Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The DOJ Inspector General’s review will focus on the FBI, not DOJ.
National Review ^ | January 12, 2017 | Andrew C. McCarthy

Posted on 01/13/2017 12:09:08 PM PST by Red Steel

The Justice Department’s inspector general has announced that his office will conduct a review that will focus principally on FBI director James Comey’s public statements regarding the Clinton e-mails investigation during the 2016 campaign.

These were the three highly unusual announcements describing the status of the investigation in which no charges were filed: (1) the detailed presentation on July 5 of: the evidence uncovered against Hillary Clinton, a legal analysis of the applicable criminal statute, Comey’s determination that an indictment was not warranted, and his opinion that no reasonable prosecutor could disagree with his assessment; (2) the October 28 letter to Congress indicating that the Clinton e-mails case was being reopened owing to newly discovered evidence (derived from the separate investigation of disgraced former representative Anthony Weiner [D., N.Y.], and specifically from a computer shared by Weiner and his estranged wife, Clinton aide Huma Abedin); and, finally, (3) the announcement on November 6 – virtually the eve of the election – reaffirming Comey’s decision (announced July 5) not to seek an indictment.

It is undoubtedly appropriate for Michael Horowitz, DOJ’s inspector general, to consider whether these actions departed from law-enforcement protocols – as I have previously explained. But it is worth noting what the IG will not be reviewing: the Justice Department’s conduct.

The IG’s press release makes no mention of the Justice Department’s decision not to open a grand-jury investigation, despite significant concrete evidence of criminal wrongdoing – the decision that deprived the FBI of the use of subpoenas to compel the production of evidence. Neither will the IG be reviewing the multiple irregular immunity agreements granted by the Justice Department in a case in which no criminal charges were filed, including agreements that reportedly called for the destruction of evidence (laptop computers of top Clinton aides) after a strangely limited examination of their potentially incriminating contents.

There will similarly be no inquiry into why the Justice Department allowed subjects of the investigation (who had been granted immunity from prosecution) to appear as lawyers for the main subject of the investigation – despite ethical and statutory prohibitions on such conduct. Nor, evidently, will the IG be probing why the attorney general furtively met with the spouse of the main subject of the investigation – the spouse who just happens to be the president who launched the attorney general to national prominence by appointing her as a district U.S. attorney in the Nineties – on an airport tarmac just days before Mrs. Clinton submitted to a perfunctory FBI interview, after which came Comey’s announcement that charges would not be filed.

According to the press release, the IG will be looking at other matters related to the Clinton investigation. These include: whether the FBI’s deputy director should have been recused because his wife had been sponsored in a run for public office by Clinton insider Terry McAuliffe; whether FBI and DOJ officials improperly disclosed non-public information; and whether the FBI’s response to a Freedom of Information Act request – which included information about President Clinton’s infamous Marc Rich pardon – was timed (the week before the election) to damage Mrs. Clinton’s campaign.

It appears that the decisions that actually tanked the Clinton investigation will not be scrutinized.

Nevertheless, it appears that the decisions that actually tanked the Clinton investigation will not be scrutinized. The IG would likely say that those matters are related to the exercise of prosecutorial authority, and are thus best left to Justice’s Office of Professional Responsibility. But of course, OPR reports directly to the attorney general. Only the IG has authority to investigate independent of DOJ supervision.

Horowitz, a very fine lawyer and prosecutor who (like Jim Comey and yours truly) was an assistant U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York for several years, was appointed Justice’s IG by President Obama in 2012. I suspect the Trump administration will want its own appointee. In a show of bipartisanship in 2001, President Bush retained Glenn Fine, the IG President Clinton had appointed shortly before leaving office; thereafter, Fine aggressively investigated Bush’s Justice Department . . . and was retained by Obama until retiring in late 2010 – ultimately to be replaced by Horowitz.

It is unlikely that Trump will want to repeat that history. Look for the Justice Department to have its first Republican-appointed IG in decades. Assuming that happens, we will have to see whether the review announced today proceeds as planned and whether, if it does, its scope is altered.

What we do know is that there has been a stark difference between the Obama Justice Department’s kid-gloves treatment of FBI investigations touching on the Democratic presidential nominee, and the aggressive approach (including FISA warrants, as I discussed in Wednesday’s column) that DOJ took on investigations touching on the Republican presidential nominee. I’ll have more to say about that over the weekend.


TOPICS: Government
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 01/13/2017 12:09:08 PM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Red Steel
The CIA should investigate the FBI.

And the FBI should investigate the CIA.

2 posted on 01/13/2017 12:11:35 PM PST by Paladin2 (No spellcheck. It's too much work to undo the auto wrong word substitution on mobile devices.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Is this IG going to be in office after Jan. 20th? At what point is Sessions going to be in charge?


3 posted on 01/13/2017 12:17:58 PM PST by Mercat (Men never do evil so fully and cheerfully as when they do it out of conscience.” (Blaise Pascal))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

So the focus of the investigation is Comey, not Hillary?

I really hate these Obamaite a-holes.


4 posted on 01/13/2017 12:19:02 PM PST by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel
Previously

5 posted on 01/13/2017 12:19:05 PM PST by TangoLimaSierra (It's gonna be bloody.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2
Trumps should fire the whole bunch and start over with people who are not waist deep in the mud and mire of DC politics.

Draining the swamp requires....well....you know....draining.

6 posted on 01/13/2017 12:22:46 PM PST by HotHunt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mercat

[Is this IG going to be in office after Jan. 20th? At what point is Sessions going to be in charge?]

To replace the IG Trump would appoint a new IG who must be confirmed by the Senate.

FROM USDOJ/OIG

The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) in the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is a statutorily created independent entity whose mission is to detect and deter waste, fraud, abuse, and misconduct in DOJ programs and personnel, and to promote economy and efficiency in those programs. The OIG investigates alleged violations of criminal and civil laws by DOJ employees and also audits and inspects DOJ programs. The Inspector General, who is appointed by the President subject to Senate confirmation, reports to the Attorney General and Congress.

https://oig.justice.gov/about/


7 posted on 01/13/2017 12:29:44 PM PST by Brad from Tennessee (A politician can't give you anything he hasn't first stolen from you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

If they take Comey down, I hope he drags a lot of people with him,especially Lynch.


8 posted on 01/13/2017 12:36:45 PM PST by surrey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: HotHunt
Trumps should fire the whole bunch and start over with people who are not waist deep in the mud and mire of DC politics.

My thoughts exactly. Then have the new guy just go after ALL of them.

9 posted on 01/13/2017 1:21:12 PM PST by NurdlyPeon (It is the nature of liberals to pervert whatever they touch.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

What deception. DOJ is a huge part of the problem. They did not uphold USConstitutional law. They have become a dangerous gang of hired oppressors of truth and justice.


10 posted on 01/13/2017 1:35:27 PM PST by veracious
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel
It appears that the decisions that actually tanked the Clinton investigation will not be scrutinized.

Not this week, anyway.

11 posted on 01/13/2017 1:36:24 PM PST by henkster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

That’s until President Trump decides the whole thing is too much of a jumble and appoints a special prosecutor.....


12 posted on 01/13/2017 4:38:48 PM PST by Intolerant in NJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson