‘Viva Le Resistance’: Mueller Team Attorney Sent Anti-Trump Texts

That wasn’t a direct quote.

 

That's true. But I suspect that it's not over. Some say that had bias played no role, there would have been no dossier, no leaks, no wiretaps, no spies, and no Mueller investigation.

 

So, you made it up. I knew that.

 

Thank you, Nostradamus!
And I predicted long ago that the left, despite all the evidence of a cabal of highly placed bureaucrats in the DOJ/ FBI and intelligence apparatus forming the Resistance that is working to destabilize and remove a legally elected president, would deny there has been a concerted effort to do what they are even now doing.

Comically predictable, indeed.

 

Not only are you ok to say it...but we both know that's exactly what you will be saying.

 

But you’ll be in agreement right??

 

The investigation will be cancelled any day now.

lol

 

Well, it's a half-baked report.

The trick here is the premise the IG establishes from the start:

It’s not my job to draw firm conclusions about why things happened the way they did. In fact, it’s not even my job to determine whether investigative decisions were right or wrong. ​

The cop-out is that we are dealing here with “discretionary” calls; therefore, the IG rationalizes, the investigators must be given very broad latitude. Consequently, the IG says his job is not to determine whether any particular decision was correct; just whether, on some otherworldly scale of reasonableness, the decision was defensible. And he makes that determination by looking at every decision in isolation.

As Congress and the Senate digs into this half-baked, though meticulously detailed report, there are a ton of threads for them to pull on. This will serve as a very sound foundation for greater investigation.

Observe this gem, from the report’s executive summary:

We did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that improper considerations, including political bias, directly affected the specific investigative decisions.​

Directly affected? What does that mean? Do the FBI and Obama Justice Department have to stamp the “I’m with Her” logo on Combetta’s immunity agreement before we can say bias directly affected the decision? Could bias have indirectly affected the decision?

Who really knows, right?

Strzok, having finished the Clinton interview and closed out the emails case, preparing to wing his way to London to conduct some real interviews — interviews with witnesses who might help him “stop” Trump:

And damn this feels momentous. Because this matters. The other one did, too, but that was to ensure that we didn’t F something up. This matters because this MATTERS.​

Get it? This, the Trump case, “MATTERS” in comparison to the Clinton case. The only thing that mattered in the Clinton case was that the FBI avoid doing anything too grossly indefensible in implementing the months-long strategy to close the case without charges after appearing to do an energetic investigation. But the Trump case matters because it “MATTERS” — because in the Trump case, Strzok and Page and the others actually get to do what the FBI usually does: make a case on a bad guy we have to “stop” — informants, wiretaps, subpoenas, predawn search warrants with guns drawn, charging people who lie to us, threatening decades of imprisonment against witnesses we’re trying to flip.

It's very clear to The American People that the same folks whitewashed Hillary and went scorched earth on Trump. Was the quality of justice afforded to two sides of the same continuum by the same agents at the same time was . . . the same.

It wasn’t. One was kid gloves, the other was scorched earth. The candidate they hoped would win got the former; the candidate they needed to “stop” got the latter. The candidate they were almost certain would win got the case dropped; the candidate they needed an “insurance policy” against . . . well, whaddya know — the case against him is still going . . . and going . . . and going.

Did bias have anything to do with that? In 568 pages that leave out the Trump half of the story, we’re told the answer is, “Who really knows?”

We know!

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/06/ig-report-fbi-no-bias-conclusion-may-not-supported/

 

Yes I mean there's no reason we can't have police who, say, attend David Duke rallies from policing Detroit. They may have a bias but of course he's capable of managing it while on the job.

 

Exactly, the body of Horowitz' report hits like a jackhammer, the summary and conclusions are as namby pamby as possible. Essentially he reports the facts and leaves the conclusions for others, keeping the target off his back. The only bridge he burned was with Comey. With any of the other possible power brokers that could return to power, he is fine, Everyone from Lynch to Trump to Rosenstein or even Yates would have no bones to pick with him. It's quite a piece of work that positions the IG to survive as many unexpected outcomes as possible, quite a contrast with all the folks who were blindsided by Hillary's defeat.

Thursday's DOJ Inspector General report covering the Obama DOJ/FBI conduct during the Hillary Clinton email investigation confirms a bombshell that had previously been hinted at through WikiLeaks disclosures:

Obama lied when he said in 2015 that he learned of Hillary Clinton's private email server through a New York Times report.


Obama lied

Specifically, Obama told CBS News the following a March 7, 2015 report:

President Obama only learned of Hillary Clinton's private email address use for official State Department business after a New York Times report, he told CBS News in an interview

CBS News senior White House correspondent Bill Plante asked Mr. Obama when he learned about her private email system after his Saturday appearance in Selma, Alabama.

‘The same time everybody else learned it through news reports,’ the president told Plante. -CBS

The OIG report reveals this was a lie. A footnote on page 89 reads "President Barack Obama was one of the 13 individuals with whom Clinton had direct contact using her clintonemail.com account"

What's more, FBI counterintelligence agent Peter Strzok told the Inspector General that the top brass of the agency wrestled over whether or not to include Obama's involvement in Clinton's exoneration statement - and that former FBI Director James Comey knew Obama had lied:

“A paragraph [in Comey’s "exoneration" statement] summarizing the factors that led the FBI to assess that it was possible that hostile actors accessed Clinton’s server was added, and at one point referenced Clinton’s use of her private email for an exchange with then President Obama while in the territory of a foreign adversary,” the IG report reads. “This reference later was changed to ‘another senior government official,’ and ultimately was omitted.”

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-06-15/ig-report-confirms-obama-lied-about-hillary-email-server​

 

Oh, the poor widdle poor Republicans!

Despite a majority of FBI, Security, Trump selections and every other kinds of managers involved, ALL the conclustions are "namby pamby as possible", almost none of the conclusions are concludable, and poor Mr. Trump is just abandoned!

Just like how somehow 4 or 5 MILLION illegal aliens and Democratic operatives and load entire truck and trainloans to come into the states to falsify votes for Hillary instead Trump to make the election fraudulent!

That the sneaky MSM will make MILLIONS of more inauguration crowds suddenly become INVISIBLE to make Mr. Trump look bad, NOW our entire security law and intelligence apparatus can't come up with a report somehow STILL manages to "whitewash" Hillary and went "scorched earth" on Trump!

How can Trumpies, and Trump, and even mainstream Republicans pump out this twaddle, these lame excuses and loser failures are ways to justify their venal ways to grab money they have never earned?

It makes 4 years whining wanting extra cookies and skip school sound like Rhodes Scholars!

FAIL!

 

Funny that a collaborator would think of themselves as the resistance but shows how disconnected from reality they have become.

 

You would in any case.

 

I always wondered how Washington would react if an outsider was elected president.

I'm extremely cynical, but even I didn't expect this level of hatred and scheming the Washington establishment has displayed toward Trump. He really has upset the apple cart.

 

Correction ; the politically corrupt Comey/Mueller/Obama/Hillary era destroyed it.

 

My understanding from what I have heard is that the I.G. said that only Comey's leadership role did not seem to be politically biased. Other issues and cases by upper level FBI agents of blatant pro-Hillary and anti-Trump biases were noted

 

And all of this because Trump won. The liberal media is pushing it with all their might to subvert the election process and reverse the will of the people. Talk about meddling. I hope that in the end they go down hard.

 

Indeed that is smoking gun stuff and is even now allowing Trump to claim that the investigation into Trump/Russia is a politically generated investigation over nothing aimed at destroying him or his presidency . . . and people are increasingly believing that he is correct. They can READ that not only is he correct but that he was correct from the get-go. Regardless of what ultimately comes of this stuff it is a major and lasting win for the GOP and for Trump.

 

I asked you are you asserting there was bias shown in the IG report?

 

The Deep State attempted to wrest the Electoral process from US. They damn near pulled it off. Give them another election to get it dialed in and we'll never have another free and fair election, which is where I think the "progressives" are going as they can't win elections, so they seek the effective end of them. But to your point, yes, all these felons need to be brought to justice.

This IG Report is something else, facts that hit like a hammer, wrapped in namby pamby:


Mollie

✔@MZHemingway
IG report lists crazy biased texts and then writes that person who wrote texts didn't mean anything by it. Like after Lisa Page emails everyone that they can't go tough on HRC in interview because she might be POTUS, she says she just meant she should be treated like anyone else.

8:32 PM - Jun 14, 2018

That's clearly horse ****, but, it's not the IG that makes charging decisions, it's a Grand Jury.

 

It is not a political bias, it is an intolerance to crime.

 

The IG report moves the ball, but it's clearly half-baked.

We have people in documentary evidence, something inarguable, stuff they wrote which was then recorded in perfect form forever, expressing their insane bias, and then, when asked what they meant by things like "We'll stop him," they say "Oh, by 'We'll stop him,' I only meant that I would adhere to my FBI oath and follow every FBI policy to the letter."

Really? That's what you meant?

Over and over again, these people claim they don't remember having written these things and then claim that they must have meant [insert advice from lawyer on how to lie without getting hit with a perjury charge here].

Oh, is that what you meant to say? Because you picked some very strange words to say what you claim you meant to say.

John Sexton at Hot Air has further examples of this tendency of lawyered-up FBI agents claiming, "Oh, when I said 'I'm... With... Her,' I only meant I was with Lady Justice with her blindfold on to shield her eyes from any political bias."

With all these rationales for not charging people with lying to investigators, once Grassley gets all the Flynn information it will be interesting to see how, in many cases the same, folks evaluated the evidence to determine if Flynn should be charged.

The media are claiming "Oh, see, they said 'We'll stop him' just meant 'We'll stop Putin's aggressions' and so that takes care of that!" is... well, it's not unexpected at this point, is it? These folks are on record providing sex acts for felony leaks of dirt on Trump so they can run it in the Fake News Media.

 

Horowitz was appointed by Obama, his report was demanded by Democrats.

Shock: Obama Lied When He Claimed He Had Only Learned of Hillary's Illegal Off-Books Email System From the News

This corrupt POS was routinely emailing her on the system he claimed he didn't know about, per the OIG report.

In 2015, President Obama told America he only learned that his secretary of state Hillary Clinton was illegally using a private email server to conduct public business after The New York Times published a story saying so. Today's release of a Department of Justice inspector general report shows that was a lie.

"FBI analysts and Prosecutor 2 told us that former President Barack Obama was one of the 13 individuals with whom Clinton had direct contact using her clintonemail.com account," the report says in a footnote on page 89. "Obama, like other high level government officials, used a pseudonym for his username on his official government email account."​

Sean Davis

✔@seanmdav
The IG found that Obama was "one of the 13 individuals with whom Clinton had direct contact using her clintonemail[.]com account." Now we know why Clinton was never going to be charged with anything related to her secret e-mail scheme. https://www.justice.gov/file/1071991/download …

11:34 AM - Jun 14, 2018

 

Indeed it is half baked, and even Center Right is calling it for what it is.


Thoughts on the IG Report From 35,000 Feet

OK, let’s start by consolidating sources. Here is a link to the report itself. (Fair warning – the Executive Summary is 14 pages. This thing is a Russian novel, not a report.) I have only skimmed it. I am more interested in the “meta” aspects of this whole thing than the nitty-gritty – advantages of not being a lawyer. If you have not, you should definitely take in the first hour of the radio show from this morning. The host relied on some great sources as I will in this post. First John Hinderacker at Powerline. Second Kimberly Strassel at WSJ. Finally, the host cited Andrew McCarthy’s Twitter feed this morning on the show, to which I will add McCarthy’s great NRO piece from later in the day which begins with appropriate sarcasm:

You’ve got to hand it to Michael Horowitz: The Justice Department inspector general’s much-anticipated report on the Clinton-emails investigation may be half-baked, but if it is, it is the most comprehensive, meticulously detailed, carefully documented, thoughtfully reasoned epic in the history of half-bakery.

Why say do I say the report “may be half-baked”? Why don’t I just come out and declare, “The report is half-baked”? Well, I figure if I write this column in the IG’s elusive style, we’ll have the Rosetta Stone we need to decipher the report.

See, you probably sense that I believe the report is half-baked. But if I say it “may be” half-baked . . . well, technically that means it may not be, too. I mean, who really knows, right?

I really want to comment on three things that do not require a detailed reading given the good sources cited above, one political and two philosophical.

I am not sure Larry Arn had a clue how fundamental things really were when he said during campaign 2016 that, “Fundamental things are afoot.” What is happening here is far more fundamental than simply who holds office and what policies they have. We are seeing a nation trying to regain reasonable footing after eight long years of intellectual drivel passing as clear and deep thought.....snip~

http://www.hughhewitt.com/thoughts-on-the-ig-report-from-35000-feet/

 

You're free to say that anyway it's called free speech, it doesn't make you right but you can say it.