The IG Report has come at long last!  The question of the day is set to be answered!

It’s….neither.  Or both.  Depends on whether you’re a Fox News or CNN fan, I think.  As so often happens with these Big Damn Reports, the political class comes out unscathed and it’s a few career bureaucrats who get the blame.

Democrats are largely seizing on the (enormous) portions that fault Comey for his conduct, particularly with regard to the FBI senior leadership sitting on the knowledge that there were Clinton emails on Weiner’s laptop and coming forward with it because they were afraid that some agents would leak it to the press if they didn’t.

Also, the IG didn’t question Comey’s judgment in choosing not to charge Clinton in the first place and agreed with Comey’s public statement that the FBI wouldn’t have ordinarily charged anyone for doing what Clinton did.

I would feel pretty happy about this if I were a Hillary supporter.  But not too happy because if Comey were fired for cause, then there’s no case for obstruction over Trump firing him.  And believe me, there’s plenty of cause.

Still, this report is going to bolster one of Team Clinton’s prime excuses for losing the election: it was Comey’s fault for announcing the reopening of the investigation in late October.  That the IG report didn’t find any political bias on Comey’s part is irrelevant, I suppose.

One aspect of the report that surprised me was how little it spoke to the Russia investigation.  One of the very few places where it did were related to Agent Strzok and his incredibly damning text messages to his girlfriend.

That’s the one bombshell I find in my reading of the report.  Unfortunately, the IG report leaves off with this and so it and other suspected misconduct among the FBI and DOJ regarding Russia will have to wait for another report.

So if you were expecting something bigger from this report, as I was, you could call it a dud.  The biggest revelation in it isn’t technically within the scope of the report and is only marginally related.  It might have had something to do with the FBI dragging its feet on Weiner’s laptop as far as the Clinton email investigation goes.

From my point of view, the most important finding in the report addressed the “leak culture” within the FBI.  Coming on the heels of the James Wolfe prosecution, this is insane.

Here’s one of the link charts:

Even this aspect requires further investigation by the OIG and this report doesn’t have any conclusions on it.  Like I said, it appears to be a dud with the exception of the bit about Strzok that just further undermines the Mueller investigation rather than anything this report was intended to address.

I’ll be curious to see what action the OIG recommends for those FBI employees who leaked information and even accepted gifts for it.  As I’ve said before, Deep State derives its power from the relationship between bureaucrats who have secrets and journalists who very much want to learn them.

Without the certainty that they will be caught and harshly punished, Deep State will persist.  It will keep abusing its power and knowledge for whatever political advantage career bureaucrats wish whenever they want to manipulate or control public opinion and the electoral process.  In this report, the OIG stopped short of saying that any FBI official did any of this with a political motive, but it is clear that they did do it and they do it a lot.

We’ll see how those investigations pan out later.  Thanks for nothing, Horowitz.

For now, I encourage everyone to come together from all sides of the spectrum and join me in agreeing that James Comey is a complete jackass.

18 comments

  1. Something I keep seeing among leftwingers on Twitter is they think that the IG report demolishes Trump’s complaints about the political bias in the Mueller investigation. It does not. Horowitz makes it very clear that the report is about the Clinton email investigation, not Trump-Russia.

    The report does open the door for allegations of political bias in the Trump-Russia investigation, thanks to Strzok. But it does NOT undercut Trump’s complaints about “12 Angry Democrats”.

  2. Here’s an angle from Jake Tapper.  He thinks Strzok’s machinations blew up in his own face.

  3. I love that Comey didn’t know that Anthony Weiner was married to Huma Abedin. So he thought that some rando had thousands of Hillary’s emails and that was somehow…better?

  4. Something i heard regarding how OIG reports are handled

    Apparently that if you are named in a IOG report, you are given a advance copy, and allowed to petition the IG, to make changes or challenge the reports findings. I found this well i was WTF? and HOW the Fuck? is that allowed?.

    Overall it seems to be more of a mortar round a few incendiary things, and then a few outright duds.

    For me the biggest other than the lovebird agents texts, which surely indcited bias, was that Comey was either dumb as a brick or deliberately covering someones ass.

  5. Trump is predictably lying through his back teeth about what it says, and his supporters will just lap it up like usual.

  6. Any comment about the report’s finding that Obama not only knew about Hillary’s server, but even exchanged emails with her on it using an alias, despite claiming he knew nothing about it? It’s been known for a couple of years, but let’s face it: Clinton was never going to be charged because Obama would have been implicated too.

  7. Any comment about the report’s finding that Obama not only knew about Hillary’s server, but even exchanged emails with her on it using an alias, despite claiming he knew nothing about it?

    Obama was predictably lying through his back teeth about what happened, and his supporters will just lap it up like usual.

  8. That would depend on whether he was aware of her personal email server or that she was using it exclusively for all her business. Those were the key questions that came out in early 2015 when it was revealed by wikileaks. Does this shed any new light?

  9. But shit if it’s lies you’re after I know the name of a current prominent politician you could fisk 24/7 and you’d still not get through it all.

  10. You’re proving Zurvan’s point, CM.

    Yes, Obama lied about not knowing of it. He even used an alias when he emailed her regarding official business because he didn’t want anyone to know it was him.

    It’s okay to acknowledge that Obama lied about something. Doesn’t make you a racist. I promise. You don’t have to start worshipping cartoon frogs or anything. Just don’t lap up Obama’s lies while criticizing us for anything.

  11. I have no problem at all saying that Obama lied, if that has been clearly established. None. He was asked when he learned that she had used an unsecured email SERVER. He said the same time everybody else learned it, through news reports. If it has been established that he KNEW she had set up a private SERVER and was using it for official business, then he was definitely lying. I’m just not sure how using an EMAIL alias quite gets you all the way there, but I’m more than happy to consider the facts.

  12. It’s pretty well explained here.

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/01/hillary-clinton-barack-obama-emails-key-decision-not-indict-hillary/

    As his counselors grappled with how to address his own involvement in Clinton’s misconduct, Obama deceptively told CBS News in a March 7 interview that he had found out about Clinton’s use of personal email to conduct State Department business “the same time everybody else learned it through news reports.” Perhaps he was confident that, because he had used an alias in communicating with Clinton, his emails to and from her — estimated to number around 20 — would remain undiscovered.

    His and Clinton’s advisers were not so confident. Right after the interview aired, Clinton campaign secretary Josh Scherwin emailed Jennifer Palmieri and other senior campaign staffers, stating: “Jen you probably have more on this but it looks like POTUS just said he found out HRC was using her personal email when he saw it on the news.”

    Scherwin’s alert was forwarded to Mills. Shortly afterwards, an agitated Mills emailed Podesta: “We need to clean this up — he has emails from her — they do not say state.gov.” (That is, Obama had emails from Clinton, which he had to know were from a private account since her address did not end in “@state.gov” as State Department emails do.)

    So how did Obama and his helpers ‘clean this up’?

    Obama had his email communications with Clinton sealed. He did this by invoking a dubious presidential-records privilege.

    But, you know, the fact that it was most likely a “clintonmail” email address would’ve been the giveaway that it was a private SERVER.

    The real question is why Obama would’ve had to declare yoga routines as privileged communications. Must be some damn good stretches.

  13. But, you know, the fact that it was most likely a “clintonmail” email address would’ve been the giveaway that it was a private SERVER.

    Possibly, depends on how technology-savvy he was (to consider the email address and immediately think, ‘oh that must means she’s set up a private server in her basement to use primarily use for govt business in order to avoid the emails being recorded’).

    It certainly has the appearance of a lie though.

    The real question is why Obama would’ve had to declare yoga routines as privileged communications. Must be some damn good stretches.

    Could certainly have been shooting the shit. But you can assume otherwise and you might be right.

    And above all else I certainly understand why you’d want Obama to be considered a liar.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: