Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, February 07, 2018

An FBI lawyer wrote in a text to her lover in late 2016 that then-president Barack Obama wanted updates on the Hillary Clinton email investigation. Two months before the presidential election, Lisa Page wrote to fellow FBI official Peter Strzok that she was working on a memo for then-FBI director James Comey because Obama 'wants to know everything we're doing.'

Text messages between Page and Strzok that emerged also showed their hatred for Donald Trump. In August 2016 Strzok wrote to her that he wanted to believe 'that there's no way he gets elected -- but I'm afraid we can't take that risk. It's like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you're 40.'

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

It's unclear what that 'insurance policy' was, but the Justice Department was at the time debating an approach to a federal court for a surveillance warrant against Trump adviser Carter Page.

Strzok was elevated to overseeing the Trump Russia probe a month earlier.

In a text sent on October 20, 2016, Strzok called the Republican presidential nominee a 'f***ing idiot.'

On Election Day, Page wrote to him: 'OMG THIS IS F***ING TERRIFYING.'

Strzok replied, 'Omg, I am so depressed.'

Five days later, Page texted him again: 'I bought All the President's Men. Figure I need to brush up on watergate.No bias here, please look away.

-The Left.

The plot continues to thicken.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

It also looks like Barry and James weren't entirely forthcoming about POTUS' involvement in the Clinton email investigation, but that is old news.

#1 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-02-07 12:36 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

is this as earthshaking as the nunes memo was supposed to be?
If so then you all really have these people where you want them, again.

#2 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2018-02-07 01:02 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

You tell me, Chief...do you think this shows bias?

#3 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-02-07 01:03 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Wow... FBI agents have personal opinions about various different pols that they share in private texts?

That's what I call news!

#4 | Posted by Corky at 2018-02-07 01:06 PM | Reply

You tell me, Chief...do you think this shows bias?

#3 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

It absolutely shows bias. The question is, did they allow said bias to influence how they went about their jobs?

I don't know. I certainly hope not.

#5 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-02-07 01:11 PM | Reply

#4

It is news when they are the supposedly unbiased investigators, sorry you can't see that.

#6 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-02-07 01:40 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Is there evidence where bias in the FBI or government resulted in improper behavior?
Yes, New York FBI agents threatened to leak info on Hillary's email investigation and GOP house members did.
No dems leaked about the Trump campaign investigation.
So yes there is bias, but only republicans are corrupt.

#7 | Posted by bored at 2018-02-07 01:46 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 5

Righto,

I think you are conflating 2 separate issues:

Personal/political biases - most people, including law enforcement officials, have them.

Personal/political biases tainting one's work.

Yes, that they were so open regarding their biases is some cause for concern. Certainly, suggesting that Trump cannot be allowed to be POTUS and that they have an 'insurance policy' raises some serious eyebrows. But none of that is proof that they were abusing their powers in an investigation. Do these texts warrant closer scrutiny? I think so, but their existence, by itself, isn't necessarily indicative of abuse of power or unethical behavior.

#8 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-02-07 01:48 PM | Reply

"It is news when they are the supposedly unbiased investigators"

nobody is unbiased, fool.

the real question is; do they tell you the whole story or just the parts that reinforce their bias, (aka, like you and sean hannity do)

#9 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2018-02-07 01:52 PM | Reply | Funny: 2 | Newsworthy 1

"It is news when they are the supposedly unbiased investigators..."

If you cherry-pick.

If instead, you only point to Strzok's negative texts about Bernie Sanders, Eric Holder, and Chelsea Clinton, or the fact he wrote the initial draft to reopen the HRC investigation, or the fact he co-wrote the Comey letter, or the fact one of his texts included the phrase "I'm worried about what happens if HRC is elected"...

...well, you might get a different bowl of cherries.

#10 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-02-07 01:52 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Advertisement

Advertisement

"It is news when they are the supposedly unbiased investigators, sorry you can't see that."

Everyone has biases, including judges and investigators, whether they are in LE or on a House or Senate committee. Jeff is right--the question is: Did their biases influence their work?

