This reads like someone's deranged bachelor uncle's facebook timeline.

Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
Question, what are your thoughts on Mueller? If you think he's doing good work then you believe his action to get rid of Strzok off the investigation was a good one.
It was a good decision, not because Strzok heads some sort of secret cabal but because 1. the risk of partisan attacks on the investigation due to the mere appearance of bias 2. the demonstration of poor character and 3. the risk that Strzok might be vulnerable to blackmail that might jeopardize the investigation.

That being said there are questions about what the 'insurance policy' he thought there was about the possibility of Trump being the president.
Do try to keep up.

In addition we have his handling of the Clinton e-mail scandal:

https://nypost.com/2017/12/04/fbi-ag...-clinton-memo/

"Records show Peter Strzok, who led the investigation of Clinton’s private email server as the second-highest-ranking official in the counterintelligence division, changed Comey’s draft language describing Clinton’s behavior as “grossly negligent” to “extremely careless,” a source told CNN."
"His handling"? This was an alteration that was reviewed by everyone else involved, and accepted as the official position. The reason for this should be obvious: the "gross negligence" statutory wording is not compatible with the decision not to prosecute. The decision not to prosecute reflects the FBI's best and most thoroughly reasoned assessment of the situation at the time. The "gross negligence" wording would therefore have been wholly inappropriate from a legal standpoint.

Furthermore the concern is weather the FBI had already decided to clear Clinton prior to the investigation being finished. Which depending on what is uncovered could lead to perjury charges for Comey.
Comey and others had determined before the entire investigation was complete that they could not prosecute Clinton under any specific statutes because they could not prove guilty intent or that she believed the information would be used against US interests. You may disagree with his interpretation of the law and his knowledge of how these statutes had previously been interpreted and by the DoJ, but the disagreement isn't such that the "wrong" interpretation would land anyone in court--let alone jail.

Now, given the way most things happen in Washington we won't see a whole lot of charges for anything however it would still be amusing political theory to watch Strzok plead the 5th since it makes him look guilty as all hell.
The only people looking guilty here are Trump & Co. and their enablers in congress. You, meanwhile, are looking increasingly corrupt.