Rep. Gowdy questions conflicts of interest - but my mind is elsewhere

I don’t know exactly how I ended up there, but I’m from South Carolina, and into legal stuff, and Trey Gowdy can provide some decent entertainment, so I was watching this video in the tweet below, and around the 2:58 mark Gowdy is talking about conflicts of interest, and says:

… and then we have a Senior Agent assigned to inv—“ — and there’s a glitch right there — “—Secretary Clinton’s email, helped draft the exoneration letter where we changed the language from ‘grossly negligent’ to ‘extremely careless, interviewed Secretary Clinton in an interview I’ve never seen, and I doubt you have either in your career as a prosecutor …

Yeah, yeah, I’m real assured about the investigation blah, blah, blah

What caught my ear was “… helped draft the exoneration letter where we changed the language from ‘grossly negligent’ to ‘extremely careless' …” It’s not like Rep. Gowdy to use words casually, he’s a lawyer too …

So first off — WE — ? He said we. And then he continues, “changed the language from ‘grossly negligent’ to ‘extremely careless’!

We changed the language from ‘grossly negligent’ to ‘extremely careless’!

I don’t know what to say, or think, about that “slip” that we changed the language from a legal term to a vague non-legal term ...

So I realize I should be paying attention to the conflicts of interest, and what’s going on with special counsel Mueller, and whatever, whatever, but now I'm just curious about the time where, as Rep. Gowdy said, "we changed the language from ‘grossly negligent’ to ‘extremely careless,’ in the exoneration letter" ... I'm also curious about the odd interview Rep. Gowdy has never seen before. I'll probably never know ... Anyway, in related news from this afternoon, the circus goes on:

Roger Stone says he's writing a book about President Trump's downfall from Russia probe

It's 'painfully obvious' Trump will be charged by mueller, says president's ally Roger Stone

up
10 users have voted.

Comments

snoopydawg's picture

It was Strzok who not only changed the wording in Comey's statement about Hillary's emails, he was the person who got the ball rolling on the fake Russia investigation.

Hillary's campaign and the FBI were involved with the Steele dossier that was used to get a FISA warrant to wiretap Trump and people in his campaign. This is how the FBI was able to learn that Flynn spoke to a Russian official. This long article first discusses the Mueller investigation and what we've learned from it, but it discusses how the Obama administration started the Russian investigation.

There are quite a few links in this that have more information on this never ending plot that was created to make sure that Hillary was the candidate who would face the winner of the republican primary. If this shit hadn't been created, there's a very good chance that Bernie would be president instead of Trump.

Strzok is now also known to have been the person who changed the wording in Comey’s statement clearing Hillary Clinton for her misuse of her private email server to say that Hillary Clinton had been “extremely careless'” as opposed to “grossly negligent”.

Strzok – who was the FBI’s deputy director for counter-intelligence – is now also known to have been the person who signed the document which launched the Russiagate investigation in July 2016.

The republicans are very aware of what actually happened and they have a duty to follow up on this, but will they is another thing.. as to Gowdy saying WE, I'm not sure what he means unless republicans were aware of what the Obama justice department was doing.

(edited)

up
14 users have voted.

I feel like I’m in the Twilight Zone stuck in a loop between Joe Mcarthy’s 1954 and George Orwell’s 1984.

Alligator Ed's picture

The use of the term "we" can be interpreted as being the US Government, particularly the FBI, making changes. Focussing on that fine point detracts from the focus of Gowdy's speech, which is about conflict of interest--another term for which is "corruption".

Mueller's team was initially composed of many rabidly pro-HRC and anti-Trump people. I do0 not know whether Andrew Weissman's attendance of a Hillary victory party (which fortunately did not occur) constitutes a violation of the Hatch Act precluding political activity by Federal employees, but it certainly does present the glaring appearance of a gross conflict of interest. Many of Mueller's staff are now gone because of this and more are on the way out.

Rosenstein's number is up. Trump is being cautious in eliminating his political enemies, taking them out slowly. Thus he is consolidating his Washington power base progressively while simultaneously weakening those of BHO and HRC. In one year Trump will still be in the WH, Rosenstein and Mueller will be out.

One side note: cadence of Rosenstein's speaking voice, and some gestures, are quite similar to ex-boss Comey.

up
11 users have voted.
GreyWolf's picture

@Alligator Ed

up
8 users have voted.
Wink's picture

@Alligator Ed
Say what you want about his politics or shameless tweets, the Trumpster's a helluva lot smarter than those "investigating" his admin., him playing them like a fiddle.

up
4 users have voted.

the little things you can do often are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. All about building progressive media. (-1.9) On Twitter @winkradio.

snoopydawg's picture

Strzok is now also known to have been the person who changed the wording in Comey’s statement clearing Hillary Clinton for her misuse of her private email server to say that Hillary Clinton had been “extremely careless'” as opposed to “grossly negligent”.

Over the course of the 2016 election the FBI cleared Hillary Clinton over her illegal use of a private server to route classified emails whilst she was Secretary of State though it is universally agreed that she broke the law by doing so.

The FBI does not seem to have even considered investigating Hillary Clinton for possible obstruction of justice after it also became known that she had actually destroyed thousands of her emails which passed through her private server, though that was an obvious thing to do.

(edited)

up
17 users have voted.

I feel like I’m in the Twilight Zone stuck in a loop between Joe Mcarthy’s 1954 and George Orwell’s 1984.

GreyWolf's picture

@snoopydawg

up
6 users have voted.
Pricknick's picture

We're still evaluating how we're going to approach the whole issue of interrogations, detentions, and so forth. And obviously we're going to look at past practices. And I don't believe that anybody is above the law. On the other hand, I also have a belief that we need to look forward as opposed to looking backwards. And part of my job is to make sure that for example at the CIA, you've got extraordinarily talented people who are working very hard to keep Americans safe. I don't want them to suddenly feel like they've got to spend all their time looking over their shoulders and lawyering up.

Guess who.
This statement basically legalizes anything and everything that happened yesterday. Or tomorrow. Perhaps moments ago.
Our current government is not only good at denying what has happened, it's also very good at denying anything that will.

up
9 users have voted.

Regardless of the path in life I chose, I realize it's always forward, never straight.

GreyWolf's picture

@Pricknick

up
5 users have voted.