FBI OFFICIALS’ ANTI-TRUMP TEXT WAS MISSING FROM EARLIER DOCUMENT PRODUCTIONS

http://dailycaller.com/2018/06/14/fbi-officials-anti-trump-text-missing-earlier-doc/

This text is a bombshell. But the fact the FBI hid it is an even bigger bombshell!

The FBI needs to be cleaned out of obama sycophants. They are too corrupt.

 

Imagine that.….

 

“We did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that improper considerations, including political bias, directly affected the specific investigative actions we reviewed,”

 

Shocker!

 

Crooked cops. Again.

 

Really this is so weak.

 

So hiding info is weak? LOL! Nixon thought so too.

 

The FBI is broken.

The FBI is full of political hacks who decide when and where to follow protocols at will. Nothing but an agency full of Rogue agents and Patsy's that protect them.

The FBI is out of control.

 

Trying to make out this tweet into some scandal is weak!

 

This is a bald face lie. Not only was this information already known and made public, Comey, himself was questioned during several interviews at the time about the text messages found through emails later discovered on Weiners laptop.

In the whole IG report today, there is nothing new. It was very much like the Trump/Kim summit. Nothing that had not already been firmly in the public domain prior was revealed in either one of these two things.

Not knowing that two FBI agents who were dating each other and claimed in a text messages that they did not want Trump elected, is nothing new, had already been discussed ad nauseam and had no impact in changing how Hillary got hurt or in how Trump benefited from Russian hacking and hijacking of the 2016 election.

This false equivalence of emails and hacking are the topic of an OP I just posted.

 

Hilarious. I remember when mueller spoke person said trump isn't a target in the investigation, you (perhaps rightly) said that it is was legal speak and didn't mean trump wasn't going to be under investigation or that he isn't a subject.

Is mueller the only govement official that can legally parse his words? I'd bring your attention to the qualifiers " we did not find", " directly affected" , " political bias"etc. this doesn't mean that none exist, that none indirectly affected any investigations or that nothing has been found to indicate that there was a personal bias instead of political.

That's ignoring the fact that there are more reports to be released. I also remember you saying McCabe will have a hearing to get back his pension or something along those lines. This is the guy that recommended a criminal referral to McCabe. It seems to me you chose which of Horowitz choices are legitimate based on politics.

 

1. Mueller nor any spokesman have commented about trump
2. Your argument is that a lack of evidence doesn’t prove anything. Which speaks for itself. Can I use that if trump isn’t “found” to have colluded?
3. Yes McCabe is appealing. I never said he was innocent.

 

Of course the swamp critters aren't going to find anything wrong with another swamp critters crimes.

Try to keep up.

 

FBI agent Peter Strzok assured his mistress and colleague Lisa Page that they would stop Donald Trump from winning the presidency in a text message, a new report from the DOJ inspector general finds per Bloomberg News White House Correspondent Jennifer Jacobs.

“Several FBI employees Who played critical roles in the investigation sent political messages,” the report reads, according to Jacobs.

“(Trump’s) not ever going to become president, right? Right?!” Page wrote to Strzok, Bloomberg reports.

“No. No he’s not. We’ll stop it,” Strzok reportedly replied.

http://dailycaller.com/2018/06/14/strozk-well-stop-trump-presidency/

Lets us know when they start reviewing all of Strzoks emails in correlation of context.

 

Lmao I’m so not surprised you’ve now tossed the IG into the swamp. Does this mean McCabe gets his pension back?

 

Emails don’t prove he did anything wrong. Is there one that says “I’m going to ignore the laws and the evidence”?

 

LMAO.....the FBI. We didn't do anything wrong but we are going to make some changes.

 

You trust government?

 

They did stuff wrong. They were very unfair to Hillary.

 

The FBI.....we didn't do anything wrong but we are going to make some changes.

 

Oh now they did something wrong.....they were unfair to Hillary.

 

I
1. Mueller spokesperson definetly said that a lot of the trump Russia news story are wrong. I was SLIGHTY incorrect however when I said his spokesperson said that. It was reported that mueller himself(or possible a lawyer he employs?) told trump he isn't a target in a criminal investigation. You commented on that story on this very forum, I remember.
2. Nope my argument isn't a lack of evidence. I'm not sure if any wrong doing occurred, I'm just saying that ,legally, that statement doesn't mean that no wrong doing occurred on the part of the investigators. So constantly posting the quote as though that means bias(political or personal) had no effect(direct or indirect) on the investigation is pointless, as the stament doesn't say that.
3. McCabe is appealing? Or wanted to/going to appeal? Just checked and I'm not finding any news that he is legally appealing.

 

While the inspector general report does not take a new look at the officials’ judgment that the evidence in the Clinton case clearly fell short of that standard, it backs their key interpretation of the law, saying it “was consistent with the department’s historical approach in prior cases under different leadership, including in the 2008 decision not to prosecute former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales for mishandling classified documents.”

 

And so do you.

 

Page: “[Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!”
Strzok: “No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it.”

No, there's no intent or bias.

LMFAO!