Skip to content
Advertisements

Texts suggest Peter Strzok and Lisa Page leaked information to the media

January 9, 2018

  Peter Strzok has come under scrutiny since we learned he was removed from the Russia investigation by Robert Mueller after some anti-Trump text messages to his mistress Lisa Page were discovered. Since that time we learned the two lovers were discussing an “insurance policy” to make sure Donald Trump did not become the President. It is widely believed at this time that the “insurance policy” they were discussing was the Russian dossier.

  We are now learning, according to this story, that the Congress is investigating texts between the two which might show they were leaking information to the mainstream media, here is more:

Republican-led House and Senate committees are investigating whether leaders of the Russia counterintelligence investigation had contacts with the news media that resulted in improper leaks, prompted in part by text messages amongst senior FBI officials mentioning specific reporters, news organizations and articles.

In one exchange, FBI counterintelligence agent Peter Strzok and bureau lawyer Lisa Page engaged in a series of texts shortly before Election Day 2016 suggesting they knew in advance about an article in The Wall Street Journal and would need to feign stumbling onto the story so it could be shared with colleagues.

“Article is out, but hidden behind paywall so can’t read it,” Page texted Strzok on Oct. 24, 2016.

“Wsj? Boy that was fast,” Strzok texted back, using the initials of the famed financial newspaper. “Should I ‘find’ it and tell the team?”

The text messages, which were reviewed by The Hill, show the two FBI agents discussed how they might make it appear they innocently discovered the article, such as through Google News alerts.

“I can get it like I do every other article that hits any Google News alerts, seriously,” Strzok wrote, adding he didn’t want his team hearing about the article “from someone else.”

 Those are some pretty damning texts. They might not show that Peter Strzok and Lisa Page were behind leaking the information which was leaked to the Wall Street Journal but it does show they were anticipating the article so they knew information was leaked. If they did not leak the information this seems to show they were in cahoots with whomever did leak the information and they actually discussed pretending they found the article accidentally.

  It might be better for Robert Mueller and the investigation  at this point if Peter Strzok and Lisa Page were the leakers because if they were not it means there is still somebody within the investigation who was/is working against Donald Trump.

  I think it is time for another special counsel…

malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium

Advertisements
6 Comments leave one →
  1. January 9, 2018 9:46 pm

    No special counsel!

    Andrew McCarthy writing in the National Review:

    “Preliminarily, we should note that there is no such thing as an independent counsel. In our constitutional system, prosecution is an executive power, so even special counsels ultimately report to the Justice Department’s leadership. That being the case, we should never have a special counsel unless one is absolutely necessary. It is pernicious to have a prosecutor who is assigned to make a case on a single target (or set of targets). These prosecutors are insulated from the pressures of an ordinary prosecutor’s office, where cases have to compete for resources and only the meritorious ones are pursued. Thus, the sorry history of the special counsel (and its predecessors — the “special prosecutor” and “independent counsel”) is empire-building, investigations that go on for years, and cases involving trivial charges often far removed from the suspected offense that was the original rationale for appointing the special counsel.”

    Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/453717/clinton-foundation-investigation-we-need-good-prosecutor-not-special-counsel

    I could understand putting three district attorneys together as a panel to review the findings of an investigation. This would be similar to how district courts work.

    Liked by 1 person

    • January 10, 2018 6:40 am

      Good point there. I would go for the panel to review an investigation, I just think the Congress’ investigation is going to go nowhere in the end.

      Like

      • January 10, 2018 9:09 am

        I think the Congress has exceeded its power. There is nowhere in the constitution that list Congress’s power to investigate. The Supreme Court has allowed investigation only as part of the legislative process.

        Justice Warren stated in a 1957 opinion in Watkins v. United States, 354 U.S. 178

        “Broad as the power of inquiry is, it is not unlimited. The power of investigation may properly be employed only “in aid of the legislative function.” Its outermost boundaries are marked, then, by the outermost boundaries of the power to legislate. In principle, the Court is clear on the limitations, clear “that neither house of Congress possesses a ‘general power of making inquiry into the private affairs of the citizen’; that the power actually possessed is limited to inquiries relating to matters of which the particular house ‘has jurisdiction’ and in respect of which it rightfully may take other action; that if the inquiry relates to ‘a matter wherein relief or redress could be had only by a judicial proceeding” ’

        With Sen Feinstein’s latest stunt its time to end Congressional overreach into the judiciary function.

        Like

      • January 10, 2018 7:39 pm

        Thanks for that information! I think Feinstein needs to be held accountable for this but we know nothing is going to be done.

        Like

  2. January 10, 2018 10:46 am

    Special consuls or prosecutors are only for the GOP in this day and age don’t you know? But I am with you.. let us play hard ball for a change.

    Liked by 1 person

    • January 10, 2018 7:40 pm

      I agree, it is time for the Republicans to grow a set.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: