FBI texts show no evidence of conspiracy, WSJ finds

[pbmus]

The Wall Street Journal read through 7,000 text messages from FBI agent Peter Strzok and FBI lawyer Lisa Page, who have been intensely criticized after it emerged they had exchanged anti-Trump texts while Strzok was investigating Hillary Clinton and later Donald Trump. WSJ concluded that the "texts critical of Mr. Trump represent a fraction of the roughly 7,000 messages, which stretch across 384 pages and show no evidence of a conspiracy against Mr. Trump."

Why it matters: President Trump has gone so far as to accuse the pair of "treason," heightening the tension between the White House and the FBI. This WSJ's findings follow the release of the controversial Nunes memo, which the White House claims shows wrongful action against Trump on the part of the FBI.

https://www.axios.com/wsj-fbi-texts-1517601011-b7fd96d3-2c08-49b7-921c-96985963a029.html?

[cloudbase]

1. Well, we all know the WSJ

is a liberal rag, he'll say.

Fake news, he'll say.

[pbmus]

2. Sorry, I will delete if fake news...

[cloudbase]

3. Nothing to delete.

It's the real deal.

[ProudLib72]

4. Failing WSJ!

I think the bias spectrum has shifted. The WSJ now appears to be center or slightly right. I guess other media outlets (like Infowars perhaps?) have filled the truly extreme right position. Soon enough, Faux will be "center" as well.

[Staph]

5. WSJ was center or slightly right.

It's now owned by Rupert Murdoch, owner of Fox News. If the Wall Street Journal can't find any useful dirt in the text messages, there is nothing to be found.

[ProudLib72]

6. Yes, that's what I assumed

Murdoch taking it over should have signaled a further lean to the right if anything. So if they couldn't find anything worth mentioning in those emails, there is nothing at all. But you do have to wonder whether or not that will convince Donald and GOP congress. Do they let this one go, or double down?