IG Report Thread

[g5000]

Sure Doc, that's cuz the FBI/DOJ already got rid of the evidence before the IG ever started.

Hey DarkFury. There's another one!

Ipse dixit.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The report has already been linked. Here's the important section:

There were clearly tensions and disagreements in a number of important areas between Midyear agents and prosecutors. However, we did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that improper considerations, including political bias, directly affected the specific investigative decisions discussed below, or that the justifications offered for these decisions were pretextual. We recognize that these text and instant messages cast a cloud over the FBI’s handling of the Midyear investigation and the investigation’s credibility. But our review did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that these political views directly affected the specific investigative decisions that we reviewed in this chapter. The broader impact of these text and instant messages, including on such matters as the public perception of the FBI and the Midyear investigation, are discussed in ChapterTwelve

Go back and read the parts you bolded. Pay close attention to the words ‘directly affected’.
It doesn’t say there was no bias. lol

Yes. The report says that while Page and Strozk may have been personally "biased" against Trump, those personal biases did not affect any official or investigative decisions.

No, it says they found no evidence that their biases affected any official decisions, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen. IOW, the IG can't prove it, but when I see what these people were saying, well it's kinda hard to assume they never actually did anything they shouldn't have. Hard to believe IMHO, I would bet serious money that whatever evidence that did exist got cloroxed. Lib dems are experienced int hat stuff.

The report examined every single step in the investigation.

At no point were Strozk or Page in a position to make any decisions that would have changed the investigation. At no point was there any evidence of bad faith on the part of any of the team.

It's very in-depth. For reference, I'm discussing Chapters 3, 4, and 5 of the report (p.37-160).

Sure Doc, that's cuz the FBI/DOJ already got rid of the evidence before the IG ever started. They didn't find any evidence cuz it was long gone. But after reading the level of bias we've seen do you really believe no one in the FBI or DOJ acted in any inappropriate way, according to the high standards of both organizations?

Wait... let me make sure I'm getting this straight.

The hypothetical evidence that would confirm your conspiracy theories doesn't exist, therefore that's evidence of the conspiracy?

 

[g5000]

All right. Everyone convene back here in six months so we can all get excited about Hillary's imminent arrest again.

 

[DarkFury]

You guys really aren't taking this well.

I'm multi boarding right now. And we are doing REALLY WELL. The undecideds are FUMING over the actions of Clinton, Comey and FAKE reports, FUMING and looking to PUNISH. Say goodbye to 18, and 20 just turned its back on you.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

You guys really aren't taking this well.

I'm multi boarding right now. And we are doing REALLY WELL. The undecideds are FUMING over the actions of Clinton, Comey and FAKE reports, FUMING and looking to PUNISH. Say goodbye to 18, and 20 just turned its back on you.

Whatever you have to tell yourself.

 

[Rambunctious]

The report shows that foreign governments indeed gained access to Hillary's server....just like we thought...she should have been prosecuted....what a white wash we got served today....

 

[g5000]

Oh, wait. What was I thinking?

easyt65 needs to start at least twenty-three insanely hilarious topics about the IG report in the next couple days.

THEN we can all adjourn until six months from now.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Here's a tweet from former Congressman and current conservative radio pundit Joe Walsh:

So the #IGREPORT proves what?

1. The FBI was right to decide not to charge Hillary with a crime.
2. That decision wasn't motivated by political bias or improper considerations.
3. James Comey made mistakes.
4. Those mistakes helped Drumpf win.

Sounds like Hillary got screwed.

Joe Walsh on Twitter

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The report shows that foreign governments indeed gained access to Hillary's server....just like we thought...she should have been prosecuted....what a white wash we got served today....

Again, the IG makes it clear that the FBI followed proper protocol and precedence when deciding not to charge Hillary with a crime.

Did you miss that part?

 

[Rambunctious]

Gowdy...."Wray is 100% wrong"

 

[tycho1572]

Go back and read the parts you bolded. Pay close attention to the words ‘directly affected’.
It doesn’t say there was no bias. lol

Yes. The report says that while Page and Strozk may have been personally "biased" against Trump, those personal biases did not affect any official or investigative decisions.

No, it says they found no evidence that their biases affected any official decisions, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen. IOW, the IG can't prove it, but when I see what these people were saying, well it's kinda hard to assume they never actually did anything they shouldn't have. Hard to believe IMHO, I would bet serious money that whatever evidence that did exist got cloroxed. Lib dems are experienced int hat stuff.

The report examined every single step in the investigation.

At no point were Strozk or Page in a position to make any decisions that would have changed the investigation. At no point was there any evidence of bad faith on the part of any of the team.

It's very in-depth. For reference, I'm discussing Chapters 3, 4, and 5 of the report (p.37-160).

We already they didn’t succeed. lol

I have no idea what this word salad is supposed to mean.

What? Salad?
Wtf are you talking about now?

 

[Hellokitty]

Okay the IG says he found no evidence of political bias on the handling of the Hillary investigation, I mean Hillary "matter". I think I need an explanation of what the FBI views as political bias, because "we're going to make sure TRUMP doesn't become POTUS" sure sounds like political bias to me.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Yes. The report says that while Page and Strozk may have been personally "biased" against Trump, those personal biases did not affect any official or investigative decisions.

No, it says they found no evidence that their biases affected any official decisions, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen. IOW, the IG can't prove it, but when I see what these people were saying, well it's kinda hard to assume they never actually did anything they shouldn't have. Hard to believe IMHO, I would bet serious money that whatever evidence that did exist got cloroxed. Lib dems are experienced int hat stuff.

The report examined every single step in the investigation.

At no point were Strozk or Page in a position to make any decisions that would have changed the investigation. At no point was there any evidence of bad faith on the part of any of the team.

It's very in-depth. For reference, I'm discussing Chapters 3, 4, and 5 of the report (p.37-160).

We already they didn’t succeed. lol

I have no idea what this word salad is supposed to mean.

What?
Wtf are you talking about now? lol

I have no idea what the sentence "We already they didn't succeed." means.

Would you like to try again, in English this time?

 

[Rambunctious]

Again, the IG makes it clear that the FBI followed proper protocol and precedence when deciding not to charge Hillary with a crime.

Did you miss that part?

That's the whitewash part...if you did what she did you would never see a day without bars and bubba the rest of your life....

 

[Hellokitty]

Gowdy...."Wray is 100% wrong"

I agree Wray is wrong, but can't stand Gowdy.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Again, the IG makes it clear that the FBI followed proper protocol and precedence when deciding not to charge Hillary with a crime.

Did you miss that part?

That's the whitewash part...if you did what she did you would never see a day without bars and bubba the rest of your life....

So you guys constantly say. It's funny, though - I've spoken to a lot of lawyers about this, and not one of them agrees with you.

 

[tycho1572]

No, it says they found no evidence that their biases affected any official decisions, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen. IOW, the IG can't prove it, but when I see what these people were saying, well it's kinda hard to assume they never actually did anything they shouldn't have. Hard to believe IMHO, I would bet serious money that whatever evidence that did exist got cloroxed. Lib dems are experienced int hat stuff.

The report examined every single step in the investigation.

At no point were Strozk or Page in a position to make any decisions that would have changed the investigation. At no point was there any evidence of bad faith on the part of any of the team.

It's very in-depth. For reference, I'm discussing Chapters 3, 4, and 5 of the report (p.37-160).

We already they didn’t succeed. lol

I have no idea what this word salad is supposed to mean.

What?
Wtf are you talking about now? lol

I have no idea what the sentence "We already they didn't succeed." means.

Would you like to try again, in English this time?

Ohhh... that was corrected.

 

[Rambunctious]

So you guys constantly say. It's funny, though - I've spoken to a lot of lawyers about this, and not one of them agrees with you

They agree that if you had top secret emails on a private server and the Russians or China got a hold of them it would not be a crime????????
BS..... I wouldn't hire those lawyers if I were you...

 

[Rambunctious]

Gowdy...."Wray is 100% wrong"

I agree Wray is wrong, but can't stand Gowdy.

Yeah I don't like him either he is a swamper ....

 

[theDoctorisIn]

So you guys constantly say. It's funny, though - I've spoken to a lot of lawyers about this, and not one of them agrees with you

They agree that if you had top secret emails on a private server and the Russians or China got a hold of them it would not be a crime????????
BS..... I wouldn't hire those lawyers if I were you...

No, they all agree that unintentional spillage doesn't meet the elements of a criminal violation of the Espionage Act.