DERSHOWITZ: ‘I DRAW THE LINE WHEN AN FBI AGENT SAYS WE’LL STOP HIM’


 

Marie Bartiromo had an outstanding program yesterday. She devoted much of it to the IG report and bore down to the nub of it. I can’t find the full thing right now, but this is a piece to start with.

Today is the big day when the IG heads to Capital Hill to testify as well as Strzok. I have yet to hear that it will be open, though we were promised by the GOPers that it would be. CLOSED.. yep.. Thanks GOP. UPDATE  A comment:

Answer: The circus will come to town at 2 p.m. on C-Span, https://www.c-span.org/video/?446804-1/doj-inspector-general-fbi-director-testify-clinton-email-probe-report

My cable company will air it, not sure of others. ( I had checked earlier)

Here we go:

 

 

Dershowitz told Maria Bartiromo on “Sunday Morning Futures” that FBI agents are allowed to have partisan proclivities but that he “draw[s] the line” at FBI agents expressing a desire to influence an investigation.

The inspector general report that came out this week revealed a new text message from Strzok to his colleague and lover Lisa Page promising “we’ll stop” Trump from becoming president. (RELATED: STRZOK: ‘We’ll Stop’ Trump Presidency)

“FBI agents are allowed to be biased. They’re allowed to support political candidates, that’s part of the law,” Dershowitz said. “Where I draw the line is when an FBI agent says, ‘we’ll stop him.’”

“That’s not an expression of bias; that’s not saying who we’re gonna vote for. That sends a message to the American people that the Federal Bureau of Investigation is going to interfere in an election in an effort to try to stop the election of one candidate rather than the other,” he said. “That to me was where the red line was crossed.”

Dershowitz also asserted that this text message precludes Strzok from continuing to be an FBI agent.

More at the  Daily Caller

Advertisements

19 Responses to “DERSHOWITZ: ‘I DRAW THE LINE WHEN AN FBI AGENT SAYS WE’LL STOP HIM’”

  1. bobmontgomery Says:

    He doesn’t testify before Congress. DOJ grabs his ass, seizes everything, announces a CRIMINAL investigation and goes in every which way possible from Strjok. When he said “WE” he meant he wasn’t alone.

    Liked by 1 person

    • bunkerville Says:

      Sure… let us find just who the “we” are…..I can make a good guess.

      Like

  2. Steve Dennis Says:

    This was the most damning text out of all the ones I have seen, and moreso than the “insurance policy” text. This goes way beyond just having a bias and is unacceptable!

    Liked by 2 people

    • bunkerville Says:

      Yea, and they “just found it” I wonder why….

      Liked by 2 people

  3. geeez2014 Says:

    Strzok….will he tell the truth under oath?
    Liberal Defense he’ll be using: “I knew about Russian collusion and that’s why I said we must stop Trump, that he will be stopped.” Then he runs into the problem of having called Republicans POSs who are morons, etc.

    He’ll lie of course. Why do people even THINK he’d tell the truth if it’ll make him look bad??Anybody think he’s eager to testify against himself?

    Like Chaffitz said this morning “Strzok isn’t still working for Fish and Wildlife, he’s in HR, he knows everything about every FBI employee …why is he still THERE?”

    Amazing.

    Liked by 2 people

    • bunkerville Says:

      I agree with you on his take on why he said what he did…. Why he will come out looking like he defeated the Russians single handedly….. but sometimes they slip… isn’t it interesting that the immigration all of a sudden took off like a rocket? Look here look there but anywhere but the IG report.

      Liked by 1 person

      • geeez2014 Says:

        Rosenstein, Mueller, etc……even if Trump’s exonerated, they’ll come out the victors. (love this “come out looking like he defeated the Russians single handedly”!) Now we’ve got Gowdy suddenly going tough FOR Trump (SURPRISE!), and the only guy in whom I have any faith anymore is Jim Jordan; thankfully, he’s heavily involved, too. But we’ll lose…..they’ll win. as usual.

        Liked by 2 people

  4. Always On Watch Says:

    That Strzok is still on the payroll at the FBI speaks volumes to me.

