Daily Beast reports presence of conservatives in the FBI as if it's a bad thing

As conservatives focused on FBI bias and abuse from the Department of Justice's inspector general's report, the lefty narrative was to do victory dances, claiming vindication.  Wrote fired former FBI director James Comey: "There was no illegal wiretapping, there were no informants inserted into the campaign, there was no "spying" on the Trump campaign.  Although it took two years, the truth is finally out."

Conservatives knew different, and Attorney General Bill Barr and U.S. attorney John Durham stated that they disagreed with that I.G. conclusion about political bias not driving the Deep State's bid to Get Trump.

The Daily Beast had a different take and, instead of going with the "right all along" line of Comey and his MSNBC pals, decided to get into "whataboutism" instead:

The report released Monday by Justice Department inspector general Michael Horowitz revealed messages between several FBI employees celebrating President Donald Trump's 2016 victory.

One supervisory special agent wrote via instant message that he was "so elated with the election" and that watching election coverage was like "watching a Superbowl comeback." The agent later explained his messages to Horowitz's office, claiming that they thought Hillary Clinton would win and it was "energizing" to see Trump claim victory. "I didn't want a criminal a criminal to be in the White House," he said.

Two other FBI agents also expressed pleasure with the 2016 election results. "Shit just got real," one employee wrote in messages uncovered by the IG report. "I saw a lot of scared MFers on... (my way to to work) this morning. Start looking for new jobs fellas. Haha." The other agent replied, "LOL." In response, the employee remarked: "Come January I'm going to just get a big bowl of popcorn and sit back and watch." The other agent replied: "That's hilarious!"

See?  Bad.  Our guys do it, but so do their guys.  Everybody does it, so conservatives are hypocrites to criticize just Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, the FBI lovebirds whose Trump-hating text messages and "insurance policy" against him on government devices were seen as evidence of political motivation.

Taken on the Beast's own terms, it's baloney.  Whoever these line agents were who expressed pro-Trump messages, they sure as heck weren't involved in overstepping their authority as Strzok and Page did.  They didn't do any politics at all so far as is known.  There was no "insurance policy" on their side, let alone colluding with characters such as James Comey or his deputy, Andrew McCabe.  They just expressed opinions (which, the left has argued in the case of Strzok and Page, they are allowed to have).  Conservatives, therefore, are hypocrites.

Bzzzt, sorry, no equivalence, Daily Beast.

But for the American public, it was a useful piece of information to have.

Because it tells us something we didn't know, something actually reassuring: that, up until now, the whole FBI/CIA-centered scandal to overturn the results of the 2016 election really was the work of some badly politicized government workers.  It wasn't the entire culture; it was just people at the top abusing their authority.

That's good news, because many of us have been dismayed at the idea of the FBI being a totally leftist organization, same as any faculty lounge, environmental agency, or blue-city government, leftists one and all, with absolutely no conservatives allowed in. 

The real news from that piece is that conservatives still exist at the FBI, meaning that conservatives still have some kind of role in government; they aren't shut out.  Despite this Strzok stuff at the top, we learn now that the agency is still not entirely politicized, composed entirely of leftists.  The ostracism of the left toward the right isn't the sole ruling factor of who gets hired; it apparently still doesn't matter if one is a Republican or Democrat, because they accept all political opinions, including conservatives'.  That matters, because agency after agency (and the press) claim themselves to be non-partisan, but pay no attention to those voter registrations and campaign donations.  One of the biggest problems with Special Counsel Robert Mueller's legal team, for instance, was that it comprised entirely campaign-donating leftists.  How on Earth does something like that happen unless there is a culture of screening Republicans out?  The FBI up until this point looked that way, a nest of leftists, and entirely untrustworthy.

The Beast's exposé of the conservative emails tells us something different: that the left hasn't gotten the hooks in quite yet.  Republicans still have "representation" over there.  So if an FBI agent knocks on your door, you no longer have to dismiss him as a probable leftist with a politically motivated activism project.  He could have any politics, and as a result, he might just be non-politicized and actually interested in catching a bad guy.  It kind of shows that the agency is reformable; it's not a hopeless nest of the left.

As conservatives focused on FBI bias and abuse from the Department of Justice's inspector general's report, the lefty narrative was to do victory dances, claiming vindication.  Wrote fired former FBI director James Comey: "There was no illegal wiretapping, there were no informants inserted into the campaign, there was no "spying" on the Trump campaign.  Although it took two years, the truth is finally out."

Conservatives knew different, and Attorney General Bill Barr and U.S. attorney John Durham stated that they disagreed with that I.G. conclusion about political bias not driving the Deep State's bid to Get Trump.

The Daily Beast had a different take and, instead of going with the "right all along" line of Comey and his MSNBC pals, decided to get into "whataboutism" instead:

The report released Monday by Justice Department inspector general Michael Horowitz revealed messages between several FBI employees celebrating President Donald Trump's 2016 victory.

One supervisory special agent wrote via instant message that he was "so elated with the election" and that watching election coverage was like "watching a Superbowl comeback." The agent later explained his messages to Horowitz's office, claiming that they thought Hillary Clinton would win and it was "energizing" to see Trump claim victory. "I didn't want a criminal a criminal to be in the White House," he said.

Two other FBI agents also expressed pleasure with the 2016 election results. "Shit just got real," one employee wrote in messages uncovered by the IG report. "I saw a lot of scared MFers on... (my way to to work) this morning. Start looking for new jobs fellas. Haha." The other agent replied, "LOL." In response, the employee remarked: "Come January I'm going to just get a big bowl of popcorn and sit back and watch." The other agent replied: "That's hilarious!"

See?  Bad.  Our guys do it, but so do their guys.  Everybody does it, so conservatives are hypocrites to criticize just Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, the FBI lovebirds whose Trump-hating text messages and "insurance policy" against him on government devices were seen as evidence of political motivation.

Taken on the Beast's own terms, it's baloney.  Whoever these line agents were who expressed pro-Trump messages, they sure as heck weren't involved in overstepping their authority as Strzok and Page did.  They didn't do any politics at all so far as is known.  There was no "insurance policy" on their side, let alone colluding with characters such as James Comey or his deputy, Andrew McCabe.  They just expressed opinions (which, the left has argued in the case of Strzok and Page, they are allowed to have).  Conservatives, therefore, are hypocrites.

Bzzzt, sorry, no equivalence, Daily Beast.

But for the American public, it was a useful piece of information to have.

Because it tells us something we didn't know, something actually reassuring: that, up until now, the whole FBI/CIA-centered scandal to overturn the results of the 2016 election really was the work of some badly politicized government workers.  It wasn't the entire culture; it was just people at the top abusing their authority.

That's good news, because many of us have been dismayed at the idea of the FBI being a totally leftist organization, same as any faculty lounge, environmental agency, or blue-city government, leftists one and all, with absolutely no conservatives allowed in. 

The real news from that piece is that conservatives still exist at the FBI, meaning that conservatives still have some kind of role in government; they aren't shut out.  Despite this Strzok stuff at the top, we learn now that the agency is still not entirely politicized, composed entirely of leftists.  The ostracism of the left toward the right isn't the sole ruling factor of who gets hired; it apparently still doesn't matter if one is a Republican or Democrat, because they accept all political opinions, including conservatives'.  That matters, because agency after agency (and the press) claim themselves to be non-partisan, but pay no attention to those voter registrations and campaign donations.  One of the biggest problems with Special Counsel Robert Mueller's legal team, for instance, was that it comprised entirely campaign-donating leftists.  How on Earth does something like that happen unless there is a culture of screening Republicans out?  The FBI up until this point looked that way, a nest of leftists, and entirely untrustworthy.

The Beast's exposé of the conservative emails tells us something different: that the left hasn't gotten the hooks in quite yet.  Republicans still have "representation" over there.  So if an FBI agent knocks on your door, you no longer have to dismiss him as a probable leftist with a politically motivated activism project.  He could have any politics, and as a result, he might just be non-politicized and actually interested in catching a bad guy.  It kind of shows that the agency is reformable; it's not a hopeless nest of the left.