Strzok interviewed Mills and Huma, and didnt charge them for their lies to the FBI

Looks like some congress members are finally calling for an investigation into the FBI's handling of these cases.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Lets see where it goes.

a reply to: Grambler


Something that is long over due. I hope the root out every coconspirator and shady investigator they can. Bring this darkness to light. Show the world how there are really two different justice systems one for them and one for us.

Prosecute these people that allowed lady justice to be soiled and make examples of them for the next people who come along and think they are above the law.




Purge DC

With the mention of X it reminds me...

What if we turned half the satellites looking down, outward?

Imagine the powers if used properly

originally posted by: Grambler
Looks like some congress members are finally calling for an investigation into the FBI's handling of these cases.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Lets see where it goes.

They can call for an investigation.

They can be outraged.

They might even write an angry letter! And underline a curse word.

Hillary won't be touched.

I've given up hope of seeing justice prevail in DC.




But there is one good thing to come from all of this.

The Mueller Investigation (AKA Operation Kill Trump) will be forever tainted.

I honestly thought that Mueller, despite any biases he might have, would conduct a fair and impartial investigation.

Now I know differently. And, just say for instance. Trump actually did commit some crimes. I won't believe it because of the partisan bias.


The FBI, once the bastion of justice and integrity, has the moral value of Michael Moore's underwear after a curry dinner.

a reply to: DBCowboy
Agreed.

This whole situation has put in the open like almost never before not only the corruption of the intel community, but also how people, both on ATS, and more importantly outside of it will cheer for a corrupt intel agencies if it suits their team.

It shows they have no credibility whatsoever.

Again we have people on the left in ats claiming that the calls for an investigation into the fbi and it's handling of these 8nvestigations is ridiculous and only right wing conspiracy theory.

Not one has remotely addressed this story where we know the fbi let mills and huma get away with lying to the fbi.

Meaning they know this is true, and yet they are not concerned with the truth, only trying to make their team look good.

Oh well.

At least those not extremely partisan to the point of denying reality can see the truth.

As always Grambler, you point out the actual proof of what is going on, and as a side note I think you are one of the most bi-partisan participants in these political threads.

Maybe a petition to have the FBI investigated properly would help speed up the process.
How many signatures would be needed for something like that?

originally posted by: 3daysgone
As always Grambler, you point out the actual proof of what is going on, and as a side note I think you are one of the most bi-partisan participants in these political threads.

Maybe a petition to have the FBI investigated properly would help speed up the process.
How many signatures would be needed for something like that?

If they are unwilling to respond to congressional inquiries of which they are required to by law, I don't think any amount of signatures would influence them.

a reply to: Grambler

If they are unwilling to respond to congressional inquiries of which they are required to by law, I don't think any amount of signatures would influence them.

Maybe a # could do it. That seems to get a lot of attention now a days.

originally posted by: theatreboy
a reply to: theantediluvian

You start with this assumption that the dossier was the reason for the investigation (rather than the Russian meddling).

I do think we can all agree the dossier WAS part of the russian meddling. Do not know how you can believe RT had more influence with fake news in the election, than a document paid for by Clinton and the Dnc...out sourced to Steele, who then paid RUSSIAN intelligence agents for this info.

That's EXACTLY the sort of spurious mischaracterization that I'm talking about.

1. RT reporting was the least of the influence campaign. The absolute least. It wouldn't have even occurred to me to mention RT, even in connection with "fake news."

2. The Clinton campaign and the DNC didn't pay for a document. They paid for research. Fusion GPS outsourced some of that research to Orbis/Steele who compiled what would become known as "the Steele Dossier." The dossier didn't even exist in its present form until months later. IIRC, there were 16 memos sent back to Fusion GPS by Steele over several months.

3. According to Fusion GPS, Steele didn't pay sources.

4. Not all of the sources were Russian officials much less "RUSSIAN intelligence agents."

Now let's address the biggest flaw in your statement. This idea that the dossier had any influence on the election itself. Here's a brief timeline to illustrate how absurd and demonstrably false that is:

June 14, 2016 - DNC email hack revealed
July 22, 2016 - DNC emails published by WikiLeaks
July 25, 2016 - Democratic National Convention starts
October 7, 2016 - Access Hollywood recording breaks, an hour later WikiLeaks publishes first batch of Podesta emails

For the next what? Month right up until the election the emails were released in daily installments to maximize the impact.

October 31st, 2016 - The very first mention of the dossier in the media comes from Mother Jones who refer to a series of "memos" (appropriately) for which they give no details.

November 8th, 2016 - Donald Trump elected President.

Shortly *after* the election, John McCain meets with Sir Andrew Wood who discusses the (now compiled dossier) and vouches for Steele.

Dec 9th, 2016 - McCain receives a copy of the dossier from David Kramer and brings it to Comey.

January 11th, 2017 - BuzzFeed publishes dossier.

Now tell me. How exactly did the dossier impact the election when it wasn't published until two months after the election?

This is insanity.

At this point, any attempt by Mueller to come after Trump or his family will be met with fierce resistance. Dare I even say attempting impeachment or unindicted co-conspirator status would spark major civil unrest amid the clear constitutional crisis such actions would cause.

The armed Citizens of America stand with President Trump. The Mueller probe is completely discredited, and their bias has been exposed.

For anyone that wants to accuse me of partisanship, please review my posts. I have been an ardent supporter of the corruption probe as well as a fan of Mueller's legacy, second only to J. Edgar Hoover himself. The revelations have been disturbing, and have totally shattered the legitimacy of not just Mueller, but has threatened the credibility of the entire FBI.

It is a sad week for the Bureau, given that its core principles break down to:

F - Fidelity: Through unwavering loyalty to country, the Constitution and their mission to enforce the law.
B - Bravery: By their willingness to fearlessly pursue and prosecute law breakers despite the political climate or public opinion.
I - Integrity: Recognizing FBI's distinguished history of rising above corruption, petty politics and always displaying integrity in everything they do. The fact this is even questionable at this time demonstrates the true crisis a minority group of pro-Clinton agents and one rogue probe can cause. They are actively dealing irreparable damage to FBI's integrity and reputation.

The terms "Untouchable" and "G-man" are synonymous with FBI special agents, who were always seen as "the cavalry" when federal crimes or incidents of major public interest occur. At the turn of the 20th century, agents from the BOI fearlessly and tirelessly investigated and prosecuted mafia figures, who had considerable power (both firepower and political power).

A total of 66 FBI agents and special agents have died since the Bureau was established (FBI.gov source). These men sacrificed their lives in pursuit of FBI's mission and their dedication to equal enforcement of federal criminal law by carrying out the righteous will of a blindfolded lady with scales. She isn't supposed to peak. Ever.

Mueller and his team have disgraced that reputation, and risk soiling the memory of every brave agent and special agent killed in the line of duty. The DOJ and FBI Director should make immediate reparations to the American justice system. They include:

1) Immediately terminating Mueller as special counsel, and terminating the employment of the exposed special agents. Not only on the grounds of unequal enforcement of the law, or political partisanship affecting their jobs, but also for their illegal leaks and propaganda contributions.

2) Sessions should open an investigation of unlimited scope into the Clintons. Everything involving the Clintons, and any Clinton co-conspirators. Any laws that were broken can still be prosecuted, as the offenses are well within the statute of limitations. It is important to investigate immediately, to avoid the Clintonistas running out the clock so to speak.

3) Sessions should appoint another special counsel with limited scope for the sake of reviewing the legality/efficacy of Mueller actions. If Mueller or his team violated any laws, they should be prosecuted. If their probe has not turned up any beneficial evidence, then it should be promptly closed. If actionable and credible evidence was found, then the scope should be extended and allowed to proceed.

4) The DOJ must also investigate whether the bogus dossier was used to acquire FISA warrants or was used as grounds to open an investigation. If so, its author and any person (including the GOP, Clintons) who funded its creation needs investigated. It is likely any person engaging in this level of propaganda is a threat to the republic.

5) The DOJ should also open an investigation into the Obama Administration's use of FBI/IC resources for political reasons. Susan Rice, PBO himself, Clapper (who lied under oath), Holder (fast and furious), Lynch (secret meeting w/ suspect Clinton's husband) and any other co-conspirators.

These are not to restore the reputation of the FBI. These actions would merely repay the Citizens of the United States for the losses they incurred at the loss of legitimacy of the entire US legal system. They can restore their reputation by taking administrative action and terminating all agents involved in mishandling the Clinton case, and spinning the counter-intelligence investigation against Russia into a false Trump/Russia narrative (that is totally false BTW).

The FBI has damaged themselves, bigly. It is on them to restore that reputation and trust the American people place in them.

a reply to: theantediluvian


Except Barrack Obama and Clapper both said Russia didn't have any impact on the election.

