The bottom line regarding the IG report is that whatever issues that existed, the report was properly opened, and *crucially* it debunks *all* the conspiracy theories.

And 'conspiracy theories', is not just the meat and potatoes of the GOP defence of Trump's impeachable conduct, but it's also the bread and butter, plates, dishwashing liquid and tea towel, of their defence.

as George Orwell wrote in 1944, “For quite long periods, at any rate, people can remain undisturbed by obvious lies, either because they simply forget what is said from day to day or because they are under such a constant propaganda bombardment that they become anaesthetized to the whole business.”

WebsterMark wrote on 12/10/19 at 16:37:56:


Issuing a demonstrably false statement- then proclaiming honest people will contest it -is no great prophetic feat.   You suffer from the belief that the quality of all judgment is subjectively equal; this is the favorite recourse of those dwarfed in contrast.   On one side we have the US intelligence apparatus concluding decisively that Russia worked to elect Trump; on the other, Trump saying "I don't know why it would be Russia".   There's no contest.

@wmI suspect the US Attorney's report will have a different view.

You mean Barr who was handpicked specifically to shield Trump and who undercut the release of the Muller report with lies before it was released? You're certainly correct in this case.

eau de sauvage wrote on 12/11/19 at 13:32:17:


well eau,  every attorney general is "hand-picked" by the president. Whether to specifically shield them is debatable. Did Holdner shield Obama? Did his replacement shield him? I forget her name right now, the one who met with Bill Clinton in the airport.

Let's be honest,  I think your judgment on Attorney General depends upon the little letter behind the presidents name, D or R.

...and this quote paints a significantly different picture than plastered all over the news...

Horowitz: As to the opening [of the investigation], which is in a different place than the FISA issues that you have identified and I talked about earlier, I think it is two different situations. On the FISA side, we found, as you noted, a lack of documentary and testimonial evidence about intentionality, but we noted the lack of satisfactory explanations, and in fact, leave open the possibility, for the reasons you indicated, it is unclear what the motivations were. On the one hand, gross incompetence, negligence; on the other hand intentionality, and we’re in between — we weren’t in a position with the evidence we had, to make that conclusion, but we are not ruling it out.

Barr is the AG of the US not Trump's personal AG and when he undercuts the agency that he is head of with his partisan dissemblings then that is debasing the office of the AG.

Here's Barr's job application in the form of a memo to Rosenstein....

https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/June-2018-Barr-Memo-t...

@WM,

there you go back on track to talking about Hilary, while Trump is soliciting foreign interference in real time.

This is the fundamental dishonesty at Mark's core.   Page drew the eye of Federal scrutiny due in part to his contact with Russian intelligence; his surveillance was about ferreting out Russian espionage and projection of power into US domestic politics.   Subsequent discovery has demonstrated just how appropriate those concerns were and are.