Horowitz Report and FBI Abuse - WSJ

[squatz1]

The IG Horowitz report has finally come out. Here are some takeaways, I've sourced these from the WSJ and the reddit (Typically The_Donald, Politics, etc)

Here is some of the info that I gathered from the report. I'll start off with some of the info from The_Donald:

Page 196-FBI lies about corroborating Steele dossier info

FBI ignores glaring issues with dossier's credibility
AG Barr's statement
Page 414-Three teams assigned to the investigation all made "basic and fundamental errors"
Horowitz summary
Fusion GPS fuckery
Confidential human sources

Statement of U.S. Attorney John H. Durham
“I have the utmost respect for the mission of the Office of Inspector General and the comprehensive work that went into the report prepared by Mr. Horowitz and his staff. However, our investigation is not limited to developing information from within component parts of the Justice Department. Our investigation has included developing information from other persons and entities, both in the U.S. and outside of the U.S. Based on the evidence collected to date, and while our investigation is ongoing, last month we advised the Inspector General that we do not agree with some of the report’s conclusions as to predication and how the FBI case was opened.”

Then you have the other side, the /r/politics subreddit:

Breaking: Dossier author Chris Steele had a meeting at Trump Tower, and maintains he was not biased against President Trump and in fact maintained a close friendship with a family member and was, if anything, “favourably disposed” to the Trumps. Extract from the OIG report here:

The full report. Here are excerpts of every single finding on political bias in the Executive Summary:

Page III. On Opening the Main Investigation.
We concluded that Priestap's exercise of discretion in opening the investigation was in compliance with Department and FBI policies, and we did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced his decision.

Page IV. On Opening Four Individual Investigations of Page, Manafort, Papadapoulous and Flynn.
We did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced the decisions to open the four individual investigations.

Page VI. On FISA of Carter Page
We did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced the FBI's decision to seek FISA authority on Carter Page.

Page XVII. On Usage of Confidential Human Sources and Undercover Employees.
Finally, we also found no documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivations influenced the FBI's decision to use CHSs or UCEs to interact with Trump campaign officials in the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.

And a Bonus on Page II. On Steele Dossier playing no role whatever in the Predication of the Investigation

These officials, though, did not become aware of Steele's election reporting until weeks laterand we therefore determined that Steele's reports played no role in the Crossfire Hurricane opening.

Emphatic rejection, on every single point, of the Barr/Trump conspiracy that the Russia investigation - or any aspect thereof - was politically biased or motivated.

I'll continue to add things here as we and other sources find them, I'm not going to make a conclusion here because there's a ton of info here.

[TECSHARE]

https://www.theepochtimes.com/james-comey-admits-he-was-wrong-while-defending-fbis-fisa-system-after-ig-report_3174705.html

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/schiff-i-had-no-idea-fbi-was-committing-serious-abuses-when-i-said-all-stuff

[Gyfts]

https://twitter.com/jasonrantz/status/1206317239726559232


James Comey was the director of the FBI but claims he did not know about the FISA abuse and then claimed during an interview in 2018 that the FISA application process in which Carter Paige, former campaign associate of the Trump campaign, did not contain any errors of signs of abuse. According to the inspector General report, there was a total of 17 significant errors in the FISA application process which points towards rampant FISA application abuse in the wire tapping of Carter Paige.

To add, Comey claimed that the debunked Steele Dossier was apart of a broad "mosaic" in regards to granting the FISA warrant when the Inspector General claimed in an open hearing that the Steel Dossier was a "central" piece in granting the application. And James Comey still claims the integrity of the FBI was upheld? Unbelievable.

[squatz1]

https://twitter.com/jasonrantz/status/1206317239726559232


James Comey was the director of the FBI but claims he did not know about the FISA abuse and then claimed during an interview in 2018 that the FISA application process in which Carter Paige, former campaign associate of the Trump campaign, did not contain any errors of signs of abuse. According to the inspector General report, there was a total of 17 significant errors in the FISA application process which points towards rampant FISA application abuse in the wire tapping of Carter Paige.

To add, Comey claimed that the debunked Steele Dossier was apart of a broad "mosaic" in regards to granting the FISA warrant when the Inspector General claimed in an open hearing that the Steel Dossier was a "central" piece in granting the application. And James Comey still claims the integrity of the FBI was upheld? Unbelievable.

I love how even when he talks about what Trump got wrong. He practically says that 'we didn't illegally spy/wiretap the trump campaign' Yeah man, it wasn't fucking illegal because you got a secret FISA court to sign off on it while you lied to them about why he needed to be spyed on. So while it's not illegal, there were serious issues with this guy even getting the warrant in the first place.

Puts into perspective how horrible they treat private American citizens rights.

[TECSHARE]

I love how even when he talks about what Trump got wrong. He practically says that 'we didn't illegally spy/wiretap the trump campaign' Yeah man, it wasn't fucking illegal because you got a secret FISA court to sign off on it while you lied to them about why he needed to be spyed on. So while it's not illegal, there were serious issues with this guy even getting the warrant in the first place.

Puts into perspective how horrible they treat private American citizens rights.

No, it absolutely was very illegal, and people are going to be prosecuted over it like I have been saying for some time.

[Mometaskers]

I haven't followed these investigations closely being non-American but it's just funny that they've trying to get rid of the man even before he stepped into the White House but look now. It's almost 2020, another election cycle and they still haven't succeeded in removing him. If anything, they only made him look sympathetic with how they are treating him.

[TECSHARE]

I haven't followed these investigations closely being non-American but it's just funny that they've trying to get rid of the man even before he stepped into the White House but look now. It's almost 2020, another election cycle and they still haven't succeeded in removing him. If anything, they only made him look sympathetic with how they are treating him.

This is why his win is virtually assured at this point. For how big of an asshole Trump can be, the democrat party has topped him as being so revolting that even people who don't like Trump will vote for him because they are so absolutely exhausted with the democrat's bullshit. Their inability to recognize this dynamic is the cause of their own self destruction. Most people would vote for a bag of rocks over any of the current democrat candidates.

[Mometaskers]

I haven't followed these investigations closely being non-American but it's just funny that they've trying to get rid of the man even before he stepped into the White House but look now. It's almost 2020, another election cycle and they still haven't succeeded in removing him. If anything, they only made him look sympathetic with how they are treating him.

This is why his win is virtually assured at this point. For how big of an asshole Trump can be, the democrat party has topped him as being so revolting that even people who don't like Trump will vote for him because they are so absolutely exhausted with the democrat's bullshit. Their inability to recognize this dynamic is the cause of their own self destruction. Most people would vote for a bag of rocks over any of the current democrat candidates.

That what I suspect is happening. We are seeing this in other Western countries as well, with right-wing parties gaining more popularity. I still wouldn't say it's an assured win for Trump though, the Dems can still pull some shenanigans.

What's clear though is that the country has become very polarized that if a Dem wins the presidency, it'll have a hard time satisfying people. If msm and social media don't have a leftist bias, Dem president would get the same treatment Trump is getting now.

[TECSHARE]

Well, that's what FOX News is for. FOX News is popular because there indeed exists a bias toward the left in most mainstream news, and there is a consumer demand for counterbalance.

I think the bias in the general media exists because leftist ideology just makes for better news. And by "better news" I mean it attracts more viewers and sells more commercials. It can be more sensational or plain interesting. Whereas "conservative news" tends to be dry and boring.

I love how every leftist thinks Fox is some kind of conservative Mecca. Fox is shit and just as establishment as the rest of the media, except for one or two legitimate people on it who they keep on very tight leashes. Most of the media is leftist, because the corporate establishment is leftist, not because it is  "more interesting". Conservatives are more individualistic by nature, the left are collectivists. Collectivist ideology aligns perfectly with the globalist cattle cart mentality the corporate media favors to protect its own interests.

Of course none of this has anything to do with the topic, which you will avoid completely of course because it is proof of exactly the opposite of everything you have been screaming at the top of your lungs for the past few years.

[TECSHARE]

Aww whats a matter techole, wake up on the wrong side of the bed this morning? (every morning actually, I don't think your bed has a "right" side).

FOX News gets mentioned by Trump seemingly a hundred times a month, wonder why that is.

I've never said anything about Horowitz, the FBI spying on Trump, or whatever this thread is actually about. I didn't even say it in this thread. Don't let that stop you from making absolutely false statements, though.

TIL everytime Trump speaks, he speaks for every conservative.

That's what I said. Take your off topic Trump derangement syndrome rambling elsewhere, this thread is about how all the narratives you have been pushing have been proven to be lies by this report.


http://www.stationgossip.com/2019/12/the-main-source-for-christopher-steeles.html

[Spendulus]

I still wouldn't say it's an assured win for Trump though, the Dems can still pull some shenanigans.

LOL "shenanigans." You mean like winning the popular and electoral votes?

What's clear though is that the country has become very polarized that if a Dem wins the presidency, it'll have a hard time satisfying people. If msm and social media don't have a leftist bias, Dem president would get the same treatment Trump is getting now.

Well, that's what FOX News is for. FOX News is popular because there indeed exists a bias toward the left in most mainstream news, and there is a consumer demand for counterbalance.

I think the bias in the general media exists because leftist ideology just makes for better news. And by "better news" I mean it attracts more viewers and sells more commercials. It can be more sensational or plain interesting. Whereas "conservative news" tends to be dry and boring.

That doesn't explain something that has always astonished me, which is how Rush Limbaugh on the radio is about to operate very successfully with about 50-70% of airtime being commercials.

Regarding presidents, though, ...

Our asshole is better than your assholes...

[TECSHARE]

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/fisa-court-slams-fbi-rare-public-statement

[squatz1]

I still wouldn't say it's an assured win for Trump though, the Dems can still pull some shenanigans.

LOL "shenanigans." You mean like winning the popular and electoral votes?

What's clear though is that the country has become very polarized that if a Dem wins the presidency, it'll have a hard time satisfying people. If msm and social media don't have a leftist bias, Dem president would get the same treatment Trump is getting now.

Well, that's what FOX News is for. FOX News is popular because there indeed exists a bias toward the left in most mainstream news, and there is a consumer demand for counterbalance.

I think the bias in the general media exists because leftist ideology just makes for better news. And by "better news" I mean it attracts more viewers and sells more commercials. It can be more sensational or plain interesting. Whereas "conservative news" tends to be dry and boring.

Well isn't that how this whole thing works. Everyone lies their echo chambers so they go to where they can find the information that they beleive in repeated over and over.

It's why Conservatives like Fox and Liberals like CNN.

I think TecShare is right in the sense that all of these news companies are mainstream news companies though, and all of them are willing to support the other side if it helps them in the longrun. Think about when 9/11 happened and Bush wanted to invade Iraq -- the media were the ones that sold the idea to the American people, and most people had supported the war initially. Both sides did that, not one or the other.

They're still the same.

[TECSHARE]

Well isn't that how this whole thing works. Everyone lies their echo chambers so they go to where they can find the information that they beleive in repeated over and over.

It's why Conservatives like Fox and Liberals like CNN.

I think TecShare is right in the sense that all of these news companies are mainstream news companies though, and all of them are willing to support the other side if it helps them in the longrun. Think about when 9/11 happened and Bush wanted to invade Iraq -- the media were the ones that sold the idea to the American people, and most people had supported the war initially. Both sides did that, not one or the other.

They're still the same.

Back then I was very opposed to Bush policies. The media, as it always does supports the establishment, be it government or corporate, because they know who butters their bread. They both serve shit sandwiches, but one has some red food coloring in it and one has some blue food coloring in it. Back then "liberal" meant leave people who aren't bothering anyone else alone, and being liberal was anti-establishment. Now being "liberal" means not leaving people alone until they comply with the establishment. There is nothing liberal about the modern left just like there wasn't anything conservative about the Bush era right.

This is part of the media's role in electing Trump. Everyone sees the media down on their knees slurping down establishment dick be it red or blue, and they attack no one more than Donald Trump. Their consistent targeting of him essentially is the seal of approval by the people as he is rejected by the establishment. He was elected as a rejection of all things establishment on both sides of the isle, and that is why he is going to win again in 2020.

[squatz1]

Well isn't that how this whole thing works. Everyone lies their echo chambers so they go to where they can find the information that they beleive in repeated over and over.

It's why Conservatives like Fox and Liberals like CNN.

I think TecShare is right in the sense that all of these news companies are mainstream news companies though, and all of them are willing to support the other side if it helps them in the longrun. Think about when 9/11 happened and Bush wanted to invade Iraq -- the media were the ones that sold the idea to the American people, and most people had supported the war initially. Both sides did that, not one or the other.

They're still the same.

Back then I was very opposed to Bush policies. The media, as it always does supports the establishment, be it government or corporate, because they know who butters their bread. They both serve shit sandwiches, but one has some red food coloring in it and one has some blue food coloring in it. Back then "liberal" meant leave people who aren't bothering anyone else alone, and being liberal was anti-establishment. Now being "liberal" means not leaving people alone until they comply with the establishment. There is nothing liberal about the modern left just like there wasn't anything conservative about the Bush era right.

This is part of the media's role in electing Trump. Everyone sees the media down on their knees slurping down establishment dick be it red or blue, and they attack no one more than Donald Trump. Their consistent targeting of him essentially is the seal of approval by the people as he is rejected by the establishment. He was elected as a rejection of all things establishment on both sides of the isle, and that is why he is going to win again in 2020.

Hm, very interesting actually. Any bit of reading I've done about the 90's and then into the 00's shows that it was a very conservative time -- maybe thought to be a bit more conservative then it actually was because of how we perceive the two terms at this point.

Even if the media attacks him all the time, he's still the biggest provider of news and is a top headline every single day.