Could care less about what either of those two think.

If people would allow the IG report to "speak for itself" neither Barr or Durham would need to comment on it. Barr's comments were less about the actual IG report than trying to rein in absolutely ridiculous overreading of it and the insane and incorrect "conclusions" being drawn from it.

People are taking the IG report as the be-all-end-all conclusion about the "investigation of the Russia investigation" and a completely false narrative is emerging from that (which you have completely bought into). That's what Barr is rebutting, NOT the IG report . . . The report says all it COULD say; you are the one ignoring that fact and representing it saying things it does not say.

All Barr and Durham are saying is the IG's subordinate, limited investigation is NOT conclusive.

Barr said that the IG's purview was limited, he could only look at procedures and process within the DOJ and could only question people who were working at DOJ at the time of questioning.

Horowitz could not compel testimony or threaten charges . . . all he could do is ask a question and unless he independently knew of direct conflicting information, he registered that answer as the truth / fact and he was duty bound to report that answer as the truth / fact -- and those answers are what comprises his report . . . IOW, he is only relying on people's word.

That's plainly evident in Horowitz repeatedly saying he found no evidence of bias; people told him that did not act with bias and Horowitz had to accept that at face value and include that in his report, which is why he just said he DID NOT make an actual "finding" that there was no bias. He could not report that there was bias because nobody admitted they acted with bias was or told him there was bias.

Given your continued and evolving mischaracterizations of the report, your statement that we need to "let the report speak for itself" would be funny if it weren't so disingenuous which is why you are only deserving of ridicule.


.

At this Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Dianne Feinstein gets IG Michael Horowitz to confirm that there were numerous text messages between FBI agents who were pro-trump as well.

You'd have thought the FBI was one big ole' Hillary party!

The IG report makes clear the FBI took steps -- detrimental to the investigation -- to keep things quiet so as not to tilt election scales.

But Comey went public on Clinton. Twice.

The investigation into FBI leaks to Giuliani ahead of the 2016 investigation has taken longer that the time it took to complete both the Mueller investigation & the Ukraine hearings leading to articles of impeachment. According to the IG, the Giuliani investigation is ongoing.
Why is Barr sitting on that?

Horowitz remains resolute that the conspiracy theories are groundless. He does not, however, deliver a clean bill of health to the FBI either in the FISA process or, we now learn, in leaking anti-Clinton information.

he went a lot further than not delivering a clean bull of health for the FISA applications. He said no one who touched FISA was vindicated, and that they uncovered “serious problems” with how the FBI suspended Pages civil rights.

Only a select few, motivated by a desire to deny any facts that paint the left in any negative light, could
read that and say Horowitz fell
short of delivering a clean bill of health.

Falling short of the ideal is one thing. Multiple serious problems is something different.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

There is no conspiracy that he found, or any indication of one.
What was done affected both campaigns to some extent and the Clinton campaign prior to the election, thru Comey's statements and the NY office leaks, that both damaged Clinton's election opportunity.

But Floridaman needs to be able to remove Russian sanctions in order to pay his debt for the last election and make his down payment for this one.

Noise, yes I’m happy problems were found and hopefully they will be addressed. The race in 2016 and the current impeachment is about a candidate and now current president welcoming, encouraging and even attempting to use military aid as a bargaining chip in helping him in our elections. Ignore the noise the issue is foreign interference in our elections.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

he found zero evidence of a
politically motivated conspiracy. He did find a large number of serious and basic errors in the FBIs attempt to spy on the Trump campaign. Maybe it was politically motivated, maybe the FBI always made serious and fundamental
mistakes, neither you nor i know which is the case. What we do know, is that according to Horowitz, serious and fundamental
mistakes were made when asking to suspend the civil
rights of an american citizen.

Does that concern you?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Was there a warrant of some sort concocted to investigate the Clinton campaign? Was there an investigation into the Clinton campaign's ties to Russia started by some illegal counter-intelligent effort based on the connection with the foreign Steele dossier which depended on Russian sources?

Did the IG report say there was "illegal counter-intelligence"?

In questioning by Graham, Horowitz let slip that phrase.

I'll have to see if I can find that.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

What investigation before the election did the Obama administration and the FBI keep secret and which one was both leaked and spoken of in public?

Who won the 2016 election?

Who's still running against their 2016 opponent in every campaign rally?

You tried to insert the notion that HRC was equally hurt by what the IG found. That is not true. Nor was there any attempt to investigate her even though there was, in the eyes of "many people" abundant reason to do so.

Fact is, the IG report, in terms of its scope and capability, was very damning of what was done in order to investigate the Trump campaign. Even though you try to minimize it. As Barr correctly said, the flimsiest of evidence was used, and continued to be used long after the FBI knew that the surveillance of Carter Page and the Steele dossier were bogus.

Fact is Barr and Durham met with the IG ahead of the release and they offered nothing to change the findings, siding with Barr doesn’t change anything. No deep state. No coup. Interference by foreign powers continues at Trumps request, through his personal attorney, but let’s focus on the past it’s so much more important than the security of the elections.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Fact is there was no need to change the facts of the investigation. The only disagreement that Barr and Durham offered was in the notion that there was no evidence of political bias. Barr explained that Horowitz did not have the legal authority to sufficiently explore that issue. Horowitz could only ask questions and accept the answers. He did not have the power to subpoena nor to compel nor to go beyond those working in the DOJ.

As far as the "facts" of the investigation goes, Barr and Durham accepted them, Horowitz's suggestion that there was no political bias is not a factual statement that there was none, but merely a statement that he did not find it. As Barr said, he did not have the tools available to determine it. But that Durham does have the ability to explore the whole issue of criminality well beyond what Horowitz had. And that the Durham investigation will be more thorough and probative of criminality.

And the fact is that Horowitz said that no one involved was exonerated.

does anyone have any clue when Durham will release his report?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Barr hinted that it might be early to mid next summer. But who knows.

thanks. long time.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

When it’s politically expedient
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

no rush....democraps are destroying themselves and turnng trump into a folk hero...it's immense fun to watch...looking forward to Comey, McCabe, Brennan, Clapper, Strozk, Page...maybe even Obama....all going to jail....:hihi: