PETER STRZOK FIRED FOR ANTI-TRUMP TEXTS

[mystery-ak]

FBI fires Strzok over anti-Trump texts

By Olivia Beavers - 08/13/18 11:10 AM EDT

 The FBI on Friday fired Peter Strzok, the controversial counterintelligence agent who came under fire for sending disparaging text messages about President Trump and other political figures during the 2016 election.

Strzok's lawyer Aitan Goelman blasted the decision, saying the "Deputy Director of the FBI overruled the FBI's Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) and departed from established precedent by firing 21-year FBI veteran Peter Strzok."

"The decision to fire Special Agent Strzok is not only a departure from typical Bureau practice, but also contradicts Director Wray’s testimony to Congress and his assurances that the FBI intended to follow its regular process in this and all personnel matters," Goelman said in a statement.

http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/401558-fbi-fires-strzok-over-anti-trump-texts
 

[GrouchoTex]

I wonder why it took them so long?

[Bigun]

PETER STRZOK FIRED FOR ANTI-TRUMP TEXTS

11:13 AM 08/13/2018
Saagar Enjeti | White House Correspondent

FBI agent Peter Strzok has been fired from the FBI for anti-Trump text messages he sent his mistress and colleague Lisa Page during the 2016 presidential election.

“Late Friday afternoon, the Deputy Director of the FBI overruled the FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) and departed from established precedent by firing 21-year FBI veteran Peter Strzok,” his lawyer Aitan Goelman said in a statement.”

More here:  http://dailycaller.com/2018/08/13/peter-strzok-fired-for-anti-trump-texts/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-agent-peter-strzok-fired-over-anti-trump-texts/2018/08/13/be98f84c-8e8b-11e8-b769-e3fff17f0689_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.37ea8f9d6f73

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/08/13/fbi-fires-peter-strzok-months-after-anti-trump-texts-revealed.html

[Bigun]

I wonder why it took them so long?

Under current civil service rules, it is damned near impossible to fire a government employee with more than 6 months on the job.

[Sanguine]

Under current civil service rules, it is damned near impossible to fire a government employee with more than 6 months on the job.

And, despite his lawyer's protestations, I hope they did follow the proper procedures.

[XenaLee]

I wonder why it took them so long?

My first thought/question, exactly.

[Millee]

There's one drop of the swamp drained.  Next!! 

[thackney]

[Hoodat]

This is interesting.  The FBI has been protecting Strzok this whole time.  Even the FBI director recommended only a demotion and suspension.  Yet someone overruled the FBI director and fired Strzok.

[XenaLee]

This is interesting.  The FBI has been protecting Strzok this whole time.  Even the FBI director recommended only a demotion and suspension.  Yet someone overruled the FBI director and fired Strzok.

You mean....someone actually cared more about the reputation of the FBI and the optics of keeping a cretin like Strzok on the payroll... more than they cared about "getting Trump"?  Wonder of wonders.  Perhaps there is some progress being made re: that swamp draining, then. 

[Bigun]

This is interesting.  The FBI has been protecting Strzok this whole time.  Even the FBI director recommended only a demotion and suspension.  Yet someone overruled the FBI director and fired Strzok.

@Hoodat @XenaLee

Aitan Goelman, Strzok’s lawyer, said FBI Deputy Director David L. Bowdich ordered the firing on Friday — even though the director of the FBI office that normally handles employee discipline had decided Strzok should face only a demotion and 60-day suspension. Goelman said the move undercuts the FBI’s repeated assurances that Strzok would be afforded the normal disciplinary process.

Strzok is the third high-ranking FBI official involved in the Clinton and Russia investigations to be fired amid an intensely political backdrop. Trump removed Comey as the bureau’s director and said he did so thinking of the Russia case. Attorney General Jeff Sessions later removed Comey’s deputy, McCabe, after the inspector general alleged he lied about a media disclosure related to Clinton.

McCabe — who, unlike Comey, could not be removed at the will of the president — has said his termination was a politically motivated attempt to undermine the Mueller probe. He is currently facing a criminal investigation by prosecutors in the D.C. U.S. Attorney’s Office.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-agent-peter-strzok-fired-over-anti-trump-texts/2018/08/13/be98f84c-8e8b-11e8-b769-e3fff17f0689_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.f2660ac114ad

[Hoodat]

McCabe — who, unlike Comey, could not be removed at the will of the president — has said his termination was a politically motivated attempt to undermine the Mueller probe. He is currently facing a criminal investigation by prosecutors in the D.C. U.S. Attorney’s Office.

How could Strzok's firing undermine the Mueller probe if Strzok is no longer a part of that probe?

[Wingnut]

I take great pleasure in the fate that has befallen this 1st class unctuous little pr(i)ck!  Whoever green lighted the kicking of his ass to the curb is a guy I want to buy a beer.

[Bigun]

How could Strzok's firing undermine the Mueller probe if Strzok is no longer a part of that probe?

@Hoodat

It was McCabe who made that allegation.

[XenaLee]

@Hoodat @XenaLee

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-agent-peter-strzok-fired-over-anti-trump-texts/2018/08/13/be98f84c-8e8b-11e8-b769-e3fff17f0689_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.f2660ac114ad

An apparent attempt to restore the public trust of the FBI, no doubt.  But... is it enough?  Once lost, trust is extremely difficult to rebuild.  Time will tell....

[Bigun]

An apparent attempt to restore the public trust of the FBI, no doubt.  But... is it enough?  Once lost, trust is extremely difficult to rebuild.  Time will tell....

Not nearly enough as there are several others who need to go as well.

[XenaLee]

I take great pleasure in the fate that has befallen this 1st class unctuous little pr(i)ck!  Whoever green lighted the kicking of his ass to the curb is a guy I want to buy a beer.

Better yet, perhaps Deputy Director David L. Bowdich should be made head of the FBI....?

[Victoria33]

I just saw on TV, the FBI gave no reason for firing him.
His lawyer says it can't be the private messages he sent. I had already written the below that it can't be the messages, when I saw this on TV, 11:07 am.  Here is what I was writing when I saw this on TV:

The problem they had in trying to fire him was, it is not against the law, or rules of the Justice Department, to send a text or email to someone and express a personal opinion about a candidate for president or a sitting president or the fact you hate broccoli.  I haven't researched to find their stated reason(s) for this firing, but it can't be due to those messages; it has to be an action he took that violated their rules. (Now, there is no reason to search for the reasons, as the FBI didn't give any.)

If you on this thread have a job, you can send personal texts, emails, to anyone you want to express your opinion on a subject, including whatever is happening in your company.  It is called, freedom of speech.  Now, if you send the president of your company a message that you hate his guts, the outcome of that is, you may lose your job.  It wasn't a law or rule you broke, it was your less than smart message to your company president.

[XenaLee]

I just saw on TV, the FBI gave no reason for firing him.
His lawyer says it can't be the private messages he sent. I had already written the below that it can't be the messages, when I saw this on TV, 11:07 am.  Here is what I was writing when I saw this on TV:

The problem they had in trying to fire him was, it is not against the law, or rules of the Justice Department, to send a text or email to someone and express a personal opinion about a candidate for president or a sitting president or the fact you hate broccoli.  I haven't researched to find their stated reason(s) for this firing, but it can't be due to those messages; it has to be an action he took that violated their rules. (Now, there is no reason to search for the reasons, as the FBI didn't give any.)

If you on this thread have a job, you can send personal texts, emails, to anyone you want to express your opinion on a subject, including whatever is happening in your company.  It is called, freedom of speech.  Now, if you send the president of your company a message that you hate his guts, the outcome of that is, you may lose your job.  It wasn't a law or rule you broke, it was your less than smart message to your company president.

How about showing extreme bias.... which you're not supposed to have... against the Commander In Chief, under which you are serving?  The president is, essentially, his ultimate 'boss'.  Right?

[Bigun]

I just saw on TV, the FBI gave no reason for firing him.
His lawyer says it can't be the private messages he sent. I had already written the below that it can't be the messages, when I saw this on TV, 11:07 am.  Here is what I was writing when I saw this on TV:

The problem they had in trying to fire him was, it is not against the law, or rules of the Justice Department, to send a text or email to someone and express a personal opinion about a candidate for president or a sitting president or the fact you hate broccoli.  I haven't researched to find their stated reason(s) for this firing, but it can't be due to those messages; it has to be an action he took that violated their rules. (Now, there is no reason to search for the reasons, as the FBI didn't give any.)

If you on this thread have a job, you can send personal texts, emails, to anyone you want to express your opinion on a subject, including whatever is happening in your company.  It is called, freedom of speech.  Now, if you send the president of your company a message that you hate his guts, the outcome of that is, you may lose your job.  It wasn't a law or rule you broke, it was your less than smart message to your company president.

I believe it is against the law for any public official to abuse his office for political reasons and I will be VERY surprised if Mr. Strozk doesn't find himself facing criminal charges for having done just that.

[Wingnut]

How about showing extreme bias.... which you're not supposed to have... against the Commander In Chief, under which you are serving?  The president is, essentially, his ultimate 'boss'.  Right?

You can't reason with that one Xena.   She reminds me of Paul Revere’s ride, a little light in the belfry.

[INVAR]

An apparent attempt to restore the public trust of the FBI, no doubt.  But... is it enough?  Once lost, trust is extremely difficult to rebuild.  Time will tell....

I have less than ZERO Trust in any of the Alphabets.

Hell, I have ZERO trust in the government itself, because they have repeatedly demonstrated that it is stupid to do so.

[XenaLee]

You can't reason with that one Xena.   She reminds me of Paul Revere’s ride, a little light in the belfry.

I try to reason with everyone, Ghost.  It's a stubborn trait, I guess.  One that I don't intend to try to change.  Especially since.... even re: folks here that I agree with 90% of the time.... I still find issues on which I disagree.

[XenaLee]

I have less than ZERO Trust in any of the Alphabets.

Hell, I have ZERO trust in the government itself, because they have repeatedly demonstrated that it is stupid to do so.

Yes, but I'm more interested in the "public" that makes up the majority of voters in this country.  That would not include you, would it?  I thought you have "opted out" of voting, henceforth.   

It remains to be seen if this is just a one-time fluke, or if it will be followed by more much-needed firings.  Let's hope it's a trend.  Natch... the idiot left media will try spin it as a 'bad thing' and as....

Trump's fault.   Whatever works, I say to that.  Because I think most Americans want to see more such firings.

[INVAR]

Yes, but I'm more interested in the "public" that makes up the majority of voters in this country.  That would not include you, would it?  I thought you have "opted out" of voting, henceforth.   

I'm voting, I never said I was not voting or not being involved.   I'm just not voting for Republicans.

As to the public - we are irrelevant as far has the Alphabets go.  They have their own fiefdoms and are populated by Obamanistas in lifelong career positions as political officers.

You're not going to be getting rid of the bulk of those whom now have weaponized Agencies to be used for political warfare.