DiscussMormonism.com

DOJ watchdog finds Russia investigation not improper, despite missteps

The report contradicts claims by Trump that the investigation was unlawful.


A major Department of Justice inspector general report released Monday has determined the FBI's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election was launched with an authorized purpose, despite significant allegations of wrongdoing in how agents handled the counterintelligence probe of President Donald Trump's campaign.

The report can be read here.

"We did not find information in FBI or Department [Electronic Communications], emails, or other documents, or through witness testimony, indicating that any information other than the [Friendly Foreign Government] information was relied upon to predicated the opening of the [Russia] investigation," the inspector general's summary said.

Inspector General Michael Horowitz's office found the Russia investigation was launched in July 2016 based on suspicions shared with the U.S. about former Trump campaign aide George Papadopoulos, and that the controversial 'dossier' authored by former British spy Christopher Steele was not relied upon in opening the investigation.

Horowitz found that DOJ had an authorized purpose in investigating whether there was a crime, and noted the "low threshold" for opening such an investigation. He also noted that while former FBI lawyer Peter Strzok was involved in the decision to open the investigation, the actual authorization came from his supervisor Bill Priestap, the former assistant director of the FBI's counterintelligence division.

Washington (CNN) - The Justice Department's inspector general found that the FBI properly opened its investigation into Russian election interference but said there were major errors in how the agency conducted the probe.

The report released Monday by inspector general Michael Horowitz did not find "documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced the decisions" to open investigations that initially focused on campaign advisers Carter Page, George Papadopoulos, Michael Flynn and former campaign chairman Paul Manafort.

While rebutting President Donald Trump's claims that the FBI illegally spied on his campaign, Horowitz's 435-page report criticized the FBI leaders and employees for how they handled four applications for surveillance under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act targeting Page.

Horowitz opened the probe early last year, and his office has reviewed more than 1 million records and conducted more than 100 interviews as part of its review, including a number of current and former law enforcement officials at the center of "deep state" conspiracies.

Hannity Waves Away IG Report Conclusions, Declares Victory for Trump

Fox News host Sean Hannity largely ignored the conclusions of the Justice Department’s top watchdog, claiming victory despite Inspector General Michael Horowitz finding Monday that there was no political bias and the FBI had sufficient evidence to launch the Russia probe into Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign.

“Well, everything we said, everything we reported, everything we told you was dead-on center accurate,” Hannity said Monday on his radio show. “And the mob and the media has missed what is the biggest abuse of power corruption scandal in the history of the country.

“This report—putting aside whatever differences and—for the attorney general and for John Durham to come out like they have...it is all there in black and white,” the pro-Trump media star added. “It’s all there. Put the conclusion differences aside for a second here.”

Attorney General William Barr slammed the IG report and defended Trump in a statement on Monday, insisting the FBI launched “an intrusive investigation of a U.S. presidential campaign on the thinnest of suspicions that, in my view, were insufficient to justify the steps taken,” contrary to the report’s findings.

Hannity’s Fox colleague Chris Wallace, meanwhile, said the real “headline” is that the report “didn’t find the things” Trump and Barr have alleged.

ajax18 wrote:This is what Devin Nunez had to say about it.

[–]slakmehl

[+1]Georgia 3764 points 8 hours ago2

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 later and 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.

DarkHelmet wrote:

ajax18 wrote:This is what Devin Nunez had to say about it.

Devin Nunez?

Speaking to Maria Bartiromo for her Fox Business show on Sunday morning, Nunes advanced a type of alternative explanation that has gotten some play on Fox News, suggesting the aforementioned call he received from Parnas on April 12 may have been placed by Parnas’s wife, not Parnas himself.

“I got a call from a number that was Parnas’s wife,” Nunes said. “I remember talking to someone, and I did what I always do which is that if you don’t know who they are, you put them to staff, and you let staff work with that person.”

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:….(clip)...

inb4 some turboretard pops in and posts some dumb comment that effectively states:

"I reject your reality, and substitute my own!"

- Doc