Yeah. I totally made that up
M
Link?
I’m reading that section of the report, and it doesn’t say that.
Yes. So? All of the emails from Comey’s private Gmail address were cc-ed to his official address, for records purposes.
The report goes into significant detail of the IG’s investigation. It is possible that some parts slipped through the cracks - but you trying desperately to suggest that a massive conspiracy exists, and your only evidence for it is the utter lack of evidence.
and then there’s this:
Strzok and Page made great effort to keep everything off the radar. and that is just THOSE TWO. We have no idea who else was working off the radar to advance their own agendas.
DO NOT try to tell me that we know everything we need to know and that the IG has gotten everything.
He makes NO SUCH CLAIM.
M
Oh, that’s why I couldn’t find it in the report - because it was nonsense from some random blog.
The IG has stated that there is absolutely no evidence that any biases affected the investigation. He goes into quite a lot of detail (150+ pages) elaborating on why he thinks so.
I understand that this is not the result you wanted, but that doesn’t make all of your fantasies true. A lack of evidence is not evidence of your conspiracy.
1 Like
From the IG report:
Most troubling, on October 29, 2016, Strzok forwarded from his FBI account to his personal email account an email about the proposed search warrant the Midyear team was seeking on the Weiner laptop. This email included a draft of the search warrant affidavit, which contained information from the Weiner investigation that appears to have been under seal at the time…
This is about the story I linked to.
Actually the IG said there was a LOT of evidence of bias and that it tainted the investigation greatly. I know you don’t want to admit that, but it;s right in the report:
He just didn’t have a document to show a direct connection, because people like Strzok and Page have made in clear in their texts to each other that they need to keep this stuff on the down-low.
NOWHERE in the report does it say that bias COULD NOT BE a factor in any decision. It just says they cannot prove it WHILE also saying it is obvious that there was bias and that taints the FBI and their investigations.
M
.
Check your timeline. Comey’s letter announcing the re-opening of the investigation happened on Oct. 28th.
By all means, feel free to quote the part of the report where the IG says evidence exists that suggests the investigation was affected by political bias.
I’ve been reading the report for hours, and you’re trying to tell me it says the opposite of what I’ve read.
You’re desperately trying to spin this, as made clear by your choice of words. There’s no sentence in the IG’s report that reads “We can’t prove this, therefore…”.
The IG found no evidence that the investigation itself was “tainted with bias”. That statement, approximately, appears in the report.
You are literally arguing that a lack of evidence is an argument for existence.
What does "timeline have to do with it? Strzok WENT OUTSIDE the normal channel as I said and as the IG report said and as the link I gave said. In doing so he was able to do things out of sight of official FBI channels.
I didn’t say they had evidence. They said in fact they could not find documentation evidence…
They ALSO detailed a great deal of bias and say that it tainted the FBI AND the investigation.
“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…,” the report read. “Nonetheless, these messages cast a cloud over the FBI’s handling of the Midyear investigation and the investigation’s credibility.”
You’re trying to say that bias categorically didn’t have an affect on the investigations and the IG backs you up.
He said NO SUCH THING.
M
Being in the denial phase isn’t surprising.
That is starting to change now that the report says the opposite of what Trump and his followers hoped it would
Still feel the IG report is credible?
LOL@MarkyS post.
He sure changed his tune fast.
Damn! @MarkyS and @Smyrna have some explaining to do regarding their evolution on the LEAST partisan report ever compiled.
Actually it doesn’t say the opposite. It is just being reported as saying something it doesn’t actually say.
M
What have I changed, now???
M
“His report is the LEAST partisan report being compiled and no one in Washington disputes that.”
You even used caps. LOL.
I still say that!
AGAIN, what have I changed?
M
You sure seem to have spent the last 24+hours disputing the IG’s conclusion, unless I am misunderstanding your posts.
So, do you agree that the IG did not find any evidence of political bias or improper consideration actually impacting the investigation?
A simple yes or no will do.
You ARE misunderstanding my posts.
I don’t dispute the IG. I dispute the incorrect press reports of what the IG said.
They are saying that the IG said there was no bias OR that the bias didn’t affect their work. He says NO SUCH THING. He says only that he couldn’t find the documentary evidence to prove they acted improperly.
He also said their obvious bias taints everything they did and casts doubt on what they did.
“Nonetheless, these messages cast a cloud over the FBI’s handling of the Midyear investigation and the investigation’s credibility.”
M
As a person who was just screaming out of the top of their lungs in another thread about “innocent until proven guilty” Then you have the nerve to assert that a claim they couldn’t find any evidence and then at the same time asserting that doesn’t mean they didn’t do as such and do so and are biased.
Holy ■■■■, you’ve really stepped all over yourself this time. Pick a side of an argument and stop being a hypocrite.
1 Like
What the hell are you talking about???
M