#11 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-02-07 02:08 PM | Reply

10

Looks like somebody read the vanity fair article.

#12 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2018-02-07 02:09 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

8-11

I get that everyone has biases and that the key question is whether those biases impacted their work.

At least in the case of Strzok, his open disdain for Trump isn't the issue, but the fact that he is stating that he is working on "insurance" in case Trump wins, from an impeachment standpoint, is a great cross examination fact. Whether he is allowing his bias to interfere with his work is open for interpretation, but from a defense standpoint, that one text alone would destroy his credibility on the stand and taint any findings, right or wrong, that he made.

No wonder Mueller removed him from the Russia investigation.

#13 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-02-07 04:14 PM | Reply

#9

Congrats for almost managing a cogent post without the typical ad hominum attack.

#14 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-02-07 04:16 PM | Reply

Criminals really hate it when the FBI is biased against criminals.

You want to see some biased texts?

Let us see Humpy Trumpy's and his crony's texts.

Hell... just read his dumbass tweets.

#15 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-02-07 04:33 PM | Reply

This is going to be a lot like the election of Donald J. Trump as President of the United States of America.

Lots of people here on this site were as certain Hillary would win as they are of Trump colluding with Russia and the FBI being objective in their investigation into the Hillary emails and spying on Trump.

The facts are coming out, the signs are there, just as they were in the election.

#16 | Posted by sawdust at 2018-02-07 05:29 PM | Reply

"as they are of Trump colluding with Russia "

You must have missed this:

Russia: Hey Junior, let's collude!
Junior: I LOVE IT!
Russia: We'll bring others.
Junior: I'll lie about it!

If they tried to collude and failed, that's still attempted collusion.

#17 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-02-07 05:41 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Tsk tsk, another example of what happens when people forget that there is to be no assumed privacy on a _ work _ phone.

#18 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2018-02-07 05:51 PM | Reply

The facts are coming out

#16 | Posted by sawdust at 2018-02-07 05:29 PM | Reply | Flag:

Yes, they are. But what I think you're pointing to is not what interests the rest of us.

Are Donald Trump and his family literal traitors? I don't know. Have they done things that are traitorOUS, very likely. Are they money-launderers? Almost without doubt. Is one or more than one of them being blackmailed by a foreign power? Bet money on it.

#19 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-07 05:59 PM | Reply

#17 DANFORTH, you mean like Schiff tried to collude with the Russians?

#20 | Posted by sawdust at 2018-02-07 06:09 PM | Reply

#20 | Posted by sawdust at 2018-02-07

What's weird about people like you is your conviction the investigation into Trump is an issue of Party loyalty rather than simple patriotism.

If anyone is a traitor, they need to be hanged. But we'll do it one at a time, lest Donald Trump gets lost in the crowd.

#21 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-07 06:12 PM | Reply

--If anyone is a traitor, they need to be hanged.

I thought we were done with Zed's creepy fantasies about Trump.

#22 | Posted by nullifidian at 2018-02-07 06:15 PM | Reply

"they need to be hanged"... Wow, as the whole Russia narrative starts to disintegrate the Dems get more shrill.

Get some counseling and follow Mueller's lead.

He has given up on the whole collusion thing and is busy setting up perjury traps so he has something to show for all the money and time he has wasted.

#23 | Posted by sawdust at 2018-02-07 08:28 PM | Reply

"He has given up on the whole collusion thing and is busy setting up perjury traps so he has something to show for all the money and time he has wasted."

Who said Mueller has given up on the whole collusion thing? I'll grant you going after Trump on obstruction of justice and perjury charges (he is a pathological liar, to use Bernie's term) is low hanging fruit, but I've seen no evidence that Mueller is no longer looking into potential Team Trump and Russia collusion.

#24 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-02-07 09:03 PM | Reply

Just an observation.

There still is no concrete evidence of real collusion with the Russians by Trump.

All the info leaked by the Mueller team is about things other than collusion.

Also, note that the leaks from the Mueller team are well timed and strategic (not by accident).

With all the shade being thrown on the legitimacy of the underlying justification to spy on Trump, I would think that if Mueller had something he would have leaked it by now.

#25 | Posted by sawdust at 2018-02-07 09:35 PM | Reply

#25

No "shade" has been thrown at all. Mueller doesn't leak. You are a fool believing Grade C propaganda or a cynical abettor of same.

#26 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-07 09:47 PM | Reply

Mueller doesn't leak...

#26 | POSTED BY ZED

Mueller hasn't leaked. It's a subtle but very important distinction.

Given the duration of this investigation, I can cite on one set of fingers the problems I've had with this investigation.

Mueller nor the people working under him are perfect, but I've seen nothing to suggest that this investigation is anything other than professional and above the bar.

#27 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-02-07 09:56 PM | Reply

Quick search...

Another day, another potentially illegal leak from special counsel Robert Mueller's grand jury investigating Russian election meddling.

NBC News reported Monday that Mueller has "gathered enough evidence" to indict former national security adviser Michael Flynn and his son.

This followed the earlier leak to CNN -- 72 hours in advance -- that the grand jury had voted the first indictments in the investigation, later identified as former campaign chairman Paul Manafort and his business associate Rick Gates.

And that raises the suspicion that the special counsel may be playing politics with his prosecutions.
-------

"A person familiar with the probe" told Bloomberg that the special counsel is examining a broad range of transactions involving Trump and his associates' businesses.

The leak comes the day after Trump told the New York Times in an interview that delving into his business matters would be outside the bounds of the Russia investigation.
-------

#28 | Posted by sawdust at 2018-02-08 07:33 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"the key question is whether those biases impacted their work"

does your bias impact your work?

#29 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2018-02-08 09:49 AM | Reply

"The leak comes the day after Trump told the New York Times in an interview that delving into his business matters would be outside the bounds of the Russia investigation."

Whitewater and Monica Lewinski. Nuf said.

#30 | Posted by danni at 2018-02-08 09:58 AM | Reply

does your bias impact your work?

#29 | POSTED BY CHIEFTUTMOSES AT 2018-02-08 09:49 AM

I have represented very different types of people over the 25+ years I have been practicing law and one of the things that was constantly drilled into all of the lawyers I have worked with, from the DA's office through private practice is that everyone deserves representation and you have to put any preconceptions or bias aside. If you are biased against your client, for any reason, then you need to withdraw. Conversely, if I have a preconceived bias against the other side or their counsel, I will usually decline the case since I can't do my best work if the case is or becomes "personal."

The only times that I have let bias (that I know of) impact my representation is when I have determined that the client has lied to me, the court or that they are doing (or continuing to do) something illegal, at which time I have told them I cannot continue to represent them and usually withdraw as a result.

I don't do any criminal defense, medical malpractice or personal injury so I don't have to face issues like that on a regular basis but that is a very bright line for me. For that perspective, Moder8 would be a better source.

Very similar rules apply to investigators, which is why Mueller kicked Strzok off the Russia investigation. As I said earlier, provable bias in an investigator is a gold mine on cross examination, as I am sure Moder8 will attest to.

#31 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-02-08 11:57 AM | Reply

I think you are conflating 2 separate issues:
Personal/political biases - most people, including law enforcement officials, have them.
Personal/political biases tainting one's work.

#8 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

===================

Sounds to me like that hero cop Mark Fuhrman.

#32 | Posted by Rex_Buyt at 2018-02-08 08:17 PM | Reply

"I think you are conflating 2 separate issues:
Personal/political biases - most people, including law enforcement officials, have them.
Personal/political biases tainting one's work."

Having Racist Beliefs
vs.
Being In A Position To Impose Racist Beliefs On Others.

Some people like to call both of those "racism."
Then make diversionary statements like "all racism is bad."
When the truth is, racist beliefs you don't act on aren't harming anyone but you.

#33 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-02-08 09:54 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2018 World Readable

Drudge Retort