So it sounds like justice was served and the oversight you feel the FBI needed was actually used. That still doesn’t prove that the warrant and investigation of Mar A Lago hasn’t been justified and done according to due process.
Perhaps,… However when you have a lead agent talking about insurance against Trump with a female FBI attorney thru text … That absolutely paints the DOJ-FBI in a ugly light and everything is going to be sus because we have seen behavior and actions not only biased but actually…illegal regarding the investigation
To note the Horowitz report nor did Durham find that there wasn’t cause to investigate Trump. Horowitz did cite the FBI for making mistakes and Durham found one lawyer who behaved improperly out of likely hundreds of staff and agents who worked on the investigation into Russian collusion. Three people out of hundreds hardly seems like a large pattern especially considering that there were 9 convictions and over 20 Indictments out of the Mueller investigation.
With pretty much all the convictions and indictments not on actual Russian collusion …. And as far as three people is three people too many when there is explicit bias through both behavior and action especially from an institution that is supposed to be at a higher level of standards
If there is a need to investigate by all means please do I would love to investigate anything that I have a concern with I have a concern on mail in ballots it may not be anything to do with anything but investigate it investigate trump investigate Biden investigate everyone… But try to have some kind of behavior standards as well as not doing anything illegal regarding the investigation The FBI is supposed to be the best and the brightest among us but they have flat out failed the American people… Unfortunately this goes all the way back to J Edgar Hoover’s and this has crossed into different sides of the politic divide so anyone could be fair game unfortunately and if they are then you better hope there is better standards of behavior and action towards that individual… I would not wish this type of behavior of both explicit bias and illegal acts of investigation against a democrat future president on record as saying that right now
The same report that caught Clinesmith also noted there was no evidence of political bias in the FBI. Bit of cherry picking some people have, even though that special council was tasked by Billy to sniff out witchhunts. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53784048 A justice department inspector general report in December 2019 did find "serious performance failures" in the FBI counterintelligence inquiry, but no evidence of political bias. The report found "17 significant errors or omissions" in the FBI applications to spy on Mr Page. However, the watchdog said there was "no documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced" the opening of the counterintelligence investigation. Probably the most chilling aspect of the Mueller Report were the instances where Trump wanted and demanded to actively collude with Russia but fell on deaf ears by handlers who knew better (didn't want to incriminate themselves) or were too dumb to know how to contact the Russians.
Your own posts show that there is already accountability in the FBI. Why would Clinesmith be charged or Peter Strozk fired if there wasn’t. Further just citing three individuals out of the thousands that work for the FBi is hardly a pattern of ingrained bias. If anything it shows that there is relatively little bias if that is all that can be turned up in multiple year investigations.
The year is 2019 …not that long ago , there was concern to investigate the investigation… There were people that said oh that wasn’t even necessary at the time… The very accountability you’re talking about which only happened recently actually produced significant progress and the best part is it’s still ongoing…. Durham’s indictment of Michael Sussmann and other court filings reveal how senior members of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign formed a “joint venture” with lawyers, opposition researchers, foreign nationals, and computer data analysts to produce false opposition research against then-candidate Donald Trump and aggressively disseminated that disinformation to reporters, the FBI, and others.See, e.g., Indictment, United States v. Michael A. Sussmann, Crim. Case No. 21–582 (CRC) (D.D.C. Sept. 16, 2021), ECF No. 1, available at https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/60390583/1/united-states-v-sussmann/ [hereinafter Sussmann Indictment]; The Government’s Motions in Limine, United States v. Michael A. Sussmann, Crim. Case No. 21–582 (CRC) (D.D.C. Apr. 4, 2022), ECF No. 61, at 13-32 (emphasis added) (seeking the admission of certain communications because they were “made in furtherance of a joint venture between and among the defendant, Tech Executive-1, and representatives or agents of the Clinton Campaign”), available at https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.235638/gov.uscourts.dcd.235638.61.0_7.pdf. " style="box-sizing: inherit; position: relative; font-size: 0.6875rem; line-height: 0.6875rem; color: rgb(0, 147, 208); vertical-align: super;">3 See, e.g., Indictment, United States v. Michael A. Sussmann, Crim. Case No. 21–582 (CRC) (D.D.C. Sept. 16, 2021), ECF No. 1, available at https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/60390583/1/united-states-v-sussmann/ [hereinafter Sussmann Indictment]; The Government’s Motions in Limine, United States v. Michael A. Sussmann, Crim. Case No. 21–582 (CRC) (D.D.C. Apr. 4, 2022), ECF No. 61, at 13-32 (emphasis added) (seeking the admission of certain communications because they were “made in furtherance of a joint venture between and among the defendant, Tech Executive-1, and representatives or agents of the Clinton Campaign”), available at https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.235638/gov.uscourts.dcd.235638.61.0_7.pdf. Durham’s filings indicate that the central component of the joint venture’s disinformation campaign—the so-called “Steele Dossier”—consisted almost entirely of rumors, innuendo, and outright falsehoods fabricated by “sources” reporting to former British spy Christopher Steele.Indictment, United States v. Igor Y. Danchenko, Crim. Case No. 21–245 (AJT) (E.D. Va. Nov. 3, 2021), ECF No. 1, available at https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/60698540/1/united-states-v-danchenko/ [hereinafter Danchenko Indictment]; Matthew Mosk, Durham Probe Offers Fresh Support for Man Who Has Long Denied Being ‘Steele Dossier’ Source, ABC News (Nov. 11, 2021, 8:27 PM) (stating that Steele is U.K. Person-1 identified in the indictment), https://abcnews.go.com/US/durham-probe-offers-fresh-support-man-long-denied/story?id=81119325. " style="box-sizing: inherit; position: relative; font-size: 0.6875rem; line-height: 0.6875rem; color: rgb(0, 147, 208); vertical-align: super;">4 Indictment, United States v. Igor Y. Danchenko, Crim. Case No. 21–245 (AJT) (E.D. Va. Nov. 3, 2021), ECF No. 1, available at https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/60698540/1/united-states-v-danchenko/ [hereinafter Danchenko Indictment]; Matthew Mosk, Durham Probe Offers Fresh Support for Man Who Has Long Denied Being ‘Steele Dossier’ Source, ABC News (Nov. 11, 2021, 8:27 PM) (stating that Steele is U.K. Person-1 identified in the indictment), https://abcnews.go.com/US/durham-probe-offers-fresh-support-man-long-denied/story?id=81119325. According to Durham, the core allegation of the Steele Dossier—that an “extensive conspiracy” existed between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin—was invented out of whole cloth by former Brookings Institution policy analyst Igor Danchenko, a Russian national on Steele’s payroll.Danchenko Indictment, supra note 4. " style="box-sizing: inherit; position: relative; font-size: 0.6875rem; line-height: 0.6875rem; color: rgb(0, 147, 208); vertical-align: super;">5 Danchenko Indictment, supra note 4. The FBI’s interviews of Danchenko establish that the most salacious allegation in the Steele Dossier—that Trump was present during the performance of a lewd act at the Moscow Ritz-Carlton—was fabricated by Danchenko and/or Charles Dolan, a public relations executive living in Washington, D.C., with lengthy ties to the Democratic Party.Interview of Igor Danchenko, Federal Bureau of Investigation (Jan. 25, 2017), https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/February 9, 2017 Electronic Communication.pdf [hereinafter Danchenko FBI Interview]. " style="box-sizing: inherit; position: relative; font-size: 0.6875rem; line-height: 0.6875rem; color: rgb(0, 147, 208); vertical-align: super;">6 Interview of Igor Danchenko, Federal Bureau of Investigation (Jan. 25, 2017), https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/February 9, 2017 Electronic Communication.pdf [hereinafter Danchenko FBI Interview]. Durham’s indictment of Danchenko shows that other significant parts of the Steele Dossier—such as the allegation that Trump lawyer Michael Cohen travelled to Prague to meet with Russian conspirators—were invented by Olga Galkina, a Russian national living in Cyprus who had ambitions of joining the State Department under Hillary Clinton if she won the presidential election.Danchenko Indictment, supra note 4. " style="box-sizing: inherit; position: relative; font-size: 0.6875rem; line-height: 0.6875rem; color: rgb(0, 147, 208); vertical-align: super;">7 Danchenko Indictment, supra note 4. According to Durham’s indictment of former Perkins Coie law firm attorney Michael Sussmann, he directed an effort by a group of computer scientists including Rodney Joffe, April Lorenzen, and others to manufacture a false narrative that the Trump organization and the Kremlin had a secret channel of communications.Sussmann Indictment, supra note 3. Of course, a Washington, D.C. jury acquitted Sussmann of the charge in the indictment. " style="box-sizing: inherit; position: relative; font-size: 0.6875rem; line-height: 0.6875rem; color: rgb(0, 147, 208); vertical-align: super;">8 Sussmann Indictment, supra note 3. Of course, a Washington, D.C. jury acquitted Sussmann of the charge in the indictment. The Recent Durham investigation is ongoing. 2019-today … https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-justice/report/the-durham-investigation-primer
My guy.... The Steele Dossier was irrelevant other than as a chuckle worthy rumor. It was inconsequential, and was never used for anything. The Durham probe has been a disaster. He hasn't found anything. 4 years, and one minor process indictment. You are in a cult, seek help.
Nope not in one , I don’t want Trump , But I do want accountability and oversight especially when there was such behavior and illegal acts in a investigative history against someone even if you hate him they still deserve better
Without the Durham investigation we wouldn’t be aware that a FBI lawyer is so willing to falsify a email in a investigation against a politician …thank goodness for investigating the investigators …the truth is out there ..cue x files
Right. I'm glad they get any FBI agents who falsify anything. You are ignoring the PREFERENTIAL treatment Trump received from the DOJ. You are ignoring the reasons why the judge and head of the FBI would be biased in Trump’s favor. You've provided nothing in the way of evidence against the FBI in this investigation. We know what they told the judge they were looking for. It was exactly what they found. That is another sign that the warrant and search were justified and according to the book. If it was political bias against Trump the DOJ would have leaked the execution of the warrant. They didn't. Trump himself did. Just give us some solid evidence as to why we should go after the FBI or DOJ and doubt them in this case.
The history of the Trump politic related investigation has been wrought with shady scenarios, implicit behavior bias at best and illegal activity at worse ,… so all of a sudden the current investigation is nothing but sunshine and lollipop purity? Maybe so but it’s sus …can’t convince me otherwise- feel free to waste time typing however
The extra steps from the DOJ that Trump got which other targets don't get is plain. The fact that you are ignoring that and have no evidence of bias in this case but cite a years old bias against Trump while ignoring there was also a bias against Clinton from the same time, makes it hard to fathom.
Any bias is wrong, as I said I wouldn’t wish the implicit bias and illegal behavior tied to the investigations against Trump over the years towards a democratic politician..it’s just wrong, it erodes trust and affects people’s lives unfairly
I'm with you. I don't like bias having an effect on investigations. But I just see so much that indicates there was no bias toward Trump and absolutely zero evidence it was there against him. The fact that people feel like there must be bias isn't evidence of anything and in this case looks like it goes contrary to the available evidence.
"Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing, I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press"
