The FBI budget request for 2017 lists 35,158 employees.
Two of them wrote anti-Trump texts.
Is there a remote chance that more than two out of the remaining 35,156 are pro-Trump?
Based on the FBI events of October 28-31, 2016 (Comey letter and false NYT story denying Russian influence on Trump), it would not be a wild guess the pro-Trump texts outnumber the anti-Trump ones exponentially.
Creation of the “scandal” based on two peoples’ selectively released texts is a textbook study of the ability of the right to create a political tsunami out of nothing, representing the opposite of what’s almost certainly true.
Yet the only investigation of bias in communications in the IG report is from the Strzok texts. This has been the ploy ever since those texts were first released. It boggles my mind no one in the MSM or even on MSNBC has screamed from the rafters “What about the overwhelming evidence of anti-Clinton bias. And why no release of texts from any other agents?”
For example, from Politico, four days before the election.:
Jim Kallstrom, who headed the FBI’s New York field office in the 1990s, has spent months citing anonymous sources within the bureau to warn that many there were upset by Director James Comey’s decision to recommend against charges for Clinton related to her use of a personal email server during her tenure as secretary of state. Kallstrom, who has endorsed Donald Trump for president, has suggested in past interviews that he has spoken with active FBI agents, including some working on the Clinton investigation, which if true, would mean the agents broke bureau protocol to discuss a case.
Josh Marshall notes this omission:
There’s also quite a lot of evidence that fear of those leaks was driven by hostility to Clinton among agents in New York as well as members of the fraternity of retired FBI Agents. This hostility or bias toward Clinton seems like a very big driver of events in the fall of 2016. This would not absolve Comey of responsibility for his actions. But it seems impossible to understand the fullness of the situation without trying to get to the bottom of this part of the story. And yet, again, it’s largely ignored in the IG Report. No mention of Giuliani. No mention of the “good FBI agents” who went to House Republicans. I can only imagine what the texts of those “good FBI agents” might contain if scrutinized like Strzok’s and Page’s have been
Marshall notes the IG investigation may be continuing and this may be in future reports. But right now, nothing is contrasted with the Strzok texts.
Note: The IG Report does quote Loretta Lynch as saying “there is a deep and visceral hatred” of Hillary by FBI agents. I believe her, and there’s a lot of other evidence of that outside the report. But relying only on a quote from Lynch (whom the entire right and some MSM believe conspired with Bill Clinton on the tarmac to fix it for Hillary) is not enough to substantiate the obvious point that the FBI was overwhelmingly biased for Trump, as Comey now admits.