How are the libs going to defend this? Looks pretty bad.

Texts and e-mails show the FBI/DOJ did everything they could to help Hillary and hurt Trump. Wow.

Have you read it?

LOL! I expected no less from you. No, obviously I have not... but I have been watching the news, and seeing a lot of what's in the 500 page report. Direct quotes, as well as legal analyst opinions.

Of course, you know FOX is hammering on it, and CNN is attempting to defend it and act like it's not a big deal.

I haven’t read it either.

Here it is if you want to read the 500 pages and multiple attachments that are not classified.

https://www.justice.gov/file/1071991/download 

David (dpnewell)

Funny... One set of media says it means one thing. The other set of media says the exact opposite.

You chose one side MACS... I'm not going to take a stand until more time has passed and sufficient information from it is digested. But it's pretty clear youre buying in on one sides interpretation.

Reporter to Obama: When did you learn about Secretary Clinton using her own personal e-mail?

Obama: When you did...

Obama received e-mails FROM Hillary's personal e-mail. Ooops. Liar.

It proves Comey is a liar. It proves the people investigating Trump were CLEARLY against him and for Hillary.

I've been watching both FOX and CNN... and yes, you are correct on which "version" I find more believable. I know that's not a surprise.

🤦

Didn't see this thread...

Most of my news feeds are from traditionally left leaning sources such as CNN.

Most of what I've read has either supported the Trump position, or seemed too defensive in the reporting.

The direct email quotes by some in the FBI is damning, to say the least.
Such as FBI agent Strzok's response to his bang--buddy's question about Trump winning the election: "No. No he won't. We'll stop it."

It's reassuring that CNN's analyst claims this didn't impact Strzok's approach to the investigation. That he remained impartial.

And lawyer numbe one, who's name they won't release.

Try reading the NPR summary. It seems pretty middle of the road.

The IG report itself states that the investigators views did not impact the decisions made. That's not CNN....

Heard that as well. I'd like to hear a lot more of the reasoning that led to that conclusion. More than counter-intuitive, it sounds sorta biased or plain irrational

I checked the investigation summary report.
Best I can understand is they looked at the actions and decisions made by those individuals and determined that they were in line with policies and procedures and best practices. Just like they decided that Comeys actions regarding announcing the reopening of Clinton's investigation didn't follow the practices at the organization.

I'm sure the body of the report has more details, but I'm working off my phone and can't scrounge through it easily.

We're asking the fox to guard the hen house.
The IG is repeatedly saying that there were many mis-steps and unethical behaviors, but they offer the caveat that no laws were broken.

If we learned anything from the left, this isn't about laws, but rather about corruption at the highest levels.

Give it two days.

then the NYT can go back to blaming Russia.

So now your argument has changed from "CNN analysts are giving a left slanted analysis of the report and I don't trust it" to " the report is biased because they're investigating themselves".

Whatever... Not worth my time

It would be nice to see the redactions.. the stuff they had to hide in best interest of national security and stuff.. 😟

This just released:

BarryS: why aren't you out campaigning??
Hillary: hung over..
BarryS: get off your fat ass..
Hillary: what about my emails..??
BarryS: your momma's emails..
Hillary: what if Trump finds out..??
BarryS: F Trump..

Film at 11... 😟

IG report has enough content to get cons and libs roiled...mostly stuff we already knew, or concluded based on what we did know. One take away for the cons is the finding that a few other FBI agents expressed anti-Trump sentiments in emails and texts, but concluded that such un-professional conduct, prohibited by policy, was not widespread. Only five such members were identified, including the two known previously who were immediately relieved of duty in the Mueller investigation, among the thousands of FBI employees...


No mention of any anti-Hillary emails... two possible conclusions: 1) the FBI is a deep-state liberal institution that is biased against cons; 2) con FBI peeps were smart enough to avoid documenting anti-Hillary sentiments in emails prior to the election, which everyone expected her to win and she would be their new boss...

One take-away for the libs: FBI was correct in the decision to not prosecute Hillary over the emails, but Comey's lack of judgement in making the two pre-election announcements were serious lapses... may have tipped the elections to Trump...

This report by the OIG only reviewed the FBI's conduct of investigations of the Hillary emails, and did not examine the Special Counsel's investigation of Russian interference in our elections and possible conspiracy by Americans.

What Hillary did was illegal.. what Comey did was illegal.. how was it correct not to prosecute..?? Because Comey didn't want to set a precedent..?? 😕


The SG will report on collusion soon..😟