Mueller's Investigation

What a coincidence

Things look very bad for Peter Strzok.

There is nothing inherently wrong with an FBI agent, investigator or official having strong political leanings. However, there is something very wrong when such political leanings influence and impact job performance. Strzok has seemingly crossed that line. I haven’t seen evidence suggesting that McCabe or Mueller have done so.

However:
“A former senior Trump administration official said Strzok was evenhanded in all his dealings with the Trump White House. "I had the occasion to work closely with Special Agent Peter Strzok and never experienced even a hint of political bias. He was one of the most competent [counterintelligence] agents, and a role model," the official said. "The country is tearing itself apart, and men like Pete Strzok are victims. The enemy is better off with him sidelined," the former official added, referring to foreign adversaries.”

www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-fbi-officials-removed-20171202-story,amp.html

Reports:

Four other members of the Special Counsel shared similar texts/emails of Anti-Trump sentiments with others within and outside of the Probe. These are high ranking lawyers that are involved in the Probe.

uess whose raw signals intelligence is being shared?

Why, members of Muellers' team!

How come?

Because they're LEAKING. Which is ILLEGAL.

Strzok was the special agent who also interviewed Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin, in which they falsely claimed they didn't know about Hillary's email server when she was Secretary of State.

Here's a theory:

FLynn grants an interview to FBI that he is not required to give.

Flynn deliberately mis-states a detail that is in conflict with the word-for-word transcripts the FBI already has....

Flynn (and Trumps team) watch to see what Strzok will do with the info.

All I want is... for this crap to go away. It's been more than a year since the election. It's time to stop the daily quest for impeachment. There has been ZERO evidence of collusion, and no real explanation of why collusion would even be illegal if there was? All I've seen is: Evidence that Obama and his goons used false pretenses to spy on the Trump campaign, and to widely share the things they learned.

Years ago, when Clinton was impeached, one of the arguments against doing it that always seemed possible to me was: If we do it, EVERY President in the modern era will continuously face the same threat, and we'll exist in a constant state of impeachment processes.

For sure, Dems have been in that mode ever since. With W, and now with Trump. I don't think they'll be placated until they've returned the favor. R's didn't seem so interested in it with Obama. The daily drama is just over-the-top.

Comey doesn't seem to fazed by all of these revelations.

Hmmm....is he a white hat? Was he flipped?

Or, was he simply told that Strzok was the fixer/cleaner for Obama/Clinton/Holder/Lynch and was told to stay out of his way?

We shall see.

Someone at the FBI has certainly painted a clear and concise picture for Trump.

Remember, Trump/Sessions/Flynn at that point had already seen the evidence how Strzok let Hillary/Huma/Cheryl walk without any charges at all after telling hordes of blatant lies. They already HAVE the emails.