Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 20

Thread: Strzok/Page Will Be Going To Prison For This

  1. #1 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    4,104
    Thanks
    18
    Thanked 806 Times in 671 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 326 Times in 306 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Strzok/Page Will Be Going To Prison For This

    They were the anonymous leaks all along, they not only started the whole Trump-Russia collusion narrative as an "insurance policy," in case the plebian voters didn't vote the way they wanted us to but they bolstered this narrative by leaking to the press as a fresh review of their texts/emails reveal:

    FBI agents' text messages spur congressional probe into possible news leaks

    Republican-led House and Senate committees are investigating whether leaders of the Russia counterintelligence investigation had contacts with the news media that resulted in improper leaks, prompted in part by text messages amongst senior FBI officials mentioning specific reporters, news organizations and articles.

    In one exchange, FBI counterintelligence agent Peter Strzok and bureau lawyer Lisa Page engaged in a series of texts shortly before Election Day 2016 suggesting they knew in advance about an article in The Wall Street Journal and would need to feign stumbling onto the story so it could be shared with colleagues.

    "Article is out, but hidden behind paywall so can't read it," Page texted Strzok on Oct. 24, 2016.

    "Wsj? Boy that was fast," Strzok texted back, using the initials of the famed financial newspaper. "Should I 'find' it and tell the team?"

    The text messages, which were reviewed by The Hill, show the two FBI agents discussed how they might make it appear they innocently discovered the article, such as through Google News alerts.

    "I can get it like I do every other article that hits any Google News alerts, seriously," Strzok wrote, adding he didn't want his team hearing about the article "from someone else."

    In one string of text messages just five days before Election Day 2016, Page, the lawyer, alerted Strzok, the counterintelligence agent, to a story in The Washington Post about a timeline in the controversial Hillary Clinton email investigation.

    Page mentions a conversation she had just had with FBI chief of staff James Rybicki and openly expressed concern the information about the FBI's timeline was too specific for comfort in the article.

    "Sorry, Rybicki called. Time line article in the post (sic) is super specific and not good. Doesn't make sense because I didn't have specific information to give."

    A few days earlier Strzok texted Page about another new article, suggesting it was anti-FBI. "Yep, the whole tone is anti-Bu. Just a tiny bit from us," he wrote.

    Page texted she had seen the article. "Makes me feel WAY less bad about throwing him under the bus to the forthcoming CF article," she texted. Congressional investigators are still trying to determine what the "CF article" reference means and who the agents thought they were trying to throw "under the bus."

    Republicans want to interview Page to determine if she assisted with any "forthcoming" articles or helped another FBI employee "give" information to the news media, particularly because she helped advise then-deputy director McCabe.

    Likewise, congressional investigators want to question Strzok about what he meant about the "tiny bit from us" reference.


    http://thehill.com/homenews/house/36...ble-news-leaks



    Other text messages reviewed by The Hill showed the two agents seemingly attempting to track down New York Times reporter Matt Apuzzo, who has covered the Russia collusion investigation.

    “We got a list of kids with their parents’ names. How many Matt Apuzzo’s (sic) could there be in DC,” Page texted. “Showed J a picture, he said he thinks he has seen a guy who kinda looks like that, but always really schlubby. I said that sounds like every reporter I have ever seen.”

    Strzok texted back, “He’s TOTALLY schlubby. Don’t you remember?”

    In another exchange, Strzok warns Page against using her work phone to hunt for information on the reporter.

    “I wouldn’t search on your work phone, no idea what that might trigger,” he texted.

    “Oops. Too late,” she responded.


    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018...nce-leaks.html

    Say goodnight scumbags, not only has your coup plot been exposed and discredited but it has now become legally actionable.

  2. #2 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    4,104
    Thanks
    18
    Thanked 806 Times in 671 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 326 Times in 306 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    While the DNC ministry of propaganda is busy pushing Wolff's book equivalent of the National Enquire this actual bombshell goes unreported.

  3. #3 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    108,120
    Thanks
    60,501
    Thanked 35,051 Times in 26,519 Posts
    Groans
    47,393
    Groaned 4,742 Times in 4,521 Posts
    Blog Entries
    61

    Default

    Here is a fascinating description of the DNC shenanigans, totally mindboggling.

    https://fabiusmaximus.com/2018/01/06...-the-dnc-hack/

    Sent from my Lenovo K8 using Tapatalk

  4. #4 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    42,254
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 22,245 Times in 13,970 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 3,056 Times in 2,851 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shape Shifter View Post
    Here is a fascinating description of the DNC shenanigans, totally mindboggling.

    https://fabiusmaximus.com/2018/01/06...-the-dnc-hack/

    Sent from my Lenovo K8 using Tapatalk
    That's pretty funny, now we see a Flat Earther website employed to supposedly expose Democrats, do any of you people ever migrate beyond sources that tell you exactly what you want to hear?

  5. The Following User Groans At archives For This Awful Post:

    cancel2 2022 (01-09-2018)

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to archives For This Post:

    Phantasmal (01-09-2018), Rune (01-09-2018)

  7. #5 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    42,254
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 22,245 Times in 13,970 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 3,056 Times in 2,851 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PraiseKek View Post
    They were the anonymous leaks all along, they not only started the whole Trump-Russia collusion narrative as an "insurance policy," in case the plebian voters didn't vote the way they wanted us to but they bolstered this narrative by leaking to the press as a fresh review of their texts/emails reveal:

    FBI agents' text messages spur congressional probe into possible news leaks

    Republican-led House and Senate committees are investigating whether leaders of the Russia counterintelligence investigation had contacts with the news media that resulted in improper leaks, prompted in part by text messages amongst senior FBI officials mentioning specific reporters, news organizations and articles.

    In one exchange, FBI counterintelligence agent Peter Strzok and bureau lawyer Lisa Page engaged in a series of texts shortly before Election Day 2016 suggesting they knew in advance about an article in The Wall Street Journal and would need to feign stumbling onto the story so it could be shared with colleagues.

    "Article is out, but hidden behind paywall so can't read it," Page texted Strzok on Oct. 24, 2016.

    "Wsj? Boy that was fast," Strzok texted back, using the initials of the famed financial newspaper. "Should I 'find' it and tell the team?"

    The text messages, which were reviewed by The Hill, show the two FBI agents discussed how they might make it appear they innocently discovered the article, such as through Google News alerts.

    "I can get it like I do every other article that hits any Google News alerts, seriously," Strzok wrote, adding he didn't want his team hearing about the article "from someone else."

    In one string of text messages just five days before Election Day 2016, Page, the lawyer, alerted Strzok, the counterintelligence agent, to a story in The Washington Post about a timeline in the controversial Hillary Clinton email investigation.

    Page mentions a conversation she had just had with FBI chief of staff James Rybicki and openly expressed concern the information about the FBI's timeline was too specific for comfort in the article.

    "Sorry, Rybicki called. Time line article in the post (sic) is super specific and not good. Doesn't make sense because I didn't have specific information to give."

    A few days earlier Strzok texted Page about another new article, suggesting it was anti-FBI. "Yep, the whole tone is anti-Bu. Just a tiny bit from us," he wrote.

    Page texted she had seen the article. "Makes me feel WAY less bad about throwing him under the bus to the forthcoming CF article," she texted. Congressional investigators are still trying to determine what the "CF article" reference means and who the agents thought they were trying to throw "under the bus."

    Republicans want to interview Page to determine if she assisted with any "forthcoming" articles or helped another FBI employee "give" information to the news media, particularly because she helped advise then-deputy director McCabe.

    Likewise, congressional investigators want to question Strzok about what he meant about the "tiny bit from us" reference.


    http://thehill.com/homenews/house/36...ble-news-leaks



    Other text messages reviewed by The Hill showed the two agents seemingly attempting to track down New York Times reporter Matt Apuzzo, who has covered the Russia collusion investigation.

    “We got a list of kids with their parents’ names. How many Matt Apuzzo’s (sic) could there be in DC,” Page texted. “Showed J a picture, he said he thinks he has seen a guy who kinda looks like that, but always really schlubby. I said that sounds like every reporter I have ever seen.”

    Strzok texted back, “He’s TOTALLY schlubby. Don’t you remember?”

    In another exchange, Strzok warns Page against using her work phone to hunt for information on the reporter.

    “I wouldn’t search on your work phone, no idea what that might trigger,” he texted.

    “Oops. Too late,” she responded.


    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018...nce-leaks.html

    Say goodnight scumbags, not only has your coup plot been exposed and discredited but it has now become legally actionable.
    Here you go, Feinstein released the actual transcript today, and you ain't going to like what it says

    https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/09/sen-...testimony.html

    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/di...rticle/2645399

    https://www.politico.com/story/2018/...founder-329573

    Of course you'll have no comment until you hear what the radio and Fox talking heads have to say first before you regurgitate their framing

    Next

  8. #6 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    6,183
    Thanks
    2,838
    Thanked 4,324 Times in 2,774 Posts
    Groans
    65
    Groaned 215 Times in 209 Posts

    Default

    Geez, these folks are getting desperate.

  9. #7 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    108,120
    Thanks
    60,501
    Thanked 35,051 Times in 26,519 Posts
    Groans
    47,393
    Groaned 4,742 Times in 4,521 Posts
    Blog Entries
    61

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by archives View Post
    That's pretty funny, now we see a Flat Earther website employed to supposedly expose Democrats, do any of you people ever migrate beyond sources that tell you exactly what you want to hear?
    You just can't stop yourself being an arsehole, it must be congenital!

    https://fabiusmaximus.com/about/politics/

  10. #8 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    4,104
    Thanks
    18
    Thanked 806 Times in 671 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 326 Times in 306 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by archives View Post
    Here you go, Feinstein released the actual transcript today, and you ain't going to like what it says

    https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/09/sen-...testimony.html

    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/di...rticle/2645399

    https://www.politico.com/story/2018/...founder-329573

    Of course you'll have no comment until you hear what the radio and Fox talking heads have to say first before you regurgitate their framing

    Next
    You didn't even bother to read the OP did you? It has fuck all to do with the dossier but rather text messages proving that Strzok and Page were leaking to the press. God you're fucking dumb.


    And just what do you think the testimony of a firm hired by the DNC to collude with the Russians on their behalf proves exactly?

    Oh from your one source which is not a proven member of the DNC ministry of propaganda, the Washington Examiner:

    Fusion GPS is a private research firm that was behind the so-called Trump dossier. The dossier was a compilation of intelligence reports put together by former British intelligence office Christopher Steele that contains salacious, mostly unverified allegations tying President Trump to Russia.

    Touche you really got me there fucktard, next.
    Last edited by PraiseKek; 01-09-2018 at 04:31 PM.

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to PraiseKek For This Post:

    cancel2 2022 (01-09-2018), Stretch (01-09-2018)

  12. #9 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    4,104
    Thanks
    18
    Thanked 806 Times in 671 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 326 Times in 306 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquillus in Exile View Post
    Geez, these folks are getting desperate.
    Excuse me you fucking dipshit? The texts are in the public sphere now and they prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Strzok and Page were leaking to the press, care to offer any form of rebuttal at all? Thought not.

  13. #10 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    6,183
    Thanks
    2,838
    Thanked 4,324 Times in 2,774 Posts
    Groans
    65
    Groaned 215 Times in 209 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PraiseKok View Post
    Excuse me you fucking dipshit? The texts are in the public sphere now and they prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Strzok and Page were leaking to the press, care to offer any form of rebuttal at all? Thought not.
    OMG, people in DC were LEAKING TO THE PRESS? That's Trump cleared, right there!

  14. #11 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    42,254
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 22,245 Times in 13,970 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 3,056 Times in 2,851 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PraiseKek View Post
    You didn't even bother to read the OP did you? It has fuck all to do with the dossier but rather text messages proving that Strzok and Page were leaking to the press. God you're fucking dumb.


    And just what do you think the testimony of a firm hired by the DNC to collude with the Russians on their behalf proves exactly?

    Oh from your one source which is not a proven member of the DNC ministry of propaganda, the Washington Examiner:

    Fusion GPS is a private research firm that was behind the so-called Trump dossier. The dossier was a compilation of intelligence reports put together by former British intelligence office Christopher Steele that contains salacious, mostly unverified allegations tying President Trump to Russia.

    Touche you really got me there fucktard, next.
    ah, certain sections of the "testimony of a firm" were leaked to feed and perpetuate the umpteen innuendos the right has created to use the call for a investigation as a deflection from actually looking at Russian involvement in the US elections

    It also questions the charge that the dossier was the basis for securing warrants or launching a Special Council investigation, claims underlying a good portion of the conservative conspiracies

  15. #12 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    4,104
    Thanks
    18
    Thanked 806 Times in 671 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 326 Times in 306 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquillus in Exile View Post
    OMG, people in DC were LEAKING TO THE PRESS? That's Trump cleared, right there!
    Leaking FBI material to the press is illegal.

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to PraiseKek For This Post:

    Stretch (01-09-2018)

  17. #13 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    life
    Posts
    52,794
    Thanks
    13,341
    Thanked 22,579 Times in 15,814 Posts
    Groans
    249
    Groaned 1,951 Times in 1,862 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PraiseKek View Post
    Leaking FBI material to the press is illegal.
    plus it was done with political intent.
    Why are these 2 still employed by the FBI? They've compromised everything they've touched

  18. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to anatta For This Post:

    cancel2 2022 (01-10-2018), PraiseKek (01-09-2018), Stretch (01-09-2018)

  19. #14 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    6,183
    Thanks
    2,838
    Thanked 4,324 Times in 2,774 Posts
    Groans
    65
    Groaned 215 Times in 209 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PraiseKek View Post
    Leaking FBI material to the press is illegal.
    Still wouldn't help Trump if Strzok and Page broke into Fort Knox. It's what Mueller finds that matters now.

  20. #15 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    4,104
    Thanks
    18
    Thanked 806 Times in 671 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 326 Times in 306 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by archives View Post
    ah, certain sections of the "testimony of a firm" were leaked to feed and perpetuate the umpteen innuendos the right has created to use the call for a investigation as a deflection from actually looking at Russian involvement in the US elections
    No I use the undeniable fact that they were working for Clinton and that Christopher Steele was actively colluding with the FSB on their behalf to get disinformation on Trump, I, also, use the Strzok emails/texts. I'm not even sure what leaked testimony you are referring to.

    It also questions the charge that the dossier was the basis for securing warrants or launching a Special Council investigation, claims underlying a good portion of the conservative conspiracies
    Lol, ya they were fucking in on it, so why should we take their word? And if they weren't in on it then how and why the fuck would they know the basis of the FISA warrants? Regardless this thread has nothing to do with any of that but rather the new investigation into the Strzok Page texts regarding leaks to the media.

Similar Threads

  1. the shooter's video page
    By tinfoil in forum Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-10-2011, 11:34 AM
  2. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 12-25-2010, 01:53 PM
  3. Buried On Page 20
    By Cancel7 in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 11-19-2007, 12:52 PM
  4. Condi Not on the Right Page
    By OrnotBitwise in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 07-31-2006, 03:57 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •