“We did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that improper considerations, including political bias, directly affected the specific investigative actions we reviewed,”
“We did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that improper considerations, including political bias, directly affected the specific investigative actions we reviewed,”
So does this “We did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that improper considerations, including political bias, directly affected the specific investigative actions we reviewed,”
Lots of escape words in there IMO, in case this doesn't pass the smell test. "Directly" affected..."specific" actions we reviewed. Specific actions sounds like a narrow scope of looking to me. Note they didn't just state everything was clean and above board?
So now the OIG reached a conclusion that you do not like and you think that your interpretation of one tiny and selectively edited piece evidence is more valid. Got it.
30 years in a maximum security federal prison will give them a lot of time to write books. Some critics on the Alt Left agree with your approach. “So, here it is. For the typical 99%’r American, the camel’s back has broken by the last straw sourced in Washington so many times the camel doesn’t even have what you’d refer to as a spin anymore. “The Clinton’s need to have their assets seized, Giustra needs to arrested, and at a minimum racketeering charges need to pursued against the whole damn bunch of ‘em….BEFORE IT GETS REPEATED WITH, SAY, THE TPP. Hillary needs to face charges of Espionage for her e-mail. And if guilty, like with Edward Snowden, all options for disposition of her miserable guilty ass should be on the table including the death penalty.” http://www.thomhartmann.com/users/t...agreements-get-access-taxpayer-money-and-enri Seems reasonable enough.
Gee, that didn't take long. The IG Report failed to live up to the Trump TV and right wing noise ballyhoo. So, you attack the report that you've been crowing about for months!!!!!!
Did what? “We did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that improper considerations, including political bias, directly affected the specific investigative actions we reviewed,”
Read my posts. My favorite Alt Left was very specific. “The Clinton’s need to have their assets seized, Giustra needs to arrested, and at a minimum racketeering charges need to pursued against the whole damn bunch of ‘em….BEFORE IT GETS REPEATED WITH, SAY, THE TPP. Hillary needs to face charges of Espionage for her e-mail. And if guilty, like with Edward Snowden, all options for disposition of her miserable guilty ass should be on the table including the death penalty.” http://www.thomhartmann.com/users/telliottmbamsc/blog/2016/01/clinton’s-used-trade-agreements-get-access-taxpayer-money-and-enri
I am sure he meant after a fair trial and a conviction for treason. But I agree the old "bullet in the back of the head" thing is a bit too Alt Left for this forum
Oh god man. The conclusion is not that the political bias did not exist. Of course it existed. The conclusion is that the political bias did not directly affect the investigation. Eat the nothingburger and move on.
Little early yet to know everything in the report, but I don't think I'm attacking anything...just curious about carefully structured statements is all. The American people know something stinks here.