Replies

I've only had time to quickly scan the executive summary, but Horowitz's statement in a couple of places is that his investigation found no testimonial or documentary evidence of political bias.

That, of course, means only that, of the various people to whom Horowitz spoke, no one flipped, and nothing incriminating was put on paper.

That leads to an extensive discussion of very significant "errors" and "omissions." Amazingly, all of these errors and omissions cut in one direction. All of them supported a course of action that, in retrospect, was illegitimate. But in the absence of explicit documentary or testimonial evidence, Horowitz would not want to conclude that the errors and omissions were coordinated or motivated by anything other than the purest of motives.

So: a coin is flipped 17 times, and comes up heads each time. But we would not want to draw any inferences from that. Errors do happen. In this case, a LOT of errors happened. All the errors were mutually reinforcing in a freakishly coincidental way. Nothing to see here. Move along.

If there was any question about the political bias of the FBI and CIA in this matter, there's one simple fact that answers the question definitively:

The FBI and CIA were investigating members of a U.S. presidential candidate about potential wrongdoing among people involved in his campaign, and they never notified the candidate about these people to warn him.

Great analogy. Such a ridiculous whitewash could only happen with bipartisan support. The FIBBERS know they have top cover from the GOP and produced this garbage.

There is also a loophole defense. There is no policy relating to spying on presidential campaigns, so nothing there to voiolate. IOW, this case is being viewed by Horowitz as no different from some crank call that some unknown dickweed might be a terrorist. Doesn;t take much to open that investigation and not apprise the target. Use that rule against a presidential campaign? No policy says otherwise.

. . . of the various people to whom Horowitz spoke, no one flipped, and nothing incriminating was put on paper.
That leads to an extensive discussion of very significant "errors" and "omissions." Amazingly, all of these errors and omissions cut in one direction. Horowitz would not want to conclude that the errors and omissions were coordinated or motivated by anything other than the purest of motives.

So: a coin is flipped 17 times, and comes up heads each time.

Bulls-eye.

Durham will surgically examine the results of flipping this two-headed coin and find the coin as bogus as the criminals using it.

The pattern and practice of overt criminal behavior.

No report required from U.S. attorney John Durham--just a set of criminal indictments to bust open the front pages of the world press.