Russia Collusion Megathread v11: This Is It

Status
Not open for further replies.
As one commentator wrote:

If anyone was under the impression that Trump would receive fair and impartial treatment from our nation’s decorated and entrusted law enforcers, I have one word for you:

LOL.

--------------
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/12/04/politics/peter-strzok-james-comey/index.html
Washington (CNN)

A former top counterintelligence expert at the FBI, now at the center of a political uproar for exchanging private messages that appeared to mock President Donald Trump, changed a key phrase in former FBI Director James Comey's description of how former secretary of state Hillary Clinton handled classified information, according to US officials familiar with the matter.

Electronic records show Peter Strzok, who led the investigation of Hillary Clinton's private email server as the No. 2 official in the counterintelligence division, changed Comey's earlier draft language describing Clinton's actions as "grossly negligent" to "extremely careless," the sources said.
The drafting process was a team effort, CNN is told, with a handful of people reviewing the language as edits were made, according to another US official familiar with the matter.

FBI agent removed from Mueller investigation over anti-Trump messages
The shift from "grossly negligent" to "extremely careless," which may appear pedestrian at first glance, reflected a decision by the FBI that could have had potentially significant legal implications, as the federal law governing the mishandling of classified material establishes criminal penalties for "gross negligence."
Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, raised questions over why the change was made after receiving documents from the FBI last month, but the identity of who was behind the edit has not been reported until now.


CNN has also learned that Strzok was the FBI official who signed the document officially opening an investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election, according to sources familiar with the matter. As the No. 2 official in counterintelligence, Strzok was considered to be one of the bureau's top experts on Russia.
But the news of Strzok's direct role in the statement that ultimately cleared the former Democratic presidential candidate of criminal wrongdoing, now combined with the fact that he was dismissed from special counsel Robert Mueller's team after exchanging private messages with an FBI lawyer that could be seen as favoring Clinton politically, may give ammunition to those seeking ways to discredit Mueller's Russia investigation.
The FBI and the Justice Department declined to comment.

CNN reported in November that Comey and his FBI colleagues were "playing with the language" throughout the process of drafting Comey's statement on Clinton, believing that they needed to condemn the former secretary of state's handling of classified information, while also making clear they would not recommend criminal charges, according to a source familiar with the FBI decision.
Comey ultimately called Clinton's conduct "extremely careless," but said "no reasonable prosecutor" would pursue charges based on the evidence.
"Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information," Comey said back in July 2016.
Grassley said that documents the FBI provided to the Senate Judiciary Committee in November included an earlier draft of Comey's exoneration statement from May 2016, which stated: "There is evidence to support a conclusion that Secretary Clinton, and others, used the private email server in a manner that was grossly negligent with respect to the handling of classified material."
Grassley then asked for the electronic "metadata," which would include "who created the original drafts, who made the edits to the draft statement, and when those edits were made."
Sources familiar with the requests tell CNN that Grassley has received the metadata, but he wants the FBI to provide further explanation about the changes.
Grassley's office did not return a request for comment.
 
Think there was either a thread on this already or it was in the mueller thread. It’s concerning but no more bullshit than mark firman being in the oj investigation
 
That seems pretty reasonable. I consider her handling of classified, despite her being a top classification authority, as extremely careless, and not too far from grossly negligent. It's certainly a question the FBI had to consider carefully.
 
This is it .
they are finally gonna lock her up
 
As one commentator wrote:

If anyone was under the impression that Trump would receive fair and impartial treatment from our nation’s decorated and entrusted law enforcers, I have one word for you:

LOL.

Could you maybe extrapolate your position into more than one word?

Because that one word, even in context, isn't very persuasive to me that a bunch of old white conservative Republicans are out to get Donald Trump.
 
Could you maybe extrapolate your position into more than one word?

Because that one word, even in context, isn't very persuasive to me that a bunch of old white conservative Republicans are out to get Donald Trump.

You think old white republicans like Trump?
 
Fuck it. Trump should replace Wray with Guiliani and have him replace the entire upper level with partisans.

It's pretty obvious the Intelligence Agencies upper levels are political now.
 
That's a nifty comeback skinny

But you know as well as I that old white republicans don't really like Trump.
 
Wonder of he was the guy behind the immunity deals (immunity for 5 people in an investigation with no charges - Mills, Samuelson, Bentel, Pagliano, Combetta)
 
That's a nifty comeback skinny

But you know as well as I that old white republicans don't really like Trump.

Seriously, though, that's Trump's bread and butter. Old white Republicans voted for him at a level of like 70% in the primaries and 98% in the general. And "establishment" party members really have no reason whatsoever to fear him, let alone want to do away with him and piss off a huge faction of their supporters. If it was up to "old white republicans," there wouldn't be this investigation at all. It's truly a testament to the strength remaining, in whatever small amount, in our US political institutions that the investigation seems to be progressing professionally.

Only truly pathological Trump supporters have any sort of rationale to the contrary.

Honestly, it's kind of scary that you guys really think Robert Mueller and company are somehow biased against the sitting GOP executive.
 
Seriously, though, that's Trump's bread and butter. Old white Republicans voted for him at a level of like 70% in the primaries and 98% in the general. And "establishment" party members really have no reason whatsoever to fear him, let alone want to do away with him and piss off a huge faction of their supporters. If it was up to "old white republicans," there wouldn't be this investigation at all. It's truly a testament to the strength remaining, in whatever small amount, in our US political institutions that the investigation seems to be progressing professionally.

Only truly pathological Trump supporters have any sort of rationale to the contrary.

Honestly, it's kind of scary that you guys really think Robert Mueller and company are somehow biased against the sitting GOP executive.

Yea. I'm not sure on stats showing old white establishment republicans that drive BMWs. But you tend to just throw stuff out there

And you are definitely more Milo's type. He likes skinny feminine Black dudes
 
It's funny how the Liberal guys just eat up everything the FBI & CIA throw at them now.

As with most things. This will backfire on them. Just like backing the Neocons in Libya and Syria backfired.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top