FBI Agent Peter Strzok Appears Before Congress for Deposition…

FBI Agent Peter Strzok appears before a joint house committee today for a closed hearing deposition.  Mr. Strzok will appear before an open congressional hearing to be scheduled later.  Today’s deposition is an opportunity to ask questions and get an “official record” of specific answers to multiple lines of inquiry.

Peter Strzok is at the center of four specifically known corrupt DOJ and FBI operations. 1) The Clinton exoneration operation. 2) The Trump investigation “Crossfire Hurricane”. 3) “Spygate”, and the abuse of the FISA court; and 4) The origin of the Mueller probe.

The deposition questioning is being directed from a hand-picked group of lawmakers.  Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte determined who will ask the questions.  One of the lawmakers selected was Jim Jordan.



This entry was posted in Big Government, CIA, Clinton(s), Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Desperately Seeking Hillary, Donald Trump, Donald Trump Transition, Election 2016, FBI, IG Report Clinton Investigation, IG Report FISA Abuse, IG Report McCabe, Jeff Sessions, Legislation, media bias, Notorious Liars, President Trump, Russia, Spygate, Spying, THE BIG UGLY, TowerGate, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

294 Responses to FBI Agent Peter Strzok Appears Before Congress for Deposition…

  1. liberty3 says:

    Continued Comments and Questions on Crossfire Hurricane
    1. The FBI used its powers to derail an election and spy on U.S. citizens. The FISA Court Ruling shows widespread abuse of the FISA mandate. According to the report, Obama’s FBI, NSA and DOJ performed searches on Americans that were against their 4th Amendment rights. This went on for years. One paragraph in the report states that 85% of the Section 704 and 705(b) FISA searches made during the time of the audit (a few months in 2015) were non-compliant with applicable laws and therefore criminal. https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/06/obama-held-russia-meetings-in-the-white-house-and-invited-john-kerry-but-not-nsas-honorable-admiral-rogers/
    2. The FBI gave outside contractors (including Comey’s friend at Columbia) complete access to NSA data. Is that a crime?
    3. The “Justice Department” has openly defied congressional oversight and has participated in a public vendetta against a sitting president. It’s called obstruction of justice.
    4. DOJ leadership declined to confirm to the White House that Lt. Gen. Flynn was under any type of investigation. Consequences?
    5. FBI Agent Peter Strzok says they were able to cull the number of emails through the use of “some amazing things to rapidly de-duplicate” the emails. The New York FBI case agent assigned to the Weiner investigation, a certified Digital Extraction Technician, as well as the FBI forensics team in Quantico say it was impossible to use the conflicted metadata to “de-duplicate” the emails. Is Strzok applying for a job with Microsoft? Someone is lying. . 1,355,980 electronic files (pg 389), containing 350,000 emails and 344,000 Blackberry communications were reviewed between October 30th and the morning of November 6th, 2016!!!
    6. We now know that the FBI had an investigation into the Clintons and moneys they received from Russia in return for giving Russia 20% of all US uranium. Prior to the Obama administration approving the very controversial Uranium One deal in 2010 handing Russia 20% of America’s Uranium, the FBI had evidence that Russian nuclear industry officials were involved in bribery, kickbacks, extortion and money laundering in order to benefit Vladimir Putin. The FBI approved the deal anyway. We also know that Rosenstein and Mueller were the ones who allowed the Uranium One deal to go forward. This was the real Russia collusion story involving the US government. Will these investigations get re-started? https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/06/criminal-in-a-robe-heres-the-rundown-on-the-corrupt-obama-appointed-judge-who-tossed-manafort-in-jail/
    Robert Mueller is in a “precarious position” over the Uranium One deal, given his lack of action on the issue. “Robert Mueller, I think, in light of what we’ve also recently learned, relative to the Uranium One Deal, surely seems a bit compromised to me. Why did Mueller stopped investigating bribes involving clinton/russia/uranium one. looking for collusion?
    7. Mueller probe has been tainted from the start. He is personal friends of a subject of the investigation. Inspector General Michael Horowitz revealed on Tuesday in a joint hearing with the House Oversight and House Judiciary Committees he is investigating whether Peter Strzok’s anti-Trump bias impacted the launch of the Russia Probe. Why was Mueller asked to investigate a crime that did not exist, while ignoring plenty of crimes that most certainly did. And is the Mueller team proceeding in a criminal manner?
    8.Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein is compromised by approving the renewal of an illegal FISA warrant, stonewalling Congress, and buckling to Comey in appointing Mueller right after Comey was fired (on Rosenstein’s recommendation).
    9. Clinton lied to federal officers. She misused classified documents and used a private server for official government work. Given the nature of Clinton’s alleged conduct and the potential criminal charges, it was absolutely essential to have her and all material witnesses appear before a grand jury to testify on the record and under oath. But this was not done. Why?
    10.The coordinated law-breaking and perjury of senior officials, almost certainly including the former directors of the FBI, CIA (John Brennan), and the Office of National Intelligence (James Clapper), has to be addressed, starting with their frequent lies to Congress, and apparent participation in a plan with Comey to mislead the president-elect about the Steele dossier.
    11. Comey used a private server for official government work.
    12. FBI agents never searched the Blackberries or other email devices belonging to Hillary’s inner circle at the State Department. Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz and his team received a crazy response when they asked FBI agents on the Hillary Clinton email investigation why not. The agents’ primary excuse was to point to “the culture of mishandling classified information at the State Department which made the quantity of potential sources of evidence particularly vast.
    13. The FBI and DOJ are intent on preventing Congress from reading the EC that opened the Full Investigation on July 31, 2016. The EC would have had to state the “articulable factual basis” for the investigation. In other words, the EC would have had to assert that there were specific, verified facts indicating a threat to national security, and it would have had to explicitly state what those facts were.
    14. The FISA application that the leadership of the FBI and DoJ signed off on remains of paramount importance for investigators. Where is it?
    15. Peter Strzok.— escorted from the FBI building but still employed by the FBI? cooperating?
    16. Bill Priestap still employed by FBI.—cooperating?
    17. Consider Page 274, footnote #165: No electronic record exists of the case agent’s initial review of the Weiner laptop. The case agent told us that at some point in mid-October 2016 the NYO ASAC instructed the case agent to wipe his work station. The case agent explained that the ASAC was concerned about the presence of potentially classified information on the case agent’s work station, which was not authorized to process classified information.
    18. The DEEP STATE and its boss, Obama, politicized and weaponized the intelligence agencies in an attempted manipulation of the 2016 election.
    19. Why didn’t the FBI examine the contents of Clinton aide Huma Abedin’s private email accounts and seek to obtain Abedin’s personal devices to determine whether classified information was exchanged. No explanation for FBI’s delay in addressing the fact that disgraced former U.S. Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) had a number of Clinton’s private emails on his unsecured laptop, some classified.
    20. Why is the FBI still preventing Congress from seeing relevant documents? A private law firm would have done better- -and been required to!
    21. What was the Justice Department and FBI’s rationale for declining to prosecute Hillary Clinton? The IG claimed that “we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information…” “Intent” is not required to charge someone with that crime. The Justice Department added proof elements that are not in the statute. DOJ’s legal interpretation that virtually assured Clinton would not be prosecuted. And that, as the IG reports states, the FBI and DOJ knew that “by September 2015″… Page #164, footnote #124 of the IG report.
    22. FBI agents like Strzok were extremely anti-Trump. What we want to know, however, is how did it happen that these were the very individuals who ran the Bureau’s investigation of Trump? Yet, Strzok was seconded to Special Counsel Robert Mueller to advise him on his investigation of Trump.
    23. The COUP is ongoing. The FBI has asked the Justice Department’s office of the inspector general to withhold from Congress the names of three bureau employees found to have exchanged anti-Trump text messages, including from one attorney who worked on the special counsel’s investigation.
    24. Obama’s name is nowhere to be found and he was corresponding with Hillary on her illegal server, yet he was the mastermind behind Crossfire Hurricane. Any charges forthcoming?
    25. (26-28) from Victor Davis Hanson) How did government officials, by hiding information about the so-called Steele dossier, mislead the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to get warrants to spy on U.S. citizens associated with the Trump campaign?
    26. How was it decided that the Clinton campaign would pay Christopher Steele for gathering dirt on the Trump campaign, and how did the information from the dossier get to intelligence agencies?
    27. How was an FBI informant inserted into the Trump campaign?
    28. How does the FBI justify illegal spying on a U.S. candidate for president?
    28.How were the names of U.S. citizens unmasked by Obama administration officials and leaked to the press?
    29. Alan Dershowitz reacted to FBI agent Peter Strzok reportedly texting his intentions to stop President Donald Trump from being elected, calling it “collusion at the highest level” Any expansion on this? Charges?
    30, Concord slammed Mueller again in a court filing challenging the legitimacy of Robert Mueller’s appointment. Will challenge to Mueller’s appointment go to the Supreme Court? Mueller’s appointment was legally flawed because he was never nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate — nor was he appointed pursuant to a specific law passed by Congress. Nor was there a specific crime committed.
    31. Comey had SACs retaliate against field agents who spoke out about his mishandling of the Clinton email investigation. Some critical agents had OPR investigations opened on them. Abuse of power?
    32. Is there anything to the story that the Steele dossier was connected to Sergei Skripal, the former Soviet/Russian military intelligence agent who spied for Britain, who, was nearly killed this spring by a dose of tFwehe nerve agent Novichok ? In a March 21 interview on the John Batchelor Show, Gregory R. Copley, editor and publisher of Defense and Foreign Affairs, posited that Sergei Skripal is the unnamed Russian intelligence source in the Steele dossier. http://dianawest.net/Home/tabid/36/EntryId/3754/Big-Dots-Do-They-Connect.aspx
    33. Is there anything to the story that The Department of Justice (DOJ) is refusing to release intercepted material alleging that former Attorney General Loretta Lynch conspired with the Clinton campaign in a deal to rig the Clinton email investigation? The information remains so secret that Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz had to censor it from his recently released 500-plus-page report on the FBI’s investigation of Clinton, and even withhold it from Congress. What’s in it?

