Horowitz report: Russia investigations not motivated by political bias

1. 83

   Don Wposted 2 months ago

   The main criticism from Trump and his supporters was that several investigations related to Russia's interference in the 2016 election were politically motivated, and part of a "deep state" operation to discredit Donald Trump. On that point, Horowitz's report is clear:
   
   "We did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced the decisions to open four individual investigations".
   
   https://context-cdn.washingtonpost.com/ … 34f20a.pdf (page 4)
   
   While Horowitz is certainly critical of procedural errors and omissions, particularly around the FISA application process, there was no evidence of "deliberate misconduct" and Trump's main criticism, political bias, is not supported by the sections of the report I have read. Throughout the executive summary, Horowitz repeatedly makes this clear in relation to the individual investigations conducted by the FBI: 
   
   "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 7).
   
   And in relation to the FBI investigating the Trump campaign, the report says:
   
   "After the opening of the investigation, we found no evidence that the FBI placed any [Confidential Human Sources (CHSs)] or [Undercover Employees (UCEs)] within the Trump campaign or tasked any CHSs or UCEs to report on the Trump campaign. 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" (page 17)
   
   So although the report contains examples of non-compliances with procedures, and several concerns about FBI policy in general, which the IG has made specific recommendations to address. There was no evidence of deliberate misconduct, no evidence of political bias or improper motivations, and no evidence that the FBI placed any human sources or undercover employees within the Trump campaign itself.
   
   Will people accept the findings of the report?

   replyreport
   1. 81

      Live to Learnposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      I accept that few are held accountable in Washington. I think the facts paint a picture which allows for a raised eyebrow and a shoulder shrug (if not a head shake and an eye roll) at the conclusions.
      
      But, the report is par for the course in Washington, imo.

      replyreport
      1. 92

         GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this

         I haven't read the report Live to Learn, so I have the sincere questions of what picture do you think the facts of the report paint, and what facts make you do an eye-roll?
         
         GA

         replyreport
         1. 81

            Live to Learnposted 2 months agoin reply to this

            I haven't read the full report but I have watched across the outlets and the consensus is that although major flaws existed in the process, at multiples levels, nothing was found to imply political bias was in play.
            
            I'm afraid I can't completely buy that, but I have more respect for the competence of the FBI than to believe they are that inept.

            replyreport
   2. 94

      Randy Godwinposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      Well Don, you have a well known Trump supporter and a fence rider commenting on this topic, want a Democrat's take?
      
      The report shows what I expected it to. I've been saying it would disappoint Trump defenders because they listen to the likes of Limbaugh and Hannity and their conspiracy Deep State theories.

      replyreport