This morning the TV was featuring a hearing into a 20 year veteran of the FBI who used incredibly bad judgement in talking political trash and using the FBI Email server to accomplish that.

The Republicans were accusing him of bias in the investigation and the Dems were supporting him as a great man. I watched this, for a bit, and was kinda amazed.

As far as I know if one is an FBI agent then he/she investigates facts, pure and simple. When they do that I assume that they give chapter and verse as to the why, what, where, when, and who. If I remember correctly that is the standard. It works in reportage and it works in investigations. Basically, bias has nothing to do with it. If there is bias then there would be, I think, non-factual, personal bias, expressed in the report of said investigation and it would be immediately discounted and tossed. I am basing this on my own experience (a very long time ago) and plain old logic. EVERYTHING done in an FBI investigation is reviewed, not just once or twice but constantly until its considered done. If anybody has ever read one of these reports they would note this stuff.

What amazed me, about the congressional hearing, is that none of this stuff was even mentioned one time, by either side! Instead the hearing continued apace with the right accusing the one testifying of everything but matricide. On the other side the man was a literal saint. However, not once, NOT A SINGLE TIME, did anybody actually get into the nitty gritty of what an investigation is and how it is handled/processed. I did turn it off so I can be dead wrong but, from what I saw, that would be unlikely. Instead each side was busily making their point and neither side took the time out to explain, exactly, what in the hell they were talking about! In other words, it was not unlike all of TV these days when it comes to politics and gov, I tend to believe that its all speculative TV or, fortune telling by people that should know better and have more respect for what they are supposed to be doing.

Anyway, I don't get it and, I guess, and I never will <sigh>

The absurdity of this circus is its premise: if people have personal views, they can't exercise judgement; if they have a political affiliation they cannot exercise judgement. Every single operation of every government is now in question, including, I might add, every single member of Congress. How ludicrous.

They did ask him why he made the remarks, and he told them Trump had attacked a dead Muslim war hero's family. So Trump was in fact a scumbag. It wasn't even a matter of personal opinion. It was a fact.

Then one of the Democratic Congressmen read Strzok a number of Trump-critical quotes and asked him if he had said them. He denied he had and then the questioning Congressman identified the REPUBLICAN Congressmen or Senators who coined the remarks. That had to be the funniest part of the whole hearing.

The truth is that everyone has a right to their own personal opinions, even if those opinions can't be allowed to affect their job performance. Congressmen and Senators certainly DO have their own opinions and those opinions DO affect their job performance in the extreme. So this hearing was the height of hypocrisy. Strzok was already investigated by the FBI's Inspector General and he found no evidence of misbehavior. If any of the Congressmen at the hearing was investigated in the same way, they would be fired immediately.

I wasn't alive when Joe McCarthy was on his crusade. My knowledge is historical. What I saw today, though, gave me a visceral glimpse of how he operated. OMG, what an absolute farce. I'm not embarrassed, I'm furious.

I think it's all a show for the American people. This is part of setting up the ending of the Russia investigation. Giving Trump a plausible reason to end it that the gullible people will believe and agree with. Along with the lies Trump tells over and over again about how it is all a conspiracy bt Democrats because they are still mad that he won the election. I expect to hear that the investigation has been shut down in the next 6-8 weeks.

I hope I'm wrong.

Only time will tell, BUT I think you are correct.

I got one thing wrong. I claimed that nobody explained what, exactly, is entailed in an investigation and I was dead wrong. The FBI guy getting grilled did that (I had turned it off before that happened so I wasn't running with a full deck and ran my mouth anyway <G>) Still, the hearing itself was a grand display of the Republican lack of integrity, or honesty, in their race to placate their lord and master - the jackass.

You are right about the show for the American People. I would change the "American People" to "his base". If the whole American People watched then, I would expect, the American People to be disgusted with the Republican fest of hate, misrepresentation, lies, and silly. Those people were just about frothing at the mouth!

I have been watching the jackass continuing to make claims of great progress. He started with the North Koreans and has now moved on to NATO, claiming his complete victory and that all members acquiesced to his demands. That was yet another claim of great progress that never happened. I have come to the conclusion that the man is, literally, living in another reality and no longer has a grasp of any kind of the real world. In other words the Republicans are being led by a fully delusional psychopathic narcissistic jackass. I also believe that Mueller will get the goods on the jackass, in spite of being under the constant, and unending, assaults and name calling. (hopefully he will finish it up pretty soon - they are saying September but I would hope for sooner)

Remember - you can bet on your speculations here:
https://www.predictit.org/home/browse?Search=mueller&isSearch=true

I predict Mr Trump will escape the purview of a grand jury indictment or the weaker un-indicted co-conspirator status. The only thing the narcissist, Mr Trump, does intentionally, is to enhance the delusions about himself. I believe he is incapable of concocting a scheme which would require extended thought processes, and would instead react to his "gut" instincts to promote himself in the moment.

For these reasons, I believe SP Mueller will not find evidence of Mr Trump and Russians intentionally "colluding" (conspiring) to do anything. I believe, based on todays indictment, SP Mueller may find several Trump surrogates/advisors who participated in a variety of low level schemes to utilize Russian expertise in IT operations from stealing emails to hacking local election boards.

Now regarding Strzok ... I have to use the word clowns to describe many of the GOP inquisitors as they were formerly prosecutors. Without factual basis, they assumed a premise i.e. that Strzok was biased against Mr Trump.

So as I always did when proving some math theorems, lets go to the definitions of what we are trying to prove.
Bias :: "prejudice in favor of or against one thing, person, or group compared with another, usually in a way considered to be unfair."

Strzok maintained his political opinions did not amount to bias. Clearly if we refer to the definition we can see the GOP has to prove Strzok's political opinions in some way influenced his decisions against Mr Trump. So what would it mean to say Strzok did something against Mr Trump. The obvious is Strzok was top agent in charge of Trump investigation, so he could have done what? At this point no Republican offered a theory of what Strzok did which adversely influenced the investigation into Mr Trump. Since they failed to present a theory, I have to conclude Strzok's statement, he did not believe his political opinions amounted to bias, must be true.

Of course Republicans make the claim his political opinions amount to adversely influencing the investigation. This is the equivalent of saying everyone who has any kind of authority or power always makes unfair decisions based on personal political opinions. Yikes.

Further Republicans may claim by just opening an investigation into Mr trump, that showed bias. But ... Russians running over each other trying to get Trump advisors in a room alone apparently doesn't mean anything.

If you think I have missed something which is exculpatory for Republicans please ... I am metaphorically all ears

The hypocrisy is stunning: If you want to prove anything beyond "He's a Democrat" you need some kind of proof. Actual evidence he did something to harm the investigations. But the FBI Inspector General already looked into it and says there is none. On the other hand, the Republicans on the committee created tons of evidence in their public statements that they were harming their own investigation of this Democrat. Too bad Congress doesn't have an Inspector General!

Strzok never did anything like what they did in the hearing.

This is nothing more than Republicans playing to the base (trumpers) in the party. It is an election year after all, and they are scared.