Strzok hearing is riveting TV
- Thread starter PDT816
- Start date
What an embarrassing day for House Republicans. And an impressive 10 hour testimony from Peter Strzok. 10 hours. Goodness.
Congressional Republicans overreached today and were taken to task.
Congressional Republicans overreached today and were taken to task.
Once again, another shining example where one side watched one hearing and the other watched a completely different hearing. Each claiming “victory” when really no one wins. But if you say “He owned the Pubs!” Or “He embarrassed himself!” loud enough on Twitter you will get thousands of likes. Dems act like this no big deal, but the Stormy Daniels story is of great importance. Pubs act like this is the biggest scandal ever, but the fact an ex campaign manager was clearly tied to russians is whatever. It’s all about whose side wins, but it’s all embarrassing and does nothing to move our country forward.
I didn’t watch much of the hearing, but I am AMAZED how how diametrically opposite the evaluations coming from the respective sides of this board are.
Way too generous; try a 20 lb. bag of San Fran street feces, known as shit in Creek County.
Yes he was. After watching it, one can understand why he is leaving. He wasn't the only one though.
Anyone who thinks that hearing was a positive for Congressional Republicans is in denial. They thought they could come in and take it to Strzok. They failed. Strzok held his own and made a number of their arguments/conspiracy theories just look foolish.
It was reminiscent of Joseph Welch.
Hey now, playing dumb worked so well for Hillary. Surely ol Peter will have the same success. He seems to be as smart as Hillary.
I’m to the point of feeling sorry for you.
I find this comment fascinating. I watched bits and pieces of the testimony and it seemed to me Strzok exposed himself for the lying corrupt sleaze his is. His preconceived bias in favor of Hillary and against Trump should be condemned by anyone who is concerned about the integrity of law enforcement agencies, regardless of which team with which they identify. He should never have been allowed within a mile of any of those investigations. Your defense of him and his actions may come back to haunt you. The precedent will have been set if he and Comey et al get to walk. If Democrats can politicize law enforcement with your support then what are you going to say when Republicans politicize law enforcement for their own benefit? Isn’t turn about fair play? This is an issue that the base of BOTH sides should unite and demand the corruption stop immediately. It is painful to see you defend such indefensible actions.
Spot on. I was actually hoping for my peace of mind that he would sound sincere and honest today. He was everything but sincere and honest.
It's a shame that he represents FBI leadership. They should never have anyone in DC investigate politically charged stuff again. Let the field agents who do an excellent job every day investigate those types of cases. The folks in the political epicenter should stick to doing budgets and departmental planning.
It really is amazing to see these libs defend this. It is a psychological disorder, a brain wire that’s been chewed through to watch that and try and make Strzok out to be the victim here.
But a guy who makes up a character and pretends to have gone to law school has no foundation of reality in which to launch.
The democrats today showed exactly why so many people see them as unfit to serve. And here come David Allen and toon town carrying the water like deaf and dumb intellectual hostages suffering from Stockholm syndrome.
Absolutely pathetic display.
I disagree. What should be condemned (if proven) is that his political opinions/bias unethically or criminally influenced the investigations. And this hasn't been proven and wasn't proven today.
Most Americans have political opinions. Many people (most?) in law enforcement have political opinions. Having political opinions or supporting certain political candidates ISN'T a crime in this country. Nor is it unethical.
And I would think that you, who is very concerned about potential authoritarian government overreached, would understand this.
Democrats are politicizing law enforcement? Come on Ponca.
America just watched an FBI agent get questioned for ten hours because Republicans claim his political views (which EVERY American is entitled to) made him bias and unworthy to participate in an investigation. And why did they do this Ponca? Because they believe they have to defend a politician (Trump) and want to find a way to attack a legitimate investigation that is currently taking place.
Who are the ones attacking Robert Mueller? Who has been attempting to politicize his investigation?
I agree. But again, having political opinions is not corruption. Supporting one political candidate over another during a presidential campaign is not corruption.
Many district attorneys/state attorneys/law enforcement members/DOJ officials/FBI agents do their job faithfully every day while also holding political opinions.
Unfit to serve? Republicans were the ones running that committee today.
And even some Republicans are talking about how bad this hearing was today for them. Earlier tonight I watched former Representative David Jolly, a Republican, compare the hearing to McCarthism.
And before you respond, yes, I know that Jolly is a Republican who dares to disagree and challenge Trump. So that makes him enemy #1 among Trump supporters and therefore your gut reaction to respond with attacks on him.
This would be a reasonable opinion if it weren’t for the text messages that prove it is an incredibly stupid opinion.
Honestly where did you go to law school? Don’t ignore this question please.
This country is falling down the rabbit hole. There is no hope for us as long as people are willing to spin corruption because it is their team doing the corrupting. That goes for both sides, not just yours. But today it is your team in the spotlight, which gives you and people like you a chance to take a stand against wrong doing, and, 2cents, you are failing yourself and your country.
I assume people pick a side because they conceive that side will benefit themselves to some degree. What earthly benefit do you derive from allowing your team to commit crimes against the country? What can you possibly gain? How are you going to react when Republicans gain enough power to do to your side what your side has done to them? What possible moral authority can you summon? And make no mistake: Republicans can and will prove to be just as corrupt and tyrannical as Democrats if they think they can get away with it.
In the meantime we slip deeper and deeper into the muck because no one is willing to tell their side to stop.
What does that have to do with anything? Honestly you are a joke. Did you see the little posters your team held up? Manafort is guilty of zero zilch nothing to do with anything in the presidential campaign. Did you cheer your team when they did their hands up don’t shoot lie?
Democrats have lost power in state after state county after county the last ten years. They lost to Donald trump. Do you not understand that? Donald trump. Hitler. Racist. Dummy immoral liar and those idiots from the coasts that call themselves progressives are so bad so unappealing so childish so toon town that we would rather have Donald trump run the country.
It would make LESS sense if you were smart enough to understand that to be honest.
That’s a very simplistic view of this. This guy was involved in both investigations dealing with the two candidates for president. In one he tried to control the situation so as to not bring charges against the candidate. In the other while I don’t think he was involved in creating the fake dossier he at least knew of its origins and still used it to gain access to spy on the other candidate. If that’s not bias I don’t know what is.
Swish this hot take around for a second. I hope trump doubles the corruption to end these fools and keeps them as marginalized as possible. What choice do we have? Today proves what we are up against.
Wow, he sent personal text messages to a friend and co-worker in 2016 about the presidential campaign. An American talking to another American about the presidential campaign. Such a crime and a shock!
And today, he told you these personal text messages were just that, personal text message that had nothing to do with his investigation. He told you that his personal beliefs at no time entered into the investigation and how there are multiple layers of supervisors above him and agents below him who would never tolerate inappropraite behavior from him in that regard. And he then discussed the political nature of the attacks on him and the FBI and the harm these attacks can cause.
He then received audible applause from those observing the hearing. Drop the mic moment that you, apparently, completely missed or ignored.
Embarrassing response. You obviously haven’t read the messages.
Applause from those democrat chimpanzees is condemning not justifying.
There is zero percent chance you have a law degree. Zero.
Applause from those democrat chimpanzees is condemning not justifying.
There is zero percent chance you have a law degree. Zero.
Show me corruption Ponca, and I will condemn it regardless of who commits it. Having political opinions, engaging in political discussions, and supporting political candidates is not corruption.
What crime has Peter Strzok committed? What crime against this country?
What in the world are you talking about Ponca?
You want to talk about crimes . . . how about the campaign manager who is sitting in a federal prison right now accused of actually committing a crime. Or the other people around Trump who are being indicted.
Yet, for some reason, you want to focus on Strzok and his imaginary crimes against this country. lol, what a joke.
Last edited:
Because they looked foolish today. That whole hearing was an embarrassment for them. Even rational Republicans are acknowledging that.
And yes, I know what happened in 2016 and in elections since then (for example, a Democrat was elected to the US Senate in Alabama). I understand also what happened before 2016. The political balance in the USA is ever changing.
Last edited:
No, as he testified today, he actively worked the Clinton investigation and did his job. Just as he did when placed on the Trump investigation.
But here is the kicker. And think about this. If Strzok was so out to get Trump, and was allowing his private political opinions to influence his work, why did he just not leak to the press about the private investigation? He could have easily done this in the summer of 2016. But he didn't, did he?
And as he said today, the thought never crossed his mind to do so.
lol.
Yep, just personal text messages to a friend and co-worker about the presidential campaign. On FBI devices. Discussing the investigations. Yep, nothing to see there at all. I'm sure his removal from the special counsel investigation and ultimately from the FBI building were due to sending personnel text messages to a friend and co-worker too. Standard procedure.
Yes, I've read the messages. Who hasn't?
They don't prove though what Trump defenders want them to prove.
would you trust Highstick to impartially investigate you if you ran for office?
