FbgTxAg said:

---

Correct me if I'm wrong - but didn't Judge Ellis get this stuff?

---

No. Ellis finally got the unredacted August 2, 2107 Rosenstein memo expanding Mueller's jurisdiction.

No he got to view the unredacted memo from Rosenstein expanding the scope of the Mueller probe.

Amazing even in renewing of the FISA, they mentioned that the FBI had to fire their source for lying to them, but they still keep his garbage in the warrant application? Just amazing.

These judges have got some explaining to do

Even Trump is going after Collyer.

Another peculiar anomaly. Horowitz reports to Sessions, but with the recusal, wouldn't Rosenstein be included in the chain of command regarding certain matters? Rosenstein must have known that Horowitz was investigating the Strzok texts before July, & consequently he signed the renewal early (June) in anticipation that Strzok's future contributions were in jeopardy. Rosenstein is a black hat like Mueller IMO.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1020994266389196800.html

Quote:

---

...Guess who was Unit Chief of the National Security Law Branch, effectively the "new" Michael Woods at the time of the @carterwpage FISA applications?

SALLY MOYER

Someone who @DevinNunes has wanted to talk to for a long time

Did she falsely certify verification of the dossier? ...

---

Interesting thread. Another name that may soon come into focus.

drcrinum said:

---

Another peculiar anomaly. Horowitz reports to Sessions, but with the recusal, wouldn't Rosenstein be included in the chain of command regarding certain matters? Rosenstein must have known that Horowitz was investigating the Strzok texts before July, & consequently he signed the renewal early (June) in anticipation that Strzok's future contributions were in jeopardy. Rosenstein is a black hat like Mueller IMO.

---

Where exactly did Rosenstein sign off on the 3rd renewal?

Because we can all do math here, the assumption was the final renewal was in July but we were wrong. I think two things were at play, while McCabe was Acting Director and a known quantity before Wray's confirmation was one and the second was likely Horowitz was getting too close.

Since the Special Agent signing all of the apps and renewals is redacted, it could have been Strzok but doubt he would have still been in position to do so once he was on Team Mueller. (Remember, Strzok is not a lawyer, if he signed any of them, he signed as an agent, not a lawyer.)

I don't know the precise date Strzok joined the Mueller Team. But we do know Horowitz showed both Mueller and Rosenstein the text messages in the July26-27, 2017 range, after the third FISA renewal.

I can't get the image to load but it is page 100 of the third application for renewal.

aggiehawg said:

---

I can't get the image to load but it is page 100 of the third application for renewal.

---

Got it, I somehow over looked it

I don't know exact date he has brought on either, but Strzok was angling to get assigned to "fix it" from the moment Mueller was appointed

FBI helped fund the phony dossier

BMX Bandit said:

---

I don't know exact date he has brought on either, but Strzok was angling to get assigned to "fix it" from the moment Mueller was appointed

---

I am not sure about that as he said to Page he didn't think there was any "there there". But what do you mean about "fix it"?

BMX Bandit said:

---

I don't know exact date he has brought on either, but Strzok was angling to get assigned to "fix it" from the moment Mueller was appointed

---

VERY good point

aggiehawg said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

I don't know exact date he has brought on either, but Strzok was angling to get assigned to "fix it" from the moment Mueller was appointed

---

I am not sure about that as he said to Page he didn't think there was any "there there". But what do you mean about "fix it"?

---

It's in his texts, I'll find it

I pulled this chart from a post on The Burning Platform.

The page is an extract from a Gallup Poll analysis written July 18. The highlighted line is about Russia as an issue.



Methodology from the Survey, for those who care (This is preamble in the downloaded report, the only way detail is available):

Quote:

---

Results are based on telephone interviews conducted July 1-11, 2018 with a random sample of 1,033adults, ages 18+, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia. For results based on this sample of national adults, the margin of sampling error is 4 percentage points at the 95% confidence level.


For results based on the sample of 528national adults in Form A, the margin of sampling error is 5 percentage points.

For results based on the sample of 505national adults in Form B, the margins of sampling error is 5 percentage points.

For results based on the sample of 133smokers, the maximum margin of sampling error is 10 percentage points.

For results based on the sample of 900non-smokers, the maximum margin of sampling error is 4 percentage points.

For results based on the sample of 678adults who drink alcoholic beverages, the maximum margin of sampling error is 4 percentage points.

Interviews are conducted with respondents on landline telephones and cellular phones, with interviews conducted in Spanish for respondents who are primarily Spanish-speaking. Each sample of national adults includes a minimum quota of 70% cell phone respondents and 30% landline respondents, with additional minimum quotas by time zone within region. Landline and cell phone telephone numbers are selected using random digit dial methods. Gallup obtained sample for this study from Survey Sampling International. Landline respondents are chosen at random within each household on the basis of which member has the next birthday.

Samples are weighted to correct for unequal selection probability, non-response, and double coverage of landline and cell users in the two sampling frames. They are also weighted to match the national demographics of gender, age, race, Hispanic ethnicity, education, region, population density, and phone status (cell phone-only/landline only/both and cell phone mostly).

Demographic weighting targets are based on the March 2017 Current Population Survey figures for the aged 18 and older U.S. population. Phone status targets are based on the July-December 2017 National Health Interview Survey. Population density targets are based on the 2010 census. All reported margins of sampling error include the computed design effects for weighting.

---

Apparently, the American people D.G.A.S. !!!

You have to ask Strzok. Those were his words to Page.

Point is, he was angling to get on from beginning. And it wasn't for career advancement. He had other reasons.

BMX Bandit said:

---

You have to ask Strzok. Those were his words to Page.

Point is, he was angling to get on from beginning. And it wasn't for career advancement. He had other reasons.

---

You have to remember the mind set of these two during the MYE they were trying to ensure HRC got elected, sitting on the Weiner laptop, changing language in the letter clearing her, on Strzok computer by the way, and then Trump won. "Unfinished Business"

"Fix it and Finish it" to me means impeach Trump. HRC was a lost cause.

Thanks. I had forgotten about that. Hope Page was asked specifically about that.

Mueller was appointed Special Counsel on May 17, 2017. The next day Strzok and Page exchanged text messages in a discussion of whether Strzok should join the Special Counsel's investigation.

I'm editorializing this to make it make more sense

Strzok wrote: "For me, and this case, I personally have a sense of unfinished business. I unleashed it with MYE [Midyear Exam, the investigation into Clinton's emails]. Now I need to fix it and finish it."

Later in the same exchange, Strzok, apparently while weighing his career options, made this comparison: "Who gives a f*ck, one more A[ssistant] D[irector][versus] [a]n investigation leading to impeachment?"



Then later in this exchange as Dixie said, Strzok stated, "you and I both know the odds are nothing. If I thought it was likely I'd be there no question. I hesitate in part because of my gut sense and concern there's no big there there."

aggiehawg said:

---

Thanks. I had forgotten about that. Hope Page was asked specifically about that.

---

Well according to Strzok's testimony:

"It wasn't so much the investigation about Secretary Clinton, but then how it played into, how it was being portrayed in the political environment, how it was being leveraged by the government of Russia and all the social media disseminations." What he wanted to fix was the misperception that Russia hadn't tried to influence the election."

But according to reports Page said:

Page suggested that the "unfinished business" was "a reflection of our Director having been fired" [Comey]

This just doesn't stand up to the facts at hand and it damn sure doesn't pass the smell test at all. Again, Strzok specifically referenced "MYE" in his "unfinished business" statement. If he had meant Comey, he would have probably mentioned Comey. He did not.

And, the fact that Page and Strzok have two entirely different interpretations of this text message tells you that the alibis and CYA actions are in full force here. Given the thousands and thousands of texts between these two, one can't reasonably believe that the meaning of this one text wasn't clear. Page knew Strzok very, very well. Most of their communications were carried out via text message. They rarely (if ever) had to ask each other what one of their texts meant that I can see. The idea that she had a different understanding of this one text than Strzok had defies credulity. They both know exactly what this text meant. That's why they are now coming up with unbelievable alternate explanations. Because they know how damning this is. Just not buying either of their BS stories.

My take is that Strzok felt somewhat responsible for Hillary's loss because of the mishandling of the Weiner laptop materials. The delay put it too close to the election. Which led to Trump winning. And then to "fix it" he was hoping to be able to impeach Trump, perhaps on the faulty obstruction of justice tag being placed on the firing of Comey.

Strzok isn't a lawyer, although his FBI training should have been detailed enough that he knew a lot about the law, since impeaching Trump on obstruction of justice based solely on Comey's firing is more of a Constitutional law issue, he lacked the full understanding of how unlikely that was.

Now as a practical matter, having someone in a non-appointed position at the FBI so politically motivated, instead of protecting the security of the American people is quite troubling. When SCOTUS says it isn't within their authority to "correct" the will of the American voting public, it sure as hell isn't within the authority of some FBI puke.

Trying to build a timeline on when Strzok was brought on by Mueller

On Jun 25th 2017 Page texted "Don't ever contact me again. You can say for pretty much certainty that's not long after the moment she knew their texts were in the hands of Horowitz.



According to Horowitz testimony, "politically-oriented" text messages between Strzok and Page were found in his office's initial search. That led to me requesting all messages between the two through the end of last November. Those messages were produced by the FBI on July 20 of this year and Mueller and Rosenstein were informed about them a week later, on July 27."

Mueller removed Strzok Aug 1st 2017 and he was sent to work in HR

According to testimony he was only on the team 75 days. Most articles just say two months.

Given the 75 days that's puts him on the team May 19, 2017

Quote:

---

Given the 75 days that's puts him on the team May 19, 2017

---

That's the same day he was weighing the decision in texts with Page and made the there's no there, there statement so I think it would have been a day or two after the 19th.

Maria's interview of Bill Browder. Interesting to listen to regarding his comments about Fusion GPS, Veselnitskaya and the Trump Tower Meeting....start about 3:15 mark to hear it.

Rubio is dirty in this somehow there is no other explanation for this. Rubio's involvement may just be he was aware of the illegal counter intel Obama was running against the Trump team and turned a blind eye. I know he's chummy with McCain, and despises Trump regardless of what he says now. Trump clowned him on stage and beat him in his own states primary.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Given the 75 days that's puts him on the team May 19, 2017

---

That's the same day he was weighing the decision in texts with Page and made the there's no there, there statement so I think it would have been a day or two after the 19th.

---

I also saw a report he was removed on the Aug 4th I just picked one and did the math

I honestly went with the first number because that would mean Mueller waited a week before getting rid of Strzok. That is not a good look.

Or Rubio is just an idiot and easily led around by the nose.



Here he is with two of his nose ring holders.

ETA: Finally!

No surprise here

Prognightmare said:

---

No surprise here

---

No surprise that a lawyer advocated for their client?

Concord lost that fight by the way (it was from May)

RoscoePColtrane said:

---

Rubio is dirty in this somehow there is no other explanation for this. Rubio's involvement may just be he was aware of the illegal counter intel Obama was running against the Trump team and turned a blind eye. I know he's chummy with McCain, and despises Trump regardless of what he says now. Trump clowned him on stage and beat him in his own states primary.

---

Don't forget -- Rubio sits on the Senate Intel Committee with Warner & Feinstein, plus McCain is an 'ex officio' member. That Committee is a bed of snakes. It recently endorsed Obama's ICA (Intelligence Community Assessment).