Who investigates the investigators

"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"

Given recent developments about [potential biases by some of the people involved in the investigations into Hillary and Trump, I wanted to make this thread to address something I think is being underplayed.

For those that dont know, it turns out one of the central figures in both the Hillary investigation and Trump one is an FBI agent named Strzok.

Here is a run down of his involvement in some key issues.

1. Interviewed hillary. This interview was not recorded, was pretty short, and allowed another person being investigated, Mills, to be present.

2. Changed the language to not use the language in the statute. This accompanied with comey lying saying he didn't share the statement with anyone, and the fact that many people myself included were baffled not only by the fact that comey stepped outside of his bounds to act as a prosecutor, but seemingly outlined the case for Why she should be charged and then went against it was very unusual.

3. Apparently started the russia investigation based in part on the dossier that was paid for by the dnc, despite other fbi employees allegedly having questions about the dossier.

4. Did the interview of flynn. This was done questionably, with macabe telling Flynn agents were coming for a different reason, and Flynn not having his lawyer present.

Then we find out that strzok was sending anti trump pro Hillary messages to his mistress that also worked for the fbi.


Now as many are quick to point out, just because he is biased doesnt mean that his work was effected. This is true.

But the fact that we see huge disparities in how the two investigations happened raises questions as to rather this bias did affect the investigations.

For example on Strzok alone; look at how he approached the interview with Flynn very harshly (as probably should be done). He sprung the interview on Flynn, didnt have his lawyer present. Now with Hillary, she reportedly had 9 lawyers present, knew the interview was occurring, wasn't recorded, and allowed to have her lawyer who was also being investigated Mills with her while she was interviewed.

This stark difference, in conjunction with what we now know to be Strzoks like of Hillary and dislike of Trump raises questions of rather Strzok specifically and the fbi and Muellers team in general are operating a double standard out of bias.


So lets look at the investigations on the whole.

So far we have a four pronged problem with Mueller and the fbis investigation.

1. The huge disparity between how the trump investigation is being handled vs Hillary's.

2. The incredible amount of constant leaks to make trump look bad.

3. Mueller and the fbis stonewalling of Congress about relevant info.

4. And now agents involved at high levels sending texts that show their bias.

Perhaps one or two of these occurring wouldn't be cause for alarm.

But combined, it starts to show a very clear picture of a biased agenda against trump and his team.



So where does this all lead?

There are many people on the left that I respect. They rightfully point out that the bias doesnt necessarily mean that the evidence against Trumps team isnt legit.

This is absolutely true. For example with the Manafort indictment. They seem to have actual documented evidence of his wrong doing with his money. In that case, the bias to me isnt a reason to ignore this evidence.

However, it still leads me to two conclusions.

1. The hillary investigation needs to be reopened. Many reasonable people on the left have no problem with this. Most probably because they carry no water for her and think justice should be served, and maybe some because hillary is no longer a player for the dems so she can be discarded.

Either way, this needs to occur.

However, #2 is probably an even bigger deal.

2. There needs to be an investigation into the investigators. If you are willing to admit that the investigation into hillary was done in a much more relaxed way than the trump investigation, that means we have to ask why the investigators chose to do this. We can already see some of them had clear biases like Strzok.

Now we have allegations that a Mueller team member was praising Sally Yates when she refused to carry out Trump travel ban.

www.foxnews.com...

If this is true, keep in mind, this is not just praising a campaign or something, it is praising an official for refusing to carry out trumps orders and do her job.

And there may be more to come, considering the list of Hillary donors on Muellers team is vast.

So not only do these investigators need to be investigated, this means that they should be immediately removed from the current investigation.

This doesnt mean that the current investigation into trumps team should end. It just means that we should be looking at the investigators, given all of the troubles outlined in the investigation, and remove anyone with potential bias.


Lastly, many people will seek to decry any conversations as to the behavior of the investigators as "whataboutism".

This is garbage.

I am saying the investigation into trumps team should continue. I am saying the indictments of Manafort and company seem legit to me.

I am just saying that we should not have the intel agencies be politicized and acting in biased manners.

Those that seek to excuse this because they support hillary or dislike Trump have no credibility, and are merely partisan shills.

Making sure that the unelected intel community, which is one of the most powerful organizations in the world, is not acting out of its own political bias in inappropriate ways, is arguably more important than either of the investigations into hillary or trump.

I’m not going to get into the particulars of your gripe...

I’ll just say this...
If you investigate the investigators, all you do is set precedent for the other side to call for an investigation into the investigators investigating the initial investigation.

And so on.

Add this to the list, where the second in command of the Mueller Investigation praised anti-Trump action at the DOJ.

Link to new ATS thread.

a reply to: Grambler

Investigate the investigation ...sure but I would make 2 teams and one team takes on 911 . Muller is still fiddle friggin around with that rope Trump gave him and the longer it goes it seems the tighter it gets . 911 is a done deal with a whole book load of holes to peer into . just my 2 cents

originally posted by: Hazardous1408
I’m not going to get into the particulars of your gripe...

I’ll just say this...
If you investigate the investigators, all you do is set precedent for the other side to call for an investigation into the investigators investigating the initial investigation.

And so on.

This isnt something I say lightly.

The particulars of my gripe are why they need to be investigated.

Even as we speak more info is coming out of Muller team people with ant trump biases.

The double standards in how they handled the two investigations is blatant and disturbing.

What is the alternative?

Just suck it up that the investigators are biased and acting in politically motivated ways?

I think that is the worst possible decision.

Never before in the time I have been a voter has there been a period where the corruption in the media, justice system and politicians is so blatantly exposed.

a reply to: Grambler

What we have here is full blown Banana Republic.

Today, it's harder to see a left/right distinction and far easier to see a taker/taken one.

And here's the real kicker: it is only getting worse.

Good luck everyone.

a reply to: loam

Oh this thread doesnt even scratch the biggest issue.

Did Obamas team use opposition research paid for by hillarys team and the DNC to spy on his opponents?

If so, it is the biggest political scandal perhaps in the history of the country.

For some reason, the DOJ and FBI have been stonewalling as much as possible to keep from telling congress what the dossier was used for.

If this occured, not only does it dwarf any possible thing the Russians could have done, but it makes the entire premise for the investigation into russia a farce.

It would prove that Obama and the dems used the intel community to subvert the rights of americans and spy on them and release thaat info to destroy their opponents.

At that point, not only should Obama and everyone involved be arrested, but the entire FBI and intel agencies involved must be totally overhauled or disbanded.

But I digress, we will get to that.

For now, the OP outlines ample problems with the investigators to be very worrisome and need dealt with.

Makes me wonder if we are reaching the Zappa point



Here's a blurb from an old document that might have some bearing on the discussion:

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

If something is not done to curb the abuses, they will inevitably continue. How much more will we, the people, accept?

a reply to: Grambler

Part of the problem here is Code of Federal Regulations 600.7, which is where Mueller's authority comes from.
www.law.cornell.edu...

(b) The Special Counsel shall not be subject to the day-to-day supervision of any official of the Department. However, the Attorney General may request that the Special Counsel provide an explanation for any investigative or prosecutorial step, and may after review conclude that the action is so inappropriate or unwarranted under established Departmental practices that it should not be pursued. In conducting that review, the Attorney General will give great weight to the views of the Special Counsel. If the Attorney General concludes that a proposed action by a Special Counsel should not be pursued, the Attorney General shall notify Congress as specified in § 600.9(a)(3).

(c) The Special Counsel and staff shall be subject to disciplinary action for misconduct and breach of ethical duties under the same standards and to the same extent as are other employees of the Department of Justice. Inquiries into such matters shall be handled through the appropriate office of the Department upon the approval of the Attorney General.

(d) The Special Counsel may be disciplined or removed from office only by the personal action of the Attorney General. The Attorney General may remove a Special Counsel for misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or for other good cause, including violation of Departmental policies. The Attorney General shall inform the Special Counsel in writing of the specific reason for his or her removal.

The code only provides for the US Attorney General to investigate, discipline, or question the special counsel. To date, Session's recusal from all things Russia Probe related have allowed Mueller to run around unchecked and unaccountable. BUT, and this will be an amazing bombshell if Sessions receives Congressional buy-in on it and limits the backlash to only the minority party, now that the Russian collusion narrative has fallen to tatters and is about to become a non-story, there's very little reason for Sessions to not intervene, do his job, see that justice is met, and snap Mueller's chain back hard enough to knock him loopy for a few months. It's time for Mueller to be responsible and accountable and either demonstrate he's actually looking for justice and with reason or end this charade and seize Mueller's assets in compensation for all the tax payer dollars he's pissed away on this witch hunt.

a reply to: Grambler

1. Interviewed hillary. This interview was not recorded, was pretty short, and allowed another person being investigated, Mills, to be present.

In secret too.

Theres your sign.

Likewise, the 911 commission interviewed Bush Jr. privately at the White House (with Cheney present) and sealed it.

This is not 'investigating' , this is covering up.

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
Makes me wonder if we are reaching the Zappa point

Here's a blurb from an old document that might have some bearing on the discussion:

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

If something is not done to curb the abuses, they will inevitably continue. How much more will we, the people, accept?

He was perhaps more human than human.

originally posted by: Hazardous1408
I’m not going to get into the particulars of your gripe...

I’ll just say this...
If you investigate the investigators, all you do is set precedent for the other side to call for an investigation into the investigators investigating the initial investigation.

And so on.

The DOJ needs to do this and do it quickly but correctly. Discipline or dismissal should result from any found wrong doing. The AG has the power to do it or appoint an Assistant AG to do it.

a reply to: Grambler

Who investigates the investigators

Dammit House and Senate. You had one job.

originally posted by: 3daysgone
a reply to: Grambler

Who investigates the investigators

Dammit House and Senate. You had one job.

Well as bad as they suck, Mueller and the FBI has stobnewalled them at every turn.

In fact, it has become commonplace for the FBI to ignore congressional inquiries.

There is no oversight.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: 3daysgone
a reply to: Grambler

Who investigates the investigators

Dammit House and Senate. You had one job.

Well as bad as they suck, Mueller and the FBI has stobnewalled them at every turn.

In fact, it has become commonplace for the FBI to ignore congressional inquiries.

There is no oversight.

You are right and it could be corrected with one well tuned letter from the AG to the SC.

Dear Mr. SC,

You have been served the following congressional inquiries 1) 2) ...
If you do not fully respond to these inquiries NLT xx/xx/2018 or fully demonstrate in writing to my personal satisfaction why you cannot you will be terminated from you present position.

Kind regards,
Jeff

Edit: Send a similar letter to the FBI Director

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: 3daysgone
a reply to: Grambler

Who investigates the investigators

Dammit House and Senate. You had one job.

Well as bad as they suck, Mueller and the FBI has stobnewalled them at every turn.

In fact, it has become commonplace for the FBI to ignore congressional inquiries.

There is no oversight.

I agree. No enforcement of the oversight.

originally posted by: 3daysgone

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: 3daysgone
a reply to: Grambler

Who investigates the investigators

Dammit House and Senate. You had one job.

Well as bad as they suck, Mueller and the FBI has stobnewalled them at every turn.

In fact, it has become commonplace for the FBI to ignore congressional inquiries.

There is no oversight.

I agree. No enforcement of the oversight.

Correct me if I’m wrong but the only tool Congress has to force these rouge agencies and/people to comply is contempt of Congress. They have used that on the previous AG (Holder) and it got them nowhere. Our present AG needs to step up.

originally posted by: whywhynot

originally posted by: 3daysgone

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: 3daysgone
a reply to: Grambler

Who investigates the investigators

Dammit House and Senate. You had one job.

Well as bad as they suck, Mueller and the FBI has stobnewalled them at every turn.

In fact, it has become commonplace for the FBI to ignore congressional inquiries.

There is no oversight.

I agree. No enforcement of the oversight.

Correct me if I’m wrong but the only tool Congress has to force these rouge agencies and/people to comply is contempt of Congress. They have used that on the previous AG (Holder) and it got them nowhere. Our present AG needs to step up.

You are correct. Enforcement of the law is something our government seems to overlook often.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical


Any time You can add Frank Zappa by all means...


Edit: Sure beats the snot out of Nero's fiddling. We will have a way better soundtrack while We watch it burn....