Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 49

Thread: Do Peter Strzok and the democrats think America is stupid?

  1. #11
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    40,852
    Amen (Given)
    8909
    Amen (Received)
    20660
    Quote Originally Posted by rogue06 View Post
    A man who was claiming that Hillary, who he was investigating, needed to be elected and said Trump, before any investigation started, needed to be impeached. Yet he wasn't biased.
    He swore so under oath!

    1 Tim 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.

  2. #12
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    39
    Amen (Given)
    17
    Amen (Received)
    13
    As someone who increasingly can't stand either party, I thought it was a sad day to watch all involved act the way they did.

  3. Amen Sparko amen'd this post.
  4. #13
    tWebber Tassman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Sydney/Phuket
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    8,679
    Amen (Given)
    2146
    Amen (Received)
    1474
    Quote Originally Posted by rogue06 View Post
    A man who was claiming that Hillary, who he was investigating, needed to be elected and said Trump, before any investigation started, needed to be impeached. Yet he wasn't biased.
    Strzok's treatment by the Trump Defence Team, masquerading as a House Enquiry, was absolutely disgraceful. Everybody has personal political views. There is no reason to think that Peter Strzok's personal views affected any of his decisions in either the Hillary Clinton email investigation or the Trump-Russia probe. His only mistake was that he used a government issued official phone to express his personal views. For this he was quite rightly sacked by Mueller.
    “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

  5. #14
    tWebber Starlight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    New Zealand
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    7,417
    Amen (Given)
    2454
    Amen (Received)
    1484
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassman View Post
    There is no reason to think that Peter Strzok's personal views affected any of his decisions in either the Hillary Clinton email investigation or the Trump-Russia probe.
    If he'd been out to get Trump, he could have anonymously leaked to the media about the existence of the Trump-Russia investigation at any time during the run-up to the general election. The media was going ballistic about Clinton's emails, and as far as the country knew, only 1 candidate for president was being investigated by the FBI. It was obviously poor judgement on Comey's part to leave the US public with that impression. But had Strzok wanted to act, he could so, so, easily have let the media know Trump was also under investigation and then watched them go ballistic.

    His only mistake was that he used a government issued official phone to express his personal views. For this he was quite rightly sacked by Mueller.
    I don't think his sacking was justifiable. His texts showed he disliked Clinton, Sanders, and Trump as politicians. To me, that doesn't meet the bar for getting rid of someone. Texting on a government phone is a slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket offense, not a firing one.

    The law enforcement person that there does need to be an investigation into for bias affecting judgment is Rudy Giuliani who was able to exercise control over law enforcement in the NY area, all but whipping the FBI agents there into a frenzied hatred of Clinton, to the point where FBI director Republican James Comey was almost unable to keep any sort of leash on that rogue branch of his agency. The NY FBI's anti-Clinton malice and bias and Giuliani's role in that warrants investigation.

    It's also worth bearing firmly in mind that the US's law-enforcement agencies are Republican-heavy. They're not full of Democrats. The FBI, like most local police forces, is full of Republicans.
    Last edited by Starlight; 07-13-2018 at 07:24 AM.

  6. Amen Tassman amen'd this post.
  7. #15
    Troll Magnet Sparko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    38,825
    Amen (Given)
    3600
    Amen (Received)
    18343
    Quote Originally Posted by Raptor View Post
    As someone who increasingly can't stand either party, I thought it was a sad day to watch all involved act the way they did.
    It was quite a ruckus.

  8. Amen Raptor amen'd this post.
  9. #16
    tWebber Tassman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Sydney/Phuket
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    8,679
    Amen (Given)
    2146
    Amen (Received)
    1474
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparko View Post
    It was quite a ruckus.
    It was utterly disgraceful.
    “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

  10. #17
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    40,852
    Amen (Given)
    8909
    Amen (Received)
    20660
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassman View Post
    Strzok's treatment by the Trump Defence Team, masquerading as a House Enquiry, was absolutely disgraceful.
    The whole thing was a mess - and Strzok didn't help himself at all with his angry arrogant opening statement.

    1 Tim 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.

  11. #18
    Evolution is God's ID rogue06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Southeastern U.S. of A.
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    37,625
    Amen (Given)
    874
    Amen (Received)
    15137
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassman View Post
    Strzok's treatment by the Trump Defence Team, masquerading as a House Enquiry, was absolutely disgraceful. Everybody has personal political views. There is no reason to think that Peter Strzok's personal views affected any of his decisions in either the Hillary Clinton email investigation or the Trump-Russia probe. His only mistake was that he used a government issued official phone to express his personal views. For this he was quite rightly sacked by Mueller.
    The only out-of-line moment was when the one guy brought up him lying to his wife while having an affair.

    OTOH, every time the questioning got truly serious and they started getting close to the truth the Democrats would interrupt and talk over Strzok so he didn't have to answer the question. It is a tactic they have used repeatedly in the past like when Nancy Pelosi got nailed in a bald face lie about being unaware of waterboarding. For the next week, she surrounded herself with a phalanx of the biggest male Democrat Congressmen who would all loudly start talking at once every time a reporter tried to ask her anything about it.

    I'm always still in trouble again

    You're by far the worst poster on TWeb -- starlight

  12. #19
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    9,114
    Amen (Given)
    1088
    Amen (Received)
    1180
    Quote Originally Posted by Starlight View Post
    If he'd been out to get Trump, he could have anonymously leaked to the media about the existence of the Trump-Russia investigation at any time during the run-up to the general election. The media was going ballistic about Clinton's emails, and as far as the country knew, only 1 candidate for president was being investigated by the FBI. It was obviously poor judgement on Comey's part to leave the US public with that impression. But had Strzok wanted to act, he could so, so, easily have let the media know Trump was also under investigation and then watched them go ballistic.

    I don't think his sacking was justifiable. His texts showed he disliked Clinton, Sanders, and Trump as politicians. To me, that doesn't meet the bar for getting rid of someone. Texting on a government phone is a slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket offense, not a firing one.

    The law enforcement person that there does need to be an investigation into for bias affecting judgment is Rudy Giuliani who was able to exercise control over law enforcement in the NY area, all but whipping the FBI agents there into a frenzied hatred of Clinton, to the point where FBI director Republican James Comey was almost unable to keep any sort of leash on that rogue branch of his agency. The NY FBI's anti-Clinton malice and bias and Giuliani's role in that warrants investigation.

    It's also worth bearing firmly in mind that the US's law-enforcement agencies are Republican-heavy. They're not full of Democrats. The FBI, like most local police forces, is full of Republicans.
    I mostly agree, except that I would also agree with the removal of Strzok from the investigation because his personal views, being that he made them on work related communications which became public could give the appearance, to the thoughtless misinformed out there, of his personal opinions somehow affecting the investigation. Strzok's only mistake was voicing his personal opinion on work related communications giving republicans the opportunity to twist that into Strzok using his position to launch a false investigation against the Trump campaign. Total nonsense of course, but as you can see by the idiotic responses from the Trump supporters in this thread, it works. Like Strzok himself said, he wasn't removed because of his bias, everybody has bias, he was removed because Mueller knew how his fellow republicans would use it to lie to their constituency in order to protect their favorite autocrat.

  13. #20
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    9,114
    Amen (Given)
    1088
    Amen (Received)
    1180
    Quote Originally Posted by rogue06 View Post
    The only out-of-line moment was when the one guy brought up him lying to his wife while having an affair.

    OTOH, every time the questioning got truly serious and they started getting close to the truth the Democrats would interrupt and talk over Strzok so he didn't have to answer the question. It is a tactic they have used repeatedly in the past like when Nancy Pelosi got nailed in a bald face lie about being unaware of waterboarding. For the next week, she surrounded herself with a phalanx of the biggest male Democrat Congressmen who would all loudly start talking at once every time a reporter tried to ask her anything about it.
    Ah stop being such a dumbell. The republicans were only there to make speeches not to get answers.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •