https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-has-concealed-details-of-his-face-to-face-encounters-with-putin-from-senior-officials-in-administration/2019/01/12/65f6686c-1434-11e9-b6ad-9cfd62dbb0a8_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.63c1830c0541

I don't think this story is as damning as some are portraying it. It's somewhat suspicious, but Trump runs an incompetent administration, and he's obsessed over leaks. Plus, the story's main focus is on the Hamburg meeting, where Tillerson was present and provided a readout. Trump's not going to discuss a conspiracy between him and Putin while Rex is sitting there.

obama terrorist

Look like this discussion really happened

scary

and then there was this;

"We need to open the case we've been waiting on now while Andy is acting"

text sent from Strzok to Page, just hours after Comey was fired
and the reply from page:

"We need to lock in (redacted). In a formal chargeable way. Soon."


Comey was not willing to let the FBI turn into a full blown arm of the DNC. McCabe/Strzok were foaming at the bit. It shouldn't be a surprise that within hours of McCabe getting the captain's chair, they set sail for the full blown anti-Trump crusade that Comey had held back. And they undertook that mad rush when congress was already deliberating appointing a special counsel, just an 8 day interim before Mueller took over. And now people want to look back and give the overzealousness of McCabe/Strzok credence as if its evidence of the FBI as an institution issuing a damning indictment of Trump. Its just the actions of radicals abusing their office to attack a political opponent. There wasn't even a shred of neutrality or professionalism in their unceremonious rush to jump over Comey's body to inb4 congress.

This post was edited by Goomshill on Jan 14 2019 05:57am

Opening a legitimate investigation before Trump can install some lackey at the FBI seems like... I don't know... common sense?

I mean really... wait for the Trump hacks in Congress to appoint a Special Counsel? At this point you're obviously trolling.

Anyone who looks at the facts surrounding that time period understands why the FBI opened the investigation. You're just making pronouncements without talking about any of the evidence.

Was Comey the lackey of Trump now? McCabe and Strzok had clearly wanted to investigate Trump and Comey suppressed them, and within a matter of hours of Comey being ousted they were already plotting to go after Trump. Congress was openly calling for a special counsel, Warner was meeting with Rosenstein, and indeed Rosenstein within a week appointed Mueller. So what good reason did the FBI have to suddenly flip around and point both barrels at Trump over 'muh russia'? Even if you could somehow pretend that the firing of Comey itself- despite the justification penned by Rosenstein- could justify investigating Trump for obstruction of justice, that still wouldn't even come remotely close to being an impetus to say 'muh russia' and be a reason to suddenly change course and accuse him of being a Russian agent. That's absurd. Its obvious from Strzok/Pages texts and the entire history of McCabe and his abuses in office that they all wanted to accuse Trump of being a Russian agent long before Comey's firing, and they only got the chance to act on it the day Comey was fired.

You trying to rationalize the actions of the FBI as if they are all consummate professionals with only the purest interests of our nation at stake- its like watching someone keep trying to cram the square peg into the round hole and just unable to see why it doesn't fit. Its not like its some grand mystery what the motivations of the actors were and their reputations spotless. We already know Strzok was vehemently anti-Trump, we already know McCabe was not only throwing darts at a picture of Trump but corrupt and illegally leaking to the WSJ for personal benefit. There was nothing legitimate about a mad rush to impugn the guy they hated in the few days of control they had over the department. There's no way to divorce their actions from the political stain on them.

How much evidence do you need? We have Strzok's texts, we have Page's testimony, we have the OIG report on McCabe. Its well established they had a hate-boner for Trump and no smoking gun to justify them. We have them on the record stating that they wanted to open the investigations the minute Comey was out of the way and McCabe took control. That's not an FBI functioning in an impartial, apolitical manner. That's the nuts taking over the nuthouse.

You act as if Comey didn't have the same concerns as McCabe and Strzok. He did. Go read his book or listen to the interviews/testimony he gave. Everyone outside the Trump cult was concerned about whether Trump was compromised, for a multitude of reasons. Comey was abundantly cautious, but after Trump fired him and said a bunch of suspicious shit over a period of a week, McCabe rightly opened the investigation.

The problem with everyone criticizing McCabe, Strzok, and Page are they only look at their words and actions from one side, without looking at the context of the times they were in. I don't view these FBI officials as angels... I look at the evidence we knew of at the time and the actions they took, which are absolutely warranted.

Here's a nice little roundup from Clint Watts, which is only what we know publicly:
https://twitter.com/selectedwisdom/status/1084498964114821120

Did we do the Collusion yet?

Still waiting for confirmation of the confirming of Collusion. IceWizard - fill me in!

Absolutely warranted? So what is it, do you think Rosenstein was unwarranted in recommending Comey's firing and OIG Horowitz was unwarranted in recommending the terminations of McCabe, Strzok and Page and recommending the former for criminal charges? Does your deep-seated deference to authority have a blind spot for those who watch the watchmen? We know that between the anti-Trump dream team, they engaged in misconduct and held wanton biases and political motivations that they allowed to interfere with their work. That's not the same as saying the Mueller probe itself is tainted as fruit of a poisonous tree, but its enough to be deeply skeptical of the specific actions and priorities of those officials we already know were abusing their offices. And here we have a story of such a specific action: McCabe/Strzok jumping at the opportunity to weaponize the FBI against Trump within hours of the abundantly cautious Comey being ousted. Even to just investigate him for firing Comey as 'obstruction' already treads deep into the waters of vindictive misuse of investigatory powers to retaliate against a president for reining in the FBI, but as the story the past few days developed, they were just going full blown Russiaburger to investigate him as "Russian asset", something you can't possibly justify as a response to Comey's firing.

To look at this story from the lens of bad faith actors looking to abuse their office to further their agendas, the glove fits. To look through the lens of apolitical professionals engaging in a neutral manner- its nonsensical. What good reason did the FBI have to try to preempt congress and Rosenstein when that was already being debated in public view? If someone level-headed like Comey was at the helm, he'd say 'lets wait prudently for a special counsel'. They were in the meeting with Rosenstein considering that very proposal. Even if a hypothetical truly neutral-hearted actor could feel the need for an investigation in that moment, they would have the good sense to know that stepping over Comey's body before its cold would give every appearance of a vendetta.

Probably same old news and takes presented in a new spin incoming.