chaparral wrote:
Perseus wrote:
You're using circular reasoning and ignoring the facts.
1) Per the FBI the senior Deputy Director reviews and/or modifies any disciplinary findings. I'm guessing you understand why someone in a senior leadership position oversees a disciplinary committee. You're being dramatic by suggesting anyone is accusing OPR of being "so wrong" that their recommendations are "routinely ignored." This is a highly usual situation.
2) How is that you've come to conclusion that Strzok did nothing wrong when the FBI said he was “antithetical to the core values of the FBI and the Department of Justice” and Strzok’s behavior was “not only indicative of a biased state of mind but, even more seriously, implies a willingness to take official action to impact the presidential candidate’s electoral prospects.?"
Wait what? So now you are saying this Strzok incident is different that is why they are not following OPR, like they normally do? So you agree with me that they normally follow OPR? Go back, I said that it is unusual not follow OPR and you said that is not true and are now saying this is an unusual situation.
This is a very simple process so I am unclear as to why you're confused. The senior Deputy Director reviews and/or modifies any disciplinary findings. He did not agree with OPR's recommendation. If you are unclear as to why I suggest you read or reread the information provided.
Additionally, I am unaware of any other FBI agent overseeing investigations into both presidential candidates while demonstrating "a biased state of mind" and implied "willingness to take official action to impact the presidential candidates prospects." If this has happened before and the agent was not fired then you could potentially make a case that the firing was politically motivated.
