IG Report Thread

[The Original Tree]

It proves you are a schill and a moron and not very good with your money or decisions for that matter.

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.

Talking to lawyers is like putting your faith in polls. It's THE OPTICS, not the word of a shyster THE OPTICS!

So you keep loudly telling us. Or are you telling yourself?

read the whole thing Doc.....educate yourself

Doc SHOULD post a disclaimer. He WORKED for Hillary and SHE STIFFED himwhen it came time to pay!
How far IN THE TANK do you have to be to let that shit happen?

I worked for Clinton's campaign in 2007, for one week - and yes, I never got paid for it.

What does that have to do with anything?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

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?

There is nothing hypothetical about the emails between Strozk and Page. There is nothing hypothetical about somebody changing the words in Comey's speech from "grossly negligent" (which is what the law explicitly says) to "extremely careless". There is nothing hypothetical about the IG being concerned about the actions and decisions made during the Clinton investigation by Strozk, they explicitly said so in the report. And yet they find no evidence; wonder why.

I did not say there is evidence of a conspiracy, kindly stop putting words in my mouth. You didn't answer my question in my earlier post, so I'll ask it again:

"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?

You're asking about feelings. I'm talking about evidence.

This isn't about what you or I "believe". That's not how the law works.

I didn't ask you how you felt about it, I asked you what you believe. I am well aware of how the law works in a court of law no evidence = no case. But the Court of Public Opinion is another story; if you want to dodge the question, that's okay.

Yes, you are asking about my feelings. That's what a belief without evidence is - a feeling.

Feelings come from the heart; I'm asking you what comes from your head. Which appears for many to be 'no hard evidence, no guilt, no problem'. For me, that doesn't work; I can't just sweep it under the rug.

No, blood comes from the heart. Feelings come from your head, too.

What you are asking me to do (and what you are doing yourself) is answer a question that neither of us have the requisite information required to do so.

You are choosing to answer it in a way that makes you feel good. I am choosing not to answer it.

 

[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).

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?

There is nothing hypothetical about the emails between Strozk and Page. There is nothing hypothetical about somebody changing the words in Comey's speech from "grossly negligent" (which is what the law explicitly says) to "extremely careless". There is nothing hypothetical about the IG being concerned about the actions and decisions made during the Clinton investigation by Strozk, they explicitly said so in the report. And yet they find no evidence; wonder why.

I did not say there is evidence of a conspiracy, kindly stop putting words in my mouth. You didn't answer my question in my earlier post, so I'll ask it again:

"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?

You're asking about feelings. I'm talking about evidence.

This isn't about what you or I "believe". That's not how the law works.

I worked for Clinton's campaign in 2007, for one week - and yes, I never got paid for it.

What does that have to do with anything?

I thought Fury was joking...

From 2006 - 2013, I worked professionally in electoral politics. I worked for Obama in 2008, too. Also 8-10 New York State Senate campaigns, 3 NYC Mayoral campaigns, 2 Congressional campaigns, 4 Governorship campaigns, and one San Francisco Board of Supervisors campaign. There's more that I'm forgetting at the moment, as well.

That explains a lot. lol

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Talking to lawyers is like putting your faith in polls. It's THE OPTICS, not the word of a shyster THE OPTICS!

So you keep loudly telling us. Or are you telling yourself?

read the whole thing Doc.....educate yourself

Doc SHOULD post a disclaimer. He WORKED for Hillary and SHE STIFFED himwhen it came time to pay!
How far IN THE TANK do you have to be to let that shit happen?

I worked for Clinton's campaign in 2007, for one week - and yes, I never got paid for it.

What does that have to do with anything?

It shows a couple of things.
1, It does not bother you when a Democrat STEALS from you so you don't care WHo they steal from.
2, If a Democrat cheats YOU or ANYBODY it's okay.

I'm telling you IT'S NOT OKAY. Stealing, cheating and lying are just that, NOT OKAY.

I worked 5 days, for 5 hours each day.

It has never been worth the time or energy to me to fight for that $350.

