart-Celler Act, and we’ve been in the cellar ever since…

          Liked by 6 people

        • mopar2016 says:

          I feel like I’ve seen this interview a dozen times.
          These people are all covering for each other.
          Not buying the faux outrage about oversight and the lack of documents being produced.
          They’ll have their closed meeting to get their stories straight, then they’ll have some nonsense for public consumption.

          Liked by 8 people

          • MAJA says:

            I feel that way at times, but my goodness, it looks like this week will be packed like last week. We have made great progress.. hearing goodlatte say out load on network tv that strok let clinton slide and was out to get Trump is HUGE.

            Liked by 1 person

          • cagefree says:

            I thought the same thing about 1/2 way through the interview. It takes a special kind of BS that is honed over a politicians “career” and Goodlatte is VERY good at it. And there’s always a slight smile (or is it a mocking smirk) on his face

            Like

        • wilski says:

          Hey man; Democrappers only want what the “people” want: more free stuff !! (with OPM).

          Liked by 1 person

        • JohnPaulJohnes says:

          And immigration act of 1882, due to unemployment issues in US.

          Liked by 1 person

      • Minnie says:

        How far back in the timeline does this go, Frankie?

        Because my father (age 5) arrived at Ellis Island with my grandparents and his 3 y/o little sister in mid 1930’s.

        They arrived legally and were processed, legally.

        It is truly sickening and unreal what has become of the honor once bestowed on folllwing the law.

        Liked by 23 people

      • PaulM says:

        Would this be your own website that you’re steering people to?

        Liked by 1 person

      • TheLastDemocrat says:

        In the Ellis Island days, you had to afford sea passage, and you had to know you likely would get accepted. People did not just hop on a ship.

        Also, for much of the era, you had to have a sponsor – had to have a job to go to, or a citizen saying they would take care of you if you were admitted.

        At Ellis Island, they then looked for the few fakers, as well as those who were medically sick, or mentally deficient. They had a pretty robust infirmary, plus had mental testing and testers to see who was mentally deficient. The fraudsters, the ill, and mentally deficient were hte 5% that got put back on the boat.

        Liked by 4 people

        • Minnie says:

          Precisely right re: sponsor.

          Dad’s family was received and welcomed by my grandfather’s brother.

          That info is readily available on the ship’s Manifest, which I was able to access for genealogy purposes.

          Liked by 4 people

          • Dixie T says:

            Yes, even in 1890 when my grandfather came to the U.S. there were “tests” that had to be taken—-and you had to pass them to be allowed entry to the U.S. Also, you had to list “who” you were going to be staying with, if you were approved to “enter.” (This was all done at the “port of entry.”) Also, the U.S. had “quotas” of how many immigrants they would allow into the U.S.—-and this is how immigrants were booked passage to come to the U.S. Those ships DID NOT bring more people over than the “quota” amount!!!

            Liked by 1 person

        • Carrie2 says:

          TheLastDemocrat, and for a long time we had quotas and suddenly now we don’t. Those immigration laws were great so we need to go back in time and follow them today. Weed out and accept in pursuant to laws/regulations and above all protect our country.

          Like

      • Carrie2 says:

        frankie, yes they were different because t hey wanted to come to America to have freedom and human rights. My father escaped the Russian pogrom (doubt many knew there was Russian pogroms) and the family went to English, place application to come to America, must have no disease/illness, must speak at least a little English, must have a job waiting or someone to support and if none of this was possible, they couldn’t come in and no use in pleading asylum. There was no welfare back then either so they knew they would have to work or do something to pay rent, buy food, etc. They came to be better and good Americans with freedom and rights. In fact, my father would never ever speak Russian language in our home. He became an American to be called an American. Ditto my Irish relatives on my mother’s side who fled the potato famine but that was not accepted as a way to plead asylum then and should not now. They all got jobs and worked on up with good pay and lives because they knew #1 in America they could,and #2 because that is what they wanted to do, that is, be a part of the America we all love. No one went around protesting these arrival altho since my father was Jewish (the real kind), many in NY were nasty to them, so they came to Massachusetts or the the midwest where my father and mother met, married and raised a family – never very poor but never very rich either but taught us to get an education and we all started some type of work at a young age AND we were required to turn in 50% of our wages for the whole family. So many selfish today won’t share a dime to anyone or in the home but expect to be supported, petted, spoiled, etc., etc. Why does anyone give their credit card to their children is mindbending!

        Liked by 3 people

      • Robert Powell says:

        What we are dealing with here, are weaponized illegals. After the Franco Spanish war 36 -1939 the communists were kicked out of Spain. Russia refused to recover them. The Communists & left then raised the same false flag and the hard core were shipped to Central & South America.AS late as the 1961 Kennedy was in contact, Currie who was Roosevelts confidant. H/T WND 2011 – – Currie was implicated by the Venona decrypts in numerous Soviet spy rings and fled to Bogata, Colombia, following World War II. The documents show “the first person [in Colombia] [Ted Kennedy] wanted to meet was Lauchlin Currie.”
        There are no coincidences.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Strzok can’t plead the fifth and keep his job. It is a violation of USDOJ employment policy and you really think he is going to give up his law enforcement enhanced retirement by getting fired just shy of meeting the minimum requirements under age and years of service? His federal pension is worth millions over his life expectancy at age 50. He is either 48 or 49. If fired he can’t start collecting until his 60’s and his pension will also be reduced by a percentage for each year he didn’t work in a federal job from the day of firing until he starts collecting.

      If he keeps his job he can collect the pension the day he turns 50.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Col.Sanders says:

        And know we know why he hasnt been fired.
        And also why McCabe was removed before he could testify as an employee.
        I am convinced firing McCabe was a CYA move allowing him to plead the 5th instead of giving testimony which would have been counter to that of Comey.

        Liked by 2 people

      • lawton says:

        He has met his 20 years to get his retirement at 57.

        Liked by 1 person

      • MSO says:

        There’s certainly a good chance that Strzok doesn’t want to keep his job. The question of forced labor arises if the FBI will not accept Strzok’s resignation.

