Tipsheet

Liberal Reporter on FISA Abuse Report: 'Take Out the Word 'Trump' and It'd Be an Obvious National Scandal'

Matt Vespa
Matt Vespa  |  December 11, 2019 2:05 PM

 The Department of Justice’s inspector general report on Obama-era FISA abuses is out and the media is rushing to highlight that there was no bias when it came to the FBI’s investigation into the allegations that the Trump campaign had Russia ties. We know there was no Russian collusion. It was a myth and peddled by the media for two years. The Mueller report torched that narrative. And it did so by shredding the infamous, unverified, and totally debunked Trump dossier. That document is ground zero for this nonsense. It’s what set off the counterintelligence probe which then became the special counsel investigation. It’s formed the basis for this Russian collusion nonsense. And it was the basis for the FISA spy warrant against Carter Page, a former Trump campaign official.

It’s now clear this document was garbage. I mean the errors in the dossier could’ve been discovered through a Google search. And yet, this document was cited as credible evidence. It was political opposition research funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democrats. Even some within British intelligence were skeptical of the document. So, why all of the screw-ups in the process? There were 17 of them, which included altering information, omitting other pieces, including exculpatory evidence relating to Page. Oh, and in case you missed that part of the hearing—yeah, DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz is before the Senate Judiciary Committee today, no evidence was unearthed that Page was a foreign agent. 

The media reaction has been predictable. The FBI may have skipped some steps concerning an intrusive spy warrant that requires a sign off by a secret court, but there was no bias. Trump was wrong. Trump’s spy claim is debunked. So, that means what happened was sort of bad, but nothing major, right? Nope. And there is at least one liberal reporter who is calling out the media for their antics concerning this report. Michael Tracey, formerly of Young Turks, ran the no bias claims through the shredder on Twitter. 

“That the media could be presenting this IG Report as "vindication" of the FBI once again shows how thoroughly corrupted the media is by their allegiance to the security state apparatus -- predictable given how many former members of that apparatus are now employed by the media,” he tweeted. I mean just look at CNN’s line up of commentators and those over at MSNBC, some of which are James Comey lackeys.

In short, he and everyone else with cognitive function know that this is a serious scandal. And if Trump wasn’t president, this would be treated more seriously. 

Recommended

Blinken In Deep Water After State Dept. Hosts Therapy Sessions Post-Trump Win Sarah Arnold
These Democratic Senators Could Sure Be in Trouble After Voting for Sanders' Anti-Israel Resolutions Rebecca Downs

“The FBI used outright fabrications to surveil a presidential campaign at the peak of an election season -- an unprecedented intervention by the security state -- but we're told by the media this is no big deal. Take out the word "Trump" and it'd be an obvious national scandal,” Tracey added.

Over at The Wall Street Journal, Kimberley Strassel dissected the no bias claim writing, “When IG says he found no "documentary" evidence of bias, he means just that: He didn't find smoking gun email that says, ‘let's take out Trump.’ And it isn't his job to guess at the motivations of FBI employees.” 

“He straightforwardly lays out facts. Those facts produce a pattern of FBI playing the FISA Court--overstating some info, omitting other info, cherry-picking details. Americans can look at totality and make their own judgment as to ‘why’ FBI behaved in such a manner,” she added.

Tracey torched this aspect of the report noting, “'Political bias’ is a red herring. If the FBI flouted procedures because they had an overblown, conspiratorial belief in the nature of ‘Russian interference,’ rather than explicitly-articulated animosity toward Trump individually, that's still a damning exhibition of ‘bias.’

All of these errors broke in a way that was meant to hurt the Trump team. Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, the two FBI officials that shed light on the bias within the FBI, spoke about an “insurance policy” against Trump reportedly with ex-deputy FBI director Andrew McCabe. That policy is supposedly a reference to the Trump dossier. Strzok was having an extramarital affair with Page, sent tens of thousands of anti-Trump texts to Page, and was a key person in signing off on the counterintelligence probe into Russian collusion and the bureau analysis of Hillary Clinton’s email server. The two worried if the FBI was being too hard on Clinton during the latter inquiry, by the way. There’s no bias, really? Sorry, this is simply not believable. And this is just one example of FBI employees exhibiting bias against the president and his supporters.