OIG Report Released: Full text

originally posted by: Xcathdra

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.

That's noble. There are more ATS visitors, than there are active members. You prove your statements, but the cynics never try to prove theirs. You're definitely a voice of truth, who helps far more people than you realize.

a reply to: carewemust

Noble?

I just realized that you two think you're playing to an audience ...

How sad. Almost as sad as the continual attempts to overtly lie.

a reply to: Gryphon66



You don't think there are lurkers reading these threads?

I'm sure site admin knows exactly how much traffic these threads generate and I can't fathom that there aren't at least a few folks who come here to read but never bother to join. And that doesn't count the members who just read and hardly, if ever post.

You've been around for a while and I thought knew better.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Of course there are lurkers reading the threads ... has everyone lost the ability to read?

What did I say above? "Playing to an audience"?

There are some members here who truly believe that they have a "silent majority" that hang on their every word ... as evinced by statements like the one I replied to.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Gryphon66

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

Prove it.

Here's my evidence:

The FBI is “Trumplandia,” according to an agent who spoke anonymously to The Guardian newspaper. In a report published Thursday, multiple sources within the FBI say that deep antipathy toward Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton and anger that FBI Director James Comey did not bring charges against her this summer have motivated leaks that could damage her presidential campaign. One agent told The Guardian that many at the bureau view Clinton as the “antichrist” and are supportive of Trump. “That’s the reason why they’re leaking is they’re pro-Trump,” the FBI agent told The Guardian.

Agent: FBI Is Trumplandia The Hill 11/03/16

The typical Federal Bureau of Investigation special agent is white, male, and middle-aged, often with a military background — in short, drawn from the segment of the U.S. population most likely to support GOP nominee Donald Trump. That demographic reality explains much of the heat FBI Director James Comey is taking from his own work force at the moment for his handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation and inquiries into the Clinton Foundation. Days before the presidential election, FBI finds itself at the center of a political maelstrom, with Comey being sharply criticized by Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton and even President Barack Obama, who’ve faulted the FBI director for going public with word of new evidence in the Clinton email probe. That furor has exposed dissension in the FBI’s ranks, prompting a flurry of leaks about alleged efforts to impede the Clinton-related inquiries and exposing lingering anger among agents about Comey’s July decision not to recommend any charges in the email probe. Incendiary, politically charged remarks from former FBI officials — with one prominent ex-FBI leader publicly calling the Clintons a “crime family” — are also endangering the law enforcement agency’s reputation for sober, nonpartisan investigation.

The FBI Looks Like Trump's America - Politico November 4, 2016

Need more?

Let's see some of that amazing backup your cronies were swooning over bud.

a reply to: Gryphon66

An article from before the election - check.

Got anything that actually supports your position?

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: carewemust

Noble?

I just realized that you two think you're playing to an audience ...

How sad. Almost as sad as the continual attempts to overtly lie.

You wouldn't know because you don't have an audience it appears to me. Just telling it like it is. It's well known that there are a lot of lurkers and, further, you should probably become familiar with the term "the silent majority."

The brighter thinkers here aren't actually responding to you personally, generally speaking, rather they are deconstructing yours and other's rhetorical & disingenuous spin for those who are trying to understand the larger picture in an integrated way.

It's actually pretty easy 'cause logic and all that and they, unlike you, don't have seriously twisted panties interfering with their credibility.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Gryphon66

An article from before the election - check.

Got anything that actually supports your position?

What time period was the Clinton Email Investigation again? Oh that's right summer and fall 2016.

Can you actually read? If so, you can read the sources I provided you. They back up my claims VERBATUM.

Of course, you're not going to do that because the point of your posts here is not in the truth, but is a bizarre attempt to discredit me and others here who are stating exactly what the IG report says.

Because apparently you think that the folks reading these posts are too dumb to notice your blatant dishonesty.

a reply to: The GUT

And how do you pretend to know who "has an audience?"

Is it more of those amazing instincts?

Any brighter thinker here isn't bothering to read these trolling threads that get dredged up out of the mud over and over.

I'm sure you consider yourself bright though ... so please ... why don't you prove something by actually citing a reference rather than taking a picture of a piece of paper that you've marked up and claiming that says something, eh?

You and yours here are promoting an agenda ... an absurd agenda that flies in the face of the facts both of this recent IG report and any other realistic, concrete and verifiable relation of factual information.

Take a look at what I'm sure you think was crafted as a takedown of my posts ... you're simply spewing the childish ad hominem that zealots like yourself consider sound reasoning. You've said nothing provable much less interesting.

The really funny thing here is that you think that the folks who are reading here buy into that schtick, when really, I imagine, they're bored to tears with the innate pomposity that your posts regularly bestow.

Now, have we given our opinions of each others posts sufficiently? Why don't you take a crack at actually discussing the facts for a change rather than sniffing your own verbal flattulence?

The Fuse is getting shorter and shorter and shorter.

💣🔨

a reply to: xuenchen

No seriously ...

I want you to do something for me. Go back to the actual valid argument you’ve made here and develop it ...

Remember? Here’s your prompt ... “it wasn’t what Strzok did but what he didn’t do that matters ...”

I only ask because I’d like to see at least one valid argument here from your “side” ...

a reply to: Gryphon66

All prior to the special counsel however the FBI started the Trump Russia bs before Comey was fired. It started before the election. Remember back on Oct 31st 2016 when Clinton tweeted out the Trump Russia collusion bs? Remember crossfire hurricane? The dossier? Carter page FISA abuse, Trump Fisa abuse, the fact the FBI used a counter intelligence excuse to spy on Trump and associates because they didnt have any evidence for a standard investigation.

The bs fit people threw when Comey was fired, with the support of Rosenstein, only to have Rosenstein appoint a special counsel to investigate obstruction for that termination even though the constitution says its not.

The FBI was biased against Trump. The DOJ was biased against Trump. The OIG report supports that with further evidence that was hidden from the Congressional committees, namely complete text messages, witnesses etc.

What you posted does not support your agenda. It actually supports the points you are trying to ignore / play down.

a reply to: Gryphon66

But that is exactly what trump wants them to do. His idea is that if they don't trust the FBI then they won't believe the final findings of Robert Mueller.
He doesn't care that if they don't trust the FBI many criminals may never be brought to justice.
He doesn't care that he's destroying the justice system as long as it works for him.
They don't see the dishonesty or the lies. They only see what he allows them to see.

a reply to: Xcathdra

The FBI is charged with investigating the domestic illicit actions of foreign powers. Indeed, the FBI has been monitoring Russian and other foreign interference in our elections for a long time. That's their job.

Do you remember when President Obama called Putin on the Red Phone on October 31 2016 and told him to knock it off or there would be consequences? (Source)

Do you remember that it is and has been an established fact that Russia by various means interfered in our election? The Intelligence community has made this statement repeatedly and the FBI is a part of that community.

All FISA warrants have been investigated and stand. The Peegate Dossier was started by Republicans, if you remember correctly.

So, you and others can do all you can to obfuscate the facts but it's not going to work.

There is no indication that "the FBI" as a whole was biased against Mr. Trump. The IG report addresses the bias of two individuals Strzok and Page.

The text messages between Strzok and Page have been known about by all (including Congress) since December 2017. Why do you and others keep trying to pretend that the IG report is the first we've known about this??? Remember, you're crowing about Mueller REMOVING Strzok from his investigation. THIS WAS NOT REVEALED FOR THE FIRST TIME IN THE IG REPORT.

Indeed, what I have quoted from the report stands clear. I'm content to let folks read the facts and get their own understanding.

Now, kindly stop wasting time accusing me and others of a) lying b) not reading c) repeating MSN and get back to arguing your actual points. These are strategies that you and others use repeatedly to try to obscure the facts and it's just not working.

You're a decent debater when you're not trying so hard to obfuscate. Stick to the facts and redeem yourself.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Gryphon66

But that is exactly what trump wants them to do. His idea is that if they don't trust the FBI then they won't believe the final findings of Robert Mueller.
He doesn't care that if they don't trust the FBI many criminals may never be brought to justice.
He doesn't care that he's destroying the justice system as long as it works for him.
They don't see the dishonesty or the lies. They only see what he allows them to see.

Oh, I know Silly. They are just mimicking what they've seen ... which is the serious point that really keeps me here arguing for the facts.

These folks are willing to tear down the FBI, a cornerstone of our national defense, just to provide any cover they can for Trump. They're willing to make ridiculous statements, lie about something they've just quoted, and verge on forum gang tactics ... ANYTHING to, in their minds, diminsh any vector that threatens their hero.

They've done it to you, they've done it to me, they've done it to others ... and they'll keep doing it.

They include a long quote from the source ... and then make a statement that is directly opposite in meaning.

They make a series of true statements that are relatively unimportant, and then insert the Big Lie.

I've already addressed the constant accusations of lying, media shilling and illiteracy.

We see the same people do the same things here in every thread.

It will not stand.

a reply to: UKTruth

Trump is not the subject of the report. He is mentioned as he applies to the overall story but
He is an accessory to the report because he was running at the time.
I know HE wants to make everything about him.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UKTruth

Trump is not the subject of the report. He is mentioned as he applies to the overall story but
He is an accessory to the report because he was running at the time.
I know HE wants to make everything about him.

You will notice that they go back and forth. It's okay to mention Trump and the IG report when it's convenient to their narrative, and then turn about and claim we're lying about it.

LOL ... it's ludicrously shallow reasoning.

a reply to: Gryphon66

1 - There is no red phone.
2 - Even though he told Putin to knock it off he failed to act for 2 years, even though he new russia was doing this.
3 - No FISA warrants have not been investigated.
4 - The IG reports is clear that they found no bias with regards to the investigation into Clinton. The IG report also makes it clear there was a bias against Trump, noting the desire by some agents to wanting to willfully harm Trump.
5 - No the text messages in the IG report were withheld from Congressional oversight. Strzoks response to page was never included in the ones turned over to the Congressional committees yet interestingly the text message prior to and just after that one text were turned over.

IG 2.0 could be even worse for FBI as feds brace for Trump-spying probe

The country is still digesting Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s scathing report on the FBI and the DOJ’s handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation, but more bombshells could be looming from the same team of investigators.

Horowitz, a former federal prosecutor, announced in March that he is probing allegations of government surveillance abuse, in light of memos released on Capitol Hill about FBI and DOJ efforts to obtain FISA warrants to surveil Trump campaign adviser Carter Page as part of its Russia investigation.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions has also said U.S. Attorney John Huber is investigating claims of FBI and DOJ misconduct related to these actions, noting that Huber would be “conducting his work from outside the Washington D.C. area and “in cooperation” with Horowitz.

Click link for article (posted one day ago)

He is starting his investigation into the FBI/DOJ actions with regards to the Trump investigation, up to and including the FISA abuses that occurred.

Now, kindly stop posting false / misleading information while making claims, like FISA issues being resolved, that arent true nor supported by fact.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UKTruth

Trump is not the subject of the report. He is mentioned as he applies to the overall story but
He is an accessory to the report because he was running at the time.
I know HE wants to make everything about him.

He is listed in the report because of the biased text messages between Strzok (FBI) and Page (DOJ) and stopping Trump from being President.

As I pointed out the IG is starting his next investigation, announced in March, dealing with the investigation by the FBI/DOJ into Trump, including FISA abuses and spying on Trumps campaign.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UKTruth

Trump is not the subject of the report. He is mentioned as he applies to the overall story but
He is an accessory to the report because he was running at the time.
I know HE wants to make everything about him.

You will notice that they go back and forth. It's okay to mention Trump and the IG report when it's convenient to their narrative, and then turn about and claim we're lying about it.

LOL ... it's ludicrously shallow reasoning.

Well, you guys are.


The IG report found -
No bias towards Clinton (which is in fact bias in her favor).
Bias was found towards Trump.

You 2 keep claiming they showed no bias against Trump.

You both would be wrong.