What it wasn’t a witch hunt

[Jim in CT]

there was all kinds of reason not to use the Steele dossier. none of the news outlets believed it. i’m glad there was no evidence of political bias, but what other reason was there for the significant errors.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

there was all kinds of reason not to use the Steele dossier. none of the news outlets believed it. i’m glad there was no evidence of political bias, but what other reason was there for the significant errors.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Seems like the IG found more rigor should have been used considering the context of a presidential campaign, but these rules didn’t exist. The team followed existing rules. They did they’re job.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

Seems like the IG found more rigor should have been used considering the context of a presidential campaign, but these rules didn’t exist. The team followed existing rules. They did they’re job.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

They butchered their job
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Sea Dangles]

Originally Posted by spence

Seems like the IG found more rigor should have been used considering the context of a presidential campaign, but these rules didn’t exist. The team followed existing rules. They did they’re job.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Really Jeff?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles

Really Jeff?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

IG said everything was justified. You’ve got you binkie right?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

IG said everything was justified.


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Sea Dangles]

Originally Posted by spence

They did they’re job.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pathetic
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Seems like the IG found more rigor should have been used considering the context of a presidential campaign, but these rules didn’t exist. The team followed existing rules. They did they’re job.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

i think i more rigor should
have been used considering the context that Page is an american citizen. they did not follow existing rules, come on, the report says “serious mistakes.”.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[ReelinRod]

The NO BIAS! conclusion is amusing.


I think we will be amused watching Horowitz squirm, dissemble and wither on Wednesday trying to defend that NO BIAS! conclusion when pressed about so many deviations of procedure, Woods violations, purposeful omissions and outright deceptions -- all to obtain the Page FISA warrant by any means*.

The Demedia are celebrating the conclusion of NO BIAS! but they are setting themselves up again for exposure of their own bias, by simply not telling the entire story.

Their reporting and commentary is choreographed to instill a belief that the IG did a deep dive into everything, that Horowitz uncovered everything that could be discovered and the book can now be closed.

In actuality, Horowitz was very limited. This was an administrative inspection examining process and procedure. Horowitz was limited to questioning only personnel in the employ of the DOJ -- not being able to look outside the DOJ and with all the FBI and DOJ employees that have been fired or quit or retired, his investigative reach was rigidly constrained.

Horowitz had no grand jury powers, he had no subpoena powers to compel testimony, only of documents and no ability to indict anyone or even threaten charges. All he could do is suggest civil or administrative actions within the DOJ, or refer a person to the AG for prosecution after the report is published . . . Given his investigation is subordinate to the concurrent Durham investigation and Horowitz being required to turn over any evidence of criminal action, criminal referral is of no effect or benefit for Horowitz. All this means Horowitz had no leverage, no hammer to make people come clean.

Understand, if Horowitz uncovered actual criminal activity he could not put that in his report!

Anything considered criminal information had to be passed on to Durham. If he suspected a person committed a crime and/or knew they were under grand jury subpoena or if he knew the particulars of incriminating documents that he turned over, he could not put that in his report! -- perhaps that explains the very conspicuous absence of the infamous Strzok/Page "insurance policy" text?

For that reason, Horowitz's testimony on Wednesday will be interesting . . . The questions he won't be able to answer could be as informative as the ones he does answer.

The legal effect of these circumstances is what Barr's and Durham's statements are trying to warn the Demedia and the liberals about . . . problem is, they are too boisterous celebrating to hear, and too occupied denouncing Barr and Durham as being political to understand.



*The Carter Page FISA warrant was desperately needed because with the 18 month look-back and the two hop rule, it (and renewals) would allow the cover-up of thousands of illegal §702(16)(17) abuses of the NSA database in the summer / fall of 2016, into the election, transition and flowing right into the Mueller investigation.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by ReelinRod

The NO BIAS! conclusion is amusing.


I think we will be amused watching Horowitz squirm, dissemble and wither on Wednesday trying to defend that NO BIAS! conclusion when pressed about so many deviations of procedure, Woods violations, purposeful omissions and outright deceptions -- all to obtain the Page FISA warrant by any means*.

The Demedia are celebrating the conclusion of NO BIAS! but they are setting themselves up again for exposure of their own bias, by simply not telling the entire story.