    Liked by 18 people

    • singular says:

      Thank you, Liberty3.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Kenji says:

      Count ME as a ‘curious American’ … who DEMANDS answers! Thanks for this comprehensive list of questions.

      Liked by 3 people

    • scorpion99man says:

      Thank you very much.


    • rvsueandcrew says:

      Darnit. I really want to read what you posted, Liberty3, but these old eyes can’t read solid text.

      (2 taps on “enter” to make paragraph separation)


    • NYSE says:

      Super post! Thanks for sharing your time.


    • Mongo Mere Pawn says:

      34. Did either the October 2016 FISA application or any of the subsequent renewals ever identify Carter Page as an undercover employee of the FBI in the Buryakov prosecution?

      35. Did such applications disclose that Page was expected to testify as to his participation as an undercover FBI employee in the electronic surveillance that ultimately led to the prosecution and conviction of Buryakov for the crime of acting as an undisclosed foreign agent of the Russian Federation, as well as the concommitant expulsion of two others who avoided such prosecution by means of diplomatic immunity?

      36. Did such applications disclose that Page was expected to so testify at the trial of Buryakov in May 2016 at the behest of the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York and the Assistant Attorney General for the National Security Division of the Department of Justice, i.e., the one who resigned mere days before the filing of the October 2016 FISA application describing Page as a foreign agent of the Russian Federation?

