Why the surveillance memo matters

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cathoholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Strzok was performing a James Comey "I am a superior FBI staff wonder that is above reproach. I never lied and I do not recall any wrongdoing. You must believe me because I can make real angry faces and then smirk at everyone of you (except my Democrats)!
 
You know, I hate the division right down party lines… surely there are some folks on both sides who can see truth??? I’m not saying MY truth. I’m just saying look for the truth. It’s in the IG report. Not just at the end. Aren’t these representatives able to read and comprehend? Don’t they have people working for them who are able to read and comprehend? Aren’t these people really working for the American people who only want the truth. No matter which way it goes? No body really wants to support a lie. Right???
 
Sorry, but there are people that lie and support others. The IG report mentions that bias was not a factor in the findings of the report, meaning it would be a separate matter in another investigative report. Its plain for all to see how disruptive and obstructive Democrat members of the committee carry on.
 
Rosenstein, Mueller want to destroy Trump’s presidency: Chris Farrell

Judicial Watch Director of Investigations Chris Farrell discusses Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s announcement that 12 Russian intelligence officers have been indicted for allegedly hacking the Democratic National Committee.

 
Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein is the target of an impeachment effort being undertaken by conservatives in the U.S. House of Representatives, according to a report.

U.S. Reps. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., and Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, both members of the House Freedom Caucus, are said to be leading the effort and could submit an impeachment filing in the next few days, Politico reported Friday.



 
Dershowitz: Indictments Against Russian Agents Prove There’s ‘No Need’ for Mueller Probe

 
GOP Rep: Lisa Page Contradicted Peter Strzok’s Testimony

Republican Rep. John Ratcliffe claimed on Monday that FBI lawyer Lisa Page contradicted many parts of testimony from her colleague and lover Peter Strzok.

Page testified for two days behind closed doors about her influence on the FBI’s investigations into Russia and Hillary Clinton’s emails less than one week after Strzok.

Strozk denied that texts he exchanged with Page — particularly one promising they would “stop” Trump from becoming president — were indicative of bias that affected the investigations. However, Ratcliffe alleged that Page contradicted Strzok in her testimony and even admitted that the texts “mean exactly what they say.”

“There are differences in their testimony on many cases,” Ratcliffe said on Monday. “She admits that the text messages mean exactly what they say, as opposed to Agent Strzok, who thinks that we have all misinterpreted his own words on any text message that might be negative.”


https://www.dailywire.com/news/33186/bombshell-lisa-page-gave-significantly-different-ryan-saavedra

"Strzok isn’t concerned about the campaign to tear America apart, only getting caught running it!"

 
A friendly reminder from PRE-Election 2016 . . . .


Thanks Caldera, petra22, grotto, Theo520, and others for keeping this thread a good reference place to be informed on this issue.

(I was glad this piece from CNN was still even available)
 
Last edited:
Tucker: Why Do ‘Reckless Partisans’ Like John Brennan Still Have Top-Secret Security Clearances?


…and from May 2018:

 
Brennan is the “iff-iest” bureaucrat ever.

Very upset that Hillary lost the election.
 
Wonder how much info on her testimony has she rehearsed with Pete? She is as devious as he is.
 
At least, now, we have a current photo … instead of that goofy highschool yearbook photo.
 
Last edited:
Why do reckless Partisans masquerade as journalists on Fox News evening line up?

#Tucker?

🤓
 
Last edited:
There is so much to be said for the dishonesty of the MSM, but you notice most don’t drag journalists and commentators into the frey unless they make headlines for some off the wall reporting. Just because some of us prefer to watch Fox for our news (though not the only news outlet…) that doesn’t make Fox bad. You seem to want to make Fox bad. Just because it’s your opinion. That’s ok. You have the right… Lots of people who want the OTHER side of the story or the WHOLE story—watch Fox!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top