ADDED: The NYT reports:
[T]he report paints an unflattering picture of one of the most tumultuous periods in the 110-year history of the F.B.I.... The report criticizes the conduct of F.B.I. officials who exchanged texts disparaging Mr. Trump during the campaign. The officials, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, were involved in both the Clinton and Russia investigations, leading Mr. Trump’s supporters to suspect a conspiracy against him. Many of those text messages have been released, but the inspector general cites a previously undisclosed message in which Mr. Strzok says the F.B.I. “will stop” Mr. Trump, according to two of the officials.ALSO: CNN:
The inspector general said that, because of his views, Mr. Strzok may have improperly prioritized the Russia investigation over the Clinton investigation during the final weeks of the campaign. The F.B.I. officials “brought discredit” to themselves and sowed public doubt about the investigation. But the report did not cite evidence that Mr. Strzok had acted improperly or influenced the outcome of the investigation, the officials said....
The findings sharply criticize the judgment of Mr. Comey....
The report from Inspector General Michael Horowitz concluded that the prosecutorial decisions in the Clinton case were "consistent" and not affected by bias or other improper actions. But it said that senior leaders' handling of the Clinton case cast a cloud over the bureau and did lasting damage to the FBI's reputation.
"The damage caused by these employees' actions extends far beyond the scope of the Midyear (Clinton) investigation and goes to the heart of the FBI's reputation for neutral factfinding and political independence," the report states.
A key finding: Comey erred in his decision not to coordinate with his superiors at the Justice Department at key moments in the Clinton email investigation. Horowitz said that Comey was "extraordinary and insubordinate," and did not agree with any of his reasons for deviating from "well-established Department policies.",,,
The report found that the Strzok and Page texts "cast a cloud" over the credibility of the investigation, although they found no evidence "that these political views directly affected the specific investigative decisions that we reviewed."...
The report faults Lynch for her meeting with Clinton on a Phoenix airport tarmac. But it says there was no evidence that Lynch and Clinton discussed the investigation into Hillary Clinton or any other inappropriate discussions.
पोस्ट्स
५८५ टिप्पण्या:
585 पैकी 1 – 200 नवीन› नवीनतम»To put it mildly...
So James Comey broke acted in a way that resulted in partisan outcomes but was totally non-partisan.
Washington DC cannot reform itself.
What was his first clue?
I was reliably promised here that the IG report would expose the political machinations of the Deep State.
BS. If not politically motivated, then why?
Comey is now a known deviant.
While we did not find that these decisions were the result of political bias on Comey’s part, we nevertheless concluded that by departing so clearly and dramatically from FBI and department norms, the decisions negatively impacted the perception of the FBI and the department as fair administrators of justice,” Inspector General Michael Horowitz said.
OK. But what terrible, but typical, bureaucratic writing: "negatively impacted the perception"
"negatively impacted" means harmed or hurt, right?
And whose perception?
The big question is: Was any of Comey's departure from Justice Department norms co-ordinated with the Attorney general?
It almost had to be.
The Attoirney General announced she would abide by his recommendation, but normally theer wouldn't be any.
Most of all, the media did not pick up on hthe pecularity of Comey havinga
press conference.
I was reliably informed by commenters here that "Top. Men." were in charge of the investigation and that her exoneration by same proved she never did anything wrong.
'While we did not find that these decisions were the result of political bias on Comey’s part, we nevertheless concluded that by departing so clearly and dramatically from FBI and department norms, the decisions negatively impacted the perception of the FBI and the department as fair administrators of justice,'
Fact: The FBI deviated clearly and dramatically from department norms.
Fact: The FBI was acting in an obviously unfair and partisan manner to any unbiased observer.
Stupid mealy mouthed opinion: It wan't the result of political bias.
Watch the usual suspects cling to that stupid mealy mouthed opinion and overlook the clear whitewashing of Hillary Clinton's criminality.
'While we did not find that these decisions were the result of political bias on Comey’s part, we nevertheless concluded that by departing so clearly and dramatically from FBI and department norms, the decisions negatively impacted the perception of the FBI and the department as fair administrators of justice,'
Then what was the reason? Either there has been a pattern of this over Comey's career which needs to be highlighted, or we had a career employee follow procedure religiously for decades only to depart in this one instance for....what reason exactly?
The IG report is a whitewash. Nothing will come of it. About what I expected.
Earnest Prole said...
I was reliably promised here that the IG report would expose the political machinations of the Deep State.
It did.
In detail.
The deep state whitewashed Hillary.
This is now indisputable.
Just like Hillary Clinton deviated from State Dept procedures.
If you're a Democrat, you can do that. With, apparently, impunity.
We have 'deviated' for 'disobeyed' and 'matter' for 'investigation'. It's really too bad that the average citizen can't play with terminology like that.
"Your honor, while I may have deviated from the law I want to see this matter put aside and my honor and reputation restored. OK? Thanks!"
Earnest Prole: "I was reliably promised here that the IG report would expose the political machinations of the Deep State."
It is difficult to convict someone based on bias and thoughtcrimes.
The report properly focuses on clear and tangible evidence and deviations from appropriate procedures which provide a more clear understanding of the shenanigans involved.
Others can draw their own opinions. For instance, here's a quick take from the DailyMail:
"'We’ll stop it': Justice Department inspector general says texting FBI lovers talked about keeping Trump from becoming president – yet insists there was no 'political bias' in Hillary Clinton email probe"
I don't blame Horowitz for avoiding trying thought crimes and leaving that to the political process.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjbPi00k_ME
Gambling in Rick's Cafe, shocking!
So far this IG report reads like Comey's, "I know this looks bad but there was no ill-intent" mindreading of Hillary Clinton's server antics.
There was no political bias, but rather a peculiar alignment of the stars that induced his divergence from established norms.
Comey's actions probably were motivated more by his desire to keep his job under a President Hillary Clinton than by politics as such, but there's no way the IG can know that. Inferences about motivation are almost always tentative in the absence of admissions by the person.
At least with a nothingburger you get a bun.
The report properly focuses on clear and tangible evidence and deviations from appropriate procedures which provide a more clear understanding of the shenanigans involved.
Then the report should not have stated the deviations had nothing to do with political bias. It should have stated them as deviations and left it at that.
Baelzar said...
The IG report is a whitewash. Nothing will come of it. About what I expected.
The IG report shows the FBI and DOJ were clearly partisan and criminal.
It is time Americans stopped being lazy cowards and stepped up to take control of the government that is supposed to serve them.
Our enemies are fighting for their beliefs every day.
Freedom isn't free.
People are constantly thanking me for my service.
They can thank me for my service by standing up to this clear criminality and not letting the progressives destroy the rule of law.
"
“(Trump’s) not ever going to become president, right? Right?!” Page wrote to Strzok, Bloomberg reports.
“No. No he’s not. We’ll stop it,” Strzok reportedly replied"
I guess that these didn't come out earlier for reasons of state security, well deep state security.
How much raw data is going to be a part of the report? In other words are we going to get the info that led to the conclusions in the report, or are we just going to get conclusions with minimum info on what led to those conclusions?
I'm not that fond of the court of public opinion, since it can so easily be led astray, but the issues under investigation are so important to the confidence in the institutions our nation runs on I don't think there will be any resolution to this without everything being put out there so we the people can hash it out.
I could be terribly wrong here, and the nuances are so subtle that either way there will be no resolution. In that case buwaya's pessimism is likely a reality.
It seems weird that the news is filled with descriptions of a preliminary version of the report. The official report isn't due to be released for another 2 hours.
Stupid mealy mouthed opinion: It wan't the result of political bias.
I can believe that. Comey and the others all thought Hillary was a lock. The election was fixed and, of they wanted to have careers, they had better clean up all those little messes she had left around.
Careerism was as important as politics for some. Strzok and Page sounded like they were motivated by politics but Comey sounds more careerist,
If the report was a whitewash Horowitz would not have, apparently, been this diligent in including all evidence in the final report.
Horowitz' report clearly documents what had been charged by republicans about the DOJ/FBI in their handling of the Hillary case and deviating from appropriate procedures which led directly to Hillary and her staffers skating.
That will no longer be in dispute (assuming all the early reviews are correct).
For criminal abuses of the FISA systems, FISA applications, the Flynn matter, etc those are part of separate investigations and will have separate reports.
Personally, I'm loving the now public disagreement between McCabe and Comey about who knew what and who authorized what.
Trump should thank Comey for helping him win the election.
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...
At least with a nothingburger you get a bun.
This is the enemy.
ARM thinks it is cool for the FBI and DOJ to send servicemen to jail for the same things Hillary is allowed to get away with.
The rule of law means nothing to these people.
If you people cannot drive this evil out you deserve the totalitarian state ARM and his friends want to impose on you.
You should have saved that one, ARM, it would have been funny under the right circumstances, but a damp squib here. If the FBI had handled this properly, we would all be bitching about President Sanders and you would be gloating.
Unfortunately there’s no reasonable prosecutor.
So, who is going to be indicted over this?
Horowitz: We did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that improper considerations, including political bias, directly affected the specific investigative actions we reviewed.
“(Trump’s) not ever going to become president, right? Right?!” Page wrote to Strzok, Bloomberg reports.
“No. No he’s not. We’ll stop it,” Strzok reportedly replied"
Nothing to see there. Just DOJ and FBI personally casually discussing stopping an opposition candidate from becoming President....and then occupying key positions within the organizations that executed plans to make that happen.
Why, this is an everyday sort of thing in most banana republics....LOL
Achilles is the most fun on this site.
Funny how nobody seems to blame Hillary for any of this mess.
It seems weird that the news is filled with descriptions of a preliminary version of the report.
They are framing the content to establish a normative references. Any deviation from this reference will require additional energy to acknowledge or reject. For example, the political myths that form close association between Nazis, Fascists, diversitists (e.g. racists, sexists), abortionists (e.g. throw grandma of the cliff), politically congruent ("="), etc., with the "right", with "conservatives", etc.
"..no political motivation.."? Okay, then what was his motivation?
I feel bad for poor Achilles today. All those months and months of visions of people being marched off to jail...poof!
Everyone gets away scot free in the email case on the grounds they are fucking morons. Hillary, Comey.
I can believe that. Comey and the others all thought Hillary was a lock. The election was fixed and, of they wanted to have careers, they had better clean up all those little messes she had left around.
Again, what definition of deviating from procedure so as not to prosecute the nominee of the Democratic Party in the middle of an election is apolitical?
Flip the parties and Rachel Maddow literally explodes in the opening to tonight's show.
As expected, nothing bad happens to the people who lied to the FBI to protect Clinton.
The only alternative reason for Comey to have done it other than political, was that he is a fucking moron.
Inga said...
I feel bad for poor Achilles today.
I feel bad for him everyday.
Trump should thank Comey for helping him win the election.
Right after Hillary thanks him for letting her continue to participate in it.
" ...... we nevertheless concluded that by departing so clearly and dramatically from FBI and department norms ...."
Why would he do that?
Let me ask the question again. Why?
Has Comey ever done anything like this before? I'll answer that one: No. (unless of course it was regarding a commie-pinko Dem or a Bill and Hilma Clintstone. But I repeat myself).
The only alternative reason for Comey to have done it other than political, was that he is a fucking moron.
Sorry, decades of by-the-book work suddenly turned deviant because "he's a moron"?
He just "fucking forgot" how to investigate someone during the most high-stakes moment of his career?
Sure.
I don't think there was "political bias" in terms of Comey wanting to Hillary to win. I think he just thought that she would win. No way in hell Trump could ever get elected, right? Oops. He believed from the get-go that Hillary would win and it probably wasn't good for the country for a sitting president to be indicted by the FBI. He thought that would look partisan than letting her go, so he went the other way and gave her a pussy-pass. Plus, with such a timid and sloppy investigation, they probably couldn't convict anyway.
Comey, which we've learned about much more since he was fired, is a kind of self-righteous bureaucratic snob who thinks he's "above all that." That's likely why there's not much evidence of partisan bias. That helps explains why he did what he did. He did not trust Lynch after she met with BJ Clinton on the tarmac and he's not dumb enough to believe their bullshit story about talking about grandkids. No one goes that far out of their way for smalltalk. That's why he made his July announcement of no charges. He said no prosecutor would ever indict Hillary anyway...because she was the Dem nominee.
That's also why he "reopened" the investigation right before the election. He had promised Congress he'd inform them of any changes, so he had to keep his promise, even if it violated protocols. Again, he never thought Hillary would lose.
He was letting his staff run rampant. They were giving away immunity like candy on Halloween, taking the Clinton narrative at face value and even letting the Clintons destroy evidence. The entire investigation was a farce! They were going through the motions, to try to keep up the facade that the FBI wasn't a bunch of hacks.
Of course, they failed in that regard, too.
"He just "fucking forgot" how to investigate someone during the most high-stakes moment of his career?"
-- He was just in a hurry, so he drafted a memo exonerating her before he finished because, well, he had places to be.
The IG report is said to actually support the idea that Comey’s actions hurt Clinton.
Why was there no grand jury empaneled? Why was immunity granted with nothing in return? Why was Cheryl Mills allowed in the Hillary interview? Why were there no consequences for destruction of evidence? Why were there no consequences for lying to investigators?
If the report doesn’t address these items it’s worthless.
Inga: "The IG report is said to actually support the idea that Comey’s actions hurt Clinton."
LOL
"Plus, with such a timid and sloppy investigation, they probably couldn't convict anyway."
-- For any other human in the country, simply saying: "We requested evidence; they destroyed the requested devices with hammers," gets you a conviction. Except by giving them immunity, no reason most of Clinton's inner circle walks -- if they'd worked for a Bush or a Romney or a Trump instead of a Clinton.
The "crime" was that Clinton was not investigated in the manner anyone else would have been given the facts of the case. The problem, though, is that this is still prosecutorial discretion, even at the level of not convening a grand jury which would have given the FBI better tools work with. This part was not in James Comey's control- it is the DoJ.
If the IG's report does not delve into the decisions in the DoJ (not the FBI) in how the FBI was hamstrung, then the report is useless and really is just another cover-up operation.
It has been curious to me, though, that all of the reporting on the conclusions of the report deal only with Comey and the FBI. Where is Lynch, Yates, and others in the DoJ? There are three possibilities- the journalists writing these stories are burying details about the DoJ operatives, the journalists weren't given the details, or Hororwitz didn't even investigate anyone outside the FBI. Which of these is most likely, do you think? I honestly don't know right now.
Inga, I'm sorry the McCabe/Comey coverup of the additional emails found on Weiners laptop weren't completely covered up until after the election.
Thank goodness someone in the NY Office wasn't just going to sit around and let Comey/McCabe continue with their coverup.
Comey/McCabe sat on the emails/laptops within the bureau from late Sept to late Oct and then....tick tock...they got word this story was going to break and it wasn't going to look too good then.
So, presto chango, investigation ON/investigation Off! Mums the word and bob's your uncle.
No evidence of a “Secret Cabal”.
So sorry Drago.
The IG reports states that Comey’s decision not to prosecute Clinton was correct.
Sorry Drago.
I hope I'm wrong about their being no direct consequences from the IG report, but I simply don't have enough faith in the current politicians to act upon it. The Republicans are pussies. Time and time again.
CERTAINLY the DoJ will sit on their hands.
Strzok...."we will stop him"
Today and the following days will be fun to observe.
Why is Comey out of the country?
"The IG reports states that Comey’s decision not to prosecute Clinton was correct."
-- Wow. Even after we learned she destroyed evidence and had her team lie to the FBI, we STILL think that she shouldn't be prosecuted?
What's the point of a law if Democrat elites are above it?
No, Inga, the stories report that it wasn't Comey's decision to make- it was Lynch's or Comey's direct supervisor at the time.
“(Trump’s) not ever going to become president, right? Right?!” Page wrote to Strzok, Bloomberg reports.
“No. No he’s not. We’ll stop it,” Strzok reportedly replied"
Yeah, it's going to be pretty hard to claim any honesty for the Obama Admin spying on the Trump campaign, given that text
Esp. given that the DoJ / FBI kept that second text hidden for a year, even after letting the first one out.
There's no possible legitimate "benefit of the doubt" here
Uh-oh. Drago didn't get Birkel's "Ignore Inga" memo.
His deviation probably wasn't much different than the FBI's standard deviation.
Daly said...
Horowitz was probably worried that if the report were too stinging, Mueller would start investigating his family and friends for imagined collusion and obstruction of justice.
Fair enough. Rosenstein is now threatening the Congressional staffers who are trying to get the FBI to turn over documents.
We learned yesterday that, in response to this very investigation, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein . . . threatened to use the Justice Department’s awesome investigative authorities as a weapon against political adversaries.
That Rosenstein threatened to subpoena the committee’s records does not seem to be in serious dispute. There are differing accounts about why. House investigators say that Rosenstein was trying to bully his way out of compliance with oversight demands; the Justice Department offers the lawyerly counter that Rosenstein was merely foreshadowing his litigating position if the House were to try to hold him in contempt for obstructing its investigations. Either way, the best explanation for the outburst is that Rosenstein is beset by profound conflicts of interest, and he’s acting like it.
The first thing to bear in mind about the news reported Tuesday by Fox News’s Catherine Herridge is that the dispute in question — which is just one of many during a year of Justice Department stonewalling — happened five months ago, on January 10.
So, what was going on back then?
Among other things, the House Intelligence Committee and senior Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee were pressing for disclosure of the applications the Justice Department submitted to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (“FISA court”) for warrants to eavesdrop on Carter Page, a former Trump-campaign adviser. (The Nunes memo is dated just eight days after Rosenstein’s reported subpoena threat; the Grassley-Graham memo is dated just four days before; both prompted bitter disclosure fights.)
Read the whole thing.
Rosenstein seems to be a Deep State member in good standing. The Deep State seems more and more to be the intelligence agencies and probably some big money people who have influence, maybe over subsequent careers.
Kevin said...
Then the report should not have stated the deviations had nothing to do with political bias. It should have stated them as deviations and left it at that.
Bingo. In this respect the report is just as dishonest and violating of procedures as was Comey's press conference
With this many people involved, including Brennan's cross-department working group established in 2016, it hardly seems that secretive at all.
Such was their over-confidence. And why wouldn't they all be over-confident, everyone on the left and their LLR was convinced Hillary couldn't lose.
So, they were not very secretive, had large working groups, obama approved wide dissemination of other unredacted information across all major departments, there were folks on the inside working directly with reporters across multiple organizations through FusionGPS, etc.
They were sending text messages about their little shenanigans to each other on very interceptable devices!! LOL
The IG report is said to actually support the idea that Comey’s actions hurt Clinton.
And that bastard Trump fired him anyway!
Of course what didn’t hurt Hillary was her flouting of the laws and regulations in the first place.
Hmmmmm, Trey Gowdy seems back on the warpath...for whatever that is worth.
Nothing Comey could do WOULDN'T hurt Clinton once her crimes became public; the question is: Why did Comey do his best to minimize the pain?
LarsPorsena said...
"..no political motivation.."? Okay, then what was his motivation?
His motivation was he didn't want Obama to fire him for torpedoing Hillary (since that would have also nailed Obama), and he wanted to keep his job when Hillary became President
I must admit I fail to see how this qualifies as a "win" for Comey, Hillary, or Obama
"I must admit I fail to see how this qualifies as a "win" for Comey, Hillary, or Obama"
-- No one goes to jail, and they get to say: "We did nothing wrong." Big win.
Of giving classified documents to Huma to print off, that when to a computer crimes type sex offender’s computer and was printed off by the maid, who had, no doubt, top secret clearance.
That wasn’t “gross negligence” though, just extremely careless. What was gross negligence was describing a US intelligence source in Iran in enough detail to get him dragged from his Iranian prison cell and hanged.
“Uh-oh. Drago didn't get Birkel's "Ignore Inga" memo.”
Yeah, dammit all!
So, we already knew that Clinton colluded with foreign agents (e.g. British, Kiev) to influence the election. Now we know that she colluded with the so-called "deep state", a domestic special interest, to influence the election, overturn the democratic consensus (a la California transgender judge), since conception, after birth, and the warlock hunt is still in progress ten trimesters later.
Greg P: "His motivation was he didn't want Obama to fire him for torpedoing Hillary (since that would have also nailed Obama), and he wanted to keep his job when Hillary became President"
Correct.
Remember, Barack Hussein Obama himself, himself, knowingly sent and received emails from Hillary over her unsecured servers in violation of the same laws Hillary broke.
Comey is every terrible thing everyone from all factions say he is: but obama sending and receiving emails to and from Hillary across those unsecured servers could not be allowed to go any further.
The additional frameup operations (Brennan/Halper/Mifsud/Downer) were in addition to the violations in the FISA 702 program (FusionGPS and Crowdstrike access) which was then weaponized into the hoax dossier.
And then there all the "everything and the kitchen sink" tactics deployed to undermine Trump as President-elect and then President (including the massive leaks, the Flynn setup, etc)
Remember, the goal was to keep Trump from being elected, then stopping him prior to assuming office, then to get him out of office fast enough that this information never became public....
....but the honey badger has outlasted them all thus far....
“No, Inga, the stories report that it wasn't Comey's decision to make- it was Lynch's or Comey's direct supervisor at the time.”
Yes, I just heard this too. I also heard that not prosecuting Hillary ( no matter by who) was the correct call.
SDaly: "Re Trey Gowdy, he will get out in front of the press, make a lot of noise, suck up the oxygen, then go back to sleep without accomplishing anything"
Given his previous performance, that's my take unless and until he proves us wrong.
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...
Achilles is the most fun on this site.
Inga said...
The IG reports states that Comey’s decision not to prosecute Clinton was correct.
ARM and Inga clearly believe democrats are above the law.
The law only applies to little people like service members.
Matthew Sablan said...
"I must admit I fail to see how this qualifies as a "win" for Comey, Hillary, or Obama"
-- No one goes to jail, and they get to say: "We did nothing wrong." Big win.
It will only be a "big win" if people like you who know it is wrong allow pieces of shit like ARM and Inga to win.
Are you going to allow it to happen?
Amazing what we know from a report not being release for another 30 minutes.
Those texts from Page and Strzok are damning.
My guess is we will hear more about them when the IG report comes out concerning the Russian collusion investigation.
So to cut to the chase, the IG report does nothing to benefit Trump; meanwhile, it now appears Mueller will flip Trump's lawyer to testify against Trump over "negotiations Cohen undertook during the 2016 campaign to help the Trump Organization build a tower in Moscow."
“ARM and Inga clearly believe democrats are above the law.
The law only applies to little people like service members.”
Hearing voices again?
Inga said...
Yes, I just heard this too. I also heard that not prosecuting Hillary ( no matter by who) was the correct call.
Inga knows that Hillary broke the law.
Inga thinks it is OK for Hillary to break the law because democrat.
Completely amoral.
Inga: Do you think it was correct to not charge Clinton when she ordered the destruction of subpoenaed evidence and lied to the FBI?
It's a straight forward question; if the IG report actually says that behavior is acceptable -- I question the validity of the rest of the damn report.
Inga said...
“ARM and Inga clearly believe democrats are above the law.
The law only applies to little people like service members.”
Hearing voices again?
I am posting your words in toto.
You know Hillary broke the law.
You think it is ok for the DOJ to selectively decide to allow her to get away with things it sent service members to jail for.
Because democrat.
Read carefully. They did not find that X is not the same as they found not-X. The report is AGNOSTIC on the question of Comey's bias. There are many reasons why that might be. Insufficient proof for example. It does not exonerate him of bias.
Comey took it upon himself to absolve Hillary on the grounds she didn't have any bad intent.
Now Comey gets the same treatment.
“So to cut to the chase, the IG report does nothing to benefit Trump; meanwhile, it now appears Mueller will flip Trump's lawyer to testify against Trump over "negotiations Cohen undertook during the 2016 campaign to help the Trump Organization build a tower in Moscow."”
Plus the New York AG is suing Trump over his bogus charity. I’m hearing that criminal charges could spring out of this.
Matthew Sablan said...
Inga: Do you think it was correct to not charge Clinton when she ordered the destruction of subpoenaed evidence and lied to the FBI?
Oh come on.
You aren't this dumb.
Inga is clearly amoral.
She wants to impeach Trump over something that isn't even a crime.
They are going to take whatever they can. They obviously don't care about the actual law or statutes.
It is now up to people like you to decide if you are going to fight them or not.
“I am posting your words in toto.”
Obviously you don’t know the meaning of “in toto”.
Inga said...
Plus the New York AG is suing Trump over his bogus charity. I’m hearing that criminal charges could spring out of this.
A Clinton supporter just used the words "bogus charity."
Enemy of freedom.
Another whitewash pure and simple. No political motives involved, come on, what a joke.
I expected this kind of a whitewash. When will the rule of law be enforced and the criminal elements in our government be held accountable? Our judicial system has always favored the rich and powerful but this is so blatant it is so wrong.
Inga said...
“I am posting your words in toto.”
Obviously you don’t know the meaning of “in toto”
Every single word you post.
You are unambiguous.
You think democrats are above the law.
Period.
Blogger Matthew Sablan said...Inga: Do you think it was correct to not charge Clinton when she ordered the destruction of subpoenaed evidence and lied to the FBI?”
You don’t really think she’s going to answer that, do you?
“Inga is clearly amoral.”
Whaaaaat?! Only amoral? I’m no longer immoral? Did I get a promotion?
Nothing is political all things are political no matter what Comey claims and his decision hurt Clinton, may have swung the election, and helped Trump by this early and hasty announcement. In any case now is the time to investigate both Clinton and Trump.
You guys insist on encouraging the fool.
This is still very early.
Lots to come out yet. I wonder if Rosenstein pays the price for threatening Congress?
just like the two men who died in prison, to cover up whitey bulger's crimes, yes the button man for bulger, died in 1976, but what difference does it make?
Ken Schoentag said...
Another whitewash pure and simple. No political motives involved, come on, what a joke.
I expected this kind of a whitewash. When will the rule of law be enforced and the criminal elements in our government be held accountable? Our judicial system has always favored the rich and powerful but this is so blatant it is so wrong.
Then recognize the democrat party for what it is and do something about it.
Washington DC will not reform itself and it will not respect the rule of law.
It is going to force us to reform it. People like Inga will fight for their tribal leader to remain above the law.
In any case now is the time to investigate both Clinton and Trump.
Fair enough but they have been investigating Trump since November 9, 2016,
"You don’t really think she’s going to answer that, do you?"
-- Probably not; sometimes I'm surprised though. But the *not* answering is just as important a data point.
Comey accidentally departed from the norms.
He never returned.
This exchange warrants more investigation:
“[Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!” Page texted Strzok.
“No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it,” Strzok responded.
That exchange, plus the "insurance policy," pretty much taints Mueller's entire investigation.
”But the *not* answering is just as important a data point.”
Of course it is. She knows.
And it points to the bullshit aspect of “Comey cost Hillary the election”. Clinton’s illegal actions are on full display. Hillary should have been under indictment in October 2016.
"This is a crisis. Certain rules don’t apply in a crisis"
Weiner cost her the election; not campaigning in key states cost her the election; the Russians... Geesh. What DIDN'T cost her the election?
Seems to me that is is a tiny bit weird that exactly the same people "investigated" Clinton and Russian collusion. Is there a non-corrupt reason why this may have happened? The FBI has lot of employees.
Inga may be right. Comey might be a Russian secret agent embeded in the FBI to give Hillary the coup de gras. Not exactly Occam's Razor, but maybe.
"we did not find that these decisions were the result of political bias" is a lawyerly way of seeming to say "we found that these decisions were not the result of political bias on Comey’s part," without actually saying that.
Ironically it was a good thing that Comey was such a reality bending moron. His clumsily idiotic actions help expose the undeniable rot infesting the FBI and DoJ. Although many of us probably suspected, we all now know that the top echelons of these agencies are full of creatures who have a complete lack of respect for the law and the American citizens, and only really care about their own careers and covering their asses.
"Is there a non-corrupt reason why this may have happened?"
-- Given one is a cyber-crime, heavy focused on technology -- and the other is about human spies with an international flavor, you'd think they'd have different experts. Yet, here we are. Must be like a TV police office, where the three main characters are experts in everything.
Hah! Damaging the agency's image of impartiality. No, under Obama that image was pretty much crippled by the time 2016 rolled around.
Don’t be chumps. Wait until the whole report comes out. What are the deviations from DOJ norms? Wouldn’t political bias involve favoring Trump by having the press conference? This is a report by Bloomberg of the conclusions. What are the underlying findings?
A bit of history on Mueller.
As FBI director in 2002, Special Counsel Robert Mueller directed his agents to oppose the pardons of four wrongfully imprisoned men because exculpatory evidence was merely “fodder for cross-examination,” newly revealed FBI documents show.
Four years later, the four men, or their estates, were awarded $102 million by a federal judge in Boston for their wrongful decades-long imprisonment due to FBI misconduct.
Mueller ordered the Boston FBI office to answer a request to him from the Massachusetts Advisory Board of Pardons for an “official version” of the imprisonment of the four men for a gangland murder in Chelsea MA in March 1965.
The four men – Louie Greco, Henry Tameleo, Peter Limone and Joe Salvati – were convicted in state court in Boston of murdering Edward “Teddy” Deegan, a small-time hoodlum, in an alley during a bank burglary.
Within days of the murder, Boston FBI agents knew the identities of the actual murderers, and reported the information to J. Edgar Hoover in Washington. But they allowed a Mob hitman they had flipped, Joseph Barboza, to settle some old scores by falsely testifying that the four men had taken part in the gangland murder he had helped arrange with others.
That's Mueller.
“Inga may be right. Comey might be a Russian secret agent embeded in the FBI to give Hillary the coup de gras. Not exactly Occam's Razor, but maybe.”
Indeed, except for the Russian Secret agent part. I can see him becoming a hero to the right after this.
Well page, handles the firtash extradition, from hungary,
Blogger mockturtle said...
This exchange warrants more investigation:
“[Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!” Page texted Strzok.
“No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it,” Strzok responded.
6/14/18, 12:41 PM
You know what else warrants more investigation?
The first text from Page was given to Congress.
The response wasn't.
That's a huge scandal. Why was the second text not given to Congress?
My theory: Lots of guys like me are interested in the texts between them two. Once those texts were given to Congress, I wasn't as interested anymore. I relaxed. Congress has got this. If they find anything, I'll hear about it.
Who knew they'd keep the smokikng gun from Congress?
“ In any case now is the time to investigate both Clinton and Trump.”
The FBI is investigating the Clinton Foundation since around the first of the year. Maybe they can expand their investigation to address all other concerns we’ve been hearing about for years now.
Yes there were a few pro-Clinton FBI agents like Strzok as well as FBI agents in NYC who continued to pursue the Clinton Foundation case and other matters, but claim to have been told to stand down. The so called Deep State is not monolithic; there are even dissenters within like John P. O'Neill who was ignored by a different president and set of FBI leaders. If anything Comey's actions seem to throw light on the issue rather than cover it up.
I am posting your words in toto.
Where it's too dark to read..
It is pretty funny being lectured by a woman, Inga, who either kept silent on her own feelings about Bill Clinton, or fully supported and enabled the guy who was so famously disappointed that you just couldn’t do stuff against women’s will anymore, you know, recently.
But the real heros, well, heroines, to the right were all of the women who voted for Jill Stein, handing Trump the presidency, because they believe everything they read in the media. Applause all around people!
No need to make instant judgments on the report -- let it stew for a bit!
August 8, 2016 Text -- only recently obtained by IG:
Lisa Page: “(Trump’s) not ever going to become president, right? Right?!”
Peter Strzok: “No. No he’s not. We’ll stop it.”
Conspiracy of silence! #m3too doesn’t mean Democrats!
Who knew they'd keep the smokikng gun from Congress?
When they redacted the cost of a $70k conference room table, it was pretty clear they weren't going to let Congress in on anything that might make them look bad. That would include smoking guns.
Strzok will be investigating crimes on Indian reservations in South Dakota until he gets his pension.
Has Comey left the country? I heard he left town.
If anything Comey’s actions seem to throw light on the issue rather than cover it up.
You know who is throwing light on the issue? Donald “The Light Bringer” Trump. And the cockroaches scurry.
Deep state derangement syndrome a thing?
pacwest said...
In that case buwaya's pessimism is likely a reality.
That's a hard prospect to digest, but that's the way the report reads to me. We're defeated.
The FBI guy Comey put in charge of the Hillary email investigation and the Trump Russian collusion investigation is expressing a contemporaneous intent to stop Trump from becoming President (to a DOJ lawyer sharing that same motive). Both Strzok and Lisa are among Mueller's first recruits to his Special Counsel team. But there's no evidence of any political bias here on the part of the FBI or Justice.
Sometimes the whitewash is more revealing of the underlying depth of the problem than even the crimes being dismissed.
I doubt that Inga/ARM would be shrugging off a statement "We'll stop Hillary from ever becoming President" as innocuous lover chit-chat.
What firtash extradition, exactly, that was due to lanky davis.
Comey didn't mean to be a deviant. The whole thing was like...an accident, an unfortunate turn of events. Call it the fog of investigation...no wait, matter, it was the fog of matter.
Look, Hillary stopped by. They had a few drinks and one thing led to another. Before he knew it, Comey was in bed with Hillary, figuratively speaking, of course. Sometimes shit just happens.
”When they redacted the cost of a $70k conference room table, it was pretty clear they weren't going to let Congress in on anything that might make them look bad. That would include smoking guns.”
There have been multiple instances where the FBI has held back or redacted relevant information solely because it makes them look bad. This power needs to be taken away from them. Maybe an independent IG-like officer who decides what gets held back for security reasons.
"Both Strzok and Lisa are among Mueller's first recruits to his Special Counsel team."
A mere coincidence. /s
I guess it's down to this - we must hope that the corrupt fucking morons who run our country are no worse than the corrupt fucking morons that run every other country.
AustinRoth said...
BS. If not politically motivated, then why?
They keep trying to sell me this bridge and I keep asking them if they own it. They wont tell me if they own it or not..
I doubt that Inga/ARM would be shrugging off a statement "We'll stop Hillary from ever becoming President" as innocuous lover chit-chat.
This one definitely fail's Dershowitz's "shoe on the other foot" test.
So it’s sounding like Horowitz did NOT say that decisions were not made for political reasons. He said there is not any documentary evidence that that is the case. IOW, they didn’t find an entry in Comey’s diary “I did it for political purposes”.
I think its pretty much undeniable now that the major national law enforcement and intelligence agencies (DOJ / FBI / CIA / NSA) and the bulk of the bureaucratic deep-state lifers believe that they are their own independent 4th branch of government, unaccountable to Congress, the President or the American people.
If this travesty is allowed to stand, there is no hope for this country moving forward... If NO ONE is held accountable for any of these myriad of crimes, then the American experiment is over. We need a national divorce... to separate along ideological lines and move forward in our own directions, because to continue to try and force these two diametrically opposed sides together will result in nothing but bloodshed.
You cannot piss on the people, and thwart justice continuously without consequence. We are nearing the breaking point, and you better believe there will be a reckoning..
Just glancing through the comments I have to chuckle at Inga who originally thought the FBI/DOJ did no wrong, but now feels triumphant because Comey violated all norms of the FBI/DOJ , and -so far- has not been indicted. We haven't even seen the whole report. I suspect there are going to be some pretty damning details in the report itself but I'll actually await the release. Though I will say that the conclusion that Comey "deviated" from departmental norms certainly reinforces Rosenstein's letter in which he recommends that Comey be fired. Certainly makes Trump's acceptance of that recommendation look a lot less like the "obstruction of justice" that the Dems have been trying to sell.
So where are we? So far, no evidence of Russian "collusion"; a clear case that Comey's firing was justified so it looks like both legs of Mueller's investigation have been removed; the temporary NY AG filing a bogus complaint against the Trump charity ( what about that Arkansas -based FBI investigation into the Clinton Foundation?); Cohen -maybe - about to be fried for things that I expect have nothing to do with Trump (see Paul Manafort); the Utah investigation into God knows what except it ain't Russian collusion and it ain't Trump; the IG's report is going to provide the various Congressional committees with additional fodder and momentum for their investigations (how is the FBI/DOJ going to be able to continue to defend the indefensible?).
Interesting time and not a good time for either side to go out on a limb or make unsubstantiated claims. Let's all read the IG's report and see what's what.
It not just a deep state, it's a deep kakistocracy.
Plus the New York AG is suing Trump over his bogus charity.
On the exact day everyone knows the IG report is coming out.
What are the odds?
I doubt that Inga/ARM would be shrugging off a statement "We'll stop Hillary from ever becoming President" as innocuous lover chit-chat.
You're kidding, I hope. That is easy if you just close your eyes and ears and say DNC talking points over and over.
Before he knew it, Comey was in bed with Hillary, figuratively speaking, of course. Sometimes shit just happens.
In Hillary's bed it happens more than just sometimes.
Didn't Comey explain he didn't deviate from expected procedure, he just pursued the investigation using a Higher Loyalty?
I is B: LOL!
Here's a more damning interpretation of the report from a far-right source.
Also:
Page and Strzok are not the only FBI officials assigned to the Clinton email probe who were found to have exchanged personal messages indicating either an animus against Trump or frustration with the fact that the FBI was investigating Clinton. The report identified five officials with some connection to the email probe who were expressing political views, faulting them for having brought “discredit to themselves, sowed doubt about the FBI’s handling of the midyear investigation, and impacted the reputation of the FBI.”
there are even dissenters within like John P. O'Neill who was ignored by a different president and set of FBI leaders. If anything Comey's actions seem to throw light on the issue rather than cover it up.
I agree. I have previously noted here that my daughter, an FBI agent and a natural Hillary voter, told me in September 2016 that she would NOT vote for Hillary.
That struck me and was why I wondered if Comey was facing an agent revolt if he had not held that July press conference.
Of course, she was an agent and trained under Louis Freeh who fought with Clinton who was determined to cover up Iran's role in the Khobar Towers bombing.
I have said it before and I’ll say it again: James Comey is a one man wrecking crew.
Does any of this mean Hillary! becomes President?
No?
Then, next.
Rosenstein can probably not continue to stonewall Congress and more will come out as he has to surrender those unredacted messages. That's where the FISA scandal is and probably some prison terms.
Remember Obama's war on IGs and there was no IG at State during the Clinton follies.
Just glancing through the comments I have to chuckle at Inga who originally thought the FBI/DOJ did no wrong, but now feels triumphant because Comey violated all norms of the FBI/DOJ , and -so far- has not been indicted.
Moving goalposts are her stock in trade. In this very thread she's also giddy the the supposed Russian Collusion investigation which was supposed to impeach Trump "any day" has been superseded by some made-up investigation into the Trump Foundation which was conveniently disclosed on the very day the IG's report was known to drop and that "criminal charges could spring out of this."
BAMN.
One more comment about Comey. This is not the first time that he has gone off the reservation because he thought he knew better than everyone else. Every time I look at Comey's track record it drags me back to sophomore year in high school when I had to read The Mayor of Casterbridge and first learned about Hubris and what follows.
Trump should thank Comey for helping him win the election.
No. Trump should thank people like you for wasting your vote on a third-party candidate in a swing state.
Trump thanks you, Inga. As do I.
To be fair, an argument could be made that Comey did what he did for strcitly careerist reasons rather than political ones. I mean, it follows that 1) "Everyone" knew that Hillary would win and 2) therefore he better do right by her. In that scenario his only concerns are to his own hide and his legacy. Even though the fix was in with the sham "investigation", he had to maintain at least a flimsy veneer of going through the motions. His mistake was one of vanity: He wanted to be a star. So he got in front of a bunch of cameras and carefully outlined all of Hillary's crimes, then he gravely intoned that he wouldn't recommend prosecution since there was no intention (as if that matters).
There's never gonna be a "smoking gun" - folks watch too many tv shows where both the crime and the successful prosecution are resolved within 60 minutes. Get 'em McCoy! (Law and Order dude).
Comey - Fired
McCabe - Fired
Strzok - shanghaid
Page - Quit
This is what "draining the swamp" looks like. It's slow and plodding and tedious and rarely ever sexy.
True, Nixon resigned, and a buncha his staff went to prison. But, more important was the Dems smashing victories in the '74 elections which ushered in all sorts of bad policies. And, despite this handicap, Carter only barely squeaked by Ford in '76 (extending and magnifying all these bad policies.
The goal (in my view) is for Trump's allies to keep the House, expand the Senate, and blunt Mueller's investigation.
Everything else is gravy.
Inga wrote:
"Yes, I just heard this too. I also heard that not prosecuting Hillary ( no matter by who) was the correct call."
From whomever you heard that, I can just about guarantee it isn't from the IG's report. It would probably be well outside the IG's purview to question that decision in either direction. The IG would be looking at violations of procedure, not the decision itself.
Why was was it a good thing that Comey went to Congress to say that Clinton was under FBI investigation 11 days before the election, which was then leaked to the press, while remaining silent about the fact that Trump was also under FBI investigation at the same time? Then Trump is given the opportunity to repeat on the campaign trail that anyone under FBI investigation should be not be running for President.
What if the shoe was on the other foot, Republicans/ conservatives/Trump supporters?
I wonder if people will believe what the MSM says and writes.
My money is that Donald Trump will win the messaging.
Hard to think a guy involved in the investigations of Hillary and Trump who hated Trump and promised to "stop" him was not motivated by politics. That's a hard sell. Frankly, people who do not follow politics will think anybody attempting that sell is a lie. George Lakoff better come up with a theory of why selling obvious bull shit is a political winner. Or a good business model.
"Why was was it a good thing that Comey went to Congress to say that Clinton was under FBI investigation 11 days before the election, which was then leaked to the press, while remaining silent about the fact that Trump was also under FBI investigation at the same time?"
-- Because Comey had publicly promised to come back if there were any new discoveries. Note that when he made that promise *he most likely knew about Weiner's computer having new Clinton emails on them, that could only be there if Abedin and Clinton lied about turning in all compromised equipment.*
When Comey promised Congress this, he was hoping to NOT have to reveal this fact, and sat on it, until he couldn't.
@Inga You will never, ever, get me to defend anything Comey did or does. He went before the press, I suspect, because he knew his pants were already on fire and he thought that might put them out. Instead he succeeded in alienating the other political party as well. If Hillary had won, as "98%" of the pollsters thought, Comey's action would have been a minor blip on the screen and would probably have been interpreted (by some anyway) as how "honest and impartial" he was, thus saving his position at the FBI. However we know the outcome was different and, instead of extinguishing his trousers, he threw gas on the flames.
Couldn't happen to a nicer guy!
Also: Given that we've learned Trump was under investigation because Clinton paid off foreign spies to create a fake dossier about him... yeah, I'd say the Clinton and Trump investigations are different enough.
So much bad stuff in the NYS complaint over the Trump Foundation, but monetarily only seeking $2.8M restitution plus unstated penalties. Fact that Trump family lets this fester instead of settling is more evidence that the Trump fortune is vastly overstated. And they'll no doubt try to keep the legal defense bills down, thereby making things worse.
Remember Trump told the Russians in the Oval Office right after firing Comey he real reason for doing so.
@ Rabel You got me with your link to the far-right WAPO. Many a chuckle.
I do like the part about Comey using GMail.
Foreign actors accessed Clinton's emails. I vaguely remember being promised for months such a thing was impossible, and that her server was more secure than government servers.
Inga said...
Why was was it a good thing that Comey went to Congress to say that Clinton was under FBI investigation 11 days before the election...
It was not a good thing, and never should have happened. Clinton should not have been under FBI investigation at that point. Had Comey done his job, she would have been under indictment awaiting trial.
But yeah, lets pretend that Comey helped Clinton.
It will never happen, but I would like to see the question whether Hillary had "intent" tried in a court of law. I think that there her "intent" would become very clear.
Inga: "What if the shoe was on the other foot, Republicans/ conservatives/Trump supporters?"
LOL
All the lefty talking points are colliding today!
Hillary was literally under criminal investigation.
DOJ/FBI/CIA claim Trump was not under surveillance or investigation because this was all just a counter-intelligence operations against Russia!
Those goalpost wheels and fallback positions are going to need alot more grease.
“But yeah, lets pretend that Comey helped Clinton.”
Let’s stop pretending here was a deep state secret cabal to hurt Trump.
Matthew Sablan,
I don't think Comey knew about the laptop until October 21st 2016 at the earliest. All of the evidence suggests that McCabe knew about it in late September 2016, but kept the details away from Comey- indeed, it appears that McCabe did nothing about the laptop and the contained e-mails, and the only interpretation of his actions is that he hoped to keep it out of the news until after the election. I hope the IG report has details about this, but we will see.
The report establishes the FBI are Masters of Dis-information and Artists at Covering up real investigations with the Authority to do faked Investigations with threats to bring false charges to destroy easy targets. You just pay them for their crime spree, and they are corrupt all the way down.
”What if the shoe was on the other foot, Republicans/ conservatives/Trump supporters?”
What a load. Clinton was under criminal investigation because of her direct actions regarding her server. With respect to Trump, we have been lectured that they weren’t investigating Trump but rather the Russians.
Inga: "Let’s stop pretending here was a deep state secret cabal to hurt Trump"
The investigation into what happened under at the DOJ/FBI/CIA/obama staff is still on-going.
They view it as a mere misstep that they didn't properly seize Clinton or her aides' devices, even though it meant that they would have missed Weiner's if he hadn't been sexting a teenage girl. This OIG report seems like a farce.
It's kind of interesting to see the blind partisanship of a couple of leftists here. Not all are and I appreciate that.
I used to post comments at and read leftist blogs.
Today even Kevin Drum is commenting on the wild left shit of the Democrats. When they are left of Mother Jones, you know something is screwy,
Inga is generally correct that Comey botched up the various investigations in many different ways. Exonerating Hillary, obviously, saved her campaign. The opposite -- recommending indictment -- probably would have sunk her.
But trashing her during Comey's infamous press conference helped sink her too.
Comey should not have held the press conference, should have privately conveyed to the DOJ the FBI recommendation to indict or not indict Hillary -- and then let the Obama DOJ make the call (probably no indictment), and then take whatever political heat candidate Trump would directed towards them.
Hillary's mis-handling of her private server caused a lotta headaches.
If Comey didn't know, that's a problem then not with Comey -- but with the FBI itself. There's no reason he should NOT have known.
You know, poor Comey. He sandbagged the original fake hillary investigation, he agreed to change the terminology to a "matter" for a literal criminal investigation, and he tried his darndest to cover up the email discovery on Weiners laptop until after the election but the NY office blew the whistle on him and he did the best he could for hillary under trying circumstances.
He then worked up his fake little memos and coordinated with Rosenstein to get an Special Proscutor appointed when there was no evidence of an underlying crime so they worked it out to start, improperly, under a counter-intelligence "investigation".
And this is the thanks Comey gets from the lefties!
LOL
Trump’s campaign was in the middle of this Russia investigation and for good cause I suspect. We’ll all be hearing much more about it as the Mueller investigation is winding down, hopefully sooner rather than later.
Geesh; reading the recommendations, most of it is: "What happened was bad, but we'll train people not to do it next time."
This is the definition of white washing (I tend to read the conclusions first and work backwards in these lengthy reports.)
Trump wasn't under criminal investigation like Hillary. There was a classified counter intelligence investigation involving some people related to the campaign, but Trump had not then and still has not been accused of any specific crime.
It had been clearly established by then that Hillary had indeed broken the law. She only avoided prosecution because Comey made up a non-existent "intent" requirement.
I’m waiting to see if the actual physical destruction of computers and phones is addressed.
I assume this is true, I guess I could be wrong, but if so, and everybody involved isn’t going to prison, then the Trumpster needs to fire everyfuckingbody. Let the chips fall where they may.
" The FBI agrees with the OIG that in a few instances, the former Deputy Director did not fully comply with his voluntary recusal."
-- ... And yet this is just a "eh, no biggie."
Inga said...
Let’s stop pretending here was a deep state secret cabal to hurt Trump.
Of course. They were only promising to stop him, not hurt him.
BAG: "But trashing her during Comey's infamous press conference helped sink her too"
Comey didn't really have much choice there because enough information was already known publicly that if Comey did not at least speak to the obvious infractions he would have been called out immediately.
So, he did something far more clever in 2 parts:
1) He improperly promoted himself to AG and assumed DOJ prosecutor authority
and
2) He laid out all the reasons any person other than Hillary would have been indicted immediately and then, on the spot, he rewrote the law to include an "intent" consideration that was specifically not included in the law when it was passed.
Yes, Comey himself, rewrote the law on the spot.
Usurping the DOJ authority and rewriting laws.
All to get Hillary off.
And the lefties are acting so very very ungrateful. Comey must sit in his chair and think what else would I have to do for these idiots to get them to appreciate me?!
“The investigation into what happened under at the DOJ/FBI/CIA/obama staff is still on-going.”
Indeed. And I suspect that it too will be a huge disappointment to you folks.
Inga: "Trump’s campaign was in the middle of this Russia investigation and for good cause I suspect."
LOL
Did they hire an oppo research firm to work directly with Putin pals to create a fake dossier?
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say "no".
Here's just one interesting piece from the executive summary regarding the the investigation into Hillary's e -mails:
"Conducted voluntary witness interviews to
obtain testimony, including from Clinton and her
senior aides, and did not require any witnesses
to testify before the grand jury. We found that
one of the reasons for not using the grand jury
for testimony involved concerns about exposing
grand jurors to classified information;"
In other words the information on Clinton's was too highly classified to be put before a grand jury, but was not classified high enough to make her "grossly negligent." Is anyone else uncomfortable with that paragraph?
Inga: "Indeed. And I suspect that it too will be a huge disappointment to you folks."
Whatever you say Collusion Girl.
This report, though I've not read all of it, is devastating to the anti-Trumpers at the FBI, and to that organizations credibility as an investigative and justice seeking entity. The IG asserts there was no political animus in the conduct of the FBI, but the evidence shows most clearly and definitively a vast and deep personal animus toward Trump. Comey was the leader, he created the culture that produced this particular behavior. Though perhaps he was just continuing the work of his predecessor. Rosenstein continues in his efforts to obfuscate the epic malfeasance.
-sw
Khesan: "In other words the information on Clinton's was too highly classified to be put before a grand jury, but was not classified high enough to make her "grossly negligent." Is anyone else uncomfortable with that paragraph?"
Here we have the DOJ/FBI pals of Hillary explaining why the classified nature of the information could not be put before a Grand Jury.....
....all the while the lefties outside of this are arguing that no classified information was involved.
But remember, lefties all know this. In fact, the obvious lies are what they like best about it.
Interestingly as well, Rosenstein is blocking any potential testimony of the FBI agent who interviewed Flynn with Strzok.
Once again, they are just trying to hold this whole thing together long enough to get past an election where in their dreams the dems take control and shut down any and all looks into any of these activities.
There is one question remaining that is the most interesting of all: Why Trump has not simply ordered the declassification of all these documents.
There has been much speculation that there were strong recommendations made to wait until as much of the IG investigations (this one and the others to come) were complete and made public and then to declassify them for maximum political advantage. Around September is the timeframe most discussed.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा