Wednesday, June 20, 2018

The IG Report: They're Guilty, but It's Okay - Tom Trinko

by Tom Trinko

The I.G. report on the Clinton email investigation is proof positive that the entire D.C. justice establishment is corrupt

The IG report is really Comey 2.0. Comey spent a long time describing how Hillary had broken the law but then concluded that it was okay. Similarly, the IG report lists example after example of political bias but declares that it had no impact on the Hillary email whitewash.

The IG report on the Clinton email investigation is proof positive that the entire DC justice establishment is corrupt; that they view themselves as rulers not public servants.

First we were told that Comey was a straight shooter whom we could trust. Then we were told the same about Mueller, Rosenstein, and now the IG. Yet in every case we’ve discovered that they are biased political actors who put the interests of the Deep State and the Democratic Party ahead of their sworn duty to uphold the law. It’s time for all conservatives to acknowledge that there are few if any honest people at the top levels of the FBI or the DoJ.

Not surprisingly highly biased people will resort to big lies to protect their power and the big government ideology they embrace.

The big lie in the Comey report was that because Hillary supposedly had no intent to mishandle classified data there was no crime. Yet a Navy seaman who demonstrated no intent to mishandle classified data was sent to prison. Further, the law says that intent is not a requirement.

There are many laws that can be broken even if the person lacks intent. Take manslaughter -- if person A kills person B accidentally because person A was very careless, then person A is guilty even though they never intended to kill person B. 

The protection of classified data is important because it can lead to the loss of American lives. Hence, the law holds people who have access to classified data to a high standard; they can’t do things that could expose that classified data to random people or foreign spies. Because the damage that is done when classified data is exposed doesn’t depend on intent, just as someone can kill someone else unintentionally, the law doesn’t require proving that someone intended to subvert American security. Yet after describing fact after fact about how Hillary broke the rules on how to protect classified data, Comey said that it was okay.
The big lie in the IG report is that if people who are provably biased make decisions that go against normal investigative procedures in ways that uniformly conform to their biases, there is no reason to believe that their decisions were impacted by their biases.

For example, General Michael Flynn was attacked by Mueller because Flynn supposedly lied to the FBI. We now know that the FBI agents who interviewed Flynn didn’t think he was lying; having been fooled into an interrogation thinking it was a normal meeting, it’s hardly surprising that he might have honestly misremembered something. We’re told by leftists that it’s okay for Mueller to go after Flynn, because what Mueller is doing is trying to turn Flynn to get the dirt on Trump.

But thanks to the IG report we know that the FBI agents who interviewed Hillary’s IT guy said that he lied multiple times in his interview -- that was not based on their “instinct” but because the guy changed his story multiple times. Still, they concluded that since the investigation didn’t matter, no one would prosecute the IT guy. If there wasn’t bias involved either by Mueller or the FBI in the Clinton case, why wasn’t the IT guy prosecuted to get him to turn on Hillary?

After all, the IT guy would be a likely person to have heard Clinton saying something that indicated that she knew what she was doing was wrong but she didn’t care, proving intent.
The answer is, of course, that the pervasive bias at the FBI and DoJ couldn’t conceive of holding Hillary to the law but were eager to invoke their “insurance” policy to nullify the 2016 election.

Yet the IG report ignores the obvious. That’s because the obvious goes against the ideology that apparently permeates the supposedly unbiased IG.

No honest person can read the seemingly unending list of bias by FBI agents and the pervasive contortions that the FBI went through to clear Hillary and not conclude that, intentionally or otherwise, the investigation was clearly biased. The report admits that the FBI had essentially cleared Hillary before talking to her. This is a huge problem because if the only reason that Hillary was “innocent” was that she had no intent, how could the FBI establish that without talking to her? 

Furthermore, others have pointed out that there is not one example of pro-Trump or anti-Hillary bias. Not one person said that we can’t afford to have Hillary as president or that we should work to make sure Trump won. Not one. Now, that’s good in that we don’t want the FBI/DoJ biased in favor of anyone, but when there is clear evidence of massive bias for Hillary having equally massive bias for Trump could have led to a more honest investigation.
The IG report is clearly written to support the Democratic narrative that any criticism of the investigation into Hillary’s gross negligence is based purely on partisan bias on the part of conservatives. While all the data in the IG report shows beyond a reasonable doubt that political bias led the FBI to let Hillary get away with compromising national security, the conclusions, which is all the mainstream media will talk about, is that that pervasive one-sided bias can’t be shown to have impacted the investigation.

Imagine a murder case where the prosecution has the murder weapon with only the defendant’s bloody fingerprints on it, has witnesses that place the defendant at the crime scene, and testimony from multiple witnesses saying that the defendant had strong reason to kill the victim, but the prosecutor says since the defendant won’t confess to the murder they will not prosecute. That’s what the IG report is. Apparently unless one of the FBI officials admitted that political bias drove actions which were in favor of Hillary, the IG believes that it can’t say that the systematic bias shown in favor of Hillary and against Trump had any impact.

Since the media will work hard to keep the truth from getting out, it’s our responsibility to educate our friends, neighbors, relatives, and coworkers on what is really going on.
Point to the seaman who was imprisoned for some photos he took in a restricted area in a submarine and compare that to Hillary’s putting highly classified data out where foreign spies could find it.

Remind folks that the IG found massive bias on the part of the FBI and ask them if they really believed that all those folks were able to so compartmentalize their thoughts that none of their bias impacted the investigation.

Make sure that they know that Comey and the FBI had decided long before they interviewed Hillary that she wasn’t guilty even though the reason that she supposedly wasn’t guilty was her intent, yet it would have been impossible to know her intent without talking to her -- unless of course you were a big fan of hers and couldn’t imagine she’d do anything wrong.
It’s up to us to inform America since the media is nothing more than a Democratic propaganda machine these days.

You can read more of Tom's rants at his blog, Conversations about the obvious, and feel free to follow him on Twitter.

Tom Trinko


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

No comments:

Post a Comment