DOJ Inspector General's Report on Russia Investigation

• Russia investigation had properly authorized purpose.
  
• No evidence of political bias causing the investigation.
  
• No evidence that Mifsud was some kind of freaking US intelligence asset framing Page or Trump.
  
• Confirms (yet *again*) that the Steels dossier had nothing to do with launching the investigation since the FBI didn't get it until weeks after the investigation was already launched.
  
• On the "SPYGATE" nonsense... completely debunks it:
  
  "We found no evidence that the FBI used CHSs or UCEs to interact with members of the Trump campaign prior to the opening of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation. After the opening of the investigation, we found no evidence that the FBI placed any CHSs or UCEs within the Trump campaign or tasked any CHSs or UCEs to report on the Trump campaign. Finally, we also found no documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivations influenced the FBI's decision to use CHSs or UCEs to interact with Trump campaign officials in the Crossfire Hurricane investigation. "
  
  (CHS = Confidential Human Source... UCE = Under Cover Employee)
  
• Some issues found with the process followed to file an application against Carter Page looks like the worst thing he found, but also found no evidence "that political bias or improper motivation influenced the FBI's decision to seek FISA authority on Carter Page." So just errors and process issues, not some kind of malicious conspiracy.

So for all the conspiracy theory enthusiasts around these parts... whomp, whomp.

(Now let's all watch Barr, in his actual capacity as Trump's political operative rather than the job he is supposed to be doing as AG, spend the day lying about and spinning what the report says for Fox News viewers.)

And Trump ran out and declared the IG report found an attempted overthrow of his government.

This is the *exact opposite* of what the report actually found.

Guess what we're going to be hearing from idiot Trump fans for the next 10 years now as they tell people who actually have read the report to go read the report and see how the Deep State tried to launch a coup against Dear Leader (with funding from George Soros no doubt)

Aaaaand... James Comey just made a statement that he had been scheduled to be interviewed on Fox and Friends tomorrow morning.

They cancelled his interview after the IG report came out.

And that should tell you everything you need to know about both what the report said and whether Fox is an actual news organization.

Trump is now publicly attacking his own appointed FBI director and calling the FBI "broken"... for simply stating the truth about what was in the IG report. Which is that the Russia investigation was above board and properly predicated and authorized and he was *not* spied on or politically targeted.


Because if you contradict Trump's propaganda you *must* be discredited. Just as he's been pulling with his Lugenpresse routine from day one.

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/sta ... 2715506690

(also, everyone knows Trump didn't actually read the report)

gcomeau wrote:
(Now let's all watch Barr, in his actual capacity as Trump's political operative rather than the job he is supposed to be doing as AG, spend the day lying about and spinning what the report says for Fox News viewers.)

So predictable...

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna10 ... ssion=true

To repeat, what he is slandering the FBI with there is the exact opposite of the conclusion the Inspector General's report just reached. And he doesn't care, because he has a job to do and it is not to act as Attorney General for the country. It is to protect Donald Trump personally. And if he has to tear down the credibility of the Justice Department to do it, so be it.

TFLYTSNBN wrote:https://statelymcdanielmanor.wordpress.com/2019/12/10/lisa-page-taking-her-power-back/

Why exactly did you feel like your response to the IG report should be... some guy's blog that doesn't address the report?

Not that I'm surprised, it's your usual caliber of response.

I always ignore the links Fly posts if they're the only thing in the post.
After all, if he can't be bothered to explain why he thinks that they're important (summary, personal feelings about it, deductions made), then it is obviously not important except as a smokescreen to distract people while he tries to marshal a new argument.
And yes, I am aware that I post links too, but I at least try to integrate them into my posts rather than using them as a substitute.
Unless I'm trolling people...