Strzok by the truth

[MaroonBells]

WASHINGTON—Following immediately on the heels of his hearing before the House Judiciary and Oversight committees, FBI agent Peter Strzok was again summoned to testify before Congress Thursday about texts calling Trey Gowdy a “pissy little shithead.” “Now what exactly did you mean when you said Trey Gowdy was a ‘dickless fuck-weasel who couldn’t investigate his way out of a goddamn paper bag’?” asked Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte during an oftentimes heated exchange in which Strzok defended sending numerous text messages to former FBI attorney Lisa Page that referred to the Republican Congressman from South Carolina as a “slavering, knuckle-dragging dipshit.” “Mr. Strzok, I have a message here from today at 11:45 a.m. in which you call Representative Gowdy a ‘reprobate fuckface whose biggest claim to fame is pissing away $8 million of taxpayer money for a dumbass, partisan circle-jerk,’ suggesting that this level of bias existed from the earliest stages of this morning’s questions. There are dozens more messages just like this, calling our distinguished colleague a ‘pointless fuckwad’ and a ‘moronic scumbag’ that I would like submitted for the record.” At press time, Goodlatte had called for Strzok to be held in contempt for refusing to answer questions about how far he believed Gowdy’s head was up his own ass.

Yes, it's from the Onion. But OH MY how I wish it were real...

[Guest]

well the Strzok victim did get embarrassed pretty badly by Gowdy, and it is believable in the sense that he has no qualms about saying stupid shit on twitter.

[Guest]

@greediron said:
well the Strzok victim did get embarrassed pretty badly by Gowdy, and it is believable in the sense that he has no qualms about saying stupid shit on twitter.

Interesting you see it that way. A quick review of the twit-o-sphere shows that our own political biases likely inform our opinions on who got the better of whom. Team Red seems to favor a "beat down" of Strzok, while team blue likes the word "obliterate" to describe what Strzok did to Gowdy. Alls I can say is that I now know what I want for Christmas...

[Guest]

True, I do have a pretty low opinion of the twit Strzok.  So maybe I am biased against innate stupidity.

[Guest]

@greediron said:
True, I do have a pretty low opinion of the twit Strzok.  So maybe I am biased against innate stupidity.

What do you have against him? He called Trump a "loathsome human," a "douche" and a "fucking idiot." So where is he wrong? Isn't that the opinion we ALL have of him? I mean, my goodness, his own Secretary of State called him a "fucking moron." I don't know...maybe that whole "not for Trump but against Hillary" stuff was just BS. 

[Guest]

@MaroonBells said:

@greediron said:
True, I do have a pretty low opinion of the twit Strzok.  So maybe I am biased against innate stupidity.

What do you have against him? He called Trump a "loathsome human," a "douche" and a "fucking idiot." So where is he wrong? Isn't that the opinion we ALL have of him? I mean, my goodness, his own Secretary of State called him a "fucking moron." I don't know...maybe that whole "not for Trump but against Hillary" stuff was just BS. 

X: Point of Order. blah blah blah.
Z: No, by way of blah blah blah.
X. Point of Order. blah blah blah.
Z: No, by way of blah blah blah.
Y: That is a valid point of order.
Z: It is not, by way of blah blah blah.
X: Point of order. It is by way of blah blah blah.
Z: It is not, and Greed will now answer the question.

MB: What do you have against him? Where is he wrong? Isn't that the opinion we ALL have of him?

Greed: As you know, MB, I have been advised that I can not answer that question due to ongoing investigation into the current VikeFans' Terms Of Service.

[Guest]

@MaroonBells said:

@greediron said:
True, I do have a pretty low opinion of the twit Strzok.  So maybe I am biased against innate stupidity.

What do you have against him? He called Trump a "loathsome human," a "douche" and a "fucking idiot." So where is he wrong? Isn't that the opinion we ALL have of him? I mean, my goodness, his own Secretary of State called him a "fucking moron." I don't know...maybe that whole "not for Trump but against Hillary" stuff was just BS. 

I have said similar about Trump, so you may have to find a different straw man.

Strzok patient is an idiot because he sought to use his position to influence an election and bragged about it on twitter.  I have to laugh at those claiming the Russian interfered with the election but ignore the actual interference by those such as this idiot.  Of course, maybe he is Russian and then there would be some meat to those concerns.

[Guest]

@greediron said:

@MaroonBells said:

@greediron said:
True, I do have a pretty low opinion of the twit Strzok.  So maybe I am biased against innate stupidity.

What do you have against him? He called Trump a "loathsome human," a "douche" and a "fucking idiot." So where is he wrong? Isn't that the opinion we ALL have of him? I mean, my goodness, his own Secretary of State called him a "fucking moron." I don't know...maybe that whole "not for Trump but against Hillary" stuff was just BS. 

I have said similar about Trump, so you may have to find a different straw man.

Strzok patient is an idiot because he sought to use his position to influence an election and bragged about it on twitter.  I have to laugh at those claiming the Russian interfered with the election but ignore the actual interference by those such as this idiot.  Of course, maybe he is Russian and then there would be some meat to those concerns.

Surely you're not suggesting that the Russians didn't try to influence the election.

[Guest]

i dont understand the outrage over the whole election influence thing?  does anybody think that we, as voters, arent getting played by dozens and dozens of outside special interest groups all the time?  I mean in our state elections we have so much outside influence from other states special interest groups... how is that not any different than foreign countries meddling with our national elections?

IMO its a lot of crying and chest pounding about nothing... its happened for years and its never been an issue in the past,  why now?

not to mention,  does anybody think for a second that our govt is not involved in influencing or flat out rigging elections and political decisions in other countries?

[Guest]

@JimmyinSD said:
i dont understand the outrage over the whole election influence thing?  does anybody think that we, as voters, arent getting played by dozens and dozens of outside special interest groups all the time?  I mean in our state elections we have so much outside influence from other states special interest groups... how is that not any different than foreign countries meddling with our national elections?

IMO its a lot of crying and chest pounding about nothing... its happened for years and its never been an issue in the past,  why now?

not to mention,  does anybody think for a second that our govt is not involved in influencing or flat out rigging elections and political decisions in other countries?

Jimmy, sometimes I just have to shake my head to make sure I'm not in an episode the twilight zone. So, you're basically saying that Russian and American election interferences are morally equivalent. Wow. Look, I don't want to insult your intelligence by reminding you that our interventions have largely been to challenge dictators and promote democracy. Russia does it for the opposite reason. 

I know you're no fan of our baby-in-chief, but the length to which I've seen Team Red go to make excuses for him, in light of what we know, is just astonishing to me. When the red/blue fight comes before our values and institutions--our very democracy--then we're in big trouble.