 

[Rambunctious]

From 2006 - 2013, I worked professionally in electoral politics. I worked for Obama in 2008, too. Also 8-10 New York State Senate campaigns, 3 NYC Mayoral campaigns, 2 Congressional campaigns, 4 Governorship campaigns, and one San Francisco Board of Supervisors campaign. There's more that I'm forgetting at the moment, as well

wow You really are a true believer aren't you?...So I'm guessing Obama was your only win???
If you really want to understand the people I would suggest another way...

 

[Missouri_Mike]

I worked for Clinton's campaign in 2007, for one week - and yes, I never got paid for it.

What does that have to do with anything?

I thought Fury was joking...

From 2006 - 2013, I worked professionally in electoral politics. I worked for Obama in 2008, too. Also 8-10 New York State Senate campaigns, 3 NYC Mayoral campaigns, 2 Congressional campaigns, 4 Governorship campaigns, and one San Francisco Board of Supervisors campaign. There's more that I'm forgetting at the moment, as well.

All democrats yes?

 

[Rambunctious]

I worked 5 days, for 5 hours each day.

It has never been worth the time or energy to me to fight for that $350

If Trump owed it to you I bet you would have...

 

[theDoctorisIn]

From 2006 - 2013, I worked professionally in electoral politics. I worked for Obama in 2008, too. Also 8-10 New York State Senate campaigns, 3 NYC Mayoral campaigns, 2 Congressional campaigns, 4 Governorship campaigns, and one San Francisco Board of Supervisors campaign. There's more that I'm forgetting at the moment, as well

wow You really are a true believer aren't you?...So I'm guessing Obama was your only win???
If you really want to understand the people I would suggest another way...

We've won around 2/3s of the campaigns I've worked on.

As for being a "true believer", that's not me at all. I'm a hired gun, I did it for the money.

And as for understanding people, I'm confident that I'm better than you at it.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

So you keep loudly telling us. Or are you telling yourself?

read the whole thing Doc.....educate yourself

Doc SHOULD post a disclaimer. He WORKED for Hillary and SHE STIFFED himwhen it came time to pay!
How far IN THE TANK do you have to be to let that shit happen?

I worked for Clinton's campaign in 2007, for one week - and yes, I never got paid for it.

What does that have to do with anything?

It shows a couple of things.
1, It does not bother you when a Democrat STEALS from you so you don't care WHo they steal from.
2, If a Democrat cheats YOU or ANYBODY it's okay.

I'm telling you IT'S NOT OKAY. Stealing, cheating and lying are just that, NOT OKAY.

I worked 5 days, for 5 hours each day.

It has never been worth the time or energy to me to fight for that $350.

Holy crap. So are you lazy or gullible?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

I worked 5 days, for 5 hours each day.

It has never been worth the time or energy to me to fight for that $350

If Trump owed it to you I bet you would have...

If Trump owed me $350? I don't think so.

That's just not very much money to me.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

read the whole thing Doc.....educate yourself

Doc SHOULD post a disclaimer. He WORKED for Hillary and SHE STIFFED himwhen it came time to pay!
How far IN THE TANK do you have to be to let that shit happen?

I worked for Clinton's campaign in 2007, for one week - and yes, I never got paid for it.

What does that have to do with anything?

It shows a couple of things.
1, It does not bother you when a Democrat STEALS from you so you don't care WHo they steal from.
2, If a Democrat cheats YOU or ANYBODY it's okay.

I'm telling you IT'S NOT OKAY. Stealing, cheating and lying are just that, NOT OKAY.

I worked 5 days, for 5 hours each day.

It has never been worth the time or energy to me to fight for that $350.

Holy crap. So are you lazy or gullible?

Neither. I was actually quite busy at the time. 2007-2008 was a good year for me.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

I worked for Clinton's campaign in 2007, for one week - and yes, I never got paid for it.

What does that have to do with anything?

I thought Fury was joking...

From 2006 - 2013, I worked professionally in electoral politics. I worked for Obama in 2008, too. Also 8-10 New York State Senate campaigns, 3 NYC Mayoral campaigns, 2 Congressional campaigns, 4 Governorship campaigns, and one San Francisco Board of Supervisors campaign. There's more that I'm forgetting at the moment, as well.

All democrats yes?

All Democrats but one, who was a Green.

 

[Rambunctious]

We've won around 2/3s of the campaigns I've worked on.

As for being a "true believer", that's not me at all. I'm a hired gun, I did it for the money.

And as for understanding people, I'm confident that I'm better than you at it

But my side keeps winning...you know what??? that in a nutshell is why the dems lose...they have to pay hired hands that are not necessarily supportive ones...kind of like when the dems pay for butts in seats at rally's...or pay homeless people to get on the bus and go and vote....its landscaping...its not real...you just made my day Doc.....

 

[del]

^

idiot apparently thinks people work for the gop for free

 

[DarkFury]

Doc SHOULD post a disclaimer. He WORKED for Hillary and SHE STIFFED himwhen it came time to pay!
How far IN THE TANK do you have to be to let that shit happen?

I worked for Clinton's campaign in 2007, for one week - and yes, I never got paid for it.

What does that have to do with anything?

It shows a couple of things.
1, It does not bother you when a Democrat STEALS from you so you don't care WHo they steal from.
2, If a Democrat cheats YOU or ANYBODY it's okay.

I'm telling you IT'S NOT OKAY. Stealing, cheating and lying are just that, NOT OKAY.

I worked 5 days, for 5 hours each day.

It has never been worth the time or energy to me to fight for that $350.

Holy crap. So are you lazy or gullible?

Neither. I was actually quite busy at the time. 2007-2008 was a good year for me.

Ah, there is yet Another problem there! 5 days at 5 hours per is 350 dollars In New York?
That WAS LOWER than minium wage in New York!

 

[theDoctorisIn]

I worked for Clinton's campaign in 2007, for one week - and yes, I never got paid for it.

What does that have to do with anything?

It shows a couple of things.
1, It does not bother you when a Democrat STEALS from you so you don't care WHo they steal from.
2, If a Democrat cheats YOU or ANYBODY it's okay.

I'm telling you IT'S NOT OKAY. Stealing, cheating and lying are just that, NOT OKAY.

I worked 5 days, for 5 hours each day.

It has never been worth the time or energy to me to fight for that $350.

Holy crap. So are you lazy or gullible?

Neither. I was actually quite busy at the time. 2007-2008 was a good year for me.

Ah, there is yet Another problem there! 5 days at 5 hours per is 350 dollars In New York?
That WAS LOWER than minium wage in New York!

I think you might want to brush up on your math skills, buddy.

Minimum wage in NY in 2007 was $7.15 an hour.

 

[task0778]

There is nothing hypothetical about the emails between Strozk and Page. There is nothing hypothetical about somebody changing the words in Comey's speech from "grossly negligent" (which is what the law explicitly says) to "extremely careless". There is nothing hypothetical about the IG being concerned about the actions and decisions made during the Clinton investigation by Strozk, they explicitly said so in the report. And yet they find no evidence; wonder why.

I did not say there is evidence of a conspiracy, kindly stop putting words in my mouth. You didn't answer my question in my earlier post, so I'll ask it again:

"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?

You're asking about feelings. I'm talking about evidence.

This isn't about what you or I "believe". That's not how the law works.

I didn't ask you how you felt about it, I asked you what you believe. I am well aware of how the law works in a court of law no evidence = no case. But the Court of Public Opinion is another story; if you want to dodge the question, that's okay.

Yes, you are asking about my feelings. That's what a belief without evidence is - a feeling.

Feelings come from the heart; I'm asking you what comes from your head. Which appears for many to be 'no hard evidence, no guilt, no problem'. For me, that doesn't work; I can't just sweep it under the rug.

No, blood comes from the heart. Feelings come from your head, too.

What you are asking me to do (and what you are doing yourself) is answer a question that neither of us have the requisite information required to do so.

You are choosing to answer it in a way that makes you feel good. I am choosing not to answer it.

1. Condescension does not play well. I know damn well blood comes from the heart.

2. What I have asked for is your opinion, not based on your feelings but based on what you know at this point.

3. If you don't want to offer your opinion, that's fine. Personally, I think there's enough data to form an opinion with the proviso that opinions can change as new information presents itself.

4. My opinion about this investigation is pretty much the same as the ones I have about the Lois Lerner IRS scandal, the Benghazi scandal, the Fast and Furious scandal, and the Clinton unsecured email server scandal, and others. Democrats have become VERY good at destroying the evidence so they can then say "nothing to see here, let's move on". But I see the emails, I see who said and did what, and what actually happened, so even though they've done so well at covering their tracks, I've lost whatever trust I used to have in some of our most important institutions. And there are quite a few other people who in the same boat. You can talk about evidence all you want, but I've seen enough; time after time, it's the same shit.

 

[del]

1. Condescension does not play well. I know damn well blood comes from the heart.

2. What I have asked for is your opinion, not based on your feelings but based on what you know at this point.

3. If you don't want to offer your opinion, that's fine. Personally, I think there's enough data to form an opinion with the proviso that opinions can change as new information presents itself.

4. My opinion about this investigation is pretty much the same as the ones I have about the Lois Lerner IRS scandal, the Benghazi scandal, the Fast and Furious scandal, and the Clinton unsecured email server scandal, and others. Democrats have become VERY good at destroying the evidence so they can then say "nothing to see here, let's move on". But I see the emails, I see who said and did what, and what actually happened, so even though they've done so well at covering their tracks, I've lost whatever trust I used to have in some of our most important institutions. And there are quite a few other people who in the same boat. You can talk about evidence all you want, but I've seen enough; time after time, it's the same shit.

good on you for not letting the facts of the case sway your opinion.

 

[DarkFury]

1. Condescension does not play well. I know damn well blood comes from the heart.

2. What I have asked for is your opinion, not based on your feelings but based on what you know at this point.

3. If you don't want to offer your opinion, that's fine. Personally, I think there's enough data to form an opinion with the proviso that opinions can change as new information presents itself.

4. My opinion about this investigation is pretty much the same as the ones I have about the Lois Lerner IRS scandal, the Benghazi scandal, the Fast and Furious scandal, and the Clinton unsecured email server scandal, and others. Democrats have become VERY good at destroying the evidence so they can then say "nothing to see here, let's move on". But I see the emails, I see who said and did what, and what actually happened, so even though they've done so well at covering their tracks, I've lost whatever trust I used to have in some of our most important institutions. And there are quite a few other people who in the same boat. You can talk about evidence all you want, but I've seen enough; time after time, it's the same shit.

good on you for not letting the facts of the case sway your opinion.

He maybe a Republican or a Liberatarian but will NEVER be a Democrat. And more and more people today are saying that.

 

[del]

1. Condescension does not play well. I know damn well blood comes from the heart.

2. What I have asked for is your opinion, not based on your feelings but based on what you know at this point.

3. If you don't want to offer your opinion, that's fine. Personally, I think there's enough data to form an opinion with the proviso that opinions can change as new information presents itself.

4. My opinion about this investigation is pretty much the same as the ones I have about the Lois Lerner IRS scandal, the Benghazi scandal, the Fast and Furious scandal, and the Clinton unsecured email server scandal, and others. Democrats have become VERY good at destroying the evidence so they can then say "nothing to see here, let's move on". But I see the emails, I see who said and did what, and what actually happened, so even though they've done so well at covering their tracks, I've lost whatever trust I used to have in some of our most important institutions. And there are quite a few other people who in the same boat. You can talk about evidence all you want, but I've seen enough; time after time, it's the same shit.

good on you for not letting the facts of the case sway your opinion.

He maybe a Republican or a Liberatarian but will NEVER be a Democrat. And more and more people today are saying that.

check your meds

this makes even less sense than you usually do, furbush