        Liked by 1 person

      • johneb18 says:

        I thought Strzok had already said that he wasn’t going to plead the 5th. And my thinking that this is plausible if he knows he had been given instructions, and therefore is able to say who told him to do what, given he’s already caught red-handed on bias. Like, might as well get out of the way of the bigger conspiracy…

        Liked by 1 person

      • Ris Eruwaedhiel says:

        Peter Strzok turned 48 last March. It was earlier reported that he still was employed by the FBI despite being escorted out.

        Like

    • Concerned Virginian says:

      For some reason i keep smelling a set up. If Peter Strzok is either close to being, or actually is in some way, the center of this damnable spiderweb, WHY was he all of a sudden saying he’s ready to testify before Congress and not (if I recall correctly) going for immunity or plead the 5th Amendment?
      Is it just possible that Strzok knows the game is up, that he’s going to be “removed” no matter what he does or says, and that he’s made his insurance arrangements for his family?

      Liked by 2 people

      • His attorney kept saying he would testify voluntarily but he turned down every date offered by Congressional committee, according to Goodlatte. He was thus subpoenaed. USDOJ employment standards require all employees to cooperate fully and truthfully with all investigations, including Congressional oversite hearings.

        Pleading the 5th violates employment standards and requires termination of employment. He can not work as a federal law enforcement officer if he pleads the fifth. Any case he would then be a witness in would be tainted.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Odin2 says:

        If the fix is in, he will fall on his sword and take all the blame. Then he will try to exonerate his accomplices as much as he can. Finally, he and his family will be taken care of for the rest of their lives by the deep state (godfather style).

        Liked by 1 person

      • mimbler says:

        Or more likely, IMO, he’s been reassured that he won’t be asked any embarrassing questions.
        I’ll be happy if you are closer to right than I am.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Concerned says:

        Just because you testify before Congress, does not mean that you told the truth. Have you seen anyone go to jail for lying to Congress?

        Liked by 4 people

    • Navy says:

      Remember CIA director William Casey who developed seizures hours before his Iran Contra hearing testimony (never spoke again) …. died quickly of brain cancer. Must have lived near power lines or something.

      Liked by 3 people

    • melski says:

      I agree DMWT. Uniparty leadership will never allow him to testify, no way! He is a dead man walking.

      Liked by 1 person

    • It’s stupid to let Stryzok testify on his own behalf before the Russian Investigation is completed. He’ll portray himself as a selfless martyr trying to save America from the evil Donald Trump. None of the Congressman will ask him why his wife was promoted to a high position in the Security Exchange Commission, a few days before the election. A payoff? Of course

      Liked by 2 people

      • Rhoda R says:

        That may be his long-term strategy – testify before Congress and then, later, claim that he can’t get a fair trial.

        Like

      • Ris Eruwaedhiel says:

        Melissa Hodgman Strzok is associate director in the SEC Enforcement Division. That’s rich. Would it be possible for the WH to fire her?

        Liked by 1 person

    • iconoclast says:

      Maybe he’s ready to drop the bomb on McCabe, Comey, Clapper, and Brennan.

      I can dream, can’t I?

      Liked by 3 people

    • It’s stupid for Congress to depose Peter Stryzok before the IG inspection is completed. He’ll portray himself as a selfless martyr trying to save our nation from the evil Donald Trump. Half the people will believe him. No one in Congress will have the courage to ask him why is wife was promoted to Deputy Director of the Securities Exchange Commission several days before the election. Here’s a link. https://www.sott.net/article/371308-Peter-Strzoks-wife-was-promoted-to-SEC-director-hours-after-FBI-found-Hillary-emails-on-Weiners-laptop

      Liked by 3 people

    • AloftWalt says:

      This, I’m afraid, is,still a vast conspiracy to cover up all of the FBI/DOB nefarious and criminal activity. As of yet, the hasn’t been a single criminal indictment. The deep state appears to be running out the clock and getting away with it.

      Liked by 2 people

    • iwasthere says:

      I’m ready to see the Ollie North deal get cut. Give Strok immunity in exchange for everything he knows.

      Like

    • Sayit2016 says:

      He can take the 5th all he wants, ( when he said he was willing to talk with OUT a Subpoena. He will be charged and he can defend himself.

      Like

  2. L4grasshopper says:

    Don’t understand the utility of grilling Strzok by Goodlatte Committee, especially since, to best of my knowledge, Goodlatte has not seen the complete unredacted recovered text exchanges between Strzok and Page.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Good Job! says:

      Strzok has insight into Brennan’s secret small circle at Langley.

      Brennan is sweating it on Twitter worse than Comey did. May be evidence Brennan is going to be “big.”

      Questions I would ask-did he first receive Steele’s material raw, or was it summarized or otherwise communicated through CIA documents?

      At any stage did he express doubts about the dossier?

      Did he see Steele’s Ukrainian intelligence from the past that was given to US intel? Did these documents have the same look as the Trump memos? Same voice and tone? No authorship indicators too? Any American spellings in them? (Trump Memo 1 is 100% American, Memo 2 is about 50-50 Amer.-Brit. Thereafter ~99.5% Brit.)

      In fact, I think the latter is a good thing for the Congress to demand anyway. Just a few of the Ukrainian documents even. If they are not in the same format, tone and voice, that’s solid evidence Steele did not initiate them. The original plan may have been to pretend the Trump memos were written by some one with a retired Eastern European intel official or Russian defector.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Good Job! says:

        Did Brennan or any one else outside the DOJ lead you to believe that any Steele data had been verified or corroborated?

        Did you text people at the FBI and DOJ, other than Lisa, about operation MYE or Trump-Russia? How about the CIA and NSA?

        Was operation Crossfire Hurricane re-named after the election? To what?

        Tell us all about Brennan’s special group that met at Langely.

        Did they all believe the Steele data?

        How about the Mueller people, did they believe the Steele dossier?

        Did the FBI hire Fusion GPS after the election to assist its investigations into Trump?

        Did the Mueller investigation hire Fusion GPS to assist its investigations into Trump?

        Did you have any dealings at any time with Fusion GPS?

        Liked by 3 people

        • Jederman says:

          Did you ever actually perform your assigned duties (per your job description) as a senior CI specialist during the two years prior to the election and/or after the election up till the time you were demoted and sent packing?

          Or were you totally dedicated to “saving the country” from PT, on the taxpayers dime?

          Liked by 7 people

      • singular says:

        Good job, good job. Have my doubts those good questions will be asked, though.

        Liked by 2 people

        • Good Job! says:

          Thank you.

          BTW the operation name is important IMO. There is a post election text about changing an operation name. If it is CH that changed, the new name could be more insight into FBI attitudes.

          Note the Steele-Trump memos have no identifying information as to origin. Just says “Company.” If Steele’s Ukrainian or other work has his name or the Orbis templates on them, the “dossier” is toast.

          Like

      • WRB says:

        I would like to know if there were any FBI and/or “informants” involved in any way with other GOP primary candidates?
        Is/was Papadopolous ever associated with the Feds in any way?

        Liked by 1 person

    • Strzok has a sword hanging over his head. He has retirement approaching. If he cooperates he get to retire on his 50th birthday. To be useful he has to give up others and testify against them. The already have some criminal referals. If he doesn’t produce, he gets fired and won’t see his ability to collect his full retirement and will then have to wait 15 years nearly to get a much reduced pension.

      Like

    • Justbill says:

      I’ve asked this question with no answer yet. How did the IG know to look for a missing text?

      Like

  3. Apollo says:

    I hope I am wrong. I really, really do. But this has all the makings of a nothingburger, unfortunately. A damp squib.

    I hope not. But we’ve seen it over and over.

    Liked by 7 people

    • benifranlkin says:

      u already r wrong. this is a Whopper. Where have u been??

      Liked by 3 people

    • beach lover says:

      Maybe, but as Goodlatte said, they have ramped up the release after Nunes and Gowdy called them out, and the letter from Nunes that was in response to the letter he received Last night at 11 PM, says he wants answers to those 2 questions by Monday 5 PM. That gets pretty specific, and will be hard to ignore like the other requests that seem so vast! Just look at the requests above… its so encompassing, I can see how they will take months to produce (esp if they want to drag their feet)

      Liked by 1 person

    • Roberto says:

      “Over and over”? Please provide an example.

      Like

  4. CopperTop says:

    7:16 Maria B. outlines the timing of the Human intelligence discussion before there was a counter-intel case or a crime to investigate that allows for a human in tell operation to commence.

    Likey a lot!

    Liked by 10 people

  5. NoJuan Importante says:

    I am detecting a flip. Maybe even a plant. “Never text me again”

    Liked by 4 people

    • Good Job! says:

      Brennan and the Brits might have bamboozled Strzok.

      BTW, all we know about is texts between Strzok and Lisa P. How about all the cast of characters? Some how I imagine Brennan was texting away.

      Like

      • KBR says:

        Poor little Strzok, getting bamboozled like that. And he had such a good nose too.

        I hope he has already spilled his guts on tape about everybody, and there is nothing more to be gained from Strzok.

        Maybe he can smell us all the way from hell.

        Like

    • GB Bari says:

      Maybe. Or, having been burned, Page knew better than to continue participating in the online activity for which she was burned.

      Liked by 1 person

  6. NoJuan Importante says:

    I am detecting a flip. Maybe even a plant. “Never text me again”

    Like

  7. CopperTop says:

    Nune question 2) How much money was spent.

    This was a good ask and in the correct order. Asking about money means asking if any was spent and to explain if the person is signed to FBI Form 1023. The relationship of the individual and what the FBI understand them to be doing (SPYING) is recorded in the 1023

    The existence of the 1023 would be hotly defended to avoid squeamish human informants signed on as Human Intelligence from being afraid to sign them since they know this doc signs their fate if IT is revealed.

    It puts to rest any indication that someone passively offered the US government the information on DJT associates/campaign.

    One of the blogs…maybe SD? pointed out long ago…this switch to Human intelligence happened after Rogers nixed the consultant’s searching and unmasking in the cyber databases.

    Liked by 9 people

    • beach lover says:

      agree. They are getting better at asking the right questions.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Charlie Currie says:

        Someone is telling them what to ask and how to ask it. Whistle blowing without being outed as a whistle blower. And, in the process of telling them what to ask, giving away the answer.

        Like

    • Roberto says:

      Speaking of Rogers, why would anyone in their right mind continue this operation knowing the Dir of the NSA wasn’t aboard–and if anything prone to blow the whistle? This borders on the insane.

      Like

      • Tarstarkas says:

        Because they were still sure HRC was going to win and then Rogers would be toast. Neither Obama or Her Odiousness would forget his ‘duplicity’.

        Liked by 2 people

  8. Brent Hull says:

    The Congressional republicans are such an astounding failure and are part of the problem along with the DOF/FBI. Think about what they are saying and look at what they are not doing. According to the Congressional repubs and supported by mounting evidence, the FBI, DOJ, CIA and others inside the federal government attempt to fraudulently overthrow a presidential election. In eralier times folks would be swinging by tree branches for these things. Today nothing gets done other than sternly worded letter afgter sternly worded letter, broken deadline after broken deadline and unenforced subpoena after unenforced subpoena, The repubs’ staggering and embarrassing failures do not keep them from TV appearances though. Congress needs to quit wasting time on TV, quit wasting time writing letters & quit setting deadlines. Congress entirely defund these agencies until they comply with demands and come completely clean on what went oin in this matter. If Congress fails to act with results then they are part of the problem.

    Liked by 12 people

  9. jbowen82 says:

    There is something Goodlate’s committee can shed some light on that might possibly be unclassified and not implicate any investigations.

    One thing that would be really useful to explore is how he, the head of counterintelligence, came to be personally involved in the Hillary Clinton investigation, then Crossfire Hurricane, then the Special Counsel. How is it he came to be personally interviewing Mike Flynn? Presumably the FBI is running multiple counterintelligence investigations at any given time and Strzock had a “day job” managing those field investigations. Managers at headquarters don’t do field investigations.

    The answer has to be some combination of his pursuing those special assignments and Andy McCabe giving them to him. Did Comey know his head of counterintelligence was off personally interviewing high-profile witnesses, including the former Secretary of State and the current National Security Advisor, instead of running his shop? Why did McCabe agree to assign him to Crossfire Hurricane while he was simultaneously responsible for Midyear Exam and while the Wiener laptop was sitting there unexamined and while Strzock had a day job to do?

    Liked by 7 people

    • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

      MYE was handled as a “HQ Special” while Crossfire Hurricane was just “special”.

      Given this wouldn’t be surprising at all that Strzok was only working these. The texts messages (assuming those released are all or nearly all of them) reflect no significant discussions of any other cases. There are some extended redactions in the time period after his July 31 assignment to Trump/Russia that seem to indicate it may have been discussed.

      Like

    • L4grasshopper says:

      Occam’s Razor.

      The rotten leadership at FBI did all they could to keep their activities to protect Hillary and get Trump as “close hold” as possible.

      Thus an upper mgt guy like Strzok is doing what a Field Agent further down the food chain should have been doing. Several of them in fact.

      Liked by 5 people

    • Truthfilter says:

      He worked for McCabe at WFO before McCabe was promoted to a position at main headquarters. I believe McCabe played a far bigger role in all of this than just leaking and lying. McCabe asked for immunity but didn’t get it. That means that they already know and therefore do not need any information he can give them. It could also mean that he is in big trouble. More will come out about him.

      Liked by 4 people

      • jbowen82 says:

        I agree that Mccabe’s role is yet to be fully disclosed. I see him being the John Dean of Spygate. To save his own skin, he will give up Comey, Yates, Lynch, Brennan, Clapper, Rice, and Obama. It’s probably going to take until next year before we get to that point.

        Like

        • Ris Eruwaedhiel says:

          I think a major weakness of the denizens of the Swamp, their Achilles Heel so to speak, is they possess no loyalty to one another. They will work together on a common goal, but, when caught, will throw each other to the wolves.

          Like

    • Amy2 says:

      I would like to ask Strzok: What lead you to believe there was no there there?

      Liked by 2 people

    • All Too Much says:

      Nice string of questions.
      Perhaps they’ll be used.

      Like

  10. Grassleygirl/Breitbartista says:

    The “sting” ,worker bees,stzrok,page, 3 other agents lawyers. Queenbee Obeyme.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. rumpole2 says:

    Color me unimpressed.
    This nonsense goes on and on and EVEN IF Congress get all the documents they seek it is JUST A CONGRESSIONAL INQUIRY. The ultimate goal is a REPORT. And after a report what do you get? Another inquiry and more reports.
    What is needed is CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS. There is already enough “probable cause” to start a whole bunch of proper criminal investigations. A proper Prosecutor can empanel a grand jury and subpoena documents. No need to beg and wait and beg again. The Congressional inquiries into the wider picture can continue as well…. (for years and years if they so choose)

    And NO… I DO NOT think Huber (with sleepy Jeff) has already been doing proper criminal investigations.

    Liked by 9 people

    • rumpole2 says:

      If for no other reason, then for the sake of “Justice” the people being called before Congress should know if they ARE subjects of criminal investigations, or perhaps just witnesses in such investigations. In fact, IF there is a REAL possibilty that some of these people will be indicted for crimes there could be a case made that they should be REMINDED of their “Miranda Rights” before “dropping themselves in it” with their testimony to Congress.
      Personally… I think they should be FORMERLY read their rights and hauled off to jail… but that’s just me.

      Liked by 5 people

    • So, then what has Huber been doing…and can you prove it?

      Like

      • rumpole2 says:

        My guess?….. NOTHING!
        My “proof” is that even now there are calls from Horowitz for referral to “disciplinary considerations”… only that. If Huber (with sleepy Jeff) had been “running a parallel criminal investigation” with Horowitz OIG probe NOW would be the time for Huber to step into the spotlight and do his bg Dance Number.
        Huber (according to Sessions) was mandated to “review” the OIG report and “make recommendations”. I have no idea if he has done even that? but if yhe has.. then I guess that report is in Jeff’s in-tray… awaiting action?

        Liked by 2 people

        • Horowitz said that the DOJ can do as they see fit with the IG report. He did NOT say that nothing was being done.

          The rest of your comment is purely a collection of assumption.

          Lack of a daily press conference by Huber is not proof of inaction. Stopping leaks was a main topic last year….hmmmmm?

          Liked by 3 people

          • rumpole2 says:

            HOPE springs eternal….
            But there comes a time when if observation reveals no sign of activity that you need to accept that this “Norwegian Blue” is not merely “Pining for the Fjords”… it is an ex-parrot.

            Liked by 1 person

            • I repeat…stopping leaks was a top priority by the Trump administration. President Trump has been successful in fulfilling many promises already.

              Liked by 2 people

              • fractionalexponent says:

                Move the whole SES/DOJ/FBI to Minot ND. Take their cell phones. Give them a couple IBM Selectrics, kerosene heaters and jerry cans. Tell them to write next January.

                If they don’t like that, just eliminate their position.

                Liked by 1 person

            • GB Bari says:

              Rumple2, JW is correct.
              Just because “observation reveals no sign of activity “, one cannot conclude with any reasonable certainty that action is or is not occurring.

              If Huber et al are doing their job properly, then neither you nor any of us should be able to observe/ detect any signs of activity. Until, possibly, that convictions occur and the felons’ families or government ppl aware of the court cases are able to leak to the media.

              But prosecutions take time, sometimes a long time, so we don’t know how far long in the process Huber may be on any of the cases that have been referred to him by Horowitz.

              Liked by 1 person

              • rumpole2 says:

                I agree.
                But it’s also true that no sign of activity could be because there is none. As you say “time will tell”

                But there is a tendency to speculate/insert all manner of things that MIGHT be happening and then to compound the “error” of speculation, start to take the speculation as FACT and add more and more layers of speculation and wind up in a “fantasy world”

                To say “we don’t know yet if Huber is doing criminal investigations” is true but it seems unlikely to me (my speculation),

                Liked by 2 people

          • Richard Whitney says:

            @JW…Agreed. It is terrific that there hasn’t been any leaks from the real prosecutors, Huber and the others. They don’t need the attention, it doesn’t help them, and it makes their investigation more terrifying to the perps.
            Huber was in place for some time before there was any reference to him. Then, Sessions was interviewed by Bartiromo, i think it was in January 2018, and he said there was a prosecutor from outside D.C. in place…and she never asked about him. A month later or so Sessions announced his name. The public did not need to know, but the perps already knew.
            Moreover, I wouldn’t want all the indictments opened just now. Sometime after Labor Day would be fine. There are short memories out there. The public will be outraged at some of the crimes described, but they might get weary if they have months to think about the executions.

