>>>4783461 Was fbianon strzok or page because no texts from 06/18/-12/14/2016 (anons theory pb bun >>4783536)

Short answer: No.

if it was anybody at that level of the FBI, it was Priestap.

Bill was at the SDNY - the same district that Weiner was arrested/investigated in (and at the same time as) until Dec 2015. His position at the SDNY almost certainly would put him 'in the know' about everything involving Weiner/Huma as well.

He wasn't part of the 'in' crowd so it seems very unlikely he would have been involved very deeply in spygate. Probably wasn't trusted much either. Remember Strzok reported directly to McCabe during the Trump-Russia and the HRC investigations as well, with Priestap basicaly being relegated to paper-pushing/rubber stamping.

It seems almost certain that his being promoted and moved to DC was a 'keep quiet, move up, speak up, turn up (dead)' deal.

There's a lot of other reasons why I believe Priestap was/is FBIAnon but there's at least 1 very compelling crumb of evidence.

I did a very deep dig into Priestap a few months back so it's available here somewhere. I unfortunately had a HD crash and lost the notes and bookmarks I had and I don't have the available time to dig back in that I had back then so you'll need to uncover those stones on your own or search past breads.

>>4784579

It's safe to say that, if it's solid info from a consistently reliable or at least 'in good faith' source that's being attacked then the source of those attacks are paid shills.

Move on and ignore the jackholes.

>>4784811

>>4784568

>>4784524

>>4784513

>>4784492

I'm a little surprised none of you have put together that he's a distraction?

Based on what I"ve watched, read about and listened to (after the fact), of his testimony it seems as if he's saying all the right things to piss literally everybody off and basically ensure he won't be confirmed.

Leaves the door open that much longer for Whittaker.

>>4784867

>>4784881

Yeah… don't be surprised when Barr isn't confirmed.