      37. What members of the Counterintelligence Unit of the FBI and the National Security Division of the DOJ participated in the investigation, prosecution and conviction of Buryakov? What was their personal and professional interaction with Page as an undercover employee of the FBI? Did any of them thereafter participate in the investigation that led to the filing of the October 2016 FISA application?

      38. Was there a hearing on the October FISA application or any of the renewals? If so, who participated in the hearing or hearings? Is there a transcript of the hearing or hearings? Were there any verbal disclosures or representations made to the FISA judge about Page that are not reflected in the application and renewals themselves?

      39. Was the alleged June 2016 FISA denied by a FISA judge because he or she recognized Page as an undercover employee of the FBI from one or more FISA applications filed in the Buryakov investigation and prosecution? If so, was the October 2016 FISA application filed with Judge Contreras because he did not become a FISA judge until after the Buryakov prosecution and conviction, and, therefore, could not have had any institutional knowledge of Page’s employment therein, whereas all other DC and NY FISA judges were presiding during that investigation and prosecution? Is this the reason Judge Contreras had to recuse himself from the Flynn prosecution?

      40. Did the DOJ or the FBI have any problem with Page joining the Trump campaign as an advisor just 10 days after the announcement of Buryakov’s plea agreement on March 11, 2016? Why did the press release announcing the plea agreement, although not naming him, describe the participation of Page with sufficient detail that the two agents expelled via his participation could readily identify him as the source of their expulsion? Why was Page invited to speak at the New Economic School in Moscow in July 2016 when Russian intelligence clearly knew he participated in a counterintelligence operation against the Federation? Why did Page accept the invitation when he knew there was a possible chance of retribution?

      Liked by 8 people

      • zimbalistjunior says:

        love it..keep it coming, Liberty and Mongo:

        heres a couple:
        – Mr Strzok, did SC Mueller interview /interrogate you after he was informed of some of your texts with Ms. Page? Did he interview/interrogate Ms. Page? Did he separate the two of you so you would not have a chance to corroborate your testimonies?
        -As a seasoned investigator yourself Mr. Strzok, if you joined an already begun investigation and then discovered that there were two lower-level agents involved with said investigation from its inception whose activities may lead one to believe that the entire investigation was possibly fraudulent, would you not interview/interrogate them?
        -Petey, what did you mean by the text thread with Page explaining how the DOJ, in planning for the interview of HRC, wanted to choose agents who would provide the best outcome, and not choose the best agents?
        -Petey, please list all the times you leaked to the press. Also, was it you and Lisa who leaked to the WSJ that the ‘insurance policy’ text did not refer to plan to stop candidate Trump, but only to continue investigating the candidate so that if he is elected president, we can then do something?
        -What efforts did you make to destroy your communication devices and or records of your communications?

        Liked by 1 person

      • I won't back down says:

        41. Who got the sealed Weiner indictment from Strzok after he sent it to his personal email address?

        42. who has their own personal “insurance policy” copy of all of the emails from the weiner laptop? Comey? Strzok? Page? McCabe? is that why they feel confident and are strutting around free?

        Liked by 3 people

    • kpm58 says:

      “What’s in it?”
      Another question I would have is who classified it at such a high level?

      Liked by 1 person

    • jimsung says:

      “17. Consider Page 274, footnote #165: No electronic record exists of the case agent’s initial review of the Weiner laptop. The case agent told us that at some point in mid-October 2016 the NYO ASAC instructed the case agent to wipe his work station. The case agent explained that the ASAC was concerned about the presence of potentially classified information on the case agent’s work station, which was not authorized to process classified information.”

      I think this is a ruse. I think his electronic record would have been inputted directly into the FBI’s server/database. It probably (almost certainly) would not have been a Word file on his local hard drive. Therefore, wiping his local hard drive would have had no effect on the record. If I’m wrong, the FBI is even further behind on technology than I imagine.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Anonymark007 says:

        Lurker and retired computer forensic investigator here. Almost all workstations are “off network”. I never connected mine to the internet. All the updates to the various programs I used were done by downloading the update to my “online” workstation and then transferring them to USB etc. The “online” workstation was basically just the computer I used to do research. I did all my analysis and then wrote a report on a completely different external 3rd system, and this could take days or weeks depending on the case. My electronic “case file” was moved to an offline storage server. I would sometimes wipe my workstation , especially after working a large case or starting a new large case. This is very common in the industry and very quick to do. I know of some investigators who have the luxury of only working one case at a time and do this for each case.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Concerned says:

      You done a good job, of describing what, who and even how this massive corruption unfolded. The only part that is missing is why none of these people were prosecuted and who is currently protecting them?

      Notice that every picture taken of any them show no real concern or fear of prosecution. If it were your are I, stress would be reflected in our face and voice. They know, they are not going to see justice.

      This is like watching, the Benghazi hearings, all over again with Hillary Clinton.


    • Ldave says:

      Excellent collection of the various aspects of the treason. Thank you very much.


    • LafnH20 says:

      TY, Liberty3.


    • Interesting comments.


  2. NoJuan Importante says:

    I’d like to know who the lures were

    Liked by 2 people

  3. Akindole says:

    The only encouraging part is that Jordan is in the room. Otherwise, we all know little Peter will lie his a$$ off, and the Uniparty firewallers will lie right back at us.

    But, more curious…no leaks? No false flag distractions/#fakenews today by Mueller?

    Liked by 4 people

    • LBB says:

      Well the small group surely has had enough time to come up with all their explanations for what they did and said. Things were dragged out enough , but that also got us more records to.

      Figure this WP story the first glimpse of what happened behind closed doors. Peter insists feelings didn’t effect doing their job. Rep Nadler the source of this info?

      “Strzok sought on Wednesday to downplay the importance of his political views, stressing to lawmakers that members of the FBI have political opinions like anyone else, and that they do not earn or lose assignments based on those views, according to Judiciary panel ranking Democrat Rep. Jerold Nadler (N.Y.). Strzok also urged lawmakers to view the text messages simply as banter between two people in an intimate relationship, according to lawmakers present — but Republicans also found that rationale unsatisfying.”


      Liked by 3 people

  4. tunis says:

    Apparently the deposition was a waste of time as Peter kept saying that he couldn’t comment due to classified information.

    Liked by 2 people

  5. Molly says:

    Good grief. I give up here.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Jive Pawnbroker says:

    You can tell that reporter in the first picture is smiling at Strzok – she’s probably asking him if she can bear his children.

    Liked by 1 person

    • LafnH20 says:

      If not mistaken, I believe that was Katherine Herridge, FOX NEWS, Chief Intelligence correspondent.

      Most likely, imho, a cordial and professional exchange.

      Liked by 2 people

  7. NoJuan Importante says:

    This whole thing is starting to look like the Warren Commission. Complete declassification at an early stage is likely the only thing that will help get to the bottom of what really happened. While all the parties are still alive.


  8. Deplorable_Vespucciland says:

    Federal Department of Matters ~ Behind the green door.

    Congressman: Is sleeping around with coworkers on the job normal procedure for FBI agents?
    Strzok: My opinions did not affect my job as I just told her we would STOP TRUMP to humor her.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Florida_Frank says:

    Goodlatte just said that the FBI lawyer in the hearing is telling Strzok to not answer many, many questions.

    Liked by 2 people

  10. youme says:

    You never trust a psychopath…they have no conscience. They lie and steal with no remorse.

    In the nine years that he was being paid $1.5 million by the Soviets and Russians for his espionage services, CIA case officer Aldrich Ames, passed every polygraph test.

    I am sure Strzok could do the same.

    Liked by 6 people

  11. Doug says:

    Step 10. Continue to take personal inventory and when we are wrong, promptly admit it.
    There Britt, I fixed it.
    Maxine however, is a psychopath with ZERO self-awareness.
    Pearls before swine….

