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

Obviously they had too much faith in the system.

 

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!

 

1. Meaning it’s based on an unnamed source
2. No evidence of wrong doing doesn’t mean there’s no wrong doing. Just like no evidence of collusion doesn’t mean there isn’t any, right?
3. He said he was. I don’t much care either way. I’ve never said McCabe was innocent, except maybe to sarcastically mock the deep state conspiracy loons.

 

1. Sick. I've seen you argue in this forum dude. There have been multiple times you've argued under stories that are based on unnamed sources. You shouldn't ever blindly believe unnamed sources. Whether or not you want it to be true. The lack of refutation from mueller, and related indictments, makes me believe that he actually did tell the president or the presidents legal team what the source alleges he said.
2. I'm going by exactly what the I.G said. He had a very specific set of words he didn't say no bias. He said political bias. He didn't say no direct or indirect. He said direct. He didn't say in any case he reviewed. He said in the Clinton case. These things matter legally. Surely he didn't recommend the 5 agents for investigations for fun.
3. Doesn't matter what he said in this instance. It's either he is appealing or isn't. And he isn't as of the post.

 

1. And sometimes they’re wrong. Do you trust every unnamed source? I don’t.
2. Yes he said no improper bias, must I post it again?
3. Why do you think I care about republican McCabe?

 

Yeah it's "funny" what these corrupt bastards leaked and what they didn't.

Why Did the Corrupt Scummy FBI/DOJ Redact Strzok's "We'll Stop Him" Response to Page's Question About Letting Trump Become President?

His response to Happy Horndog Page's question: "Trump's not going to become president, right?"

That wasn't previously disclosed. Did Rat-Faced Rosenstein redact it for, ahem, "national security concerns"?


Sohrab Ahmari

✔@SohrabAhmari
How is it that Lisa Page's question ("Trump's not going to become president, right?") was leaked, but Peter Strzok's response ("No, we'll stop it") was not until now? And how is that not a massive deal?

My mind is boggled.

8:10 AM - Jun 14, 2018

As Biden would say. It's a Big Fn Deal!

Patient, step at a time. We will get to the bottom of all of this, and the guilty will pay!

 

From the OIG report, pages XI and XII, regarding STRZOK, etal:


" We were deeply troubled by text messages exchanged between Strzok and Page that potentially indicated or created the appearance that investigative decisions were impacted by bias or improper considerations. Most of the text messages raising such questions pertained to the Russia investigation , which was not a part of this review. Nonetheless, when one senior FBI official, Strzok, who was helping lead the Russia investigation at the time, conveys in a text message to another senior FBI official, Page, " No, he won't. We'll stop it", in response to her question , " [Trump's ] not ever going to become president, right ?!" , it is not only indicative of a biased state of mind, but even, more seriously, implies a willingness to take official action to impact the presidential candidate's electoral prospects. It is antithetical to the core values of the FBI and the Department of Justice.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/14/politics/read-doj-ig-report/index.html


Yeah..."what conspiracy"?

"INSURANCE POLICY".

 

We also learned that members of the FBI were taking bribes from the media. That is perhaps the worst bit of information to come from this report. The rest was not that surprising... http://dailycaller.com/2018/06/14/ig-report-fbi-agents-bribed-journalists/

 

Wow, no documentary to show their bias. No, they didn't come right out and say lets let Hillary off the hook so she can run for President because we know she'll win if she does. But that's just what they did and the bias within the FBI and Attorney General is clearly shown.

 

It’s admirable how a total lack of evidence doesn’t change your mind lol

 

Keep reading tens of thousands of texts were "unrecoverable".

 

However, what they do say proves Trump was right to fire Comey so no obstruction.

I'm surprised the swamp hasn't deleted or bleach bit every single piece of incriminating evidence by now.

 

Acknowledges that improper considerations and political bias occured.

 

There is plenty of evidence. She was told to hand over her E-mails and didn't do it. Destroyed them instead. Right there she committed a crime. Used her private server, another crime. Still no charges brought against her. That's because the Attorney General told Comey to only call what she did a (matter) after meeting Bill Clinton right here in Phoenix on her private jet. Found her innocent over a month before they even interviewed her or a dozen witnesses. Even then never swore her in.

 

So it proves the FBI was colliding to pick sides against a president. That’s corrupt as ****. And since it wasn’t in the report that proves again how corrupt they are and obstructing justice by withholding evidence. It completely nullifies their reports on Hillary and proves how guilty she is.

This is actual collusion folks. Easily probable and obvious corruption. Puts Russia Russia cries to shame.

 

I say we are going to stop Trump in 2020 all the time does that mean Im part of the deep state conspiracy to break the law?

 

What does being delusional have to do with guy who prioritized investigations?

 

You aren't Whitewashing Hillary's espionage and working on The Trump Witch Hunt as some of the top folks in the highest law enforcement group in the nation, Silly!

Mark Meadows on IG Report: "Rosenstein Must Be Held Accountable for His Obstructionist Conduct"

 

Why Did FBI Assign Same Agents to Clinton and Trump Cases?

 

Dirty Redactions. Sex for Dirt.

Did reporters violate the law in giving gifts to FBI employees in exchange for leaks?

The swampiest revelation in the I.G. report.

 

Horowitz Confirms He Did NOT Recover All Missing Strzok-Page Text Messages

 

The Entire Trump Witch Hunt is tainted.

Giuliani: Trump’s not sitting down for an interview “in a corrupt investigation”



“Anything Peter Strzok touched is contaminated …”

 

Says the guy who adores the networks who generated weeks of BS stories when Trump said 'They let you..."

 

They are about as unbiased as the most extreme Left-wing posters here, good analogy.

NO BIAS IN THE FBI’S HILLARY EMAIL PROBE? YOU’RE KIDDING, RIGHT?

There is a basic problem at the heart of the report of the Department of Justice Inspector General on the FBI’s 2016 investigation of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server and address to conduct official U.S. diplomatic business.

The report provides reams of evidence that the key FBI executives running the email probe were extremely prejudiced, nay, obsessively biased against President Donald Trump and for Clinton. But the report offers zero logical explanation for why those reams don’t provide the most likely explanation for the fact the FBI gave Clinton a free pass after she demonstrated gross negligence in handling hundreds of the country’s most sensitive national security secrets.

And that’s why come Monday, IG Michael Horowitz is likely to have a very rough time of it before the Senate Judiciary Committee. And no matter how bruised and battered he may be at the end of the day, he’ll have to face it all over again before the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday.

 

It's a half baked report, Horowitz is a cautious guy and unless it was signed "we did this out of bias" he wasn't going to find any bias, but, he did meticulously lay out the ground work for Grand Juries to mine the various areas of criminal behavior, and while his Russia investigation isn't presented yet, he did disclose a few gems:

The IG Report also deals with the “insurance policy” text between Strzok and Page:

August 15, 2016: In a text message exchange on August 15, 2016, Strzok told Page, “I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office—that there’s no way he gets elected—but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40….” The “Andy” referred to in the text message appears to be FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. McCabe was not a party to this text message, and we did not find evidence that he received it.
***
Strzok provided a lengthy explanation for this text message. In substance, Strzok told us that he did not remember the specific conversation, but that it likely was part of a discussion about how to handle a variety of allegations of “collusion between members of the Trump campaign and the government of Russia.” As part of this discussion, the team debated how aggressive to be and whether to use overt investigative methods. Given that Clinton was the “prohibitive favorite” to win, Strzok said that they discussed whether it made sense to compromise sensitive sources and methods to “bring things to some sort of precipitative conclusion and understanding.” Strzok said the reference in his text message to an “insurance policy” reflected his conclusion that the FBI should investigate the allegations thoroughly right away, as if Trump were going to win. Strzok stated that Clinton’s position in the polls did not ultimately impact the investigative decisions that were made in the Russia matter.​

That explanation does not clear Strzok. Per Strzok, the “insurance policy” means that he thought the FBI should “investigate the [collusion] allegations thoroughly right away, as if Trump were going to win.” So they could release or leak their findings before the election and thereby insure that Trump wouldn’t win.

It didn’t happen, of course, because the “Russia investigation” found no evidence of collusion or other wrongdoing.

Once President Trump won the election, to the shock and dismay of Lisa Page and Peter Strzok along with many others at the FBI and the Department of Justice, they then used the ongoing Russia investigation with the goal of driving Trump from office:

May 18, 2017: Mueller was appointed Special Counsel on May 17, 2017. The next day Strzok and Page exchanged text messages in a discussion of whether Strzok should join the Special Counsel’s investigation. Strzok wrote: “For me, and this case, I personally have a sense of unfinished business. I unleashed it with MYE [Midyear Exam, the investigation into Clinton’s emails]. Now I need to fix it and finish it.”

Later in the same exchange, Strzok, apparently while weighing his career options, made this comparison: “Who gives a f*ck, one more A[ssistant] D[irector]…[versus] [a]n investigation leading to impeachment?” Later in this exchange, Strzok stated, “you and I both know the odds are nothing. If I thought it was likely I’d be there no question. I hesitate in part because of my gut sense and concern there’s no big there there.”
​

As always, Strzok had a story:

Strzok acknowledged that his text messages could be read to suggest that Strzok held himself responsible for Trump’s victory and Clinton’s defeat because of the Midyear investigation and that he viewed the Russia investigation as providing him an opportunity to “fix” this result by working on an investigation that could result in the impeachment of President Trump. However, Strzok said he strongly disagreed with this interpretation and provided a lengthy explanation for these statements.​

I’ll bet he did.

A common theme of the FBI employees’ responses to the IG’s questions is that, yes, they certainly were Hillary Clinton partisans; and yes, they absolutely detested Donald Trump; and, too, they thought Trump voters were beneath contempt and Trump’s election would threaten the survival of the republic. But those were only their private political views, and didn’t affect the judgments they made while investigating Hillary’s obviously illegal server on the one hand, and the Trump campaign’s nonexistent alliance with Russia on the other...Right.

No one can read the vicious, hateful, over-the-top partisan vitriol that FBI employees directed against Donald Trump–Strzok and Page are not the only ones quoted in the IG’s report–and give any credence to that claim. These high-ranking FBI agents were politicized to the core and were determined to do anything they could to secure their candidate’s election. Failing that, they plunged into the faux Russia election story in hopes of discrediting President Trump and as they explicitly discussed, driving him from office.

The IG’s report exposes a deeply corrupt, vile and politicized FBI and Department of Justice. And so far, we are seeing only half of the story, at most. No one has yet looked into the Democrats’ “Russia” tale or any partisan corruption linked to Bob Mueller’s farcical “investigation.” Given DOJ’s bitter refusal to cooperate with the Congressional committees that have constitutional oversight responsibilities over that Department–has anyone tried to justify DOJ’s stonewalling?

We can assume that the damning documents that have been produced so far are only the beginning. Most likely, they provide only an inkling of the information the Justice Department, apparently still dominated by Obama holdovers, is withholding from Congress.

The unravelling of the effort to bring down President Trump has barely begun.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/06/notes-on-the-ig-report.php