Shep is trying to poke holes in the IG report but Catherine Herridge is setting his snowflake ass straight....she is awesome.....

:lol:

What are you talking about?

Did you read the report? There's an executive summary, it's only about 15 pages long.
That's like reading headlines......

You're welcome to read all 568 pages, if you'd prefer.
no, but to make a judgment based on 15 out of 568 pages is a bit rash.
 
"A paragraph summarizing the factors that led,the FBI to assess that it was possible that hostile actors accessed Clinton’s server was added, and at one point referenced Clinton’s use of her private email for an exchange with then President Obama while in the territory of a foreign adversary. This reference later was changed to “another senior government official,” and ultimately was omitted"

Even Obama was caught using the servers....
We knew this years ago.....it was reported in 2015 or 2016.....by what you call the fake news! :D
 
Shep is trying to poke holes in the IG report but Catherine Herridge is setting his snowflake ass straight....she is awesome.....

:lol:

What are you talking about?

Did you read the report? There's an executive summary, it's only about 15 pages long.
That's like reading headlines......

You're welcome to read all 568 pages, if you'd prefer.

these idiots havent read a total of 568 pages in their entire life - then theres the problem of retaining what they read

.0001%
No we do read....you guys just get talking points...it's hilarious to see you guys try and post...
 
In undertaking our analysis, our task was made significantly more difficult because of text and instant messages exchanged on FBI devices and systems by five FBI employees involved in the Mid year investigation. These messages reflected political opinions in support of former Secretary Clinton and against her then political opponent, Donald Trump.Some of these text messages and instant messages mixed political commentary with discussions about the Mid year investigation, and raised concerns that political bias may have impacted investigative decisions.In particular, we were concerned about text messages exchanged by FBI Deputy Assistant Director Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, Special Counsel to the Deputy Director, that potentially indicated or created the appearance that investigative decisions were impacted by bias or improper considerations. As we describe in Chapter Twelve of our report, most of the text messages raising such questions pertained to the Russia investigation, which was not a part of this review. Nonetheless, the suggestion in certain Russia-related text messages in August 2016 that Strzok might be willing to take official action to impact presidential candidate Trump’s electoral prospects caused us to question the earlier Midyear investigative decisions in which Strzok was involved, and whether he took specificactions in the Midyear investigation based on his political views. As we describe Chapter Five of our report, we found that Strzok was not the sole decision maker for any of the specific Midyear investigative decisions we examined in that chapter.We further found evidence that in some instances Strzok and Page advocated for more aggressive investigative measures in the Midyear investigation."

Political Bias drove not only the Hillary exoneration but the Trump aggressiveness in investigation.... Damn....
Even fox news says the horowitz report says no bias.
no proof FBI’s Clinton probe tainted by bias

finally you got that nothing burger.
Its not a nothing burger...wait for Wray to speak and you will see its not a nothing burger...people will be fired and possibly prosecuted... Definitely we will see bad people like Comey exposed...
LOL. News Flash: Comey was already fired.
And the recommendations did say don't let some dude do that again.
 
“Under these circumstances, we did not have confidence that Strzok’s decision to prioritize the Russia investigation over following up on the Midyear-related investigative lead discovered on the Weiner laptop was free from bias,



"The inspector general concluded that Strzok’s text, along with others disparaging Trump, “is not only indicative of a biased state of mind but, even more seriously, implies a willingness to take official action to impact the presidential candidate’s electoral prospects.”

Inspector general blasts Comey, says others at FBI showed ‘willingness to take official action’ to hurt Trump
 
Last edited:
Shep is trying to poke holes in the IG report but Catherine Herridge is setting his snowflake ass straight....she is awesome.....

:lol:

What are you talking about?

Did you read the report? There's an executive summary, it's only about 15 pages long.
That's like reading headlines......

You're welcome to read all 568 pages, if you'd prefer.
no, but to make a judgment based on 15 out of 568 pages is a bit rash.

Let me clue you in on how official reports like this work.

The beginning of the report is a summary of it's conclusions. The rest of the report explains those conclusions in depth.

If you want to read the whole thing, by all means go ahead. But the salient points of the report are all contained in the summary.
 
Did I miss something by reading the Conclusion/Recommendations? It seems to be all recommendations for the FBI to tighten up its texting protocols and not allowing for another Comey Moment of going around the AG to announce findings and decisions on prosecution.

I didn't see any suggestions for anything other than FBI policies.

Did I miss something?
This is the redacted version.. Which is what we feared would happen..
 
Did I miss something by reading the Conclusion/Recommendations? It seems to be all recommendations for the FBI to tighten up its texting protocols and not allowing for another Comey Moment of going around the AG to announce findings and decisions on prosecution.

I didn't see any suggestions for anything other than FBI policies.

Did I miss something?
This is the redacted version.. Which is what we feared would happen..

:smile:

There are no redactions in the document.
 
Read the report. It's not redacted
Congress just requested that the IG send them the unredacted version and he has agreed to do so.....Rosenstein has had the document for two weeks and he whitewashed the shit out of it...
 
Trey Gowdy is on fire right now.....he is pissed at the FBI and the DOJ...
 
I'm not reading 500+pages, but if Horowitz thought the FBI's decisions were motivated by bias or favoring Hill for pol purposes, he wouldn't cave. And he was under no pressure to cave, since Sessions is the AG LOL


The question we considered was not whether a


particular investigative decision was the ideal choice or

one that could have been handled more effectively, but

whether the circumstances surrounding the decision


indicated that it was based on considerations other than

the merits of the investigation. If a choice made by the

investigative team was among two or more reasonable

alternatives, we did not find that it was improper even if

we believed that an alternative decision would have

been more effective.

Thus, a determination by the OIG that a decision was

not unreasonable does not mean that the OIG has

endorsed the decision or concluded that the decision

was the most effective among the options considered.

We took this approach because our role as an OIG is

not to second-guess valid discretionary judgments

made during the course of an investigation, and this

approach is consistent with the OIG’s handling of such

questions in past reviews.
---

However, jmo, but Hillary could have been indicted. Still, prosecutors (and Comey consulted with them) base decisions not on just whether they can get a conviction but on "intent to do bad" and the effect a prosecution could have. I thought the prosecution of Martha Stewart was pretty cheap, so there you go.
 
Last edited:
Read the report. It's not redacted
Congress just requested that the IG send them the unredacted version and he has agreed to do so.....Rosenstein has had the document for two weeks and he whitewashed the shit out of it...

:lol:

Link?
You find it ass...I'm not your servant...if you doubt me look it up....

:lol:

You make the claim, it's your responsibility to prove it - not mine.

It's a moot point, because I did look it up - and you're lying.
 

Forum List

Back
Top