FBI Agent Peter Strzok escorted out of FBI headquarters today

a reply to: Xcathdra

A bit of history ...there is always a bit of history of where these guys come from that make you go mmmm .

a reply to: Gryphon66

Actually, in the Oversight Hearing, Horowitz specifically said that he did NOT say there was no bias in the investigation. He said there was not bias on the part of the prosecutors.

If the investigators withheld or changed information, then the prosecutors would not have been making a valid decision.

a reply to: BlueAjah

Did Horowitz say that any evidence had been found of bad or incomplete information provided to the prosecutors?

This investigation by the IG is complete. There is no statement that the investigation was compromised in fact the IG report states the opposite.

Why do you think the Republican side show kept demanding that they change the conclusion in the report?

a reply to: Xcathdra

That's not what the IG said in the report.

THAT is what Republicans in Congress are desperate to spin up.

You don't have to "make it by simpler" man ... The facts don't agree with your claims which mirror Republican talking points.

It's not that I don't understand you ... I'm saying that your interpretation is incorrect.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: BlueAjah

Did Horowitz say that any evidence had been found of bad or incomplete information provided to the prosecutors?

This investigation by the IG is complete. There is no statement that the investigation was compromised in fact the IG report states the opposite.

Why do you think the Republican side show kept demanding that they change the conclusion in the report?

As they explained, because the facts of the report do not match the conclusions.
As Horowitz explained, while he was being very careful with his wording, he did not see definite proof, but that does not mean that bias did not affect the work.
And - there is information that more information was provided since then to Horowitz, that he was misled, and information was withheld from him.

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

The report did not dispute the outcome of the FBI investigation into Clinton's server.

a reply to: BlueAjah

Your paraphrase is noted.

The fact is IG Horowitz released the report into Clinton emails, came to Congress to answer questions, and stood by the conclusion that the investigation had not been compromised.

Again, why do you think Gowdy, Graham and the rest kept telling him that the conclusion should be changed.

The reason for that is more than obvious, speaking of political bias.

a reply to: rickymouse

He was being sarcastic. He gave the dates for those laws. I think the point you're not getting is... Is this something new? And as was pointed out... Were people prosecuted for it?
And what is the answer to that? Very few...

a reply to: the2ofusr1

a reply to: Sillyolme

Horowitz revealed in the hearings that there are continuing investigations, including into the individuals involved.
This is not over. Some people may be charged with crimes.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Well it is and it was reaffirmed at the hearing yesterday when he said it again.

BlueAjah laid it out in her post.

a reply to: BlueAjah

The Steele dossier, as his stack of notes has come to be known, was assembled by Christopher Steele during his investigation of trump dealings in Russia.
It was not made up by people living here. It has not been debunked. Not one bit.

a reply to: Gryphon66

So you are saying you know better than the man who ran the OIG investigation and that he was lying in his report and in his testimony to Congress?

a reply to: Xcathdra

Yeah. Ummm.
I don't think that's what he's saying at all.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Thanks for your opinion (again).

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: BlueAjah

The Steele dossier, as his stack of notes has come to be known, was assembled by Christopher Steele during his investigation of trump dealings in Russia.
It was not made up by people living here. It has not been debunked. Not one bit.

It has never been verified and by using it to obtain FISA warrants without following the woods protocol made its use illegal.

Considering the IG has an investigation into that topic we should get some answers. The IG also opened an investigation into the altered 302's in the Russia investigation AND now the Clinton investigation.

a reply to: Xcathdra

No, I'm not saying that as you well know.

I'm saying that your opinion is incorrect.

Come on i want the video.
So far there's no report he's been fired or this for that matter.
The only place I could find with this is fox or links back to fox.
Probably went to lunch with other agents and that became escorted out. Lol

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Xcathdra

Thanks for your opinion (again).

It is not my opinion so you can stop with the deflection.

It was Horowitz conclusion.

Here -


If you care about facts you will watch it and listen. If you dont care you will continue to ignore facts that dont support your agenda while making claims that have since been debunked by the man who wrote the report.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Xcathdra

No, I'm not saying that as you well know.

I'm saying that your opinion is incorrect.

Well its not my opinion. It is Horowitz conclusion. See link above