The attorney general says the FBI’s conduct during the investigation was a ‘travesty’

[candycorn]

For those who believe the IG exonerated the FBI on starting the all out assault on Trump, Barr should have disabused you of that notion. People will be going to prison over this.

William Barr on Why He Disagrees With the IG Report’s Conclusions​

MR. BAKER: Could you tell us where exactly you disagree with Mr. Horowitz?

MR. BARR: I think there are three parts or issues, let’s say categories of analysis in the report. The first is, was the investigation adequately predicated, the start of it? The second one is, how was it conducted? And I break that down into two things: How was it conducted before the election and how was it conducted after the election? The real meat of Horowitz’s work, and the real thrust of the report actually deals with the conduct of the investigation, where I think it quickly became apparent that it was a travesty.

MR. BAKER: The abuses? I want to come onto these in detail, but the abuses that in particular refer to the application for the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court—

MR. BARR: And also the fact that from day one it generated exculpatory information and nothing that substantiated any kind of collusion. But put that aside for a minute, going back to the issue. In many ways the issue of whether it was adequately predicated is something of academic interest only.

I think that it’s a big deal to use the law enforcement and the intelligence resources of the United States government to investigate a campaign of especially an opposing party. I’m sure there were instances in the past, but I can’t think of any recent instance where that was done.

MR. BAKER: The report does make clear there were concerns about that and discussions at very high levels within the FBI as to the sensitive information—

MR. BARR: What is the basis you have for looking into something? And what are reasonable steps to take, taking into consideration the weight of the evidence that’s prompting you to do that​

this is the same guy who accepted Mueller’s report without Mueller talking to your blob. His credibility is zero. He may as well be the blob’s campaign manager.

 

[depotoo]

Well, Billy the Bagman said a lot of things about Mueller's report which were also lies so....................................

Links to those lies.

Mueller complained to Barr about Russia report memo

He could complain all he wanted. Barr knew it wasn’t an honest report. Horowitz backs that up.

You must think people are idiots.

But............it was an honest report. That is why Billy the Bagman was forced to mis-characterize it.

"Special counsel Robert Mueller wrote a letter to Attorney General William Barr last month complaining that a four-page memo Barr wrote characterizing Mueller’s findings “did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance” of the Russia investigation, two senior Justice Department officials confirmed to POLITICO on Tuesday.

Mueller sent the letter to Barr on March 27, three days after Barr issued his four-page summary, and cited “public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation.”

“This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the Special Counsel: to assure full public confidence in the outcome of the investigations,” Mueller wrote.

The letter will likely buoy congressional Democrats’ accusations that Barr mischaracterized Mueller’s report on purpose in order to protect the president. Its disclosure comes on the eve of Barr’s public testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, and amid a back-and-forth between the Justice Department and the House Judiciary Committee over whether committee staff can question Barr separately on Thursday.

The letter also reveals a widening gulf between Barr and Mueller, who have been friends for decades, and is a sign that the special counsel’s team was angry with how Barr characterized the findings."

Oh, bull. It never mentioned that Page worked for the cia as an asset, as just one example. A couple more examples at the link. They also stated the dossier as credible and it was found it wasn’t. It was a sham report from the get-go.
Oh, Another Omission? Carter Page Says The Mueller Report Only Tells Half The Story

 

[bripat9643]

Well, Billy the Bagman said a lot of things about Mueller's report which were also lies so....................................

Links to those lies.

Mueller complained to Barr about Russia report memo

He could complain all he wanted. Barr knew it wasn’t an honest report. Horowitz backs that up.

You must think people are idiots.

But............it was an honest report. That is why Billy the Bagman was forced to mis-characterize it.

"Special counsel Robert Mueller wrote a letter to Attorney General William Barr last month complaining that a four-page memo Barr wrote characterizing Mueller’s findings “did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance” of the Russia investigation, two senior Justice Department officials confirmed to POLITICO on Tuesday.

Mueller sent the letter to Barr on March 27, three days after Barr issued his four-page summary, and cited “public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation.”

“This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the Special Counsel: to assure full public confidence in the outcome of the investigations,” Mueller wrote.

The letter will likely buoy congressional Democrats’ accusations that Barr mischaracterized Mueller’s report on purpose in order to protect the president. Its disclosure comes on the eve of Barr’s public testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, and amid a back-and-forth between the Justice Department and the House Judiciary Committee over whether committee staff can question Barr separately on Thursday.

The letter also reveals a widening gulf between Barr and Mueller, who have been friends for decades, and is a sign that the special counsel’s team was angry with how Barr characterized the findings."

Why should anyone believe Mueller? He's a proven tool and a douchebag. He didn't even author the report. Weinstein did.

 

[bripat9643]

For those who believe the IG exonerated the FBI on starting the all out assault on Trump, Barr should have disabused you of that notion. People will be going to prison over this.

William Barr on Why He Disagrees With the IG Report’s Conclusions​

MR. BAKER: Could you tell us where exactly you disagree with Mr. Horowitz?

MR. BARR: I think there are three parts or issues, let’s say categories of analysis in the report. The first is, was the investigation adequately predicated, the start of it? The second one is, how was it conducted? And I break that down into two things: How was it conducted before the election and how was it conducted after the election? The real meat of Horowitz’s work, and the real thrust of the report actually deals with the conduct of the investigation, where I think it quickly became apparent that it was a travesty.

MR. BAKER: The abuses? I want to come onto these in detail, but the abuses that in particular refer to the application for the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court—

MR. BARR: And also the fact that from day one it generated exculpatory information and nothing that substantiated any kind of collusion. But put that aside for a minute, going back to the issue. In many ways the issue of whether it was adequately predicated is something of academic interest only.

I think that it’s a big deal to use the law enforcement and the intelligence resources of the United States government to investigate a campaign of especially an opposing party. I’m sure there were instances in the past, but I can’t think of any recent instance where that was done.

MR. BAKER: The report does make clear there were concerns about that and discussions at very high levels within the FBI as to the sensitive information—

MR. BARR: What is the basis you have for looking into something? And what are reasonable steps to take, taking into consideration the weight of the evidence that’s prompting you to do that​

this is the same guy who accepted Mueller’s report without Mueller talking to your blob. His credibility is zero. He may as well be the blob’s campaign manager.

Why should Mueller be required to interview Trump when he knew the Russian collusion theory was horse manure right from the beginning?

 

[bripat9643]

I'm curious how much of the Russia Hoax will be discovered by Durham.
Can the NSA provide a lot of the missing details?
Can computer experts review the hacks and determine if in-fact they were a deep state coup plot?
Brennan looks awfully nervous to me, I think he knows its just a matter of time until he gets outed.
I wonder if he'll roll-over on anyone or take the hit?

Well, there was no hoax so.................................

Of course there was. The IG report said so.

 

[007]

Last line of quote from OP:

MR. BARR: What is the basis you have for looking into something? And what are reasonable steps to take, taking into consideration the weight of the evidence that’s prompting you to do that

The whole thing was supposedly started because Papadopoulos in a London bar "suggested" to Australian Downer (a Clinton lackey) that "there was some suggestion" that "the Trump Campaign" had received some information " from Russia" damaging to the Clinton Campaign.

What to do? What to do with the election coming up in four months?

A common sense American would expect its law enforcement to RUSH, rush mind you, to Papadopoulos and ask him:

1) Who from the Trump Campaign received this information;

2) Who from Russia delivered the information;

3) What exactly was the information.

So They could do everything possible to stop the interference in the election.

But, NO. Instead, they opened a full investigation on Trump and his whole Campaign, and specifically on 4 people in it--just because of what Papadopoulos supposedly said in a London Bar.

They didn't even bother to talk to Papadopoulos for four months AFTER the election

Obama's FBI wasn't interested in protecting America from interference in the election by Russia. They were interested in getting Trump and his friends and associates.

Andrew McCabe: "First we fuck Flynn, then we fuck Trump!"

________________

And that was information that the FBI planted with Papadopoulos, so the FBI set Papadopoulos up. They planted the information with him and then sent in another FBI asset with the infamous blonde bombshell, to ask about the very same information the FBI had planted with him. It was a set up, an FBI trap, and then they leaked it to the democrat propaganda wing, and then used the democrat propaganda wing stories about what they had leaked to them as evidence to help start SPYING on then candidate Trump. 99.9% of this is already PROVEN FACT.

Comey, McCabe, Ohr, Brennan, Clapper, Lynch, etc, even obama, they all should be locked up.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

For those who believe the IG exonerated the FBI on starting the all out assault on Trump, Barr should have disabused you of that notion. People will be going to prison over this.

William Barr on Why He Disagrees With the IG Report’s Conclusions​

MR. BAKER: Could you tell us where exactly you disagree with Mr. Horowitz?

MR. BARR: I think there are three parts or issues, let’s say categories of analysis in the report. The first is, was the investigation adequately predicated, the start of it? The second one is, how was it conducted? And I break that down into two things: How was it conducted before the election and how was it conducted after the election? The real meat of Horowitz’s work, and the real thrust of the report actually deals with the conduct of the investigation, where I think it quickly became apparent that it was a travesty.

MR. BAKER: The abuses? I want to come onto these in detail, but the abuses that in particular refer to the application for the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court—

MR. BARR: And also the fact that from day one it generated exculpatory information and nothing that substantiated any kind of collusion. But put that aside for a minute, going back to the issue. In many ways the issue of whether it was adequately predicated is something of academic interest only.

I think that it’s a big deal to use the law enforcement and the intelligence resources of the United States government to investigate a campaign of especially an opposing party. I’m sure there were instances in the past, but I can’t think of any recent instance where that was done.

MR. BAKER: The report does make clear there were concerns about that and discussions at very high levels within the FBI as to the sensitive information—

MR. BARR: What is the basis you have for looking into something? And what are reasonable steps to take, taking into consideration the weight of the evidence that’s prompting you to do that​

this is the same guy who accepted Mueller’s report without Mueller talking to your blob. His credibility is zero. He may as well be the blob’s campaign manager.

If mewler has any integrity left at all HE would have had what bullshit that dossier was IN HIS OWN REPORT.

 

[candycorn]

For those who believe the IG exonerated the FBI on starting the all out assault on Trump, Barr should have disabused you of that notion. People will be going to prison over this.

William Barr on Why He Disagrees With the IG Report’s Conclusions​

MR. BAKER: Could you tell us where exactly you disagree with Mr. Horowitz?

MR. BARR: I think there are three parts or issues, let’s say categories of analysis in the report. The first is, was the investigation adequately predicated, the start of it? The second one is, how was it conducted? And I break that down into two things: How was it conducted before the election and how was it conducted after the election? The real meat of Horowitz’s work, and the real thrust of the report actually deals with the conduct of the investigation, where I think it quickly became apparent that it was a travesty.

MR. BAKER: The abuses? I want to come onto these in detail, but the abuses that in particular refer to the application for the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court—

MR. BARR: And also the fact that from day one it generated exculpatory information and nothing that substantiated any kind of collusion. But put that aside for a minute, going back to the issue. In many ways the issue of whether it was adequately predicated is something of academic interest only.

I think that it’s a big deal to use the law enforcement and the intelligence resources of the United States government to investigate a campaign of especially an opposing party. I’m sure there were instances in the past, but I can’t think of any recent instance where that was done.

MR. BAKER: The report does make clear there were concerns about that and discussions at very high levels within the FBI as to the sensitive information—

MR. BARR: What is the basis you have for looking into something? And what are reasonable steps to take, taking into consideration the weight of the evidence that’s prompting you to do that​

this is the same guy who accepted Mueller’s report without Mueller talking to your blob. His credibility is zero. He may as well be the blob’s campaign manager.

Why should Mueller be required to interview Trump when he knew the Russian collusion theory was horse manure right from the beginning?

why did your blob run like a bitch from being interviewed in person, under oath?

 

[bripat9643]

For those who believe the IG exonerated the FBI on starting the all out assault on Trump, Barr should have disabused you of that notion. People will be going to prison over this.

William Barr on Why He Disagrees With the IG Report’s Conclusions​

MR. BAKER: Could you tell us where exactly you disagree with Mr. Horowitz?

MR. BARR: I think there are three parts or issues, let’s say categories of analysis in the report. The first is, was the investigation adequately predicated, the start of it? The second one is, how was it conducted? And I break that down into two things: How was it conducted before the election and how was it conducted after the election? The real meat of Horowitz’s work, and the real thrust of the report actually deals with the conduct of the investigation, where I think it quickly became apparent that it was a travesty.

MR. BAKER: The abuses? I want to come onto these in detail, but the abuses that in particular refer to the application for the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court—

MR. BARR: And also the fact that from day one it generated exculpatory information and nothing that substantiated any kind of collusion. But put that aside for a minute, going back to the issue. In many ways the issue of whether it was adequately predicated is something of academic interest only.

I think that it’s a big deal to use the law enforcement and the intelligence resources of the United States government to investigate a campaign of especially an opposing party. I’m sure there were instances in the past, but I can’t think of any recent instance where that was done.

MR. BAKER: The report does make clear there were concerns about that and discussions at very high levels within the FBI as to the sensitive information—

MR. BARR: What is the basis you have for looking into something? And what are reasonable steps to take, taking into consideration the weight of the evidence that’s prompting you to do that​

this is the same guy who accepted Mueller’s report without Mueller talking to your blob. His credibility is zero. He may as well be the blob’s campaign manager.

Why should Mueller be required to interview Trump when he knew the Russian collusion theory was horse manure right from the beginning?

why did your blob run like a bitch from being interviewed in person, under oath?

We all know such interviews are traps designed to trick the target into committing perjury. Mueller proved he is a douchebag, right from the beginning.

No one is required to answer questions from a prosecutor, moron.

 

[007]

For those who believe the IG exonerated the FBI on starting the all out assault on Trump, Barr should have disabused you of that notion. People will be going to prison over this.

William Barr on Why He Disagrees With the IG Report’s Conclusions​

MR. BAKER: Could you tell us where exactly you disagree with Mr. Horowitz?

MR. BARR: I think there are three parts or issues, let’s say categories of analysis in the report. The first is, was the investigation adequately predicated, the start of it? The second one is, how was it conducted? And I break that down into two things: How was it conducted before the election and how was it conducted after the election? The real meat of Horowitz’s work, and the real thrust of the report actually deals with the conduct of the investigation, where I think it quickly became apparent that it was a travesty.

MR. BAKER: The abuses? I want to come onto these in detail, but the abuses that in particular refer to the application for the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court—

MR. BARR: And also the fact that from day one it generated exculpatory information and nothing that substantiated any kind of collusion. But put that aside for a minute, going back to the issue. In many ways the issue of whether it was adequately predicated is something of academic interest only.

I think that it’s a big deal to use the law enforcement and the intelligence resources of the United States government to investigate a campaign of especially an opposing party. I’m sure there were instances in the past, but I can’t think of any recent instance where that was done.

MR. BAKER: The report does make clear there were concerns about that and discussions at very high levels within the FBI as to the sensitive information—

MR. BARR: What is the basis you have for looking into something? And what are reasonable steps to take, taking into consideration the weight of the evidence that’s prompting you to do that​

this is the same guy who accepted Mueller’s report without Mueller talking to your blob. His credibility is zero. He may as well be the blob’s campaign manager.

Why should Mueller be required to interview Trump when he knew the Russian collusion theory was horse manure right from the beginning?

why did your blob run like a bitch from being interviewed in person, under oath?

Because it was obvious from the beginning that he was being falsely accused and SET UP... that's WHY... you empty headed fucking moron.