FBI Agent Who Cleared Clinton Was ‘Hardcore Hillary Fan’ Who ‘Hated Trump’

 An anti-Trump FBI agent who was one of Hillary’s “biggest fans” was allowed to lead the FBI’s botched Clinton email probe. FBI agent Peter Strzok was deputy head of counterintelligence at the bureau, and was in charge of leading the Hillary investigation as well as investigating supposed collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia in the 2016 election.

Shtfplan.com reports: That’s right, the man who the mainstream media admits was a key player in the Clinton investigation was a Hillary supporter the entire time. To make matters worse, after Trump won, Strzok was directly involved in the sham investigation into supposed collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia during the election in which his preferred candidate lost.

 The Washington Post reported: During the Clinton investigation, Strzok was involved in a romantic relationship with FBI lawyer Lisa Page, who worked for Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, according to the people familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.

The extramarital affair was problematic, these people said, but of greater concern among senior law enforcement officials were text messages the two exchanged during the Clinton investigation and campaign season, in which they expressed anti-Trump sentiments and other comments that appeared to favor Clinton.

The people discussing the matter did not further describe the political messages between Strzok and Page, except to say the two would sometime react to campaign news of the moment.

The Justice Department inspector general’s office said in a statement Saturday that its investigators are “reviewing allegations involving communications between certain individuals, and will report its findings regarding those allegations promptly upon completion of the review of them.’’

A spokesman for Mueller’s office said Strzok was removed “immediately upon learning of the allegations’’ and added that Page left the Mueller team two weeks before it became aware of the allegations.

For their part, The New York Times praised Mueller as moving “swiftly” to remove the biased agent as if anyone with a half a brain would believe that Mueller somehow was unaware of Strzok’s political leanings after working with him for years.

Mr. Strzok’s reassignment shows that Mr. Mueller moved swiftly in the face of what could be perceived as bias by one of his agents amid a politically charged inquiry into Mr. Trump’s campaign and administration.

But the existence of the text messages is likely to fuel claims by Mr. Trump that the F.B.I. has a bias against him and that he is a target of the “deep state” — a term used to describe the notion that government intelligence agencies secretly conspire together.

 Make no mistake, this is a HUGE DEAL despite both The Times and The Post specifically trying to downplay the revelations while painting the also bias Robert Mueller as some sort of hero who removed Strzok immediately upon finding out about his true agenda. Keep in mind we already know that Mueller himself is a close personal friend of James Comey and a long-time member of the deep state.

 The fact that these bombshell revelations were made public by two of the countries biggest anti-Trump establishment newspapers points to the likely fact that this story was about to be revealed by another news outlet and the establishment simply wanted to beat them to it by releasing a sort of limited hang out version of what actually transpired.

 It is safe to say that Strzok’s support for Hillary was most likely even worse than reported and that he may have even had a direct hand in guaranteeing that Clinton wasn’t charged in the private email scandal.


FBI agent investigating Hillary was huge Clinton fan

The Daily 202: Trump White House might learn more from studying ...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/daily-202/2017...

Jun 8, 2017 - That is what alumni of Bill Clinton's White House and Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign are thinking this morning as James Comey arrives on Capitol Hill to .... disagreements among the eternally feuding Trump campaign team when they are brought in to talk with the special counsel's lawyers and FBI agents.

Views: 65

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Nice

yep sure is.

FBI agent Peter Strzok should be fired, indicted, prosecuted and serve time for evidence tampering.

Instead, they simply moved him to Human Resources in the FBI. His intentional biased involvement had shaped the bogus Hillary Clinton email server investigation as well as blatant framing members of the Trump transition team. The intentions are to build and impeachment case. It's complete -in your face- partisan criminal behavior. This country cannot have an ounce of confidence in an agency that weaponizes their law authority to manipulate and fabricate or facts/non-facts. 

Peter Strzok, now what a name, who is he? Hmmm?

LOL Tif

Read it or do your homework for a change.

Yes Mr. Music, he should be investigated, and treated as a criminal.

Is Peter Strzok A Ding Bat?

Got Home Work Hmmm?

LOl Tif

Peter Strzok is a criminal.

Hey Frank,

 Tif is more intelligent then she acts, she has a way to rap the world around her little finger, and several sites republish what she finds. Ain't She Amazing? She accomplished things and did not even tell me.

 Long ago, every last person in this gov, has been placed into the network files, there is not much not known, just some to be exposed in ways to upset the establishment.

