Posted on 02/17/2018 8:01:05 PM PST by TheConservator
“rue, but in the case of Page & Strzok, it’s hard to interview people when their pants are around their ankles all the time.”
Or are they? No E-Mails, texts, or even a reference to such in anything released. No divorces or breakups, pictures together, that we know of. Sundance has posited that this ‘affair’ was actually ‘leaked’ by the alleged lovebirds themselves, based on connecting some dots. As to motive - that’s the hard part.
The Boss says:
Yeah. Comey has a book problem all right.
He’ll have a YUGE problem when a federal prosecutor throws the book at him.
..... Busted
The OIG has already said they withheld thousands of texts of a personal or intimate nature.
Like Wall Street’s “To big to fail” banks.
No one was punished except the General public.
The real problem may be the Swamp is too big to drain.
Eventually, when we all realize nothing will be done again to the perps...the IRS Lois Lerners, some choice RINOs and a host of others,
It will become apparent how we’re actually being governed.
Conversely, the common liberal is left unsatisfied that justice has not been served while Trump stays in office.
Better economic times, information fatigue or a nasty global distraction..... The American public can usually be counted on to have a short memory and move on from anything too complicated.
We know they aren't saying anything. That's not the same thing.
I would be very highly skeptical that they haven't been approached. They surely have been. And I'd be willing to bet that their silence is a result of the fact that they've already been indicted, told they've been indicted, and told that they'd better not open their mouths for anyone but the USA handling their case if they want to have any hope of cutting a deal.
On November 8th alone, the day 2 of 3 FusionGPS employees took the fifth, and Simpson also refused to answer most of the questions put to him, DOJ issued 31 sealed indictments. Shortly thereafter, DiFi started leaking the parts of his testimony Simpson was willing to give. Why? Because the Dems' staff had lost contact with the conspiracy, and realized any chance of coordinating at least some of their stories would have to come from outside their little "secret society."
Keep this in mind, too: some of these people have failed to appear for interviews they're not permitted to decline, either with Judiciary or HPSCI. So they're not just shutting out reporters. That sounds like the kind of silence you get when your lawyer tells someone whose subpoenaed you that it would be a waste of time all around, because you'll be invoking your Fifth Amendment privilege for the whole interview.
Still odd. So I’d have to believe that of the thousands of texts they found, none mixed business with ‘pleasure’ or if some did, that immediately meant that the text would stay locked up? Maybe, but odd.
Knowing fully what to expect, I took a look at the front page of the Dallas Morning News to see their coverage of the indictments. It is the most breathtaking spin imaginable. They claim the 32-page (and I may have the page count wrong) document “serves as a point-by-point refutation of Trump’s claim that there was no collusion between his campaign and the Russians.” If you only got your news from the DMN, you would fully expect him to be frogmarched out of the White House on Monday. Just incredible stuff. But, why care if you are damaging your reputation beyond all repair when the only ones left reading you are liberals looking for a little confirmation bias.
Actually reporters WILL try to interview people, even though they know full well nothing will come of it. They do it all the time because they can the aborted interview and ‘show’ that the person is a crook (since he won’t talk). They find the people at their home or at work, and then they run the aborted interview.
60 minutes is FAMOUS for doing that. But not here, never here. Sorry, but Sundance has a point.
Everyone in the "small group" DOJNSD and CounterIntel FBI had preferred contacts, typically at the big three: WaPo, NYT, or WSJ. The fact that they leaked nothing exculpatory to their cause during the Nunes' revelations tells you they've gone dark.
Also keep in mind that we haven't even seen the largest part of the most incriminating of these texts anyway, because they involve classified material.
I guess we’ll just disagree on this. I’ve seen the what the media does when they actually WANT to report on someone, and they certainly don’t give that someone veto power to shut them down.
...but that’s certainly going on here. No stories with reporters outlining the characters from in front of the FBI building, nothing! This is certainly a first for me.
Fair points...still, other than a Washington Post story from December (which Sundance thinks was leaked by the alleged lovers themselves), I haven’t found any other source of this ‘affair’. Do you know of any - the OIG Letter that I found mentioned them by name, but nothing to indicate anything more?
The major networks have been frenzied in their anti-Republican/Conservative coverage, fawning in their Democrat coverage, and icing out any stories they couldn't spin for decades.
The week before Hugh Scott and a small group of Republican Senators went to the White House to urge Nixon to resign, Sam Irvin, the chairman of the House Committee investigating Nixon for impeachment publicly stated that in his opinion Nixon had not committed any impeachable offense.
That story was buried in the last pages of the A section of The New York Times.
The fact that the press is disinterested in a seditious conspiracy against the President of the United States is, sadly, typical, when the President is a Republican, and nothing in the least bit new.
By the way, here’s an example of what CNN does when they can’t get an interview they want (just came across it):
http://thefederalist.com/2018/02/16/cnn-lie-ted-cruz-afraid-talk-record-guns/
They certainly don’t just say “aw shucks” and walk away. The non-interview becomes the story. In this case, the fact that they were told by their lawyers to keep quiet would be a story on its own. But nothing...
Because Strzok had actually read the statute and realized his boss would look foolish quoting its language verbatim only to conclude that "no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case..."?
I’m not surprised by it, and it’s pretty much what Sundance has been saying all along.
Comey is loyal to Progress, a leftist idea/goal that supersedes the Constitution.
Comey is thus a traitor, like his boss, the Muslim Traitor, and his wantedtobe boss, Crooked Hillary.
They are too busy playing “RODEO CLOWN” protecting this “small group” from OUR EYES and EARS and WRATH!!
The Fourth Estate is The Fifth Column!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.