Horowitz's DOJ IG Report

[Azalin]

44 minutes ago, OJABBA said:

This response is what I have gotten from the sheep...

 

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/doj-fbi-clinton-not-trump-inspector-general_us_5b044190e4b003dc7e46e1e7

 

Message to the sheep: Trump baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaad.

Edited June 14, 2018 by Azalin

[Golden Goat]

20 minutes ago, Azalin said:

Message to the sheep: Trump baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaad.

 

"Well, I think that the dangerous, you know, edges here are that he is trying to undermine the media and trying to make up his own facts. And it could be that while unemployment and the economy worsens, (Trump) could have undermined the messaging so much that he can actually control exactly what people think. And that, that is our job."

MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski, February 22, 2017

 

 

Edited June 15, 2018 by Golden Goat

[Albwan]

 

 

[RaoulDuke79]

15 minutes ago, Golden Goat said:

 

"Well, I think that the dangerous, you know, edges here are that he is trying to undermine the media and trying to make up his own facts. And it could be that while unemployment and the economy worsens, (Trump) could have undermined the messaging so much that he can actually control exactly what people think. And that, that is our job."

MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski, February 22, 2017

 

 

That whole statement is is a mess 6 ways to Sunday. I had to read it 4 or 5 times to find out what she was trying to say,  and it now that it makes sense, it's even worse.

Edited June 15, 2018 by RaoulDuke79

[Prickly Pete]

1 hour ago, Koko78 said:

 

So let me get this straight: You won't listen to anyone or anything you disagree with unless they prove your beliefs wrong... which they can't do because you won't listen to them?

 

This is what I run into every day from these people.

 

It's pointless to discuss anything with them.

[K-9]

1 hour ago, Koko78 said:

 

So let me get this straight: You won't listen to anyone or anything you disagree with unless they prove your beliefs wrong... which they can't do because you won't listen to them?

Not at all. I was regularly participating in that thread and enjoying some of the viewpoints put forth, especially by DR. But that thread devolved into the usual partisan bickering with each side breathlessly pointing to every new article as “proof” of this or that when they aren’t proof of anything at this point and that’s just not important to me. I’m willing to listen to anyone about most anything, but until there is concrete evidence one way or the other, it’s just noise. It may be interesting noise and provide lots of grist for discussion, but I’m willing to wait until the investigation is over and the report is in. That’s when my beliefs will be changed one way or the other. This just isn’t something to get ahead of your skis on, especially in such a charged partisan environment. It’s cool that others can enjoy it though, don’t get me wrong. 

 

 

[Albwan]

2 minutes ago, OJABBA said:

 

This is what I run into every day from these people.

 

It's pointless to discuss anything with them.

    Yea man, don't waste your breath, their hatred of trump has trumped

any rational thought. They wish for the economy to crash, pray that

Nk doesn't denuclearize, side with  ms13 , all because for some 

weird reason they hate the elected POTUS, and the people who voted 

for him. So UN-AMERICAN to disrespect the office. They  should go to 

Canada, or all move to california and form their own cultist colony

of hate.

[K-9]

3 hours ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

Rod Rosenstein is up to his eyeballs in this.  And again, this was nothing more than a chartered fishing expedition purposed to bring down the sitting President. 

 

You cannot cling to "nation of laws" and defend the investigation.

All due respect, that is all supposition at this point. I’m struck by the contradiction between your respect for the rule of law and your willingness to accuse Rosenstein of breaking the law and pronouncing him guilty without due process.

Edited June 15, 2018 by K-9

[TakeYouToTasker]

5 minutes ago, K-9 said:

Not at all. I was regularly participating in that thread and enjoying some of the viewpoints put forth, especially by DR. But that thread devolved into the usual partisan bickering with each side breathlessly pointing to every new article as “proof” of this or that when they aren’t proof of anything at this point and that’s just not important to me. I’m willing to listen to anyone about most anything, but until there is concrete evidence one way or the other, it’s just noise. It may be interesting noise and provide lots of grist for discussion, but I’m willing to wait until the investigation is over and the report is in. That’s when my beliefs will be changed one way or the other. This just isn’t something to get ahead of your skis on, especially in such a charged partisan environment. It’s cool that others can enjoy it though, don’t get me wrong. 

 

 

 

I can appreciate this position.  I find it completely reasonable for someone not willing to, or who hasn't yet, Fung themselves into deep diving independent research in the topic.

 

On a personal level, I think this place benefits from your voice, however.

 

We need more introspective dissent down here.  More intelligent, respected, well thought out, introspective individuals who buck the regular trends.

 

There are important conversations that need to happen, and they shouldn't be one sided.

 

Please consider this.

6 minutes ago, K-9 said:

All due respect, that is all supposition at this point. I’m struck by the contradiction between your respect for the rule of law and your willingness to accuse Rosenstein of breaking the law and pronouncing him guilty without due process.

 

You'll note that you're the first person to declare anyone guilty.  I've never used that phrasing.  My words are carefully chosen.

 

I don't know if Rosenstein is guilty of anything at all.  I know he's involved as a major player, and has a massive role to play.  I know where my educated suspicions lie, and I know the difference between justice and  the the proper application of the powers we afford the law, and the Mueller investigation.

 

I suspect you do as well.

[K-9]

1 minute ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

I can appreciate this position.  I find it completely reasonable for someone not willing to, or who hasn't yet, Fung themselves into deep diving independent research in the topic.

 

On a personal level, I think this place benefits from your voice, however.

 

We need more introspective dissent down here.  More intelligent, respected, well thought out, introspective individuals who buck the regular trends.

 

There are important conversations that need to happen, and they shouldn't be one sided.

 

Please consider this.

I appreciate the kind words and there are times l feel compelled to participate more often but that usually dissipates soon after the the usual devolution occurs and the insults ensue. There are other forums for me to share ideas that don’t resort to that level of discourse. So you will have to keep carrying the water of that intelligent, respectful, and well thought out discourse in the meantime. Something tells me you won’t have a problem with that at all.

[GG]

3 minutes ago, K-9 said:

I appreciate the kind words and there are times l feel compelled to participate more often but that usually dissipates soon after the the usual devolution occurs and the insults ensue. There are other forums for me to share ideas that don’t resort to that level of discourse. So you will have to keep carrying the water of that intelligent, respectful, and well thought out discourse in the meantime. Something tells me you won’t have a problem with that at all.

 

You're an idiot.

 

 

(I don't think you've been properly initiated, yet)

[B-Man]

Quote

 

Kimberley Strassel‏Verified account @KimStrassel

FollowFollow @KimStrassel

 

1) Don't believe anyone who claims Horowitz didn't find bias. He very carefully says that he found no "documentary" evidence that bias produced "specific investigatory decisions." That's different ...................#IGReport

 

2) It means he didn't catch anyone doing anything so dumb as writing down that they took a specific step to aid a candidate. You know, like: "Let's give out this Combetta immunity deal so nothing comes out that will derail Hillary for President." #IGReport

 

3) But he in fact finds bias everywhere. The examples are shocking and concerning, and he devotes entire sections to them. And he very specifically says in the summary that they "cast a cloud" on the entire "investigation's credibility." That's pretty damning. #IGReport

 

4) Meanwhile this same cast of characters who the IG has now found to have made a hash of the Clinton investigation and who demonstrate such bias, seamlessly moved to the Trump investigation. And we're supposed to think they got that one right? #IGReport

 

 

 

 

No one said straight up in writing "I'm making these decisions BECAUSE of my extreme bias."

 

That doesn't happen outside of a Scooby-Doo cartoon. But they were pretty darn close to just that.

 

 

 

.

Edited June 15, 2018 by B-Man

[Deranged Rhino]

11 minutes ago, B-Man said:

No one said straight up in writing "I'm making these decisions BECAUSE of my extreme bias."

That doesn't happen outside of a Scooby-Doo cartoon. But they were pretty darn close to just that.

 

And I'll add (again for emphasis) the OIG's job is not to assign motive or pronounce judgment either way. His job is to present facts to the DOJ and Congress, nothing more. Doing more would be improper. 

 

That's why Huber's role is important to keep in mind (and most people are not aware of him let alone understand his role). Huber and Sessions can make those calls and have the ability to bring charges. Huber was appointed by Sessions last year - and worked in secret for over six months before Sessions let anyone know about it. Huber has a grand jury empaneled in Utah, far outside DC, that's been working for at least two months.  None of that would not be going on if there was not a larger indictment/prosecution process planned.

 

That's why the body of the report is much more important than the Summary or Conclusion sections. The body contains facts - including a bunch of long speculated, now backed by evidence, facts. Huber and Horowitz have been working together in secret for months - without a filter between them. The unclassified conclusions and summary were edited and approved by RR and the DOJ before the report's release, but they have no impact on what Huber can do with the evidence contained in the body. See how it's going to work?

 

So, the FBI gets a "clean bill of health" with this report in the eyes of some. Meanwhile the cases are being built against the actual people who broke the law in the background rather than entire institutions. The goal has never been to burn down the FBI or DOJ. Both are needed - not only to have a functioning country, but if you're planning on prosecuting the offenders you need a functioning Department of Justice to bring the ball over the goal line. 

 

Now we are going to get a flurry of Congressional hearings (Horowitz is Monday to start it off), more subpoenas and testimony - drawing attention to the body of the report as both partisan sides try to claim victory in the media. All the while, Horowitz and Huber continue their work...

 

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

51 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

And I'll add (again for emphasis) the OIG's job is not to assign motive or pronounce judgment either way. His job is to present facts to the DOJ and Congress, nothing more. Doing more would be improper. 

 

That's why Huber's role is important to keep in mind (and most people are not aware of him let alone understand his role). Huber and Sessions can make those calls and have the ability to bring charges. Huber was appointed by Sessions last year - and worked in secret for over six months before Sessions let anyone know about it. Huber has a grand jury empaneled in Utah, far outside DC, that's been working for at least two months.  None of that would not be going on if there was not a larger indictment/prosecution process planned.

 

That's why the body of the report is much more important than the Summary or Conclusion sections. The body contains facts - including a bunch of long speculated, now backed by evidence, facts. Huber and Horowitz have been working together in secret for months - without a filter between them. The unclassified conclusions and summary were edited and approved by RR and the DOJ before the report's release, but they have no impact on what Huber can do with the evidence contained in the body. See how it's going to work?

 

So, the FBI gets a "clean bill of health" with this report in the eyes of some. Meanwhile the cases are being built against the actual people who broke the law in the background rather than entire institutions. The goal has never been to burn down the FBI or DOJ. Both are needed - not only to have a functioning country, but if you're planning on prosecuting the offenders you need a functioning Department of Justice to bring the ball over the goal line. 

 

Now we are going to get a flurry of Congressional hearings (Horowitz is Monday to start it off), more subpoenas and testimony - drawing attention to the body of the report as both partisan sides try to claim victory in the media. All the while, Horowitz and Huber continue their work...

 

 

Im not sure we DO need an FBI.

5 hours ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

No, Joe.  There doesn't need to be payback.  This isn't a Mel Gibson movie.

 

 

Either we are governed by the rule of law, or we are not.  If we are not, as you seem to prefer, then everything the Obama Administration, their subordinate agencies, the Clinton Campaign and Foundation, and the DNC has done is completely acceptable, because the law doesn't matter. 

 

If the law does matter, then the law needs to be followed in their prosecution, if, and only if, laws were broken, and only for people who actually broke the law.

 

You’re maddening in your defense of the indefensible.

[Nanker]

12 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

 

Im not sure we DO need an FBI.

Then just exactly are we as a nation supposed to do with J. Edgar Hoover’s favorite desk ornament - (John Dillinger’s12” penis) that he had preserved in formaldehyde a-la Lennin’s Trophy of Rasputin’s male member, one might ask? 

Edited June 15, 2018 by Nanker

[Prickly Pete]

15 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

 

Im not sure we DO need an FBI.

 

You’re maddening in your defense of the indefensible.

 

He's just trying to play "I'm the levelest head" vs. K-9's "I'm the levelest head". 

Let them level each other.

 

 

 

Edited June 15, 2018 by OJABBA

[Deranged Rhino]

 

 

Can confirm from my own sources:

 

**********************************************************************************************************

 

Pg. 294. Was going to save this for my longer write up but it's getting picked up now so might as well put it here. 

 

Read the full page in context (couldn't post an image myself, tried). 

 

There's more going on within the body of this report than it seems. 

Edited June 15, 2018 by Deranged Rhino

[Buffalo_Gal]

Anthony Weiner, the gift that keeps on giving (and yes, I realize that sounds terrible and can be taken in a multitude of ways. ?)

Edited June 15, 2018 by Buffalo_Gal
misspelled anthony

[TakeYouToTasker]

55 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

 

Im not sure we DO need an FBI.

 

You’re maddening in your defense of the indefensible.

 

I defend the rule of law.  Full stop.

 

You're advocating for tyranny.

 

I'm advocating the import of the process.

 

You're advocating outcome at all cost.

 

I'm advocating for a long term, peaceful solution to the problem.

 

You're advocating for a fascist dictatorship empowered to crush it's political enemies.

 

Id rather be on my side.

[Deranged Rhino]