What was Strzok's 'insurance policy'?

T

Tranquillus in Exile

New member
All we have to go on is one text message from Strzok to Lisa Page in August 2016:

I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office — 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.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...eep-state-smoking-gun/?utm_term=.3b5528f2976c

Many people think this referred to the FBI's investigation of the Trump campaign, which started in July 2016. But what exactly was Strzok implying? Some opinions:

- The FBI leadership was planning to stop Trump being elected. (If so, what did they actually DO? Whatever it was, it didn't work out.)

- If Trump won, the FBI would do its best to frame him.

- The FBI would continue its investigation even if Trump won, and any illegal activities would be uncovered. (Such a thing had never happened before, but under certain circumstances it would have been their plain duty.)

Which interpretation do you go for, and what is the evidence?
 
Wasn't any. He got fired. However even backing Comey's statement about Hillary's server does not matter to the rightys. Strzok and Comey made daffy president with that incorrect press conference. Rightys just cannot understand that many who saw what a joke and a crook Trump is, still did their jobs as fairly as they could.
 
Nordberg said:
Wasn't any. He got fired. However even backing Comey's statement about Hillary's server does not matter to the rightys. Strzok and Comey made daffy president with that incorrect press conference. Rightys just cannot understand that many who saw what a joke and a crook Trump is, still did their jobs as fairly as they could.
Click to expand...
I think he could be referencing the fact that Trump campaign was under investigation, if he had leaked that, who knows what wouid have happened, but he didn’t leak it and Trump won.
 
Some Trump fans talk about the 'insurance policy' a lot, probably more than Strzok ever did. If you point out that nothing about the FBI investigation was leaked before the election - not even its existence - they say "yeah, but the insurance policy!"

They must know what they think it was, so let's hear from them!
 
Tranquillus in Exile said:
Some Trump fans talk about the 'insurance policy' a lot, probably more than Strzok ever did. If you point out that nothing about the FBI investigation was leaked before the election - not even its existence - they say "yeah, but the insurance policy!"

They must know what they think it was, so let's hear from them!
Click to expand...

Maybe "they" don't care because they won. I know that you are not one of them, but Democrats' time would be better spent fixing their party. Perhaps next time, they can choose a candidate that half of the country doesn't already hate.

Btw, Steel just said in a British court that he was hired by the DNC to overturn the election results.
 
“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office – that there’s no way he gets elected – but I’m afraid we can’t take the risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40,” the text read.
Click to expand...
whatever it was the FBI had no business going about it's "path"
"we can't take that chance" is intent to interfere ( and i'm not talking about Russians interference)
 
Tranquillus in Exile said:
All we have to go on is one text message from Strzok to Lisa Page in August 2016:

I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office — 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.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...eep-state-smoking-gun/?utm_term=.3b5528f2976c

Many people think this referred to the FBI's investigation of the Trump campaign, which started in July 2016. But what exactly was Strzok implying? Some opinions:

- The FBI leadership was planning to stop Trump being elected. (If so, what did they actually DO? Whatever it was, it didn't work out.)

- If Trump won, the FBI would do its best to frame him.

- The FBI would continue its investigation even if Trump won, and any illegal activities would be uncovered. (Such a thing had never happened before, but under certain circumstances it would have been their plain duty.)

Which interpretation do you go for, and what is the evidence?
Click to expand...


I think he was talking about them telling the nation that the Russians were meddling in the election.


what he didn't realize is that the republican congress would trash the FBI and refuse to go on record that it was true before the election


he and others overestimated the republicans in office
 
Controlled Opposition said:
Steel just said in a British court that he was hired by the DNC to overturn the election results.
Click to expand...

This what you mean, C.O.?


Steele says he was hired to help Hillary with a potential election challenge

British ex-spy Christopher Steele, who wrote the Democrat-financed anti-Trump dossier, said in a court case that he was hired by a Democratic law firm in preparation for Hillary Clinton challenging the results of the 2016 presidential election.

The Democrats never filed a challenge, but Mr. Steele’s answer suggested that was one option inside the Clinton camp.

http://prairiepundit.blogspot.com/2018/12/steele-says-he-was-hired-to-hillary.html


I don't think that's what Trumpsters mean by the 'insurance policy'.
 
Tranquillus in Exile said:
This what you mean, C.O.?


Steele says he was hired to help Hillary with a potential election challenge

British ex-spy Christopher Steele, who wrote the Democrat-financed anti-Trump dossier, said in a court case that he was hired by a Democratic law firm in preparation for Hillary Clinton challenging the results of the 2016 presidential election.

The Democrats never filed a challenge, but Mr. Steele’s answer suggested that was one option inside the Clinton camp.

http://prairiepundit.blogspot.com/2018/12/steele-says-he-was-hired-to-hillary.html


I don't think that's what Trumpsters mean by the 'insurance policy'.
Click to expand...
Any site that refers to the Steele dossier as 'Democrat financed', doesn't merit the time it takes to click the link.
 
Tranquillus in Exile said:
This what you mean, C.O.?


Steele says he was hired to help Hillary with a potential election challenge

British ex-spy Christopher Steele, who wrote the Democrat-financed anti-Trump dossier, said in a court case that he was hired by a Democratic law firm in preparation for Hillary Clinton challenging the results of the 2016 presidential election.

The Democrats never filed a challenge, but Mr. Steele’s answer suggested that was one option inside the Clinton camp.

http://prairiepundit.blogspot.com/2018/12/steele-says-he-was-hired-to-hillary.html


I don't think that's what Trumpsters mean by the 'insurance policy'.
Click to expand...

The real story of the last election is British collusion.
 
evince said:
Biden: McConnell Rejected Obama's Bipartisan Plan To Warn ...
https://theguardiansofdemocracy.com/biden-mcconnell-rejected...

Former CIA Director John Brennan also presented congressional leaders with top-secret evidence indicating Russia was meddling in the election, Biden said, and the Obama administration urged Republicans to put out a “bipartisan warning” to Russia.
Click to expand...

I think he was talking about them telling the nation that the Russians were meddling in the election.


what he didn't realize is that the republican congress would trash the FBI and refuse to go on record that it was true before the election


he and others overestimated the republicans in office
 
evince said:
I think he was talking about them telling the nation that the Russians were meddling in the election.


what he didn't realize is that the republican congress would trash the FBI and refuse to go on record that it was true before the election


he and others overestimated the republicans in office
Click to expand...
And let's not forget....Obama was presiding over a period of time when decorum in politics was considered admirable. He opted to keep the election clear of perceptions of bias.

Look where that got us, and look at the state of Washington now.
 
Controlled Opposition said:
Maybe "they" don't care because they won. I know that you are not one of them, but Democrats' time would be better spent fixing their party. Perhaps next time, they can choose a candidate that half of the country doesn't already hate.

Btw, Steel just said in a British court that he was hired by the DNC to overturn the election results.
Click to expand...

Hillary was brutally mistreated by Fox and other right-wing outlets. She was investigated by the Repubs from Whitewater to Benghazi. Reds cranked about a dozen investigations. Like Mccarthy said, they were designed to cost her polling points and it worked.They were not about justice, but politics. However it worked cross the country. People think, where there is smoke, there is fire. She must have done something crooked, otherwise she would not be investigated so much. But they found her guilty of nothing. Absolutely nothing. But the idea that she is crooked was planted in the mind of American voters and they hated a woman who was an extremely well qualified candidate and sort of lost to a real crook.
 
Nordberg said:
Hillary was brutally mistreated by Fox and other right-wing outlets. She was investigated by the Repubs from Whitewater to Benghazi. Reds cranked about a dozen investigations. Like Mccarthy said, they were designed to cost her polling points and it worked.They were not about justice, but politics. However it worked cross the country. People think, where there is smoke, there is fire. She must have done something crooked, otherwise she would not be investigated so much. But they found her guilty of nothing. Absolutely nothing. But the idea that she is crooked was planted in the mind of American voters and they hated a woman who was an extremely well qualified candidate and sort of lost to a real crook.
Click to expand...

She is crooked. You speak in past tense, as though she has been cleared. If anything, the Clinton Foundation fraud will bring her down.
 
Controlled Opposition said:
Maybe "they" don't care because they won. I know that you are not one of them, but Democrats' time would be better spent fixing their party. Perhaps next time, they can choose a candidate that half of the country doesn't already hate.

Btw, Steel just said in a British court that he was hired by the DNC to overturn the election results.
Click to expand...



"Btw, Steel just said in a British court that he was hired by the DNC to overturn the election results."

You misunderstood what he said.


British ex-spy Christopher Steele, who wrote the Democrat-financed anti-Trump dossier, said in a court case that he was hired by a Democratic law firm in preparation for Hillary Clinton challenging the results of the 2016 presidential election.

He said the law firm Perkins Coie wanted to be in a position to contest the results based on evidence he unearthed on the Trump campaign conspiring with Moscow on election interference.



His scenario is contained in a sealed Aug. 2 declaration in a defamation law suit brought by three Russian bankers in London. The trio’s American attorneys filed his answers Tuesday in a libel lawsuit in Washington against the investigative firm Fusion GPS, which handled the former British intelligence officer.

In an answer to interrogatories, Mr. Steele wrote: “Fusion’s immediate client was law firm Perkins Coie. It engaged Fusion to obtain information necessary for Perkins Coie LLP to provide legal advice on the potential impact of Russian involvement on the legal validity of the outcome of the 2016 US Presidential election.

“Based on that advice, parties such as the Democratic National Committee and HFACC Inc. (also known as ‘Hillary for America’) could consider steps they would be legally entitled to take to challenge the validity of the outcome of that election.”

The Democrats never filed a challenge, but Mr. Steele’s answer suggested that was one option inside the Clinton camp, which funded Mr. Steele’s research along with the Democratic National Committee.

The U.S. intelligence community concluded that Moscow interfered in the election by hacking Democratic Party computers and stealing emails that it released via WikiLeaks.
 
Last edited:
Controlled Opposition said:
She is crooked. You speak in past tense, as though she has been cleared. If anything, the Clinton Foundation fraud will bring her down.
Click to expand...

Nope.. The Clinton Foundation is a PUBLIC Operational Charity.. Open to audit. Its not like Trump's private charity..

The State of NY is going after Trump's charity because of persistent illegal actions.

When you learn the difference in how the charities are structured, you will quit making such dumb predictions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top