You should review Obama/IC claims following the election. His exact words included the mention that Russia was conducting what would constitute as common intelligence collection activities, and that Obama warned them to quote unquote "knock it off" which he states they did.

This spin started when Clinton needed a way to explain her embarrassing and devastating loss. Deep state traitors, an angry 33% of the public and massive propaganda from the DNC machine spurred these ridiculous claims.

The email releases were leaks, which even an NSA whistleblower (Binney) who examined CrowdStrike's evidence concluded. The transfers of over 16GB of data happened in a matter of seconds. That isn't over any network. Especially not one monitored by IT/security staff. They'd detect such a major exfiltration of data immediately. Instead, an APT would use encryption or steganography to release the data in bursts over a period of days/weeks/months or even years. The goal of an APT is Persistence (ie: the second letter in its name - advanced persistent threat), not burning the foot-hold you worked so hard to gain.

Especially not a nation-state intelligence agency. There was nothing to gain by releasing the emails, since most voters were decided by that point. Clinton voters weren't going to listen to reason, nor would Trump voters. Anyone pretending there was a mass of "swing voters" waiting to go vote Democrat (if not allegedly for Comey, Russia, Trump, racism, sexism, nativism, voter suppression, gerrymandering, voter intimidation, propaganda, NRA lies, RWNJ talking points, [insert ridiculous excuse for losing here], etc etc etc) after the Primary was over is mistaken.

I have a lot of respect for you ante. And respectfully, this entire narrative is entirely disproven. There can be another special counsel appointed (or FBI investigation), but the partisan agents involved in Clinton's criminal investigation and this investigation are unacceptable. The fact Mueller has covered for those agents, and faced a threat of contempt in congress also shows his true colors. These people are unqualified to run the probe.

The justice, freedom and liberty loving Citizens of this country will not permit any unjust removal of the POTUS due to any finding from Mueller's partisan and totally discredited kangaroo court.

In light of the revelations, it is so clear Mueller cannot continue. He has lost legitimacy and credibility. Unfortunately, since Sessions erroneously recused himself due to public pressure, yet another special counsel needs to be appointed for this Russia crap. But *only* to review existing evidence to determine whether or not there is any cause to continue an investigation at the tax payer's expense. The DOJ itself needs to conduct an audit of the Mueller probe, including action taken by rogue agents in relation to this investigation, the Clinton criminal investigation or any other investigation their actions are suspect.

Hint: Loss of credibility for even one Special Agent will result in every case that SA has handled being scrutinized. Remember that "benefit of the doubt" so many anti-LE posters talk about? Such benefits are no longer applicable to the outed/exposed agents (Strzok, for instance). Once credibility and legitimacy are lost, there is really no coming back.

That is precisely why non-felonies involving false statements, lies or abuse of trust will generally DQ prospective LEO applicants.

a reply to: Grambler

Wow you seem angry.

Almost like someone from the left that is mad that it's being discovered that the Intel community is corrupt and been working for your side.

I'm not angry. I don't agree with any of what you just said so how can I be angry about it? I don't think the "Intel community" was working for "my side" unless you mean... America? And that sort of logically precludes me viewing a string of assumptions as a "discovery."

Despite all of your bluster here, you admit the fbi "soft peddled" the investigation into hillary.

I said that I think there's enough evidence to warrant concern.

Because despite your best efforts, you are blinded by the fact you hate teump, and so you have no problem with the Intel community being biased against him.

Your position has evolved from there was no Russian meddling (denial) to "Pokemon Go!" (dismissal). It's because of those pro-Trump blinders that you have been and remain absolutely unconcerned about Russian meddling. It makes perfect sense then that you need for there to be some other reason for anyone to investigate it.

In the beginning, you didn't believe the Russians were behind the DNC hack. In fact, I'm not sure that you believe it now but when evidence was presented, the most I remember seeing you concede was that it was possible but you'd immediately follow up with some reason why it didn't matter.

When it came to fake news? You argued that fake news was less of a factor than media bias. When it was revealed that social media was lousy with Russian trolls pushing that fake news? You dismissed the importance and went on about "Pokemon Go!" Never mind the fact that your initial position (no Russian meddling) had already been disproved, you just made a slight adjustment. The same with every single development about the admin lying about things involving Russia. Not enough to so much as raise an eyebrow.

And every single failed counter narrative launched by the pro-Trump crowd you've been behind 100%. Me? I've never even claimed that Trump colluded with anyone. I took the time to put together the pieces and concluded that the Trump Tower meeting wasn't a big deal and posted a thread saying so. You think you're not so all in on being pro-Trump that you could stray that far from the pro-Trump orthodoxy?

Let's get real here. You're WAY more intractable than I am when it comes to these issues.

Is it a coincidence we now see fbi members involved with that writing anti trump pro Hillary things?

Does Trump's obvious pro-Russian bent prove he colluded with Russia? After all, priority #1 seemed to be undercutting Obama's sanctions. Right? That's about the strength of your argument.

Of course, you'd never connect THOSE dots and conclude that maybe Trump might be a risk but you'll connect dots you know less about to conclude that this investigator let Clinton off the hook.

Have you read the text messages? No? Me neither. So you're just relying on (part) of the characterization as "possibly pro-Hillary / anti-Trump" and leaping to conclusions. You of course leave out the part that the messages (however many there were) have also been characterized as having something to do with one of the debates.

Basically your rant here is an excuse to say it's ok for the fbi to be bias, it was ok for them to go soft on Hillary.

Is that your interpretation? No, I never said it was okay for them to go soft on Hillary. In fact, I said there's enough smoke that it's worth investigating to see if there's fire.

But yes, because I'm not being unreasonable af as you are, I do think it's "ok" for the FBI agents to have biases. Because they're human beings and human beings have thoughts. They can't help it. They have opinions. They have biases.

You're the buying into this ridiculously absurd standard by which anyone who has an opinion is unfit to investigate. That's irrational bull#.

Honostly, you seemed unhinged.

Lmao. You seem angry.

You make it seem as if I didn't want am investigation into russia, I never said that.

No, you make it seem that way. Be honest. Do you think there's even anything to investigate? No? Do you believe that the investigation of Russian meddling is all part of a campaign to delegitimize Trump? Yes? Then why on Earth would you want the investigation?

I think you pay lip service to the idea of a investigation because you know consciously that it's the right position to have but on an visceral level, you think it's all part of an evil, corrupt scheme to damage Trump. Which is why though you say "it should continue" you posted three threads yesterday trying to delegitimize the investigation.

On a rational level, you know that the investigation should happen. On an emotional level, you can't stand that it's happening.

But for some reason, instead of charging mills or huma with lying, and then trying to flip them to find out who committed the more serious crime, immunity was handed out to everyone.

Oh boy. I've already said straight away that if they lied and it appears they did, they should be charged. I'm already on board. It was literally the first thing I said. As to why they weren't? I'm also on board with finding out why the investigation proceeded the way it did. The difference here, is that you are 100% convinced you know "the truth" and there's nothing that will dissuade you.

Where did the emails come from that proved Mills lied for instance? Did they come from her laptop? If that's the case, that might be a problem because the immunity she was given was for being incriminated by anything found on her laptop. That was the condition for her turning it over.

Then there is the question of whether or not they even honestly thought there was a prosecution to be had against Clinton. If they didn't think that, that would seem to undercut their motivation to flip Mills or Abedin.

But again, I don't really care. I'm okay with them being charged for lying to the FBI tomorrow. You on the other hand are losing your # that they weren't charged because in your mind, every single aspect of that investigation is tit-for-tat with the Muller investigation.

You can't consider either one outside of the context of the other.

Oh and let's not forget Papadopoulos was only charged with lying. But that's ok right? No problem the fbi and Mueller thought that was seruous, but not Hillary's team lying.

But this doesn't bother you, the fbis double standard.

It's too early to know where this is going but I'll be surprised if they charged him if there's not something he adds to their case.

And there you go again. You keep ignoring distinctions. Since Strzok was involved in both investigations, that's all you need to know. Nuance is completely irrelevant. In your mind, there's a perfect equivalence, it's all "the FBI" (never mind all the other individuals involved, how the respective investigations played out, who the prosecutors involved were or what their thinking was) all that matters is that you can contrast them, claim a double standard and despite all *your* bluster, use that as a way to delegitimize the Mueller investigation while simultaneously claiming you support it.

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: DBCowboy
Agreed.

This whole situation has put in the open like almost never before not only the corruption of the intel community, but also how people, both on ATS, and more importantly outside of it will cheer for a corrupt intel agencies if it suits their team.

It shows they have no credibility whatsoever.

Does anyone else remember Trump getting hammered for "not trusting" the IC?

Remember the accusations?

He was Right Again!!

a reply to: Grambler

Admit it. You are willing to say go after Hillary again because she is gone, and it doesn't affect your party.

But you will fight tooth and nail to argue against any corruption of the investigators because you drsperately want to see trumps people go down.

It certainly makes it easier from a strategic standpoint but I've never been a supporter of Clinton or really *any* politician and I've never made any bones about it. Prior to the election? I freely admitted that Clinton lied. I never denied that my primary position was being anti-Trump either.

I don't have any hangups about admitting my own biases. That's you projecting your own inner struggles on me. Now you're trying to mic drop some bull# on me hypocritically. Are you saying you want to see Cheryl Mills charged with lying to the FBI because you're beside yourself with outrage that she lied to the FBI?

If that were the case, you wouldn't be running around saying "people on the left say they care about lying to the FBI so..." You'd just say lying to the FBI is a serious crime. And you wouldn't have just said this:

Oh and let's not forget Papadopoulos was only charged with lying.

For all the bluster and finger pointing, the reality is you don't really see lying to the FBI to be that big of a deal in general. What makes you angry is that nobody was charged with it in the midst of the Clinton email investigation taking place during the election. Be honest, if there was no Mueller investigation and nobody was charged with lying to the FBI, how much would *you* really care?

I find the bias and corruption of the fbi to be a bigger deal than either the investigation into hillary or trump.

I know you do. I just don't share your opinions. I don't believe the investigations into Russian influence in the election are unjustified. You clearly feel that they are. Which is why you also believe that the only reason any of them occurred/are happening is as part of a grand conspiracy by Obama,/Clinton/the DNC/the FBI/the CIA/the GOP establishment/the "deep state"/basically "the other team" to hurt Trump.

I am sorry you don't.

And I'm sorry that you're not at all concerned about Russian influence on the election or Trump's foreign policy.

a reply to: JBurns

Good and don't forget the DOJ runs the FBI so the DOJ could use a good shower also.

And the State Dept.

Everyone on the CIFUS panel that signed off on U1.

I get the feeling James Comey was nothing but a fat cat that let others do the work and make decisions, then he appears any time there is a camera.

Comey was too busy sitting around reading Reinhold Niebuhr and finding intellectual quotes to ponder to realize the partisan hacks in his department were covering for the Dems.

The FBI will not regain credibility until justice is found against Clinton and her goons, and possibly even Obama and his DOJ.

a reply to: theantediluvian

I dont believe I ever said there was bno russian meddling.

Show me where I said that and I will gldly own up to it.

I said I saw no proof Russia hacked the DNC. I have still seen no proof. We only have the FBi and crowdstrikes word. And the FBI never even looked at the server, which is absolutely unthinkable.

I do think the russian social media thing is a joke. It is a thinly veiled attempt to try and censor social media to make sure only approved establishment messages can be shown. But yes we know your position is that russian social media posts were more effective and disturbing than the MSM and other foreign medias total backing of HIllary.

Agree to disagree I guess.

Now as far as was their something to investigate? I am still for an investigation. I have no clue, perhaps Trump or his team did work with russia to steal the election. I have seen no proof of that, neither have you. But it is a serious allegation, and should be investigated by impartial people.

What failed narrative have I been behind? See this is what I am talking about. When Idiscuss something like the U1 scandal, is that a failed narrative? When i point out that it is ridiculous that the FBI didnt look at the server, or that Hillarys team paid for the dossier that was sourced from Kremlin agents, or when I point out the double standard by the fbi.

See, you view anything like this as a distraction from Trunmp. That is because you are only interested in getting Trump.

Thats why your response of "I siad go after Mills and Huma" misses the point. The point is the FBI did go soft on them.

Why?

And no0w why should those same FBI people be involved with the investigation into Trump. Yes, the messages that I ahvent seen that apparently show bias against Trump wouldn't be a big deal on their own.

But as this thread proves and you have agreed; it does appear the FBI for some reason went easy on Mills and Huma.

Couple that with the bias messages, the stonewalling of congress, and the leaks that hurt trump, and it shows a pattern of the FBI acting politically to favor hillarys team and hurt trump.

Clearly this politicization of the FBI is less of a priority to you than getting Trump.

But you dont want the FBI looked into, because it may hurt your investigation into trump.

As far as the immunity deals.

The point is you say the FBI gave flynn a deal, so that shows they will attempt to ett him to flip on higher ups, which makes sense.

But again, in the case of hillarys team, they handy out immunity for no reason.

The main point isnt that they should relook into hillarys team as you agree, its that we need to know why the FBI did that, and seeing as everything mentioned above with them, they should not be inloved with the Trump investigation until they are looked at and can explain themselves.

Its more than just strzok being involved, as you know.

For some reason, lying to the FBI was enough to charge papapdopolous, but not Mills and Huma. Please, tell me the nuance that makes that make sense.

The fact is there is more than enough proof that the FBI went soft on Hillary and her team, and are charging Trumps team with crimes that they left hillarys team off on. They are leaking to hurt trump, they are stonewalling congress, and someo f them have had biased messages against trump.

You dont want anyone to talk about that, because you are afraid that if the investigators are proven to be biased, it lessons the legitinmacy of the investigation into trump; and to you taking down trump or his team is largest goal.

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Grambler

Admit it. You are willing to say go after Hillary again because she is gone, and it doesn't affect your party.

But you will fight tooth and nail to argue against any corruption of the investigators because you drsperately want to see trumps people go down.

It certainly makes it easier from a strategic standpoint but I've never been a supporter of Clinton or really *any* politician and I've never made any bones about it. Prior to the election? I freely admitted that Clinton lied. I never denied that my primary position was being anti-Trump either.

I don't have any hangups about admitting my own biases. That's you projecting your own inner struggles on me. Now you're trying to mic drop some bull# on me hypocritically. Are you saying you want to see Cheryl Mills charged with lying to the FBI because you're beside yourself with outrage that she lied to the FBI?

If that were the case, you wouldn't be running around saying "people on the left say they care about lying to the FBI so..." You'd just say lying to the FBI is a serious crime. And you wouldn't have just said this:

Oh and let's not forget Papadopoulos was only charged with lying.

For all the bluster and finger pointing, the reality is you don't really see lying to the FBI to be that big of a deal in general. What makes you angry is that nobody was charged with it in the midst of the Clinton email investigation taking place during the election.Be honest, if there was no Mueller investigation and nobody was charged with lying to the FBI, how much would *you* really care?

I find the bias and corruption of the fbi to be a bigger deal than either the investigation into hillary or trump.

I know you do. I just don't share your opinions. I don't believe the investigations into Russian influence in the election are unjustified. You clearly feel that they are. Which is why you also believe that the only reason any of them occurred/are happening is as part of a grand conspiracy by Obama,/Clinton/the DNC/the FBI/the CIA/the GOP establishment/the "deep state"/basically "the other team" to hurt Trump.

I am sorry you don't.

And I'm sorry that you're not at all concerned about Russian influence on the election or Trump's foreign policy.

Leading from behind, is not a foreign policy and still waiting on the proof of influence.

Seriously? Everyone knows the DNC and Clinton Machine lied their way through the whole race. The fact that repubs were charged and none of them were, is the problem.

Lying to the FBI is the lowest and easiest charge to get people on. The FBI knows Mills and Huma lied, hillary too but let it slide! Strzok and Comey did everything, not to mention the MSM, to waterdown and dismiss any guilt, changing the wording and adding "intent" to circumvent the law.

Obama had no idea any of this BS was going on? Right.

Besides being the first black potus, his admin will go down as the most corrupt and useless presidency in history.

a reply to: theantediluvian

Thank you for admitting you dont share my opinion that a biased and politicized FBI is a bigger problem.

That really sums it up.

I never said the investigation into russia shouldnt happen.

My concern is that it should encompass all parties, and should be carried out by impartial investigators.

You want the investigation to happen so bad you dont care if the investigators are politicized and acting to help one side.

In other words, you juts care about Trump going down, not about really getting to the bottom of Russia.

I do think lying to the FBI is a big deal. I think manafort and Flynn and others should be charged.

I also think Mills and Huma should be.

But as I will say again, Mills and Huma are secondary to the fact that if the FBI let them off for some reason, and yet didnt with Flynn and others, it shows a double standard. especially given all of the other problems we see with the FBI to hurt trump (stonewalling, leaks, bias messages).

You are looking at it like "Oh the FBI should have charged them, go ahead and hgo get them now. But we cant look into rather or not the FBI acting inappropriately, cause I really really want them to take down Trump!"