Their reporting and commentary is choreographed to instill a belief that the IG did a deep dive into everything, that Horowitz uncovered everything that could be discovered and the book can now be closed.

In actuality, Horowitz was very limited. This was an administrative inspection examining process and procedure. Horowitz was limited to questioning only personnel in the employ of the DOJ -- not being able to look outside the DOJ and with all the FBI and DOJ employees that have been fired or quit or retired, his investigative reach was rigidly constrained.

Horowitz had no grand jury powers, he had no subpoena powers to compel testimony, only of documents and no ability to indict anyone or even threaten charges. All he could do is suggest civil or administrative actions within the DOJ, or refer a person to the AG for prosecution after the report is published . . . Given his investigation is subordinate to the concurrent Durham investigation and Horowitz being required to turn over any evidence of criminal action, criminal referral is of no effect or benefit for Horowitz. All this means Horowitz had no leverage, no hammer to make people come clean.

Understand, if Horowitz uncovered actual criminal activity he could not put that in his report!

Anything considered criminal information had to be passed on to Durham. If he suspected a person committed a crime and/or knew they were under grand jury subpoena or if he knew the particulars of incriminating documents that he turned over, he could not put that in his report! -- perhaps that explains the very conspicuous absence of the infamous Strzok/Page "insurance policy" text?

For that reason, Horowitz's testimony on Wednesday will be interesting . . . The questions he won't be able to answer could be as informative as the ones he does answer.

The legal effect of these circumstances is what Barr's and Durham's statements are trying to warn the Demedia and the liberals about . . . problem is, they are too boisterous celebrating to hear, and too occupied denouncing Barr and Durham as being political to understand.



*The Carter Page FISA warrant was desperately needed because with the 18 month look-back and the two hop rule, it (and renewals) would allow the cover-up of thousands of illegal §702(16)(17) abuses of the NSA database in the summer / fall of 2016, into the election, transition and flowing right into the Mueller investigation.

Funny typical response when the report fails to support yours and others fantasies..you responded just like bengiza, biden, emails..
With suggestion. Of cover up or the IG himself is bias..

Where is the smoking gun ,, maybe the IG used the standard the Republicans are using to defend Trump. He cant find. Anyone who spoke directly to anyone who directed or ask can you do us a favor conduct surveillance on Trumps campaign for political reasons
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Funny typical response when the report fails to support yours and others fantasies..


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

but it did.....

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Funny typical response when the report fails to support yours and others fantasies..you responded just like bengiza, biden, emails..
With suggestion. Of cover up or the IG himself is bias..

Where is the smoking gun ,, maybe the IG used the standard the Republicans are using to defend Trump. He cant find. Anyone who spoke directly to anyone who directed or ask can you do us a favor conduct surveillance on Trumps campaign for political reasons
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

the report highlighted many errors, some it labeled as “serious”. the DOJ ignored a lot of exculpatory information when applying for FISA warrants on an american citizen.

i’m not sure what the motive was to commit a large number of serious errors, if not political, in this case. Maybe the FBI is just that unprofessional all around.

Durham stuck his neck out to say he disagrees with parts of the reports. Let’s see what he says. But if I’m ok with the mueller report not finding Trump colluded with russia, than i should
be equally satisfied with the IG report finding no political bias.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

the report highlighted many errors, some it labeled as “serious”. the DOJ ignored a lot of exculpatory information when applying for FISA warrants on an american citizen.

i’m not sure what the motive was to commit a large number of serious errors, if not political, in this case. Maybe the FBI is just that unprofessional all around.

Durham stuck his neck out to say he disagrees with parts of the reports. Let’s see what he says. But if I’m ok with the mueller report not finding Trump colluded with russia, than i should
be equally satisfied with the IG report finding no political bias.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Here's a link to IG reports, all of them. https://oig.justice.gov/reports/all.htm
What the IGs do is find errors in procedure, that is the job they are to perform.
Read any executive summary, you will find that the issues are listed and they always are found and acted upon.
All jobs performed by humans have errors, misjudgements and miscalculations.
In my experience few people conspire to do their jobs incorrectly, perhaps it is common in your industry.