OIG Report Released: Full text

a reply to: Xcathdra

He wasn't fired he was moved.

I can do this all day baby doll.

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: Sillyolme

No matter what you think about Trump, doesn't it concern you at all that members of FBI and DOJ use their powerful positions to affect the outcome of a presidential election?

Can you prove that anyone, especially Strzok/Page, used their "powerful positions" to affect the outcome of a Presidential election?

We keep asking for that proof but you don't seem to be able to provide it ... why?

a reply to: Sillyolme

Don't be too sure about that. Huber was appointed by Sessions to look into some things, including the FBI, the Clinton Foundation, and the Clinton emails. He is working outside of DC so he will hopefully not be affected by pressures.

And unlike Horowitz, Huber can prosecute.

a reply to: Gryphon66

See the other thread
www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: Gryphon66
1. LOL ... another half-truth:

Moscow-Washington Hotline

Although in popular culture known as the "red telephone", the hotline was never a telephone line, and no red phones were used.

Yeah there was no red phone - like I said and like your source says.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
2. So there was Russian interference in the election?

Yes. Russia attempted to interfere. There was NOT Russia-Trump collusion. The left seems to get confused on this point.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
3. If FISA warrants haven't been investigated, then how can you claim they're fake?

Stop with the lies. I never claimed they were fake. I said, numerous times now in multiple threads, that the FBI, by omitting the source of the dossier / info and who paid for it in the FISA warrant application they committed a fraud on the court. Secondly I have said the FBI/DOJ violated the Woods protocol, which requires every single fact used in a FISA warrant application against a US citizen to be verified before it can be used. The dossier, which was used in the FISA warrant application, was not verified.

Hence the warrants are invalid and anything gleaned from those warrants are fruit of the poisonous tree.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
I'm going to quote you on the next one:

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Gryphon66

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.

Here you plainly admit that the bias that was revealed on the part of Strzok/Page didn't affect the Clinton Investigation.

Strzok/Page's texts did show bias. But I'll ask the question you won't answer again: what did they do to "hurt" Trump?

Correct the report claims there was no bias in the Clinton investigation by these people. The very same people who covered her email server, the anothy weiner emails and the fact they also contained classified info from Clinton etc. As I stated the bias was in her favor and meets the definition of obstruction of justice in that Clinton investigation.

How does it hurt Trump? Wow you really dont get it. Strzok was on the original Russia investigation against Trump before Comey was fired. He was then moved to the Mueller SC which was investigating Trump-Russia collusion. Strzok was one of the agents who interviewed Flynn and the 302's said he didnty lie. Comey told Congress Flynn didnt lie. All the FISA warrants against Trump campaign were obtained illegally thru the violations I already laid out. The investigation into him does not meet the SC statute. The President cant obstruct justice. Yet he is udner investigation for all of these things because people at the FBI/DOJ are biased agaisnt him and stated clearly they wil do what it takes to ensure he is not elected / stay in office if he is.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
5. I've quoted a news report from DECEMBER 2017 that is literally discussing the texts from Strzok/Page! That also quotes a REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMAN referring to these texts! Good god man!

Why don't you name your source? Fox News?

The “we’ll stop it” text: the IG report’s most inflammatory finding, explained

The more sophisticated argument you’re hearing from Trump allies, including some members of Congress, is that the “we’ll stop” text should have been disclosed earlier. The text preceding it, Page’s question about Trump’s chances, was published in a Senate Homeland Security Committee report earlier this year — yet Strzok’s response was somehow omitted. Congressional Republicans are wondering if it was omitted intentionally:

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Well, at least we all know where you're getting your arguments from.

The OIG report.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
You brought up the FISA warrants, I corrected you. /shrug

No you actually lied by claiming they were investigated and found to be ok even though I stated that the IG is investigating those and the probe into Trump by the FBI/DOJ. I even provided a link that you ignored.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Nope, I'm not going to stop demonstrating the truth. Now, get to the topic and stop the crap about me.

When you start telling the truth let us know. Until then we will continue correcting your misinformation.

Wrong post. Sorry.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Xcathdra

He wasn't fired he was moved.

I can do this all day baby doll.

and you =will still be wrong.

Does Strzok still work for Mueller and the special counsel? Nope because Mueller fired him and sent him back to the FBI, who in turn sent him to HR.

Do you not understand the difference between the FBI and Special Counsel and the fact they are separate entities?

a reply to: Sillyolme

???
I was replying to your post that seemed to imply that Aallanon was not welcome to join the conversation.

a reply to: BlueAjah

Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced on Thursday that Utah's top federal prosecutor, John Huber, has been examining a cluster of Republican-driven accusations against the FBI and has decided that no second special counsel is needed -- at least for now.

Source CNN ... Hint, Sessions letter to Congress is also linked

a reply to: BlueAjah

That never happened. That's where you major mistake is.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Xcathdra

He wasn't fired he was moved.

I can do this all day baby doll.

and you =will still be wrong.

Does Strzok still work for Mueller and the special counsel? Nope because Mueller fired him and sent him back to the FBI, who in turn sent him to HR.

Do you not understand the difference between the FBI and Special Counsel and the fact they are separate entities?

Do you not understand that Strzok has been employed by the FBI all along, that he joined the Mueller Investigation as an FBI agent???

a reply to: Gryphon66

True but it's also clear for this conversation that that didn't effect the outcome of the investigation.
It is very likely that his actions effected the outcome of the election.
Seems Comey helped trump a good deal. He should be getting flowers and candy from him.

a reply to: Gryphon66

No special council means nothing. The prosecutor does not need a special council to take action.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: BlueAjah

That never happened. That's where you major mistake is.

Here's the fallacious connection they're trying to make Silly:

Strzok/Page showed clear bias against Trump. They could both be called "senior officials at the FBI."

Then, they mention Comey (also a "senior official"), whose out-of-the-ordinary actions have been said to have affected Clinton's campaign.

Then, they try to claim that because Strzok/Page were biased against Trump, and Comey's actions were possibly damaging to Clinton ... that "Presidential Elections were Compromised by Senior Officials at the FBI."

LOL ... they're sneaky but not that great at it.

It took forty seconds for my last post to go through.
What is going on with this site???

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: BlueAjah

Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced on Thursday that Utah's top federal prosecutor, John Huber, has been examining a cluster of Republican-driven accusations against the FBI and has decided that no second special counsel is needed -- at least for now.

Source CNN ... Hint, Sessions letter to Congress is also linked

Huber is not a special counsel . He is a US attorney assigned to Utah and was assigned to the OIG to assist his work. Trying to cloud the two in hopes people dont know there is a difference is just sad.

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: Gryphon66

No special council means nothing. The prosecutor does not need a special council to take action.

A true statement ... that has zero relevance to the conversation.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: BlueAjah

Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced on Thursday that Utah's top federal prosecutor, John Huber, has been examining a cluster of Republican-driven accusations against the FBI and has decided that no second special counsel is needed -- at least for now.

Source CNN ... Hint, Sessions letter to Congress is also linked

Huber is not a special counsel . He is a US attorney assigned to Utah and was assigned to the OIG to assist his work. Trying to cloud the two in hopes people dont know there is a difference is just sad.

NO one has claimed that Huber is a Special Counsel ... do try to keep up.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Xcathdra

He wasn't fired he was moved.

I can do this all day baby doll.

and you =will still be wrong.

Does Strzok still work for Mueller and the special counsel? Nope because Mueller fired him and sent him back to the FBI, who in turn sent him to HR.

Do you not understand the difference between the FBI and Special Counsel and the fact they are separate entities?

Do you not understand that Strzok has been employed by the FBI all along, that he joined the Mueller Investigation as an FBI agent???

So now you are going to play the same game? If you spent more time reading and understanding posts and less tiem running in circles you would see that is exactly what I have been saying. Another user cant seem to grasp the concept that Mueller fired Strzok from the SC and the FBI sent him to HR.

What part confuses you?

a reply to: Xcathdra

Care to point out the facts you think I'm ignoring.
Oh and make sure they are facts and not just your opinion.