  And yes, she is sexy and intelligent, and used silly, a silly image in dedates, of which I LMAO, some have noticed, it has become her favored gif to post. How sexy and intelligent is she?

High Valley - She's With Me (Official Music Video)- YouTube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j733rosgzi4

If she's got issues with the statement I posted, which actually validates content in the above article then say what's to disagree with in that statement. She seems to like fighting with everybody. That isn't exactly the best approach for genuine debate.

No, if she had a issue she would state it, what she said was home work, she all ready has the files on these people. Most of them.

As for a genuine debate, I will admit she does it her way and not according to what others want.

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Mike Lester

ALERT ALERT

Newt Says What The Rest Of Us Are Thinking:
It’s Time To Throw Peter Strzok In Jail

Disgraced FBI special agent Peter Strzok, a senior member of the bureau who gained notoriety in recent months over his anti-Trump text messages to a colleague, was grilled for nearly 10 hours during a joint congressional committee hearing on Thursday.

At issue was Strzok’s anti-Trump texts to former FBI lawyer and lover Lisa Page that coincided with his leading of the investigations into both former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email server scandal and the alleged Trump/Russia 2016 election collusion, as well as his involvement in the subsequent Robert Mueller special counsel probe.

The hearing proved to be a heated battle, as Strzok displayed an arrogant smugness in defiance of pointed questions from Republicans that he largely danced around, while Democrats sought to upend and undermine the entire hearing with a plethora of interruptions, parliamentary maneuvers and outright praise for the man who helped let Clinton off the hook while ferociously targeting Trump.

Former House speaker and presidential candidate Newt Gingrich was less than impressed with Strzok’s performance and cooperation in the hearing and suggested during an appearance on Fox Business that the FBI agent should be held in contempt of Congress.

“I think they have to move to hold him in contempt and throw him in jail,” Gingrich said of Congress and Strzok.

“This is a person who is willfully standing up and refusing to appear as a congressional witness and he was a government employee at the time,” he continued.

“He has every obligation to inform the legislative branch, and I don’t think they have any choice except to move a motion of contempt because he is fundamentally — and so is his girlfriend (Page) — they’re both fundamentally in violation of the entire constitutional process,” he added.

Page had been subpoenaed to appear before Congress on Wednesday but refused to appear, saying she’d been unable to review relevant documents prior to the scheduled hearing, a closed-door hearing that has since been rescheduled for Friday.

Gingrich was not the only one who thought Strzok deserved to be held in contempt of Congress, as House Judiciary Committee chairman Bob Goodlatte informed Strzok that he remained at risk of such during the hearing, according to The Daily Caller.

That warning from Goodlatte came after Strzok had refused to answer a straightforward question posed by House Oversight Committee chairman Trey Gowdy, regarding how many people Strzok had personally interviewed between a specific set of dates in relation to the Clinton email investigation.

“Mr. Strzok, please be advised that you can either comply with the committee’s direction to answer the question or refuse to do so,” Goodlatte stated. “The latter of which will place you in risk of a contempt citation and potential criminal liability. Do you understand that? The question is directed to the witness.”

Strzok still refused to answer, citing instructions received from his counsel and the FBI to not answer certain questions on certain topics.

Goodlatte replied, “Mr. Strzok, in a moment we will continue with the hearing, but based on your refusal to answer the question, at the conclusion of the day we will be recessing the hearing and you will be subject to recall to allow the committee to consider proceeding with a contempt citation.”

It is unclear if Goodlatte and the committee ultimately did consider a contempt citation for Strzok following the contentious hearing, nor is it clear if Page will be held in contempt for blowing off her subpoenaed appearance on Wednesday.

Hopefully Congress will follow through on the threats of contempt followed by actual jail time against Strzok and Page in response to their uncooperative behavior and failure to appear when subpoenaed, if only to ensure that future witnesses called before Congress for sensitive or contentious hearings don’t think they can get away with the same sort of behavior.

TEA PARTY TARGET

Cops Sent To Seize Veteran’s Guns Without A Warrant, He Refused To Turn Them Over

“No one from the state was going to take my firearms without due process,” says Leonard Cottrell, after successfully staving off law enforcement and the courts from confiscating his firearms. Cottrell, an Iraq War veteran, was at work when he received a phone call from his wife. The cops were there, busting in to take his guns away. It all started after a casual conversation his son had at school.

Ammoland reports:

Police said their visit was sparked by a conversation that Leonard Cottrell Jr.’s 13-year-old son had had with another student at the school. Cottrell said he was told his son and the other student were discussing security being lax and what they would have to do to escape a school shooting at Millstone Middle School.

The conversation was overheard by another student, who went home and told his parents, and his mother panicked. The mom then contacted the school, which contacted the State Police, according to Cottrell.

The visit from the troopers came around 10 p.m. on June 14, 2018, Cottrell said, a day after Gov. Phil Murphy signed several gun enforcement bills into law.

After several hours, Cottrell said police agreed not to take the guns but to allow him to move them to another location while the investigation continued.

“They had admitted several times that my son made no threat to himself or other students or the school or anything like that,” he said.

Cottrell said he made it very clear to the police that he was “not going to willingly give up my constitutional rights where there’s no justifiable cause, no warrants, no nothing.”

The troopers searched his son’s room and found nothing, Cottrell said.

“To appease everybody, I had my firearms stored someplace else,” he said. “That way, during the course of the investigation, my son doesn’t have access to them and it’s on neutral ground and everything and everybody’s happy.”

“In the Garden State, the usual approach is to confiscate first and ask questions later, and victims of this approach often don’t know their rights. ‎In this case, the victim pushed back and confiscation was avoided — but the circumstances surrounding the incident are outrageous. A student expressing concern over lack of security is not a reason to send police to the student’s home — but it might be a reason to send police to the school to keep students and teachers safe” said Scott L. Bach, executive director of the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs and a member of the NRA board of directors.

NJ.com adds:

Cottrell, a disabled U.S. Army veteran who served three tours during “Operation Iraqi Freedom,” owns a shotgun and a pistol. He has all the correct permits to own the firearms, he said, and predominately uses the shotgun to hunt.

He said his wife allowed the officers to enter the home, and with her permission, they searched his son’s room — but they did not find any weapons, he said. The officers, he said, didn’t have a warrant but still wanted to take his guns. Cottrell wouldn’t let them.

“No one from the state was going to take my firearms without due process,” he said Thursday.

He said the attempted seizure resulted because of a new law Gov. Phil Murphy signed into law that makes it easier for police to confiscate guns when someone in the state poses a threat to themselves or others. The law is part of a broader statewide effort to make New Jersey’s gun laws even tougher amid the national outcry for more gun control in the wake of the school shooting in Parkland, Florida.

Cottrell said the officers “danced around the issue” when he confronted them about the new law.

A New Jersey State Police spokesman declined to answer questions about whether this incident had anything to do with the new gun laws.

In an email, Sgt. First Class Jeff Flynn said, “Troopers responded to Mr. Cottrell’s residence in reference to the report of a possible school threat. Based on their investigation, it was determined that Mr. Cottrell’s weapons did not need to be seized.”

David Codrea, writing for Ammoland, further added:

To appease everybody, I had my firearms stored someplace else,” New Jersey gun owner and Army veteran Leonard Cottrell Jr. told New Jersey 101.5 after a June 14 visit from State Police,. “That way, during the course of the investigation, my son doesn’t have access to them and it’s on neutral ground and everything and everybody’s happy.”

Cottrell was recalling state troopers showing up at his door to confiscate firearms after his 13-year-old son was overheard discussing lax school safety with a friend.

Indoctrinated by a pervasive snitch culture — one that never seems to deter the blatantly obvious demonic nutjobs — the eavesdropping student told his parents, who told school administrators, who in turn called the cops. (Note “If you see something, say something” carries risks of its own – if you report the wrong person, you could end up smeared as a “hater.”)

“Cottrell said he made it very clear to the police that he was ‘not going to willingly give up my constitutional rights where there’s no justifiable cause, no warrants, no nothing,’” the report continued. Despite that, his home is now a “gun free zone” and that has been publicized by the media. He has, in fact, willingly ceded those rights, and by his own words in order to make authorities “happy.”

Before judging him for that, consider the environment that is New Jersey. Then consider the overwhelming force the state can bring to bear, and its predisposition to using it, especially if it’s to enforce citizen disarmament. It’s easy to anonymously declare “Molon Labe” on the internet. In meatspace, resistance is more effective when the aggressor doesn’t get to dictate the time and place, especially if that place is your home and you have family inside.

Appeasing gun-grabbers, generally couched as “compromise,” is impossible. It’s like throwing a scrap of flesh to a circling pack of jackals and expecting them to be sated and leave you alone — instead of sensing opportunity and fear, and moving in closer.

© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service