IG Report Into Russia Inquiry

cncmin

Well-known member
Well, I'm so surprised that none of the dittoheads have piped in yet. A whole bunch of their idiotic conspiracy theories squashed in one fell swoop. Combine that with Fiona Hill squashing a bunch more yesterday, and they're pretty much left to ignorantly drooling over the dozens of lies Dear Leader told them on Faux & Friends this morning and following the rants of an elderly, nutty con man.
 

Costa Rican Gopher

Mind of a Scientist
What a bunch of nonsense. None of this dispels anything. It's literally just nonsense, intended to convince non-thinkers of their innocence ahead of the tourble that's coming down the pike.

It's important to understand what this is. It's the FBI people leaking the parts of the IG report that implicate them. They're doing this in partnership with CNN/WaPo/NYT to shape the stories & get ahead of the damage that's coming. We saw that with the first leak that emerged last night claiming one of Peter Strzok's FBI attorneys had lied on the Page FISA app, then altered documents to cover his tracks. This will continue until the IG report comes out. It's easy to paint a picture they want us to see, when we don't get to see the report or hear the other side of this story. Also of note, is none of these so-called reporters have seen it either. They're just reporting what their partners in the FBI are telling them to write.

- We already knew Horowitz was not likely to prove political bias. In his last report he said he believed the FBI acted out of political bias, but he couldn't prove it. He's right. That's very hard to prove. No shocker that hasn't changed. The claim that Horowitz didn't find political bias is meaningless.

- Same with Mifsud not being an FBI informant. He was absolutely NOT an FBI informant! He was a CIA informant. Brennan & the CIA, didn't tell Comey & the FBI what they were up to with the entrapment scheme against Page/Papadapolous. That's why the FBI asked Papadapolous to wear a wire when he met with Mifsud. The FBI was still in the dark. It was once they interviewed Mifsud that they figured out he was CIA, working for Brennan/Obama. That's why after lying to FBI investigators three times, the FBI let him go & never charged him with anything. Compared to every other person accused of lying to the FBI investigators, the idea that a suspected Russian agent, was allowed to lie to them three times, then walk away, uncharged & continue living in DC, is preposterous, unless you understand who Mifsud was actually working for. Then it all makes sense.

- We still don't know what opened the Russia investigation. Are we going with the Joseph Mifsud telling George Papadapolous about HIllary emails? The Steele (Russian intel) dossier came later. Like all the rest if this garbage, this is also nothing new.
 

Cruze

Active member
It looks like we can now add the Russian Inquiry/Steele Dossier to the Hillary Clinton investigations and all of the Obama investigations that went exactly nowhere for Republicans since 2008. They are batting 0 for at least 16 investigations and God knows how many taxpayer dollars and federal employee hours spent on them. It has to be the worse batting average in the history of politics anywhere in the world.


 

Section2

Well-known member
I don’t know if CRG is correct overall. I won’t hold my breath. But this is absolutely narrative building by a compliant MSM. Howie hated it when Barr did something similar, but I have a feeling he will let it slide now.
 

short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
So, it appears the conclusion - based on what has been reported - is

Sloppy - unprofessional - but not criminal and not part of a conspiracy.

Which - ironically - is what some people are saying about the President and the Ukraine matter.

Makes you feel real good about the level of professionalism in all levels and sectors of the Federal government.

And this is the way the world ends. not with a bang, but a whimper.
 

TruthSeeker

Active member
So, it appears the conclusion - based on what has been reported - is

Sloppy - unprofessional - but not criminal and not part of a conspiracy.

Which - ironically - is what some people are saying about the President and the Ukraine matter.

Makes you feel real good about the level of professionalism in all levels and sectors of the Federal government.

And this is the way the world ends. not with a bang, but a whimper.
If the president is sloppy and unprofessional, then that's a big enough indictment to vote him out. Either way, Trump loses.
 

cncmin

Well-known member
I don’t know if CRG is correct overall. I won’t hold my breath. But this is absolutely narrative building by a compliant MSM. Howie hated it when Barr did something similar, but I have a feeling he will let it slide now.
LOL yeah. OK.
 

TruthSeeker

Active member
UI. Almost all the Trumpists on these boards are UIs. They're unknowing traitors to their country propping up our adversaries.
 

cncmin

Well-known member
UI. Almost all the Trumpists on these boards are UIs. They're unknowing traitors to their country propping up our adversaries.
.
.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/steveandriole/2019/10/11/mueller-was-right-again-this-time-its-russian-election-interference-with-social-media/#4cf1e98b5405
.
https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Report_Volume2.pdf
.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/new-study-shows-russian-propaganda-may-really-have-helped-trump-n1025306

It doesn't just happen here. Boris Johnson and his cronies in the UK were helped in the Brexit campaign by...Russia. as of 11/12, anyway, Boris Johnson et al. have not released the report on the subject. Notably, there is an upcoming election, very soon.
https://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/clinton-criticizes-uk-blocking-russian-influence-report-66933937

In some ways it is, actually, kind of funny in a way. Russia cannot defeat us or the Western world militarily. Instead, they simply spread lies to a bunch of horribly gullible tools who have the same power to vote as the rest, and that is leading to the West destroying itself from within.
 
Last edited:

justthefacts

Active member
- We already knew Horowitz was not likely to prove political bias. In his last report he said he believed the FBI acted out of political bias, but he couldn't prove it. He's right. That's very hard to prove. No shocker that hasn't changed. The claim that Horowitz didn't find political bias is meaningless.
That's not what the first report said. It said that while the messages raised questions of bias, there was NO EVIDENCE that that bias impacted the investigation. It's a big difference from "could not prove" and "there was no evidence."

I expect this will be your response to the next report too: make assertions that aren't supported by the evidence, and hope no one notices. I do like how you implicitly accuse Trump appointee Christopher Wray with running an organization that is dirty.







 

KillerGopherFan

Active member
I don’t know what the IG report is going to say. I’ll accept whatever the results are, unlike our lefty friends with the Mueller Report.

But, it’s interesting that the IG report hasn’t been made public, and there’s all kinds of trying to explain what it’s going to say before it public. It seems like people are trying to get ahead of the release of damaging information.

The last IG report was quite critical of Federal authorities, but said that, despite evidence of bias, there wasn’t proof that the bias was acted on to change the course of the investigation.

On the other hand, the Mueller Report exonerated Trump from Russian conspiracy theories. The impeachment inquiry has only produced hearsay evidence and no direct evidence of a quid pro quo for a meeting and/or aid. But lefties are willing to make the assumption of guilt for Trump. I suspect the IG report could have a similar level of evidence as the impeachment and the earlier IG investigation, but lefties will be hypocritical in its interpretation.

I don’t believe for a minute that the IG report will not be very critical of Federal authorities.
 

Dean S

Active member
I don’t know what the IG report is going to say. I’ll accept whatever the results are, unlike our lefty friends with the Mueller Report.

But, it’s interesting that the IG report hasn’t been made public, and there’s all kinds of trying to explain what it’s going to say before it public. It seems like people are trying to get ahead of the release of damaging information.

The last IG report was quite critical of Federal authorities, but said that, despite evidence of bias, there wasn’t proof that the bias was acted on to change the course of the investigation.

On the other hand, the Mueller Report exonerated Trump from Russian conspiracy theories. The impeachment inquiry has only produced hearsay evidence and no direct evidence of a quid pro quo for a meeting and/or aid. But lefties are willing to make the assumption of guilt for Trump. I suspect the IG report could have a similar level of evidence as the impeachment and the earlier IG investigation, but lefties will be hypocritical in its interpretation.

I don’t believe for a minute that the IG report will not be very critical of Federal authorities.
This contradicts your statement that the Mueller Report exonerating Trump:

"Fourth, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, however, we are unable to reach that judgment. The evidence we obtained about the President's actions and intent presents difficult issues that prevent us from conclusively determining that no criminal conduct occurred. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."
 

KillerGopherFan

Active member
This contradicts your statement that the Mueller Report exonerating Trump:

"Fourth, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, however, we are unable to reach that judgment. The evidence we obtained about the President's actions and intent presents difficult issues that prevent us from conclusively determining that no criminal conduct occurred. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."
“the Mueller Report exonerated Trump from Russian conspiracy theories”.

The point you’ve highlighted referred to Obstruction of Justice.
 

saintpaulguy

Active member
I don’t know what the IG report is going to say. I’ll accept whatever the results are, unlike our lefty friends with the Mueller Report.

But, it’s interesting that the IG report hasn’t been made public, and there’s all kinds of trying to explain what it’s going to say before it public. It seems like people are trying to get ahead of the release of damaging information.

The last IG report was quite critical of Federal authorities, but said that, despite evidence of bias, there wasn’t proof that the bias was acted on to change the course of the investigation.

On the other hand, the Mueller Report exonerated Trump from Russian conspiracy theories. The impeachment inquiry has only produced hearsay evidence and no direct evidence of a quid pro quo for a meeting and/or aid. But lefties are willing to make the assumption of guilt for Trump. I suspect the IG report could have a similar level of evidence as the impeachment and the earlier IG investigation, but lefties will be hypocritical in its interpretation.

I don’t believe for a minute that the IG report will not be very critical of Federal authorities.
Crowdstrike Strozk Page Coup Attempt DNC Server Fusion GPS Misfud!

Cmon homes, it’s looking like a lot of crazy is going down river.
 

bottlebass

Main Member
OMG BEEG! Your report may actually be coming out next week!

Where is beeg? This is his big moment he has been talking about non stop every time he gets put in a box.
 

justthefacts

Active member
I don’t know what the IG report is going to say. I’ll accept whatever the results are, unlike our lefty friends with the Mueller Report.

But, it’s interesting that the IG report hasn’t been made public, and there’s all kinds of trying to explain what it’s going to say before it public. It seems like people are trying to get ahead of the release of damaging information.

The last IG report was quite critical of Federal authorities, but said that, despite evidence of bias, there wasn’t proof that the bias was acted on to change the course of the investigation.

On the other hand, the Mueller Report exonerated Trump from Russian conspiracy theories. The impeachment inquiry has only produced hearsay evidence and no direct evidence of a quid pro quo for a meeting and/or aid. But lefties are willing to make the assumption of guilt for Trump. I suspect the IG report could have a similar level of evidence as the impeachment and the earlier IG investigation, but lefties will be hypocritical in its interpretation.

I don’t believe for a minute that the IG report will not be very critical of Federal authorities.

Ugh, the first bolded is incorrect and I explained that 5 posts before this one: http://www.forums.gopherhole.com/boards/threads/ig-report-into-russia-inquiry.93482/post-1848489

The second bolded, despite the incorrect passage being cited earlier, is also a mischaracterization:

 
Last edited:

KillerGopherFan

Active member
Ugh, the first bolded is incorrect and I explained that 5 posts before this one: http://www.forums.gopherhole.com/boards/threads/ig-report-into-russia-inquiry.93482/post-1848489

The second bolded, despite the incorrect passage being cited earlier, is also a mischaracterization:

Yeah, thanks for correcting that. It demonstrates how unbiased inspector generals write conclusions differently than lefty biased hack prosecutors working on the Mueller report when the level of evidence is basically the same. One makes no assumptions and the other makes lots of assumptions in its conclusion.
 
Top Bottom