It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

OIG Report Released: Full text

page: 15
32
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 08:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Xcathdra

Funny I never heard that explosion.
Possibly because this is just another maybe Russia created dirty conspiracy that has zero credibility.


That would be because you ignore information that doesn't agree with your agenda. Either way it was in the media.




posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 08:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: xuenchen

Give it up.


Except he is correct.

Also -
Sally Yates: DOJ Ordered FBI Not to Overtly Investigate Clinton Foundation
edit on 16-6-2018 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 08:57 AM
link   
The Clinton Foundation investigation was ongoing and not overt (not made public, not commented on, etc.)

The Manafort investigation was ongoing and not overt (not made public, not commented on, etc.)

THAT is what the IG report says.



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 09:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

That was what Manafort was doing. Oh my God . Just go ahead and kidnap facts from one story and use it in another. How dishonest!



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 09:04 AM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker

I'm committed to the truth.



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 09:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

He wasn't fired . Is he not still working for the FBI?



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 09:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Xcathdra

That was what Manafort was doing. Oh my God . Just go ahead and kidnap facts from one story and use it in another. How dishonest!


Of note, Peter Strzok's employment with the FBI was not terminated; he was moved to HR, which is probably worse than terminating him.

I know you know, this, but there are some posts here that are desperately trying to mislead and misrepresent the truth.



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 09:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

No I don't ignore facts. I do ignore bull# conspiracy theories and dude this is bull#.
Nobody would ignore that kind of story EVER! If it was true believe me I would have heard it and so would everyone else.
It's a lie.
edit on 6162018 by Sillyolme because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 09:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Shaking my head.
Like I said give it up.
Start concentrating on the talking points you're gonna need to defend trump in the coming months because he's in so much hot water we can make president soup.
You're what aboutism isn't going to make a difference to what happens to him and it won't help him.
edit on 6162018 by Sillyolme because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 09:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

Strzok was in charge of the investigation into Russian interference in our election at its outset.

When Special Counsel Mueller was appointed, Strzok continued to work on the investigation.

When the texts between Strzok and Page were discovered, Strzok was immediately removed from the investigation by Mueller.

There is ZERO evidence that Strzok's alleged political beliefs had any effect on his investigative work; this is established in the IG report.

The fact is that the majority of FBI agents are white, middle-aged, former millitary and Republican.

The fact is that numerous agents inside and outside the FBI in 2016 have stated that the FBI was "Trumplandia."

Those are facts.



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 09:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

If there was no fear that Strzok's work was affected by his bias, why was he removed from the investigation?


edit on 6/16/18 by BlueAjah because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 09:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: Gryphon66

If there was no fear that Strzok's work was affected by his bias, why was he removed from the investigation?



FBI procedure.

Optics.

Common sense.



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 09:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

In a company I worked for in N.Y. if someone needed a taking down but couldn't get fired, (Teamsters Union local 295) they would transfer them to archives. This was before digital data storage so pretty much they put invoices in numerical order and bound them up in books and filed paperwork on their feet all day long. They became the bitches of the auditors every spring. Get me this get me that.
I have seen lateral moves that would feel like a firing would be preferable but they paid $18.00 an hour (plus full benefits and paid vacation time) in the eighties when minimum wage was around $3.75 I think. So no one ever wanted to quit. They just endured until they were transferred back into the big room with the windows. Lol.



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 09:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

You're not supposed to DRINK the bong water!!!

Sheesh!!



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 09:28 AM
link   
DP


edit on 6/16/2018 by Flyingclaydisk because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 09:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

FBI procedure because...
a biased investigator can not be trusted.

So, why should we assume that the work Strzok had already done was unbiased? He was one of the top people in charge of both the Clinton email investigation and was one of those who started the whole Russia thing.

The FBI has that procedure for a reason. This guy should never have been involved in ANY of that due to his bias. And there is no proof that it did not affect his work. The IG claimed that they did not have "proof" that it did, but they also did not have proof that it did not. And yet, the FBI thought there was reason enough to pull him from the Russia investigation.

So, it seems that the FBI thought that there was reason for concern about his bias.



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 09:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: Gryphon66

You're not supposed to DRINK the bong water!!!

Sheesh!!



LOL.

Better that than Kool-Aid (TM)



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 09:37 AM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah

Indeed, even the appearance of bias in public OR private statements is subject to disciplinary actions.

You shouldn't assume anything; the IG report states clearly that the work that Strzok and Page had done on the Clinton's Email Server Investigation was not compromised.

You're laboring under the impression that Federal agents are not also American citizens who have political opinions.

FBI procedures exist to prevent those opinions from compromising their law enforcement work.

The IG reviewed Strzok's work and found it was compliant with standard investigative policies and further, they found no irregularities in the procedures followed (aside from, of course, private messages on government devices.)

As stated, the FBI is known to have a conservative/right-wing bias (Comey, Rosenstein, etc. are all Republcians.)

Funny that folks never brought this "bias" issue up when it was clear that certain agents were leaking/directly working against Clinton, eh?



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 09:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

I agree.
Every report every memo all show how these folks are not politically motivated in their approach to their duties. And that established protocols, rules and laws are employed in their decision making.



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 09:48 AM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah

Optics just like this right now.
Look at how y'all are reacting to this when he was removed. Imagine the uproar if he had not been.



new topics

top topics



 
32
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join