Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Strzok v Gowdy and "This is not Benghazi!"
#1





Quite the exchange.

What I can say, and what I believe most who work can say, is that someone's personal opinions don't mean they'll provide a less than professional service. My company deals with some of the worlds worst companies... some of them are my clients. But, I provide to them the very best service I'm capable of, and in many ways, I go above and beyond for them as it helps my business, regardless of my opinions of said company.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#2





WOW!
Reply
Thanks given by:
#3
What have we come to? This is exactly what is wrong with politics and justice (in the USA). Everyone is walking around with a club because they are too f'ing stupid to use a scalpel effectively.
A leader without followers is just a person taking a walk...
Reply
Thanks given by:
#4
Trey Gowdy looks like he just stepped out of "Deliverance"
No one is coming to save you. This life is 100% your responsibility.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#5
Gowdy's line of questioning yesterday was lol stupid.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#6
The fact that the Chairman allowed one of the members to call Strzok a liar while he's under oath.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#7
I found the "as a dentist, I'm VERY good at reading body language" exchange hilarious.

You're interrogating the former head of counter-espionage, with the friggin FBI...and trying to intimidate him by suggesting you're an expert in the field of body language.

You're a ****ing DENTIST.

The combination of arrogance and stupidity within the republican party would be comical if they weren't behind the wheel of an entire country.
Reply
Thanks given by: Cal
#8
Every day the Orange A-Hole is in office makes me more glad I'm Canadian and live here.
America is being turned into a s***hole by this moron and his oh so complicit sycophants.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#9
Stzrok is a slithery one.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#10
(2018-07-13, 11:45 AM)Stevie_Y Wrote: Stzrok is a slithery one.

If by "slithery", you mean he's answering the loaded questions and false statements being made about him respectfully without lashing out?
Reply
Thanks given by: GloryYrs70s
#11
Personally I think Strzok did a great job maintaining his composure for that long in front of all that STUPIDITY.

It amazes me that some people can watch the same questioning and think Gowdy or the Dentist or Gohmert OR ANY OF THE REPUBLICANS were the "winners" in their debates.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#12
(2018-07-13, 12:03 PM)theDC Wrote:
(2018-07-13, 11:45 AM)Stevie_Y Wrote: Stzrok is a slithery one.

If by "slithery", you mean he's answering the loaded questions and false statements being made about him respectfully without lashing out?

Presenting loaded questions is literally the point of this hearing. (Except for Gohmert, who is clearly out of line, and probably crazy)

Gowdy is presenting his line of questioning to set up that Strzok displayed severe bias. That doesn't even need to be proven, it's in the texts. 

Anyway, the media is making this division worse. 

To answer your question, Strzok is slithery : he literally said "not once in my 26 years did my personal opinions impact any official investigation I took...." etc "It is not who I am" while literally texting the exact opposite of those statements. To put it simply, he's a liar.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#13
Thats Bullshit.

ANYONE working for the government or law enforcement can have personal opinions AND still do their jobs professionally.

I've been doing it for 38 years.

For ANYONE who thinks that is not possible, that is a reflection on them.
Reply
Thanks given by: GloryYrs70s
#14
(2018-07-13, 12:17 PM)zapzac Wrote: Thats Bullshit.

ANYONE working for the government or law enforcement can have personal opinions AND still do their jobs professionally.

I've been doing it for 38 years.

For ANYONE who thinks that is not possible, that is a reflection on them.

Fully agreed.

I have negative opinions on ministers I work for, etc, but it doesn't impact the job I do, whatsoever.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#15
(2018-07-13, 12:13 PM)Stevie_Y Wrote:
(2018-07-13, 12:03 PM)theDC Wrote:
(2018-07-13, 11:45 AM)Stevie_Y Wrote: Stzrok is a slithery one.

If by "slithery", you mean he's answering the loaded questions and false statements being made about him respectfully without lashing out?

Presenting loaded questions is literally the point of this hearing. (Except for Gohmert, who is clearly out of line, and probably crazy)

Gowdy is presenting his line of questioning to set up that Strzok displayed severe bias. That doesn't even need to be proven, it's in the texts. 

Anyway, the media is making this division worse. 

To answer your question, Strzok is slithery : he literally said "not once in my 26 years did my personal opinions impact any official investigation I took...." etc "It is not who I am" while literally texting the exact opposite of those statements. To put it simply, he's a liar.

You took the Gowdy bait.... 

Once again, context is ignored.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#16
(2018-07-13, 12:13 PM)Stevie_Y Wrote: To answer your question, Strzok is slithery : he literally said "not once in my 26 years did my personal opinions impact any official investigation I took...." etc "It is not who I am" while literally texting the exact opposite of those statements. To put it simply, he's a liar.

Are you suggesting that investigators are not allowed to hold personal opinions?

And he did not "literally text the opposite", lol. If that were true he'd have been texting that he was making stuff up and skewing the investigation.

Your leap is just as stupid as the one the Chair took.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#17
(2018-07-13, 12:19 PM)RyeRocks Wrote:
(2018-07-13, 12:17 PM)zapzac Wrote: Thats Bullshit.

ANYONE working for the government or law enforcement can have personal opinions AND still do their jobs professionally.

I've been doing it for 38 years.

For ANYONE who thinks that is not possible, that is a reflection on them.

Fully agreed.

I have negative opinions on ministers I work for, etc, but it doesn't impact the job I do, whatsoever.

Same here, one of my clients is one of the worst food companies on the planet, and I do excellent work for them.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#18
(2018-07-13, 12:22 PM)Limestoner Wrote:
(2018-07-13, 12:13 PM)Stevie_Y Wrote: To answer your question, Strzok is slithery : he literally said "not once in my 26 years did my personal opinions impact any official investigation I took...." etc "It is not who I am" while literally texting the exact opposite of those statements. To put it simply, he's a liar.

Are you suggesting that investigators are not allowed to hold personal opinions?

And he did not "literally text the opposite", lol. If that were true  he'd have been texting that he was making stuff up and skewing the investigation.

Your leap is just as stupid as the one the Chair took.

No, I'm suggesting that Strzok is lying about his bias affecting his work for the FBI. That leap is actually based on very simple logic by watching the video.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#19
Yea, you can't demand that gov't employees' personal opinions are always in favour of their government.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#20
(2018-07-13, 12:26 PM)Stevie_Y Wrote:
(2018-07-13, 12:22 PM)Limestoner Wrote:
(2018-07-13, 12:13 PM)Stevie_Y Wrote: To answer your question, Strzok is slithery : he literally said "not once in my 26 years did my personal opinions impact any official investigation I took...." etc "It is not who I am" while literally texting the exact opposite of those statements. To put it simply, he's a liar.

Are you suggesting that investigators are not allowed to hold personal opinions?

And he did not "literally text the opposite", lol. If that were true  he'd have been texting that he was making stuff up and skewing the investigation.

Your leap is just as stupid as the one the Chair took.

No, I'm suggesting that Strzok is lying about his bias affecting his work for the FBI. That leap is actually based on very simple logic by watching the video.

You may want to actually listen to Strzok's response (when he's finally allowed to give one)

The context around a few of the questions, especially the one that Gowdy think's he's got him, IS NOT about only wanting to join if impeachment is the outcome, it IS about a career decision to join a single investigation or stay in his current role.
Reply
Thanks given by:


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)