Op-ed:
A Report Tainted With Political Bias
By: Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor / Right Side Patriots on American Political Radio
“[Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!” “No. No he’s not. We’ll stop it.” - F.B.I Attorney Lisa Page's question...F.B.I. Counterintelligence Agent Peter Strzok's* reply
Sounds like a threat to me...maybe even a threat of violence...or was it just more rhetoric spewed in an effort to
“fix'
the election...either way the two parties involved need some serious
jail time. And so does former F.B.I. Director James Comey who in last
Thursday's Inspector General's report** was basically found
"guilty" only of breaking F.B.I. protocol and using
“poor judgment”
during the 2016 election, while finding no evidence at all that showed
his decisions regarding the investigation into Hillary Clinton's emails
were
“improperly influenced by political bias.”
No
"political bias" it seems no matter that James Comey
decided two months before interviewing Hillary Clinton regarding her emails and
private server that he would not be referring her to the D.O.J. for
criminal prosecution for her what he called a simple case of
“mishandling” classified information. No
"political bias" found even though Comey
“inappropriately” went outside of the chain of command and
“botched”
the discovery of Clinton's emails on Anthony Weiner's laptop or that he
used a personal gmail account to conduct official F.B.I. business.
No
"political bias" even though then F.B.I. Director James
Comey took it upon himself to hold a July 2016 nationally televised news
conference and basically announce to the nation that he had found
Hillary Clinton
“innocent” of breaching the Espionage Act in
regards to her handling of classified information...which we all know
she is indeed guilty of. And while this
“watchdog report” did find Comey personally
“insubordinate” and that his actions taken were
“inconsistent” with Department policy as well as having violated long-standing
“Department practice and protocol” when he criticized what was then and still is Hillary's
“uncharged conduct.” Saying that no charges would be forthcoming...it seems even that did not reach the standard of
"political bias" no matter the fact that it's solely up to the Department of Justice not the F.B.I. to make
“charging” decisions.
Very odd indeed because James Comey actually went over the head of
then Attorney General Loretta Lynch to hold said news conference, and he
went over her head again in an October 2016 letter to Congress where he
disclosed that agents were
“scrutinizing new evidence” in the Clinton case. And in a side note, the report also found that Loretta Lynch herself exhibited
“bad judgement”in
regards to her infamous tarmac meeting with Billy-Boy Clinton...the
very meeting that within days saw Comey exonerating Hillary of criminal
wrongdoing on national television...but hey...no
"political bias" was found there either even though Lynch acceded to Comey's wishes during the most
"controversial moments" of the Hillary investigation.
Yet even with all this, the so long-awaited
"watchdog" report...
A Review of Various Actions by the Federal Bureau of Investigation...still did not find evidence that
"political bias" or
“improper influence”
impacted any of the decisions James Comey made in regards to the
Hillary email investigation, including his above stated decision not to
level charges against her. Amazing isn't it...and yet there's still
more.
More as in there was no
"political bias" found nor were there even
questions raised by the Inspector General concerning Barack HUSSEIN
Obama's lying about his claim that he only learned about Hillary's
private email server when seeing it reported on the news even though he
had been sending emails to Hillary on the very server in question for
quite some time, and doing so while using a phony name.
And of course the Inspector General would only say regarding the
above mentioned Lisa Page and Peter Strzok that their actions were
"indicative of a biased state of mind"...with
“indicative” obviously not being the same as definitively. And while in this report the Inspector General
“suggested” that Peter Strzok may have intentionally “
slow-rolled” the review of emails connected to the Clinton investigation...emails discovered after the initial probe was closed...
“suggesting” something is not a statement of fact as this most certainly should have been.
But before I go on, what I want to know is why did Republicans allow
this particular man...one Michael E. Horowitz...Inspector General of the
Justice Department alone...one of but
73 Inspector Generals
each related to a specific governmental agency...why did they allow him
to even become part of the investigation let alone allow him to lead the investigation knowing his background? After all, there are quite few other channels in which this
investigation could have been handled...handled in a more timely manner as well.
So why do I ask these questions...for two reasons. The first is because as
the Inspector General, Michael E. Horowitz's duty is to detect and deter
waste, fraud, abuse, and misconduct in D.O.J. programs and personnel,
as well as to promote economy and efficiency within Department operations. And it's
my opinion that this entire investigation and subsequent report, in its
taking over a year and a half to be completed and then published, is the epitome of
wasteful spending of our hard-earned taxpayer dollars. And it's a waste
because this report exposed little that we already didn't know.
In other words it's just another rehash of the same old, same old stuff
with a few new questionings thrown in for good measure. And besides, we
knew its conclusion before one word was even put to paper...as in
Hillary Clinton gets away with treason yet again, and that while James
Comey walks away a defeated man he does so with but a mere slap on the wrist.
Now as to the second reason why I believe Michael E. Horowitz should
never have been tasked with this investigation and it's a reason the media
is hushing up... as in this man is the epitome of Democratic
"political
bias" in action. Being first a
"career" attorney in Ronald Reagan’s
then non-politicized Office of Management and Budget sector, Horowitz
turned on Reagan and
"upended his ability to conduct foreign policy in the national interest to crush communist uprisings in South America."
Horowitz then moved on to work in the Department of Justice from 1991
to 2002...the majority of which was during the Bill-Boy Clinton
years...ain't that a not so happy coincidence...where in his capacity as
an Assistant U.S. Attorney from 1991 to to 1993 Horowitz actually worked
for...yes for...James Comey who was then Deputy Chief of the Criminal
Division in the Southern District of New York.
And dare I say that this very same man...Michael E. Horowitz...was
nominated for the position of D.O.J. Inspector General by none other
than President Barack HUSSEIN Obama himself back in 2011 and conformed
in 2012, after which he went on to serve under than AG Eric Holder. And
it was Horowitz who, in a
514-page report on 'Fast and Furious,' wrote that while he recommended that the D.O.J.
"review the actions" of 14 officials and to consider whether disciplinary action was warranted, he basically gave Eric Holder a
"pass" on any direct involvement in that government fiasco.
And even while Horowitz had a few disagreements with Obama especially
in regards to the
Inspectors General Empowerment Act...an act Horowitz
championed in an effort to further affirm the independent authority of Inspector
Generals...talk about a Democratic operative...talk about a
"politically biased" man with a giant 'D' after his name writing a potentially
"politically biased" report.
And so we see one not so happy coincidence after another involving a
man who, if he was at all honorable, would have recused himself
completely from this investigation or should never been tasked with it
in the first place. No one with the ties he has to all the key person's
being investigated had any business whatsoever being involved, and yet
Michael E. Horowitz sat as the head honcho of it all simply because his
job description deemed it to be so...no matter that exceptions to the
rule happen every day in the swamp that is Washington D.C.
So what exactly did Inspector Horowitz spew forth in his 500-pages of
what I consider to be without question of a doubt a
"politically biased" report?
Besides the report mentioning its personal condemnation of former F.B.I. Director James
Comey, Horowitz's report did raise a few new questions about the role of F.B.I. Counterintelligence Agent Peter Strzok's texting F.B.I.
lawyer Lisa Page, and that the Inspector General
"might be willing" to take official action to see whether any such actions actually did
“impact” Trump's electoral prospects.
Also found was
“bias”
pertaining to text messages and instant messages sent between three
other F.B.I. employees...messages sent and received using F.B.I. mobile devices and
computers...messages that expressed
“hostility” toward then-candidate Donald Trump coupled with words of support for then-candidate
Hillary Clinton. In fact, as per the report, some of these text and
instant messages mixed political commentary with discussions about the
“Midyear investigation,” and raised concerns that
"political bias may have impacted" F.B.I. investigative decisions...but
“may have impacted" unfortunately does not go far enough in saying that it did impact decisions...which was indeed the case.
So the bottom line regarding the report itself is this... finding
"bias," alluding to
"bias," and raising concerns is vastly different than
acting upon said
"bias" and concerns for nowhere in his report did
Inspector General Horowitz say whether any criminal referrals stemming
from the report had been or would be made. Nor did Horowitz even
“challenge”
Comey's out-of-line decision that Hillary should not and would not be
prosecuted because his investigators uncovered no proof that political
opinions at the F.B.I. influenced the 2016 presidential election
outcome.
“We found no evidence that the conclusions by department prosecutors were affected by bias or other improper considerations,” Horowitz stated adding that all conclusions were
“based on the prosecutor’s assessment of facts, the law and past department practice.”
In other words, like I said before, this entire investigation has
been a waste of time and our taxpayer dollars except in one area
alone...the report actually vindicates President Trump's firing of James
Comey over his mishandling of the Hillary investigation and well as its
saying that former F.B.I. Deputy Director Andrew G. McCabe had indeed
been dishonest about his contacts with the news media regarding Hillary
Clinton.
So with overtly
"biased" Inspector General Horowitz now alluding that
another report specifically addressing all the leaks that seem to have
become D.C.'s new norm will soon be released, and that he is
“separately reviewing” some aspects of the Russia investigation concerning allegations that the F.B.I.
“spied” on the Trump campaign for
“political purposes”...both issues
not covered in last week's report...both issues that also will most likely
be tempered down...what did President Trump have to say about this
now "officially”
exposed anti-Trump
"bias" and what amounts to F.B.I.
"institutional
self-interest" most especially on the part of James Comey and Peter
Strzok? And what did President Trump...the target of all this hate...have to say about
no
"political bias" being found on any of the key players parts when the
entire report itself just reeks of
"political bias?"
Acknowledging that the Inspector General's findings are a
“total disaster”
for the bureau, and while the report did vindicate his May 2017 firing
of then F.B.I. Director James Comey, President Trump tweeted out...and rightfully so... that he has to
"beat a phony Witch Hunt and all of the dishonest people covered in the IG Report," and that
“Comey
will now officially go down as the worst leader, by far, in the history
of the FBI. I did a great service to the people in firing him. Good
Instincts. Christopher Wray will bring it proudly back!”
And Trump added in another tweet...again rightfully so...that
“FBI
Agent Peter Strzok, who headed the Clinton & Russia investigations,
texted to his lover Lisa Page, in the IG Report, that “we’ll stop”
candidate Trump from becoming President. Doesn’t get any lower than
that!” And with those words President Trump said what we've all
been thinking since day one...when it comes to venomous Democrats who
still grovel at the feet of Hillary Clinton while longing for what might
have been...venomous Democrats who truly will stop at nothing to get
their way...it really does not get any lower than that.
_________________________________________________
Update:
* Yesterday morning disgraced F.B.I. Agent Peter Strzok said
he's open to testifying before Congress about his actions as he
"wants the chance to clear his name and tell his story." ...as per attorney Aitan Goelman in an interview with the Washington Post. Should be interesting if it actually happens.
** The Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on the IG report late yesterday afternoon...more on that in a later article.
Copyright @ 2018 Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor / All Rights Reserved.
*************************************************************
For more political commentary please visit my
RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS partner Craig Andresen's blog
The National Patriot to read his latest article
Freedom of Speech – The Bane Liberal Existence
************************************************************************
RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS...LIVE!
Today, Tuesday, June 19th from 7 to 9pm EST on
American Political Radio,
RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS Craig Andresen and Diane Sori discuss ' A Report Tainted with Political Bias'; 'Freedom of Speech - The Bane of Us All'; and important news of the day.
Hope you can tune in at:
http://listen.samcloud.com/w/73891/American-Political-Radio#history