            Liked by 3 people

        • Marko says:

          LOL that is what I figured….so now even MORE time is being wasted as Huber writes a report on if he thinks there might be a reason for criminal referall? HAHAHAHAHA. This is just total BS. I’m going to keep asking the obvious questions here. Where is Huber and where are the indictments?

          Liked by 1 person

    • Ray Runge says:

      Wholly agree with your point. At the lowest level for the bar, until a felonious bureaucrat is forced to Lawyer Up” then the endless discussions are simply another day watching congress critters sit in $2,000 chairs. An indictment is quite commen for the Mueller witch hunt.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Roberto says:

      Would you rather have them NOT hold a hearing and just pretend nothing happened?

      Liked by 2 people

      • rumpole2 says:

        No
        Hearings are fine,
        (but they achieve close to nothing).
        My point is that proper criminal investigations DO NOT have to wait until people have testified before Congress.
        The VERY OPPOSITE might make sense…. if there are criminal investigations underway and people are made aware that they are subject (or witness) in criminal proceedings… then that would be a valid reason to NOT testify before Congress (until the criminal case has run its course)

        Liked by 2 people

      • rumpole2 says:

        Keep in mind that after months of hearings, The Senate Intelligence Committee found that there was Russian election meddling meant to help Trump, hurt Clinton

        Let THAT sink in.

        Such a committee would (I am sure) find evidence to confirm the presence of Rocking horse poop.

        Liked by 4 people

  12. Deplore Able says:

    From Fox News story:

    In a letter to House Intelligence Committee Chair Devin Nunes, R-Calif., obtained by Fox News, the FBI says its confidential explanation outlined whether the “FBI utilized confidential human sources prior to the issuance of the Electronic Communication initiating that investigation.”

    The agency added that it had forwarded House Republicans’ request for summaries and transcripts of any conversations between Trump officials and informants to the director of national intelligence.
    ________________________________________

    The request was forwarded to the Director of National Intelligence? Why would the DNI have the summaries of the informant conversations rather than the FBI?

    Maybe the informants were not hired by the FBI? Maybe the informants were hired by British Intelligence and the info was forwarded to the DNI through the CIA? The DNI (Clapper at that time) included the information in the Presidential Daily Briefing?

    Something about this just doesn’t fit.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Everywhereguy says:

      That’s because the lying liars that arranged the Clinton email whitewash and the Trump infiltration operations did their best to hide things and keep them hidden (which got trickier when the election turned out ‘wrong’). So stuff dribbles out at a trickle. No wonder they call themselves the *Resist*ance.

      Liked by 1 person

    • joeknuckles says:

      Now that a classified document exists, POTUS can declassify it. Badabing.

      Like

      • fractionalexponent says:

        Trump is for eliminating federal jobs to save taxpayer money. Don’t waste time trying to fire the SOBs, just eliminate their positions.

        And why does corruption need to be classified? Well, we all know the answer to that…

        Liked by 1 person

  13. joeknuckles says:

    I think they should waterboard this traitorous SOB. You know he’ll never tell the truth voluntarily. I’d even be in favor of doing a Jack Bauer and shooting him in the kneecap to get him to talk. He can take it. After all, he is a super agent, isn’t he?

    Liked by 1 person

  14. citizen817 says:

    Liked by 13 people

  15. Mncpo(ret) says:

    Strzok has made a deal, obviously, to keep him out of jail. His attorney has stated, “He will not plead the 5th”. We will see later when it’s presented publicly. I wonder how many leaks, either intentional or illegal, we’ll see prior to him publicly testifying?

    Like

    • Carrie says:

      I think Sundance said it looks like he has immunity for the Clinton email investigation but not for the FISA abuses. It should be one of the first questions out of the bat- were you given immunity, and if so, by whom?

      Liked by 2 people

  16. missilemom says:

    No, Mr. Goodlatte the Special Counsel witch hunt should NOT continue.

    Liked by 5 people

    • mopar2016 says:

      The Goodlatte bill had some good things in it.
      It had some strange stuff too, like DACA beneficiaries to receive a 3-year renewable legal status. For how long?
      And more green cards for foreign skilled workers. It’s hard for me to believe that we don’t have enough American skilled workers, They failed to act on HR392 which addresses that problem. 41 republicans joined the dems to vote against the Goodlatte bill.
      I’d like to hear from Louie Gohmert or Steve King and hear why they voted against the Goodlatte bill.

      Like

      • Carrie says:

        I think it got altered somewhere along the way. It didn’t end chain migration like I thought originally it was supposed to.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Sdl921 says:

        King had said that he wouldn’t vote for any bill that included any form of reward/amnesty for illegals. Work permits = amnesty (not citizenship but amnesty nonetheless).

        Liked by 1 person

    • GB Bari says:

      That was my first reaction for which I was going to post here but you did it first so great.

      I’ll add that Goodlatte covered both sides of his buttcheeks – although Maria led him into it – by later stating that since the investigation has produced no evidence against Trump he thinks Mueller should begin to wind it down.

      Ah, politicians…… 🙄

      Like

  17. De Oppresso Libre says:

    What the hell is an “in camera review” anyway? Is that where someone at another location holds a document up to his phone on snap chat, or a cctv in a “secure facility” to make it look secret squirrel official? There’s no possibility of the FBI producing a bogus document, and placing it in front of a camera for your review, is there? Naaaaaaaah, they would never do that; they’re not THAT desperate, deceptive, and dishonest….are they? (sarc/) Much like everyone else, the kabuki theater and stonewalling has become more tiresome and unpleasant than an Obama speech glorifying himself.

    Like

    • mimbler says:

      “In chambers; in private. A judicial proceeding is said to be heard in camera either when the hearing is had before the judge in his or her private chambers or when all spectators are excluded from the courtroom.”

      The above is the legal definition. Basically: in secret.

      Liked by 5 people

    • rvsueandcrew says:

      From The Free Dictionary:

      In Camera:
      In chambers; in private. A judicial proceeding is said to be heard in camera either when the hearing is had before the judge in his or her private chambers or when all spectators are excluded from the courtroom.

      It’s Latin, not English

      Liked by 2 people

    • jahealy says:

      From Wiki:

      “In camera is a legal term that means in private. The same meaning is sometimes expressed in the English equivalent: in chambers. Generally, in-camera describes court cases, parts of it, or process where the public and press are not allowed to observe the procedure or process.”

      Liked by 1 person

    • All Too Much says:

      The outcome of an in camera review is, generally, to obtain a court order either allowing or disallowing documents to remain confidential, nonpublic. The attorneys for each side are present and allowed to argue to the court why the information should remain confidential or why it should not remain confidential.

      Liked by 3 people

    • rumpole2 says:

      Legal system is full of Latin phrases.

      Left to their own devices.. Lawyers like to dress up in gowns and wigs and talk dirty to each other… in Latin.

      Liked by 1 person

    • GB Bari says:

      LOL! That was my first reaction too, not knowing the definition of what that meant. But apparently it’s not quite as nefarious as we suspected.

      Liked by 1 person

      • De Oppresso Libre says:

        That’s the great thing about Treepers…..if you want to know something, they’re some very knowledgeable people to clarify things for you! I still thought my version was funny though…

        Liked by 1 person

  18. liberty3 says:

    Wray cannot be trusted. He is a company man. He used to work under Comey, so he is compromised. “Wray was Assistant Attorney General from 2003 to 2005, working under Deputy Attorney General James Comey”! Think about it we need all new leaders- -people from outside the former FBI to clean house.

    Liked by 11 people

    • joeknuckles says:

      He’s a member for f the deep state cult.

      Liked by 2 people

    • mimbler says:

      Whoever advised PDJT to appoint a comey man to replace comey after he was fired is a saboteur IMO.

      Liked by 4 people

    • mopar2016 says:

      Horowitz used to work for Comey too. They both worked in the US attorney’s office in the Southern district of New York. Crooks investigating crooks, what else is new?

      https://heavy.com/news/2017/01/michael-e-horowitz-inspector-general-department-of-justice-fb-investigation-james-comey-hillary-clinton-email-review/

      Liked by 2 people

    • cagefree says:

      I think this exchange in the movie “Clear and Present Danger” kinda covers what’s going on here:

      Jack … “It gives me no pleasure to do it, sir. As acting deputy director of intelligence, it is my duty to report this matter to the Senate oversight committee.”
      President Bennett … “You’re not going to do that.”
      Jack … “I’m not?”
      President Bennett … “No, no. You’ve got yourself a chip in the big game now. You’re gonna tuck that away, you are going to save that for a time when your own ass is on the line and then you’re gonna pull it out. And I’m going to cash it in for you. Right?”
      Jack … “I don’t think I have any more to say to you sir.”
      President Bennett … “The country can’t afford another scandal Jack. To protect itself it won’t allow the possibility of another desception that goes all the way to the top. You’ll take the blame, Cutter and Ritter will take some too but it won’t amount to much, they’ll get a slap on the wrist and then $20,000 an hour on the lecture circuit. The rest of the blame will fall on Greer. Oh yeah you’ll take him down with you. You’ll destroy his reputation but that’s as far as it’ll go. The old Potomac two step Jack.”

      Like

  19. rumpole2 says:

    We were told for a year and a half that many documents could not be made available because they were “part of the OIG probe”. Now that the OIG probe (part 1) is out… the same excuse is going to be used because there are more months of OIG probing to come. And apparently this excuse is also used to delay Criminal prosecutions. Don’t you think this just a game? Not “chess” but rather “Tiddlywinks”. There is no reason why criminal investigations could not have been at least started at the same time as a OIG probe. We might have at least some indictments (as well as an OIG report) by now… with other indictments to follow.
    It seems silly to me taht various documents are closely guarded and can only be shown (reluctantly) to one “inquiry” at a time, each taking months, if not years.

    Liked by 8 people

  20. L4grasshopper says:

    So what’s keeping Huber from acting?

    McCabe was referred a couple months ago right after the first IG Report on him. Nothing.

    2nd IG Report has been out now for a couple weeks, and no referrals, and no Huber.

    Hate to sound so pessimistic, but if Huber was going to do something…..anything…..it should have started by now if only to start squeezing some of the individuals lower on the food chain…..like Mueller is trying to do.

    The absence of any Huber action by now is sending a real signal that there won’t be any.

    Liked by 4 people

    • mimbler says:

      Personally, I think Sessions’ public response to the IG report was a stand down order to Huber.
      Kind of like when Obama said Hillary did nothing intentionally wrong with her emails.

      Like

    • rumpole2 says:

      As a level 4 Grasshopper… you should have learned to be more “Patient” LOL

      Perhaps take some time to consult the “Oracles” via conspiracy threads on twitter?

      “Big Uglies” take time…..

      We seem to be “Between Big Uglies”..

      The OIG Report was a fizzer in and of itself… not sure what the fan posters are going to latch onto next?

      The evidence is real, the indictments are Fake…

      Liked by 4 people

    • Marko says:

      Because this is total BS. It stinks. Where is Huber? Where are the indictments?

      Liked by 3 people

  21. mdt123 says:

    On the immigration front, I strongly sense the secret UniParty gameplan is as follows –

    a) Get the Goodlatte bill out of the way last week;

    b) Then get the Ryan “compromise” bill with a fix for ‘child separation’ bill in the house next week;

    c) The Ryan bill passes with just enough GOP support, no or few Dems vote for it, the math is worked out just right behind the scenes;

    d) Senate jumps on it and passes it within a few days as is so no recon needed;

    e) Now Trump is under great pressure to sign it or be accused of continuing to put ‘children in cages’. Trump caves.

    I believe this is the scenario being setup with the non-stop ‘child separation’ propaganda campaign.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Amy2 says:

      Silly wabbit. Nothing passes in the Senate.

      Like

    • Concerned says:

      Then Trump should sign a Executive Action that would fully implement his plan before the vote. This way Ryan and his friends would be seen passing a bill the majority of US voters do not want, right before midterms.

      Like

    • mimbler says:

      I think that is the plan. I’m hoping there is enough voter pressure on the repubs to make it fail,

      Like

    • JX says:

      All this uproar about “the children” didn’t coincidentally happen happen when Ryan was trying to hustle through his amnesty bill. It was a planned and coordinated psyop.

      Liked by 3 people

      • WRB says:

        Maybe, but the Dems needed to change the subject fast on Singapore Summit and FBI corruption, and this border hysteria fits the bill.

        The GOP (I surmise) are going through some face-saving moves in the House. (See! we care!) … and trying to accommodate their CoC donors or at least trying not tick them off too much. But no way will dems in the Senate pass anything that could be construed as a “win” for the GOP.

        Liked by 2 people

  22. citizen817 says:

    It all comes back to Sessions not exercising his position as head of the DOJ.

    Liked by 7 people

    • Concerned says:

      You mean the paraplegic Sessions?

      Like

    • KBR says:

      So why do you suppose he sent one of his employees out on a mission to harass the DHS secretary?

      Like

    • rumpole2 says:

      I guess… at a stretch… I could accept Sessions FEELING that he would have to recuse from some issue… but…
      NOT THIS ISSUE… leaving his POTUS exposed
      NOT so soon after he took the damned job (he should have not taken the job)
      And.. NOT( knowing as he did), that those below him taking his place were the totally corrupt Obama hold-over gang.

      Liked by 2 people

      • citizen817 says:

        Hard liner Immigration guy Session should have known better. After all he was a swamp dweller for 20 yrs as a Senator. He knew all the players/obstructionists before accepting the position as AG. Who, better than a sitting Senator, doesn’t know how dirty the swamp is? Upon accepting the position of AG, he should have, and could have fired all the 0zer0 holdovers at Justice, and then recused on muh Russia. Instead, he left them all in place…and still recused. He is a hide part of the problems.

        Liked by 3 people

  23. emet says:

    Law enforcement organizations must first be law-abiding organizations. The FBI continues to self-destruct. Other agencies and STLs won’t want to work with them, their agents will be at a disadvantage when testifying, and we are going to see people released from prison because the FBI set them up. In short, POTUS will not have to shutter their headquarters, they are simply going to fade away. Marshalls and HSI will work the cases.

    Liked by 1 person

  24. Chip Doctor says:

    I will go into this with eyes wide open. While I always hope that the big bombs will fall, I have learned not to get my hopes up too high. We know that they are all colluding to protect themselves, but times are a changin’. It used to be that they could go into private session and get their stories straight. But in today’s world of the instantaneous spread of information, it gets harder and harder to keep their stories straight. So, it is likely that whether through an asked or unasked question, Sundance will gleen a new bone. And as we know, the ankle bone is connected to the shin bone and the shin bone is connected to the knee bone and so on. These people are not as smart as they think they are. If they were, Hillary would be president or Trump would be in jail.

    Let’s hope for a bomb, but be prepared for another brick in the crumbling wall for Sundance to work with.

    Liked by 3 people

  25. Echo says:

    Hee, hee….
    Nothing Strzok says will matter one little bit.
    Because Strzok will only be prosecuted if Rosie says he will be prosecuted with the correct charges…. J walking (leaking) doesn’t count .

    Rosie controls all prosecutions. President Trump doesn’t seem to understand why that’s a massive problem. PDJT understands Rosie is Deep state and hates his guts, doesn’t he?

    Liked by 2 people

  26. MSO says:

    Congress hasn’t the votes necessary to impeach anybody involved in the DOJ/FBI scandal and everybody in congress, the FBI and the DOJ knows that to be true. So all will hear is “…blah, blah, important, blah, blah, get to the bottom, blah, blah.”

    Meanwhile, there will be even more secret meetings about secret things that prohibit the general public from knowing what is going on. The worst of this is that we already know what is going on and our government is pretending that we don’t.

    Liked by 4 people

    • fractionalexponent says:

      All military officers serve at the pleasure of the President. Doesn’t that apply to DOJ/FBI? Border Patrol needs help. Let Strzok be the FBI counterintel rep in Juarez. Give him some pesos to call home…Rosenstein, you’re needed in Thule…

      Liked by 1 person

  27. SW Richmond says:

    Immigration is a good example of what I’m about to describe. The left uses purely emotional (and factually wrong) appeals, while the right counters with facts. These facts fall on deaf ears.

    There is an obvious personality chasm between the left and the right. I think that is easily explained: the left is driven by and dependent upon their emotions, while the right embraces a balance between their emotions and their intellect, allowing neither to always be dominant.

    The left is immune to logical, fact-based arguments. We can point out ’til we are blue in the face that Trump has merely continued the border policies of previous administrations, the pictures are from 2014 (Obama), and so on, it doesn’t matter. The left ignores facts. We must accept this: we can and should continue to present fact-based arguments, because failing to do so would endanger our credibility with our own base, but we must not expect them to prevail or to sway leftists. THE LEFT IS IMMUNE TO FACTS.

    The more the left loses, the more emotional and irrational they become. This may present a strategy for beating them: their irrational outbursts must be continuously and ruthlessly highlighted and broadcast.

    This brings me to Sundance’s previous piece about “cold anger”, and to articles I have read on blogs like Westernrifleshooters which decry the right’s apparent inability to organize a response to the left’s marching, whining, and bitching. I am sure this illustrates the difference between the irrational, emotional left and the more-balanced right. The left gets angry and loses it; they go straight to threatened and actual violence, massing in protest. They find emotional comfort in their swarms. The right instead embraces “cold anger”, does not wear their anger on their sleeves for all to see, does not need to engage in some juvenile public approval-seeking display. The right does not “virtue-signal”, while the left simply must do so. The right simply cannot imagine behaving the way the left always does. I think this apparent non-response by the right emboldens the left, and the emboldened left, thinking their outrageous behaviour gets them what they want without a countering reply, ramps up their behaviour still further. This further convinces the right that the left is nuts, serving to increase the chasm between the two Americas.

    I am sure most of you have seen this posted numerous places, but here it is again:

    Kipling’s “The Wrath of the Awakened Saxon”

    http://www.europeanamericansunited.org/school1/Fiction/kipling/awakened.htm

    At some point the Rubicon will be crossed, if it hasn’t been already. Until then, recognize the overly emotional behaviour of the left as what it is, and do not imagine you can engage the left in rational arguments because the left is not rational.

    Liked by 5 people

    • blind no longer says:

      This is the thing I have never understood about Republicans. You will never WIN when playing by a different set of rules. The Left doesn’t play by the rules, they make em up as they go along.
      I believe PDJT WON partially because of this. He basically said hey I can play that game better than all of you! #WAR.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Ris Eruwaedhiel says:

        The Republicans play by Marquess of Queensberry rules and want the liberals to like them. Pres. Trump fights back. Screw the rules. I like something that Zman said in an interview: “Ask me about my principles after I’ve won.”

        Liked by 1 person

    • GB Bari says:

      The DemonRat Left’s false narratives are amplified 100x louder than any Republican/conservative argument simply because the eneMedia controls what message gets broadcast over thousands of leftwing-controlled local TV stations, all of the major cable news networks (except for maybe 6 hours of Fox each weekday) and via thousands of leftwing-controlled local and national newspapers / online news sites.

      Conservatives have no means of broadcasting their message to the general population via regular TV other than a few hours of Fox, and a very few hours on OANN for the few that can receive that channel (OANN does not dwell on politics but is very fair and somewhat deferential to President Trump). And as far as I can tell, no national newspapers are deferential to this President; nor are most local newspapers.

      Liked by 2 people

      • GB Bari says:

        HOWEVER…in spite of that huge imbalance in broadcasting & publishing the narrative from the Left versus the narrative from the President, it s apparent that, between PDJT’s tweets and the pro-Trump conservative online media, that enough of OUR message is getting through. This is evident in the results of the 2016 election, and in the several mainstream polls that continue to show support for PDJT is not dropping, but actually slowly building.

        So it is amazing that despite the vast array of megaphones screaming negative messages at the public, at least half and evidently more than half of the voters aren’t buying the Lefts disingenuous hyperbole.

        Liked by 1 person

  28. Ted Nougat says:

    With the amount of vitriol Strzok/Stroke expressed, does anyone really think that his appearing before the committee is going to benefit a restoration of the rule of law? Like, he’s ready to come clean and spill the beans on everything? I am believing for full discloser of this whole mess, resulting in many people going to jail, but I am also prepared for another slap in the face.

    Liked by 1 person

  29. blind no longer says:

    The one thing I got out of that interview…that Goodlatte met with Mueller. Don’t don’t know why he would meet with him. Maybe Sundance can cast some insight on this for me.

    Liked by 1 person

  30. Justbill says:

    These lawmakers are a joke. They’re still asking nicely for documents that they’ve been asking nicely for for over a year. They threaten to “use all the tools at our disposal “. We’ve been hearing that shit for how long now? Give me a break. Just admit it. You are auditioning for your deep state masters offer of employment after you retire.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Marko says:

      DING DING DING….I actually called a couple of their offices and vented on the total BS of asking over and over again and doing nothing. “We asked for these documents for over a year blah blah blah….yeah so lets send another letter with a deadline!

      Like

  31. Landerelmarmot says:

    What are the chances that Strzok is ready to “burn it down”? His career is ruined, there’s a pretty high likelihood his marriage is destroyed and he probably feels betrayed by McCabe and Comey. He might be ready to light a match to it all and just spill his guts. If that’s the case, I hope he lives long enough to make it to the hill this week.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ris Eruwaedhiel says:

      It’s been speculated that one of the reasons he continued to work for the FBI was a form of protection against an, ahem, unexpected demise. The same was written about Paul Manafort in solitary confinement.

      Like

  32. jeans2nd says:

    Beg pardon, but where is the spot where Rep Goodlatte refers to Strzock as “former?”
    Listened twice, and the only “former” heard was in ref to former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.

    Anyone, please correct me. Ears must be going bad from listening to too much nonsense and stupidity. A very sincere tyvm

    Like

  33. Stab, the unstoppable hero says:

    Anyone else notice that crazy big bald spot on the back of Strzoks head? Yeah, from the front it looks like he has a full head of hair but if you look at pics of him from the side or the back… Yikes. Did he rub the back of his head, like with a cloth. No wonder he looks so glum. Can’t imagine a total fox like Lisa would put up with that for very long.
    Y’know what? That’s what Goodlatte should ask Strzok about at the hearing. “Hey Pete, what kind of head trauma causes a bald spot like that? Is Strzok a Jewish name, cause it sure looks like your yamaka caught on fire. Hey Pete, I heard that Wiener had pictures of your bald spot on his laptop. That true? Where is that laptop anyway? I’ll bet you didn’t want anyone to see those pictures. C’mon Pete, fess up.”
    Yep. they might as well ask about his hair because they’re not going to get information about anything else that’s missing.
    Maria should just stop asking. This crap is beneath her by now.

    Like

    • Ris Eruwaedhiel says:

      I noticed the bald spot, too. Strzok is a Polish name.

      I read about child porn pix on Weiner’s laptop. Horrifying.

      Lisa Page as a “total fox.” Ha ha!

      Like

  34. Carrie2 says:

    And the music plays on and on but soon will come to an end and we all hope for and pray for a great ending removing so many contra-America criminals and walk them to the gallows to be sure the disease is dead!

    Like

  35. CopperTop says:

    Latest from Jeff@themarketswork

    summary: Everything ‘clinton foundation’ …FISA back and forth from Goodlatte to FBI and they questions that arise from noting the back and forth

    https://themarketswork.com/2018/06/24/goodlattes-request-no-9-the-fbis-response/

    Like

  36. Sorry to say, but I don’t trust this Goodlatte. I think he is a swamp creature and is just like Rooster Head, talk, talk, talk but no serious action. Just my 2c worth and hope I am wrong.

    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