IG’s FISA ABUSE REPORT IS STAGGERINGLY MISLEADING AND DECEPTIVE

The report itself contradicts the conclusions that (1) there was proper predication to start spying on the president’s team and that there was (2) “no political bias” in the FBI’s launching of “crossfire hurricane”, the single greatest criminal political conspiracy in the history of this country. 

The general public and CNN/MSNBC viewers in particular are being duped. Though I will continue to break it down for you as I go through it, here are just some of the preliminary facts I was able to pull right out of the IG report:

(1)   OPENING THE INVESTIGATION WAS LEGAL BECAUSE IT ONLY NEEDED TO BE APPROVED BY FBI LEADERSHIP.

Professional discretion granted to them by the rules (AG and DIOG) allows them to do pretty much whatever the heck they want. Nobody in the horribly corrupt media tells you this. This is about dirty cops covering their own despicable behavior. Here’s what Horowitz stated,

“The AG Guidelines and the DIOG do not provide heightened predication standards for sensitive matters, or allegations potentially IMPACTING CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED ACTIVITY, SUCH AS FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS. Rather, the approval and notification requirements contained in the AG Guidelines and the DIOG are, in part, intended to provide the means by which such concerns can be considered by senior officials. However, we were concerned to find that neither the AG Guidelines nor the DIOG contain a provision requiring Department consultation before opening an investigation such as the one here involving the alleged conduct of individuals associated with a major party presidential campaign.”

The report continues,

“Crossfire Hurricane was opened as a Full Investigation and all of the senior FBI officials who participated in discussions about whether to open a case told us the information warranted opening it… we concluded that the quantum of information articulated by the FBI to open the individual investigations on Papadopoulos, Page, Flynn, and Manafort in August 2016 was sufficient to satisfy THE LOW THRESHOLD ESTABLISHED BY THE DEPARTMENT AND THE FBI.”

(2)  HOROWITZ CONTRACDICTS HIMSELF REGARDING HIS FINDING OF NO POLITICAL BIAS IN THE BODY OF THE REPORT ITSELF.

In the report, Horowitz admits that Strzok, an obviously politically biased individual, WAS DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN THE DECISION TO START THE INVESTIGATION. So why not conclude that it was politically motivated? Because technically Strzok’s boss made the actual final decision!

The biased assistant here (Strzok) likely recommended that the investigation should be started without ever revealing his political bias to his boss, and his boss obviously took that recommendation to heart and decided to move ahead with the investigation, all the while mistakenly believing that his employee (Strzok) was politically neutral. Horowitz essentially dismissed political motivation in starting the investigation ONLY BECAUSE HE DID NOT HAVE DIRECT EVIDENCE OF BIAS AS RELATING DIRECTLY TO STRZOK’S BOSS, while yet admitting in the report that Strzok was still clearly allowed to influence the final decision. This is total hypocritical idiocy.

This is what Horowitz delivered to the American Public:

 “We further found that while STRZOK WAS DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN THE DECISIONS TO OPEN CROSSFIRE HURRICANE AND THE FOUR INDIVIDUAL CASES, he was NOT THE

SOLE, OR EVEN THE HIGHEST-LEVEL, DECISION MAKER AS TO ANY OF THOSE MATTERS. As noted above, then CD AD Priestap, STRZOK'S SUPERVISOR, was the official who ULTIMATELY MADE THE DECISION TO OPEN THE INVESTIGATION, and evidence reflected that this decision by Priestap was reached by consensus after multiple days of discussions and meetings that included Strzok and other leadership in CD, the FBI Deputy Director, the FBI General Counsel, and a FBI Deputy General Counsel. 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. We similarly found that, while the formal documentation opening each of the four individual investigations was approved by Strzok (as required by the DIOG)”