You can edit your posts on TERB instead of posting a correction (unless I've missed something in using both words?).
Peter Strzok Fired.
- Thread starter Butler1000
- Start date
yep! a good start...
AAG Sally Yates: fired
Director Comey: fired
Dep Dir McCabe: fired
Chief Counsel Baker: demoted, left
Chief of Staff Rybicki: left
FBI Counsel Page: demoted, then left
Dep Dir of Counterintel Strzok: demoted, FIRED
Next up Ohr!
Isn't it strange that all of the above were closely connected to the Clinton investigation(matter lol) and the "Unverified and Salacious Dossier"(Comey's words)
Ohr is scheduled to testify on the 28th and another IG report is in the pipeline. Most likely we'll see criminal referrals after that.yep! a good start...
AAG Sally Yates: fired
Director Comey: fired
Dep Dir McCabe: fired
Chief Counsel Baker: demoted, left
Chief of Staff Rybicki: left
FBI Counsel Page: demoted, then left
Dep Dir of Counterintel Strzok: demoted, FIRED
Next up Ohr!
Isn't it strange that all of the above were closely connected to the Clinton investigation(matter lol) and the "Unverified and Salacious Dossier"(Comey's words)
yep! a good start...
AAG Sally Yates: fired
Director Comey: fired
Dep Dir McCabe: fired
Chief Counsel Baker: demoted, left
Chief of Staff Rybicki: left
FBI Counsel Page: demoted, then left
Dep Dir of Counterintel Strzok: demoted, FIRED
Next up Ohr!
Isn't it strange that all of the above were closely connected to the Clinton investigation(matter lol) and the "Unverified and Salacious Dossier"(Comey's words)
Next up is Manafort.
Then Stone.
Then Cohen.
Then Trump.
Coming from a nutcase like you, obviously you make no sense as usual. Keep on ass kissing that moron called Trump as you really are one of his cult followers!!
The F.B.I. Needs to Explain Its Reasons for Firing Peter Strzok:
On Monday, Strzok’s lawyer, Aitan Goelman, claimed that his client’s firing had been ordered, late last week, by David Bowdich, the deputy director of the F.B.I., despite the fact that the Bureau’s Office of Professional Responsibility, which normally handles disciplinary matters, had recommended a lesser punishment: a demotion and a sixty-day suspension. “This decision should be deeply troubling to all Americans,” Goelman told the Times. “A lengthy investigation and multiple rounds of congressional testimony failed to produce a shred of evidence that Special Agent Strzok’s personal views ever affected his work.”
As of late Monday afternoon, there was still no official word from Bowdich or his boss, Christopher Wray, about Strzok’s dismissal. The Times and the Wall Street Journal both reported that a spokesperson for the F.B.I. didn’t respond to requests for comments about Strzok’s firing.
It is perhaps possible that Bowditch and Wray have some damaging information about Strzok that we don’t know about. Horowitz, the inspector general, is still carrying out a separate inquiry into the Bureau’s handling of the Trump-Russia investigation. Conceivably, he could have found something damning and tipped off Bowditch and Wray.
If there is such information, the F.B.I. needs to make this clear immediately. At the very least, it needs to explain the basis of the decision to dismiss Strzok, pointing out which internal rules he violated, and why these violations amounted to a firing offense. As things stand, it looks like the Bureau’s leaders buckled to Trump and his political and media outriders, dispensing with departmental norms and setting a highly disturbing precedent.
In a tweet that he posted just after noon on Monday, Trump crowed about what had happened. “Agent Peter Strzok was just fired from the FBI - finally,” he wrote. “The list of bad players in the FBI & DOJ gets longer & longer. Based on the fact that Strzok was in charge of the Witch Hunt, will it be dropped? It is a total Hoax. No Collusion, No Obstruction - I just fight back!”
In his larger quest to end the Mueller investigation, Trump clearly sees Strzok’s dismissal as a victory, albeit a relatively small one. That should be sufficient cause for alarm. Encouraged by what happened here, Trump will surely expand his attacks on Mueller and his colleagues. The leaders of the F.B.I. need to start talking.
https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-...o-explain-its-reasons-for-firing-peter-strzok
So you are saying that the FBI has honourable ideals. They are not out to get DT, but are merely in search of the truth. The rotten egg is gone.
The FBI has ideals. The majority of its agents have unbiased integrity.
Members of the top eschelons were political animals. Biased. Perhaps even incompetent.
And they are out for him.
Yup. And considering the number of them fired, demoted and being spoken of in terms of an investigation I'm not off the mark.
His personal views may have been biased, but the work that he performed showed absolutely no evidence of any bias.
I disagree. Not obtaining access to the DNC server and accepting their word and the word of a private contractor on a matter of what is being touted as national security worthy is quite biased.
Or so grossly incompetent is also worthy of dismissal. Any superviser as well that let this slide.
The texts are corroboration of biased actions.
The IG didn't find any tampering nor did the House committee that he testified before. Perhaps you should have been a witness.
Yet. Hopefully they reopen the DNC server case. It has always smelled. Who investigates a crime without directly examining the evidence?
Are you referring to Trump refusing to speak to Mueller?
The server issue has been investigated to death. You just don't like to outcome so lets have more investigations until we get it right. Maybe we should have another Benghazi investigation.
I'm referring to the DNC refusing the FBI access to their servers after the supposed hack. The one that released the Podesta/Wasserman emails exposing the Clinton rigging of the Primary.
Strzok was in charge.
It was not investigated correctly because the FBI never actually examined the servers. Only accepted the conclusions of a private security firm.
Yet this is one of the basis of collusion. Now that Strzok has been found have bias his conclusions on this are highly suspect.
Mueller's investigation into the Trump supported Russian hacking of the DNC servers is ongoing, with multiple guilty pleas, indictments and signs of more to come.
Isn't it great?
The FBI investigated. They collected and examined the evidence they thought necessary. Apart from Nunes et all and the other protectors of Trump who have created this phony narrative for the purpose of distracting etc. no other law enforcement agency or professional has said there anything missing from FBI investigation. And once again you have tried to tie it to Mueller etc which is contrary to all evidence. Really very funny and sad and predictable.