    Liked by 3 people

    • bunkerville Says:

      I would have been so embarrassed to have all of my texts such as his out in the open I would have wanted to crawl in a hole.. Talk about hoots pah (Sp)

      Liked by 1 person

  5. bydesign001 Says:

    Hi there Bunkerville, I was wondering myself if today’s hearing was going to air live. Answer: The circus will come to town at 2 p.m. on C-Span, https://www.c-span.org/video/?446804-1/doj-inspector-general-fbi-director-testify-clinton-email-probe-report

    My cable company will air it, not sure of others.

    Liked by 2 people

    • bunkerville Says:

      WOW… and i had checked the schedule earlier…thanks so much…!!! 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

      • bunkerville Says:

        Why hasn’t Fox reported that it would be public!!

        Liked by 1 person

      • geeez2014 Says:

        I’d heard specifically this morning it would be private…at least I thought it was today’s hearing.
        I’ve been watching for an hour and it’s turning my stomach to hear the amazing stuff was said but “no bias”

        I’m not a fan of Lindsay Graham but HE IS ROCKING IT….absolutely TOUGH and RIGHTEOUS….very, very good…amazingly so.

        I feel much less safe with Wray as Director; I find him self serving, smarmy and like a snake.
        Feeling so sorry for other FBi offices when he says “New York is our best”
        Don’t know what to make of Horowitz but he’s more honorable than I find Wray. I hope I’m wrong about Wray.

        Kamala Harris is on now…got to change the channel…as I had to for the loathsome Blumenthal.

        Liked by 2 people

      • geeez2014 Says:

        Trump appointed Wray. S..H..

        Liked by 2 people

      • bunkerville Says:

        Z… I watched it too.. Harris didn’t get anywhere. No real questions but the one guy from Nebraska. Can’t recall his name… Other than that, a dog and pony show… thanks to know you too thought it was closed.

        Liked by 1 person

      • bunkerville Says:

        Sasse was his name.

        Liked by 1 person

      • geeez2014 Says:

        For a change, Lindsay Graham ROCKED IT….Cruz was pretty good….but didn’t really hit a strike…I think Graham was THE toughest, most Pro Trump, which kind of stunned me.

        Some of the questions from the Left were SO off the hearing subject, or at least not appropriate….I should have written them down. It was really clear they were only trying to look important, look like Trump haters (which clearly thrills them no end) and made it into the records……..

        I’m really REALLY worried now about Roger Stone and others….this could be the Trump swan song….man. He’s changing his story!? UGH.

        Liked by 1 person

  6. Mustang Says:

    Folks in the military, and we are talking about millions of people, all have their own political views. This has never been a problem (to my knowledge) because the DoD mission is to defend the United States no matter what political party is in charge. I suppose there could be a problem if a voting officer attempts to influence a serviceman’s vote, and it may have happened in the past … I’m simply not aware of it. The FBI, on the other hand, particularly when the director is a political appointee, and/or when the FBI is investigating a political matter, human nature being what it is, I can see how easily an investigator would allow him or herself to be influenced by their own political ideology. I might be able to understand how it could happen by a young, inexperienced agent, but I could not understand how such a thing could go ahead beyond the supervisory level.

    It shouldn’t be that way at all, of course —since we are a nation of laws, and especially since there must be probable cause to investigate anyone. Someone must make an allegation —and before an investigation can go ahead, the allegation(s) must be compelling; the person making it must have judicial standing. Beyond this, each crime listed within criminal statutes contain elements of criminal activity and, I believe, each of these must be present before an indictment can be rendered.

    Maybe what is missing here are laws that demands stiff penalties politicizing criminal investigations. There may be such a law, but if there is, I can’t find it. If there is such a law, it would appear to me that it’s being largely ignored.

    Liked by 3 people

    • bunkerville Says:

      What is missing in my mind, is that I wasn’t permitted for one nanosecond to text, phone email on work time. My work account!!!! It was a fireable offense. Period. Full stop. We knew that we were being monitored.
      We also knew our personal facebook accounts were monitored due to union troubles big time…. I had my car keyed… so I don’t want to hear about their “rights.” from Dershowitz or anyone,

      Liked by 3 people


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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: