Inspector General Report on Clinton Email/Server Investigation Released

Yesterday, Inspector General Horowitz's 500+ page report was released. No real surprises; it contained details and conclusions that had been previously leaked (covered upthread), such as:

--FBI Director Comey's honesty wasn't deemed an issue, but his judgment and failure to follow protocols were severely criticized.

--Comey's public declaration that Clinton was "extremely careless" in her email/server practices, along with his informing Congress that the investigation was being reopened (shortly before election day), were deemed a violation of protocol, insubordinate, and extremely inappropriate.

--The FBI agent lovers who exchanged negative text messages about Trump (and several other Democrat and Republican politicians) during the email investigation were deemed unprofessional and inappropriate.

--The FBI's conclusion that there wasn't a crime nor a warranted prosecution of Clinton regarding her email/server practices was appropriate and confirmed by the IG.

--The IG concluded that none of the human errors (bad judgment, inappropriate communications) affected the outcome of the Clinton email investigation.

--The IG concluded that then-AG Loretta Lynch should not have welcomed Bill Clinton onto the plane when he approached her on the tarmac, given his wife was under investigation, even if the topic never arose (as Lynch and Bill Clinton both insist).

So, the Clinton camp and some Democrats are using the IG conclusions to bolster their claims that Comey's inappropriate and untimely public declarations were significant factors in her election loss.

And, the Trump camp and some Republicans are using the IG conclusions to bolster their claims that Comey deserved to be fired and Trump didn't fire him for refusing loyalty to Trump when it came to the Russia investigation (even though that's essentially what Trump told Lester Holt).

One new bit was included in the IG report: among the FBI lovers' unprofessional texts was one where the male agent told the female agent "we won't let him (get elected)". That's being used by the Trump camp to bolster their "deep state!" claims and attempts to discredit the Russia Interference investigation.

Trump claimed today that the IG report "totally exonerates him - no collusion!". That's false. The IG investigation addressed the Clinton email/server investigation only. There's nothing in Horowitz's report discrediting the Russia Interference investigation and nothing clearing Trump of anything.

Rudy Giuliani, Trump's propaganda tv attorney, is calling for everyone criticized in the IG report to be jailed! Obviously Rudy (and likely many of FOX's viewers) don't care that there is no evidence that any of them committed any crimes (aside from Deputy FBI Director McCabe who is already charged with lack of candor in denying he leaked to the press).

I'm glad the report came out and we are one step closer to getting this stuff over with.
I don't like that they are going to give the department personnel "bias" training when any bias was in the top section of the department. And they will not get called on for any responsibility. The peons will grumble about it no doubt. No mention of what kind of bias and I can only think of political bias.

(06-15-2018, 02:24 PM)Maggot Wrote: we are one step closer to getting this stuff over with.

Would you be referring to the Russian investigation when you say "this stuff"?

(06-15-2018, 02:31 PM)Duchess Wrote:

(06-15-2018, 02:24 PM)Maggot Wrote: we are one step closer to getting this stuff over with.

Would you be referring to the Russian investigation when you say "this stuff"?

This was all about Hillarys e-mail screw up. Most Americans already knew she handled classified info like a laundry list. Even though the claim is that no bias was found throughout the report there is plenty of bias, so much so that there will be bias training for the department, I think that's stupid and just a dog & pony show because it's the top players that are bias. No I'm looking forward to the FICA report that should be a 3 ring circus. Most Americans know the clowns in the 3 rings.

I say let the investigation continue until the real truth is found.

IG Horowitz's report didn't say there was no individual bias when it came to FBI agents' personal political views and communications. They are human beings and have opinions like everyone else.

The IG report only said that that the investigation uncovered nothing to indicate that personal biases for or against Clinton or Trump had an impact on the final outcome of the Clinton email/server investigation.

Yesterday, Horowitz appeared for questioning before the Senate Judiciary Committee. He stated that he cannot be sure that bias on the part of Peter Strzok didn't impact Strzok's decision to prioritize continued focus on the Russia meddling investigation over the Weiner/Abedin laptop investigation.

The fact that the laptop investigation was delayed was bad for Clinton because by the time Comey (wrongly and insubordinately, according to the IG report) informed the Congress that he was re-opening the Clinton email/server investigation in that limited scope, it was very close to election day. Of course, the Republican Congress leaked the information to the press, which Comey says he knew was gonna happen, but he took it upon himself to breach protocol and inform Congress anyway because he was sure Clinton was gonna win no matter what. Clusterfuck of bad decisions and wrong assumptions.

Horowitz refused to answer questions about whether pro-Trump FBI agents were feeding Giuliani information during the run-up to election day because that's part of a separate investigation.

Anyway, I think it's good that FBI Director Wray is having all FBI heads and agents undergo training in regards to protocols, practices, personal communications sent on FBI devices, etc... Comey's poor judgment and the unprofessional/biased communications found on Strozk's and Page's cell phones are black eyes for the Bureau. Here's what that training entails: https://www.wsj.com/articles/fbi-bias-tr...1529445819

Guess what I found on the Department of Homeland Securities website?
https://www.dhs.gov/news/2018/06/18/myth...nce-policy

You know what's really weird? It says exactly what I've been saying all along. We've been separating kids at the border for a very long time for some very good reasons. Imagine that...

There is no good reason to separate children from their families who are seeking asylum.

(06-25-2018, 11:06 AM)Blindgreed1 Wrote: Guess what I found on the Department of Homeland Securities website?
https://www.dhs.gov/news/2018/06/18/myth...nce-policy

You know what's really weird? It says exactly what I've been saying all along. We've been separating kids at the border for a very long time for some very good reasons. Imagine that...

Your link explains what we've been trying to get you to comprehend in the "RETURN TO SENDER (Immigration)" thread. I'm not sure why you're posting this in the RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE thread.

Anyway, I posted a synopsis of what's covered in your link in caps, bolding, and coloring - just for you and Maggot in that thread, after you falsely insisted that family separation was an Obama policy.

Yes, children were separated from parents at the border in the Bush II and Obama administrations, when there was JUST CAUSE (parents were criminals, child's safety at risk...). It was the exception, not a rule or policy applied to all familes crossing outside of official entry points. It was not a policy or by-default practice in the United States until Trump and Session's introduced their Zero Tolerance policy. It did not happen at anywhere near the scale that it was happening after the Trump/Sessions policy was enacted and before Trump was forced to rescind their new policy last week.

That's simply a fact -- there's no link or spin that will change that fact. It's recorded history.

(06-25-2018, 11:24 AM)HairOfTheDog Wrote:

(06-25-2018, 11:06 AM)Blindgreed1 Wrote: Guess what I found on the Department of Homeland Securities website?
https://www.dhs.gov/news/2018/06/18/myth...nce-policy

You know what's really weird? It says exactly what I've been saying all along. We've been separating kids at the border for a very long time for some very good reasons. Imagine that...

Your link explains what we've been trying to get you to comprehend in the "RETURN TO SENDER (Immigration)" thread. I'm not not sure why you're posting this in the RUSSIA INTERFERENCE thread.

Anyway, I posted a synopsis of what's covered in your link in caps, bolding, and coloring - just for you and Maggot in that thread, after you falsely insisted that family separation was an Obama policy.

Yes, children were separated from parents at the border in the Bush II and Obama administrations, when there was JUST CAUSE (parents were criminals, child's safety at risk...). It was the exception, not a rule or policy applied to all family's crossing outside of official entry points. It was not a policy or by-default practice in the United States until Trump and Session's introduced their Zero Tolerance policy. It did not happen at anywhere near the scale that it was happening after the Trump/Sessions policy was enacted and before Trump was forced to rescind their new policy last week.

That's simply a fact -- there's no link or spin that will change that fact. It's recorded history.

Prove it. Show me the verified numbers.

Here is an interesting interactive map of the U.S. with different statistics for the statistically minded statisticians.

statistics


migrationpolicy.org site

Posts 287 to 291 have been copied to the RETURN TO SENDER (Immigration) thread for further discussion here: http://mockforums.net/showthread.php?tid...#pid473054

Erik Prince Cooperating with Mueller?

I hope so, though I'd love to see him do some time rather than get off scot free in exchange for cooperation (assuming he broke any laws). He's an unscrupulous mercenary, in my opinion.

Special counsel Robert Mueller has acquired Blackwater founder Erik Prince’s computer and phones as he zeroes in on the Trump ally’s ties to the Russia probe.

ABC News reported Monday that the military contractor’s electronics were turned over to the special counsel after news broke last week that he is “cooperating” with federal investigators.



^ Prince, the brother of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, has long been under scrutiny for a clandestine meeting in the Seychelles shortly after Trump was inaugurated that was allegedly intended to establish a backchannel between the administration and Russia.

In May, the New York Times revealed that in sworn testimony before the House Intelligence Committee last November, Prince appeared to have lied when claiming he had no “formal communication or contact with the campaign.” In August 2016, the report noted, the Blackwater founder arranged a meeting between the president’s son Donald Trump Jr. and Arab officials who were interested in helping his father win the election.

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/06/mueller...es-report/

Considering the situation I believe that no one mentioned in the investigation will remain loyal when their feet are held to the fire. Even the ones "yet to be named" It may come to who is the better liar.

The evidence will tell the story.

Most of the Trump campaign members and associates now cooperating started off being loyal to the Trump campaign.

They're now cooperating because they lied to Mueller's investigators about their election-related interactions with Russian operatives and/or other foreign operatives.

The investigators and prosecutors knew the Trump campaign members and associates were lying because Mueller's team had (or later obtained) solid evidence to contradict what the Trump campaign members and associates had claimed under questioning.

They could have kept being loyal and lying. But, they would have faced a mountain of perjury charges and maximum sentences if charged with other crimes. Or, they could cooperate.

(05-16-2018, 05:19 AM)Duchess Wrote:

I feel confident that Judge Ellis will rule similarly. I don't see any way that he can't.

Your confidence was based on sound logic and your prediction was correct.

A federal judge in Northern Virginia who had sharply criticized the special counsel’s case against Paul Manafort refused on Tuesday to dismiss the charges, clearing the way for Mr. Manafort to stand trial on charges of financial fraud.

Mr. Manafort, President Trump’s former campaign chairman, has been charged in two jurisdictions with a host of federal crimes as part of the special counsel inquiry into Russia’s influence on the presidential campaign.

In a preliminary hearing last month, Judge T. S. Ellis III challenged the charges of bank fraud and tax evasion against Mr. Manafort, saying he saw no relationship between the case before him and “anything the special counsel is authorized to investigate.”

But in the 31-page opinion issued on Tuesday, the judge said that “upon further review,” it was clear to him that the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, had “followed the money paid by pro-Russian officials” to Mr. Manafort — a line of inquiry that fell squarely in his authority.

Full story: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/26/us/ma...v=top-news
-----------------------------

Judge Ellis also reiterated warnings about prosecutorial overreach. He is certainly doing everything possible to assure the public that the court does not favor the governmental prosecutors over the defendant.

Manafort's Virgina trial is currently set to begin on July 24^th.

The Senate Intelligence Committee has just released this -

^ I'm glad they released that statement, which is simply a repeat of what Intelligence long ago determined and announced. It contradicts Trump's bullshit propaganda designed to discredit the independent investigation.

In England, Russia's role in the Brexit referendum has been under investigation since early on too. No surprise, their intelligence is finding all kinds of links to Russian-backing in regards to the divisive campaign and discord. Arron Banks, the millionaire businessman who bankrolled Nigel Farage's campaign to quit the EU, initially swore he had no meetings with Russian operatives. So far, when confronted with evidence to the contrary, he's admitted to at least four. Sound familiar? https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018...connection

We also know that Russia financed far right Marine LePen in the French Presidential election and engaged in organized covert activities to divide communities there too.

I'm hoping Cambridge Analytica is held accountable for the role it played in harvesting/providing personal data to help those who orchestrated the deceptive and divisive efforts to undermine democracies. ETA: Also very interested in learning more about the funneling of Russian monies into U.S. politics via the NRA.

So the Senate has agreed with all our intelligence officials that Russia meddled in our election to help trump and trump intends to meet with Putin without any aides/note takers/etc. being present.