Skip to comments.Context: Strzok bias text used in report as example; under review in the Russia report?
Posted on 06/14/2018 12:47:41 PM PDT by Bigtigermike
IG reports that the disturbing bias texts were used to investigate if there was bias in Hillary (Midyear) case. While they couldnt find evidence bias in the Hillary case based on those texts, most of them are related to the Russian investigation which wasnt REVIEWED in this particular matter which deals with the Hillary email scandal
In particular, we were concerned about text messages exchanged by FBI Deputy Assistant Director Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, Special Counsel to the Deputy Director, that potentially indicated or created the appearance that investigative decisions were impacted by bias or improper considerations.
As we describe in Chapter Twelve of our report, most of the text messages raising such questions pertained to the Russia investigation, which was not a part of this review.
Nonetheless, the suggestion in certain Russia- related text messages in August 2016 that Strzok might be willing to take official action to impact presidential candidate Trumps electoral prospects caused us to question the earlier Midyear investigative decisions in which Strzok was involved, and whether he took specific actions in the Midyear investigation based on his political views.
As we describe Chapter Five of our report, we found that Strzok was not the sole decisionmaker for any of the specific Midyear investigative decisions we examined in that chapter.
There were clearly tensions and disagreements in a number of important areas between Midyear agents and prosecutors. However, we did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that improper considerations, including political bias, directly affected the specific investigative decisions we reviewed in Chapter Five, or that the justifications offered for these decisions were pretextual.
Nonetheless, these messages cast a cloud over the FBIs handling of the Midyear investigation and the investigations credibility. But our review did not find evidence to connect the political views expressed in these messages to the specific investigative decisions that we reviewed;
Sure it will.
It was a whitewash. Strzok and Page discussed going from an investigation that didn’t matter (Hillary email) to one that did (Trump Russia). Bias can take more than direct opposition. Bias can also take the form of indifference, and that clearly was the case with Hillary.
How many years will that take? It was a total whitewash.
Until the Russia report shows to be yet another whitewash.
They make up the rules as they go along! Kills time and accomplishes nothing.
It’s a whitewash of the Hillary investigation but the information they weren’t able to cover up undermines Mueller’s case against Trump.
Lisa Page looks like a horses azz, same teeth.
The IG should have made criminal referrals—if they do not it was a whitewash.
In light of those FBI text in the #3 redacted report, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck.......ITIS A DUCK!
Political bias, evident.
From what I’m seeing so far, it’s a small win for Trump. The report helps to clip the Mueller report by dirtying up the FBI & basically wipes out obstruction of justice concerning the firing of Comey.
This IG report looks almost inconsequential at first glance, but when you read the details you find all kinds of red flags all over it that directly relate to OTHER ongoing legal matters.
I'm sure the lawyers for Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort, and Concord Management are going to be all over this thing.
Those lawyers need to seek civil damages against any FBI official who showed bias against them.
I'm not a lawyer, but I think it has to be more than just "bias." They have to demonstrate that an FBI official actually engaged in professional misconduct and/or criminal activity. I honestly don't think that will be difficult to prove. In fact, I suspect Mueller has delayed Flynn's sentencing at least twice since January because he knows damn well how the case is going to end.
Agreed—they have to engage is some overt act—of course the whole Russia investigation was as phony as a three dollar bill—so pursuing it looks like one big overt act to me.
In addition, Hillary Clinton sycophants (meaning virtually everyone in the Democrat Party and Propaganda Media) lamely and ireelevantly assert that Hillary didn't intend to break the law—which is not even a requirement of the Statute. This is a shining example or the double standard which Establishment elites routinely enjoy, and it's the precise reason why a yuge majority of the American people want—first and foremost—to Drain the God d-mn Swamp!
There's also Loretta Lynch's insistence on calling this a "matter" instead of a criminal "investigation", not to mention her amazingly "coincidental" Tarmac meeting with Bill Clinton to discuss grandchildren and such—which doesn't come anywhere close to passing the "smell test" for any objective individual.
If there's any Justice in this country, the Hillary email investigation will be re-opened, and she'll be convicted of breaking a law which exists to protect our national defense, and then they will "lock her up".
Anything less than an unbiased investigation of this particular malfeasance by Hillary Clinton (while serving as Secretary of State, no less) will be extremely disappointing—and a discouraging (even devastating) sign that the Swamp will not be Drained—ever...
The entire DOJ is too corrupt and biased to investigate anyone or anything that comes out of the IG report. Americans will have no confidence in anything they do on these matters, moving forward.
We need a Special Counsel. Period.
Melt the phones!!!!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.