The current attempt to discredit the Mueller investigation--which is reaching a fever-pitch on FOX and other pro-Trump media--involves private text messages sent by FBI agent Peter Strzok. For example, "God, Trump is a loathsome human being." 2/x
-
-
Show this thread
-
The most incriminating-seeming text Strzok privately sent sayings "there’s no way he gets elected—but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk." According to critics, this is evidence of a conspiracy at the FBI to help Hillary Clinton defeat Trump. 3/x
Show this thread -
The FBI publicly drew attention to its investigation into Hillary's emails shortly before the election, while keeping quiet about its investigation into Trump's ties to Russia. If that was a conspiracy to help Hillary win, it was awfully confused. 4/x
Show this thread -
Stewart Baker, a lawyer who served as Assistant Secretary for Policy in the Department of Homeland Security under George W. Bush, provides a good explanation of why Strzok’s "insurance policy" text is not at all evidence of a conspiracy here: 5/xhttps://www.lawfareblog.com/peter-strzoks-insurance-policy …
Show this thread -
It turns out Strzok also texted that Bernie Sanders is "an idiot" and “I’m worried about what happens if HRC is elected.” And, it bears repeating, these are private text messages. Privately sharing an opinion isn't a crime. Thankfully. 6/x
Show this thread -
Strzok was removed from the Mueller investigation over the summer, which was the right decision, because appearance of impartiality is important to any law enforcement effort. 7/x
Show this thread -
And oversight of law enforcement and intelligence agencies is crucial. There are many cases in US history where officials have abused their power. Privately expressing opinions isn't one of them. However, DOJ selectively publicizing private text messages might be. 8/x
Show this thread -
What's clear is the people trying to make a big deal out of Strzok's private opinions aren't motivated by the rule of law, oversight, the integrity of law enforcement, or other laudable concerns. Quite the opposite. They're trying to undermine the rule of law. 9/x
Show this thread -
Two Trump officials confessed to felonies. Two others are under indictment. Anyone charged is innocent until proven guilty. But publicly available information indicates there's likely enough evidence to bring charges against others. Trump loyalists are right to be nervous. 10/x
Show this thread -
“If the facts are against you, argue the law. If the law is against you, argue the facts. If the law and the facts are against you, pound the table and yell like hell.” Yelling about one FBI agent's private political opinions is an especially desperate table pounding. (END)
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
One agent who changed Comey’s statement on Hillary to non criminality and the same DOJ who gave everyone immunity but demnaded they destroy all possible evidence as a condition...Yup ..Nothing to see here..Move along...
-
I should have mentioned this, thanks for bringing it up. Public statements from government agencies seek input from multiple officials. Drafts get edited many times. If you think one agent could force the director to use any specific wording, you have no idea how this works.
-
No it was multiple ..At least the reports I saw last night..But he was among them...McCabe was one also ..The “Andy” in the text with Page about insurance I assume..The whole thing may all be coincidence but I believe that requires suspension of reality.. My 2cents Cheers!
-
What's a coincidence? A bunch of officials working together to craft a public statement that best reflects their agency's assessment is normal procedure.
-
And when the final product is VASTLY different than the initial draft? And every possible negative word towards Clinton is walked back??? Like I said a suspension of belief..At least on my part and I have an open mind...I guess we will see!! Btw great having an exchange of ideas!
-
"VASTLY" is overstating. "Extremely careless" is hardly positive. But to whatever extent the edits reflected pro-Clinton bias, the FBI more than made up for it by publicizing the email investigation. Regardless, that's not a reason to ignore the law or dismiss evidence now.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.