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: 17
32
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 01:26 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I realize that you aren't actually interested in the basis for my statements, but, in good faith, I'll be glad to provide information.

For convenience, you can refer to Terrorism News on the FBI website.

Eight successes in June 2018 alone ... and it's only the 16th.

These deal with preventing chemical weapon manufacture, apprehending those supporting ISIS and other foreign actors domestically, etc.

Let me know if you need more within reason.
edit on 16-6-2018 by Gryphon66 because: Noted




posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 01:31 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Also ... you might reference this page if you're leary of taking FBI reports at their face value ...



The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has been one of the best known and most scrutinized components of the U.S. government for well over seventy years. As a result it has been the subject of non-fiction books, novels, a multitude of articles, films and television shows, and congressional hearings. In addition to its criminal investigative effort and pursuit of bank-robbers that propelled it into the news, the Bureau has also been heavily involved in counterintelligence, counterterrorism, foreign intelligence, and counter-subversion work. FBI successes, failures, and abuses have helped produce attention and controversy for the Bureau. Today's National Security Archive posting of 38 documents - drawn from a variety of sources - provides a window into the Bureau's activities in those areas since, with one exception, 1970. The collection's aim is to present a foundation for understanding the scope and history of the organization, and in some instances to offer correctives to popular accounts.


National Security Archive - Documenting the FBI: Declassified Documents Provide New Detail on Confronting the Terrorist Threat – from al-Qaeda to Skinheads

Aside from that, I'll see you in your new thread...



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 01:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UKTruth

The report wasn't about trump. Why would they mention that?


Why they mentioned it is less important than the fact that they did.
If you would really like to know why, it is detailed in the report. Perhaps you should actually read it.


Perhaps you should read it, as you haven't been able to produce one single citation from the report to back up your claims.

To follow-up ... where are the details on Strzok's actual activities that harmed investigations at hand or President Trump?

Thanks again.


The report in no way exonerated the FBI from taking action based on political bias against President Trump. Fact.
It specifically called out the clear bias against Trump, having done a thorough review of the texts between Strzok and Page.

Like CNN you are lying about the contents of the report, cherry picking in the full knowledge that anyone reading it will know you are lying, but the plan (as always with the left) is to fool as many people as possible, those that don't bother reading the report.

In true leftist style you have now moved on to questions about which actions Strzok took relating to Trump, when those actions will be part of the next report. This report was about the Clinton investigation but the IG felt it necessary to include their concerns about political bias against Trump relating to the Russian investigation.

For now, we know that the IG office is 'deeply troubled' by Strzok's bias and concerned about the willingness to use official actions against Trump due to that bias... a far cry from the narrative you have tried (in vain) to push about the FBI being clean.

Whether you like it or not the facts of the report debunk your narrative, parroted from the pages of CNN.

Thanks much.



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



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 01:44 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

The report stated that the Midyear Investigation had not been compromised. It doesn't address any other investigations except peripherally.

Bias against Trump existed on the part of Strzok and Page. We've established that repeatedly; we've also established that the IG report notes no actions taken by either of them that harmed either President Trump or the investigations.

Over and over, repeatedly, ad infinitum.

I'm not the point here, nor are your opinions about me or about CNN.

The fact is that there is no evidence that anyone in the FBI acted against a) the Midyear/Clinton investigation or b) President Trump.

If you have that evidence, present it.

Your opining on me, CNN and everything else you can think of to throw into the mix is boring.

My "narrative" is to point out what the IG report (you know, the topic here) actually says, and to point out the lies of posters who contradict it.

Neither you nor the IG report debunks that. Indeed, your claim is that the report debunks itself???

Absurd. Try harder.
edit on 16-6-2018 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 01:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: UKTruth

we've also established that the IG report notes no actions taken by either of them that harmed either President Trump or the investigations.

Over and over, repeatedly, ad infinitum.



Once again, you are incorrect (or more likely lying given you have been shown the specific text)

The report specifically references the Clinton investigation when determining that no actions were found that proved bias affected that investigation. Moreover, it relates to six areas of that investigation, noted clearly on pages 2&3 of the report. That statement does not relate to the Russian investigation.

Please. Try and do your research and actually understand the issue before just replaying MSM here.

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



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 02:04 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Not incorrect at all.

I didn't reference the "Russia investigation" except in direct commentary to another member. You know that.

You state what I've pointed out multiple times about the IG report and want to pretend that you're doing something.

As I said, you keep repeating yourself with zero evidence.

I've quoted from the IG report; you're the one lying about what I'm saying.

Best.
edit on 16-6-2018 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 10:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Xcathdra

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


You really need to start paying attention.

HE WAS FIRED FROM THE SC BY MUELLER.

He is in the FBI, relegated to HR although my guess his days are numbered with the FBI.

Stop making claims, only to be proven wrong, and the try and go back and move the goal post. You are the one who keeps claiming he was not fired by Mueller when in fact he was. Now you change it to fired from the FBI.

Speaking of being dishonest..



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 10:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

No you ignore facts that dont support your agenda. Like constantly lying about there not being any more IG investigations, even though you were provided a list with links to the stories.



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 10:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

Case in point of you ignoring facts that dont fit your agenda.

Thank you for once again proving my point.



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 10:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

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.


He was removed for bias.



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 11:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
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.


That is because of bias and the interference from the executive level in that investigation. Unless you consider lying to the FBI agents, which the IG reported noted, allowing suspects in that investigation to act as Clinton's lawyer to allow them to shield info under attorney client privilege, not obtaining search warrants for critical material, not executing any warrants to obtain items from Clinton's home, Sally Yates saying no overt investigation into the Clinton Foundation, Comey changing the law to prevent Clinton from being charged, Strzok rewriting Comey's statement to remove the trigger words of gross negligence, Comey lying about prosecuting that crime, Comeys own use of a private email account, FBI agent Kadzik sending email to Podeasta keeping him informed aof the investigation, its progresss and what was going on in violation of law and FBI procedure, Comney and others using 1 email account so they could write an email, not send it so its pushed into the draft bin so others could then log on and read it then deleted it when people were done with it to prevent a electronic trail from being created, the DOJ giveing everyone immunity to prevent prosecution, even though the people who got immunity lied, negating the immunity agreements..

I can keep going but something tells me you and others arent serious about what the FBI/DOJ did, in a biased manner, to protect Clinton while trying to prevent Trump from becoming President and finally what they did to make sure he was impeached.



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 11:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
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.


Feel free to link us to that info because that is not what the IG report, nor other evidence outside of the IG, shows.



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 11:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: BlueAjah

You can assume or dont. The interpretation is entirely up to you.
But the results of this report arent. It says they investigated documentation and interviewed 100s of people before they came to the conclusion they did.
It's really just your problem you don't believe it.
And you only don't believe it because it didn't hang Hillary.


For the love of God read the entire report. What you are claiming is not in the report.



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 11:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: UKTruth

I am not incorrect; you, however, seem to be intentionally attempting to mislead.

We are discussing the OIG report about the Midyear Investigation, i.e. the Cliton Email Server investigation.

In that report, the issue of anti-Trump bias on the part of two agents, Strzok and Page, is discussed.

The report did state that there was the appearance of a "willingness to take action," but didn't find any such actions taken by Strzok (or Page).

Please, cite something from the report that demonstrates these allged actions, as I and others have made numerous citations that prove the exact opposite.


No you would be incorrect. The bias against Trump is noted in the report and specifically calls out how the FBI was willfully trying to hurt Trump.



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 11:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UKTruth

The report wasn't about trump. Why would they mention that?


Because of the text messages found that target Trump.



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 11:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Not even close.. but you keep pushing that false hood.



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 11:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra


What are you hoping to accomplish with these cynics, Xcathdra?



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 11:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UKTruth

The report wasn't about trump. Why would they mention that?


OIG Report

Page XII of the executive summary -

We were deeply troubled by text messages exchanged between Strzok and Page that potentially indicated or created the appearance that investigative decisions were impacted by bias or improper considerations. Most of the text messages raising such questions pertained to the Russia investigation, which was not a part of this review.

Nonetheless, when one senior FBI official, Strzok, who was helping to lead the Russia investigation at the time, conveys in a text message to another senior FBI official, Page, “No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it” in response to her question “[Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!”, it 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.

This is antithetical to the core values of the FBI and the Department of Justice.We do not question that the FBI employees who sent these messages are entitled to their own political views. However, we believe using FBI devices to send the
messages discussed in Chapter Twelve—particularly the messages that intermix work-related discussions with political commentary—potentially implicate provisions in the FBI’s Offense Code and Penalty Guidelines. At a minimum, we found that the employees’ use of FBI systems and devices to send the identified messages demonstrated extremely poor judgment and a gross lack of professionalism. We therefore refer this information to the FBI for its handling and consideration of whether the messages sent by the five employees listed above violated the FBI’s Offense Code of Conduct.



The executive summary alone highlights all the bias.

There was noted bias against Trump by these people and you and others trying to spin it by claiming it says no bias is disingenuous and a lie because it was not referencing their actions towards Trump in that assessment. They were biased when it came to Trump, as the OIG report notes and that you and others intentionally ignore.

Strzok -Fired by Mueller from the SC.
Page - fired by the DOJ (given a choice of letters).
edit on 16-6-2018 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 11:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Xcathdra


What are you hoping to accomplish with these cynics, Xcathdra?


To prevent them from getting away with intentionally misleading people about the facts involved.

The truth matters.



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 11:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

No one here has claimed that there was no bias on the part of Strzok and Page. That is an absurd lie.

Please quote me saying otherwise if you can.

Stop yourself for a moment and think about these continual ridiculous attempts to lie about a) the IGs report and b) what I have stated clearly and openly.

You can't believe that anyone except Trump zealots arebdeluded enough to believe it.
edit on 16-6-2018 by Gryphon66 because: Notef




top topics



 
32
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join