    Liked by 1 person

  12. benifranlkin says:

    Goodlatte is saying on Fox that Strzok’s attorney at the closed door meeting told his client not to answer many of the questions the Congressmen were asking of Strzok….there u have it…dead man walking

    Liked by 1 person

  13. ForGodandCountry says:

    Posted above, Sara Carter out with a new piece on today’s Strzok testimony….



    “Freedom Caucus member, Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-FL)-who was also in attendance- told SaraACarter.com, “It was a waste—Strzok is full of it and he kept hiding behind [the] classified information excuse.

    Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) who was at the deposition Wednesday, told saraacarter.com that Strzok should be back to testify at an opening hearing.”


    Liked by 1 person

  14. Pam says:


    • blind no longer says:

      I thought they were doing a classified setting hearing after the closed door hearing. How could he possibly use the “it’s classified” to refuse to answer questions? Such bullsh*t, they use those classifications to hide all their corruption, and keep the WITCH HUNT alive!!!


      • Molly says:

        You may already know this by now, but the first closed door (secret) session was recorded, will be transcribed and released. It’s where they find out “what is” classified. Strzok is then questioned further and “it” is discussed in the second “classified session”.

        Liked by 1 person

  15. talker2u says:

    Wipe that smirk off your face!

    Liked by 1 person

  16. American Male says:

    Strzok is bobbing and weaving, playing the “Classified” card, he needs to be made an example of.

    Liked by 1 person

  17. Cankles Clinton says:

    It’s interesting to see new pics of the legendary Peter Strzok and see if they match what out brains have envisioned. I’m thinking Pete has been well prepared by James Baker and the rest of the guys and gals over at Lawfare. There could also be coordination with some of the other criminal suspects.


  18. citizen817 says:

    No surprise…
    FBI had instructed Strzok not to answer many questions.


  19. ltravisjr says:

    After months of seeing the same screen grabbed facial shots of the players it’s gratifying to finally SEE them as they have to come out of the shadows and into the open.


  20. Bing says:

    If Strzok is not answering certain questions because an FBI attorney or his attorney is telling him not to answer, there should not be any reason the questions are not be made public immediately with the imposed reason for no response.


  21. cheryl says:

    I take comfort that those high-dollar lawyers are quickly draining that little weasel’s bank account. I hope he gets bankrupted like he badgered Flynn and bankrupted him.

    Liked by 1 person

  22. Concerned says:

    The DOJ and FBI could still find out today. Yet we still see no action on their part. Anyone surprised by this lack of action?

    Solomon told Hannity Julian Assange was ready to make a deal!

    John Solomon: I would love to see the evidence he was going to provide. He was going to provide technical evidence that would answer who did not provide these documents. That would be critical to any investigation and why it was turned away is a great mystery to me.

    Extract taken from:
    John Solomon: Julian Assange Was Ready to Provide Technical Evidence on Podesta Emails – COMEY Turned it Down (VIDEO)


    The point is, we clearly have today massive levels of corruption in the FBI and DOJ and nothing is being done to correct it.


  23. Nightstand says:

    Shocking news, I just found out that during the meeting between P. strzok and congressional members and that during that meeting some very shocking information came out and we now know what that shocking information that P. Strzok told the members of congress is. He told them “I’m not saying nothing” Shocking. Stay tuned for more shocking news!


  24. Firefly says:

    Maybe there is a legit reason the FBI has been holding things so tight. I sure hope it’s legit and not a coverup. It’s weird- we don’t know what’s going on behind the scenes.

    Liked by 1 person

  25. Nightstand says:

    Hey Jeff Sessions, did you ask your boss Rosenstein could you please go to the bathroom? When you return to your room sit in the corner and keep quite.

    Liked by 3 people

  26. GB Bari says:

    All of the Sturm und Drang in this thread today indicates some treepers (or visitors) are thinking only on the surface and not contemplating deeper, broader implications of what is happening in our government. In the midst of possible criminal investigations it is not wise to openly discuss testimony that has not been released to the public.

    Sundance owns this blog and has every right and reason to prohibit speculative posts about verbatim testimony regardless of it being represented as “quotes” and regardless of from where that alleged quote originates. It is not official and whatever was said in the closed door meeting has not been released to the public; Sundance wants to ensure that his site does not participate in spreading information not cleared to the public.

    It is our responsibility to honor that requirement/rule from the website owner and conduct ourselves accordingly.

    Off soapbox.

    Liked by 3 people

  27. Like

  28. Doug says:

    I think we can now conclude Storoke is not “cooperating” as previously presumed…..


  29. SalixVeridi says:

    OK, folks. I agree with everyone here. This is SO frustrating. This guy and his cohorts should be in cuffs heading to the penitentiary.

    What can we do? We are all sitting and reading and listening and it is making us all sick from the gross unfairness of it all.

    So we cannot do anything about Strzok. But we can do something about Congress, particularly the Republican party. We need to bombard them with phone calls and emails. We need to tell the we will not tolerate any more disgusting excuses for these traitors to the American people. If they want reelection, they will have to do their job and that is to put pressure on the FBI, DOJ, and yes, even Donald Trump. These guys must all be indicted and then jailed.

    Release the documents and let the light shine on them. Let the creeps who did this dirty deed pay the price. We will SHUN them. They will be like cockroaches running from the corners when the light shines on them. They can scurry away with their stupid smirks, but they will forever be tarnished as the people who tried to subvert an election and p’sd on the Constitution.


  30. Concerned says:

    Open Obstruction by the FBI. Note: the FBI telling Strzok, not to answer questions.

    Mr President, this is pure BS! Tell the FBI and DOJ to turn over all of the requested information without redaction , after all, they work for you!

    Chairman Bob Goodlatte: “FBI Counsel in the Room Instructed Mr. Strzok Not to Answer Many, Many Questions” (VIDEO)



  31. Dutchman says:

    I THINK I can see a ‘legitimate’ justification for the FBI lawyer,…I’m NOT saying this IS the case, just that it COULD be.

    The White House Council is NOT the “Presidents Lawyer”: he ‘represents the ‘intetests ‘ of the PRESIDENCY, not the President. An important distinction.

    Similarly, the FBI lawyers were there today, NOT as ps’s lawyers. They were there representing the interests of the FBI.

    Now, whether that was to preserve the integrity of ongoing investigations, (legitimate) or to cover up malfeasence (ILLegitimate) is the question, and we really don’t have enough info, to be able to judge.

    For my part, with ALL of this stonewalling, I just don’t see how it can possibly turn out well. They can’t impede forever, its going to come out.

    Its understandable, ‘human nature’ even, to TRY to cover up, deny, obsfuscate to postpone the day of reckoning, but I just Dont see it being ‘successful ‘, this time.


  32. Rynn69 says:

    What I do not think Jeff Sessions understands is that by not prosecuting the individuals involved in the whole Spygate-Frame-up cabal, the DOJ (and thereby FBI and all the DOJ’s other divisions) will never recover the integrity of the agency. By doing nothing, it cements that fate. The American people have zero confidence in the DOJ and, for the sake of our country, it needs to be overhauled and wrongdoers brought to justice. AG Sessions is contributing to this fact, not preventing it. These crimes are too monumental.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Concerned says:

      I believe it’s safe to say that most Americans see the FBI and DOJ as both corrupt and unresponsive to the rule of law. It’s now up to the President and Congress to take responsibility for their lack of management (oversight) of the FBI and DOJ.

      As predicted the FBI and DOJ are now hiding information under the grand jury process and national security.


  33. Concerned says:

    Anyone care to give the probability that the grand jury process and national security concerns being referenced is originating from the Robert Mueller witch hunt?


  34. Mike diamond says:

    So why did Martha Stewart go to prison when come y and strzok,Hillary and many more are free!

    Liked by 1 person

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 )


Connecting to %s