- Oct 6, 2008
- 125,001
- 60,455
- Thread starter
- #21
11. Bloody fingerprints that leave no doubt.
âThanks to DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz, we now know that high-level FBI officials were involvedâŚ.text messages between FBI Deputy Director of Counterintelligence Peter Strzok and FBI lawyer Lisa Page that suggest an illegal plan to utilize law enforcement to frame Trump. The most revealing exchange we know of took place on August 15, 2016. Concerned about the outcome of the election, Strzok wrote:
I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in [Andrew McCabeâs] officeâthat thereâs no way [Trump] gets electedâbut Iâm afraid we canât take that risk. Itâs like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before youâre 40.
No amount of sugar coating or post hoc explanation of this and other texts can conceal the coupleâs animus against Trump and support for Clinton.
Strzokâs messages illustrate his commitment to Clintonâs victory and Trumpâs defeat or, if Trump won, to an âinsurance policy.â
The term âinsurance policyâ obviously refers to the Trump-Russia collusion investigationâŚâ The Politicization of the FBI
And, for the Democrat boot-lickers, their motto:
'We donn need no stinkin' evidence!!'
We learned that that is their view long ago:
What was new with the Clarence Thomas nomination was the accusation of criminal wrongdoing on his part, namely the unproved sexual harassment claims of one Anita Hill.
Even though Ms. Hill couldn't prove her accusation, that didn't matter. Thus, a new mantra for the Left was born:
âThe nature of the evidence is irrelevant; itâs the seriousness of the charge that matters.â Tom Foley, Democrat, Former Speaker of the House.
âThanks to DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz, we now know that high-level FBI officials were involvedâŚ.text messages between FBI Deputy Director of Counterintelligence Peter Strzok and FBI lawyer Lisa Page that suggest an illegal plan to utilize law enforcement to frame Trump. The most revealing exchange we know of took place on August 15, 2016. Concerned about the outcome of the election, Strzok wrote:
I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in [Andrew McCabeâs] officeâthat thereâs no way [Trump] gets electedâbut Iâm afraid we canât take that risk. Itâs like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before youâre 40.
No amount of sugar coating or post hoc explanation of this and other texts can conceal the coupleâs animus against Trump and support for Clinton.
Strzokâs messages illustrate his commitment to Clintonâs victory and Trumpâs defeat or, if Trump won, to an âinsurance policy.â
The term âinsurance policyâ obviously refers to the Trump-Russia collusion investigationâŚâ The Politicization of the FBI
And, for the Democrat boot-lickers, their motto:
'We donn need no stinkin' evidence!!'
We learned that that is their view long ago:
What was new with the Clarence Thomas nomination was the accusation of criminal wrongdoing on his part, namely the unproved sexual harassment claims of one Anita Hill.
Even though Ms. Hill couldn't prove her accusation, that didn't matter. Thus, a new mantra for the Left was born:
âThe nature of the evidence is irrelevant; itâs the seriousness of the charge that matters.â Tom Foley, Democrat, Former Speaker of the House.