An extremely damaging item in the full report is that Mueller misused the FBI to go after a Congressman who raised questions about Bureau negligence in preventing 9/11.
Weldon, wasn’t it?
(Section on Ted Stevens from the report)
THE WITCH HUNT AGAINST REPUBLICAN SENATOR TED STEVENS AND HIS TRAGIC DEATH
Ted Stevens had served in the U.S. Senate since 1968 and was indicted in 2008 by the U.S. Justice Department. One would think before the U.S. government would seek to destroy a sitting U.S. Senator, there would be no question whatsoever of his guilt. One would be completely wrong in thinking so when the FBI Director is Robert Mueller.
Roll Call
provides us with General
Colin Powell’s take on Ted Stevens:
https://www.rollcall.com/news/recalling_the_injustice_done_to_sen_ted_stevens_commentary-237407-1.html]
“According to former Secretary of State Colin Powell, who had worked closely with the senator since his days as President Ronald Reagan’s national security adviser, the senator was ‘a trusted individual ...
someone whose word you could rely on. I never heard in all of those years a single dissenting voice with respect to his integrity, with respect to his forthrightness, and with respect to the fact that when you shook hands with Ted Stevens, or made a deal with Ted Stevens, it was going to be a deal that benefited the nation in the long run, one
that he would stick with.’”
Such a glowing reputation certainly did not inhibit Mueller’s FBI from putting Stevens in
its cross-hairs, pushing to get an indictment that came 100 days before his election, and engaging in third world dictator-type tactics to help an innocent man lose his election, after which he lost his life.
As reported by NPR, after the conviction and all truth came rolling out of the framing and conviction of Senator Stevens, the new Attorney General Eric Holder, had no choice.
He “abandoned the Stevens case in April 2009 after uncovering new and ‘disturbing’ details about the prosecution…”
Unfortunately for Ted Stevens, his conviction came only eight days before his election, which tipped the scales on a close election.
https://www.npr.org/2012/03/15/148687717/report-prosecutors-hid-evidence-in-ted-stevens-case]
Does this sound familiar yet? The allegation was that Senator Stevens had not paid full price for improvements to his Alaska cabin. As
Roll Call reported, he had actually overpaid for the improvements by over twenty percent.
Roll Call
went on to state:
20
“But relying on false records and fueled by testimony from a richly rewarded ‘cooperating’ witness… government prosecutors convinced jurors to find him guilty just eight days before the general election which he lost by less than 2 percent of the vote.”
https://www.rollcall.com/news/recalling_the_injustice_done_to_sen_ted_stevens_commentary-237407-1.html]
After a report substantiated massive improprieties by the FBI and DOJ in the investigation and prosecution of Senator Stevens, the result was ultimately a complete dismissal of the conviction.
At the time there was no direct evidence that Director Mueller was aware of the tactics of concealing exculpatory evidence that would have exonerated Stevens, and the creation of evidence that convicted him in 2008. Nearly four years later, in 2012, the Alaska Dispatch News concluded:
“Bottom line: Kepner (the lead FBI investigator accused of wrongdoing
by Agent Joy) is still working for the FBI and is still investigating cases, including criminal probes. Joy, the whistleblower (who was the FBI agent who di
sclosed the FBI’s vast wrongdoing, especially of Kepner), has left the agency.”
https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/article/why-lead-fbi-agent-botched-ted-stevens-case-still-employed/2012/06/07/ ]
Director Mueller either did control or could have controlled what happened to the lead FBI agent that destroyed a well-respected U.S. Senator. That U.S. Senator was not only completely innocent of the manufactured case against him, he was an honest and honorable man. Under Director Mueller’s overriding supervision, the wrongdoer who helped manufacture the case stayed on and the whistleblower was punished. Obviously, the FBI Director wanted his FBI agents to understand that honesty would be punished if it revealed wrongdoing within Mueller’s organization.
Further, not only was evidentiary proof of Senator Stevens’ innocence concealed from the Senator’s defense attorneys by the FBI, there was also a witness that provided compelling testimony that Stevens’ had done everything appropriately. That witness, however, was who agents sent back to Alaska by FBI Agents, unbeknownst to the
Senator’s defense attorneys.
This key exonerating testimony was placed out of reach for Senator Stevens’ defense. Someone should have gone to jail for this illegality within the nation’s top law
enforcement agency. Instead, Senator Stevens lost his seat, and surprise, surprise, Mueller’s FBI helped another elected Republic an bite the dust. Unfortunately, I am not speaking figuratively.
21
In August of 2010, former Senator Stevens boarded his doomed plane. But for the heinous, twisted and corrupt investigation by the FBI, and inappropriate prosecution by the DOJ, he would have still been a sitting U.S. Senator. Don’t forget, one vote in the Senate was critical to ObamaCare becoming law also. If Senator Stevens was still there, it would not have become law.
In the following month after Senator Stevens’ untimely death, in September of 2010, a young DOJ lawyer, Nicholas Marsh who had been involved in the Stevens case, committed suicide at his home as the investigation into the fraudulently created case continued. The report expressed,
“no conclusion as to his (Marsh’s) conduct,” given his untimely death. Robert Luskin, an attorney for Marsh, said, “he tried to do the right thing.”
https://www.npr.org/2012/03/15/148687717/report-prosecutors-hid-evidence-in-ted-stevens-case ]
If you wonder what happened to the valuable FBI agent who was an upstanding whistleblower with a conscience, you should know that in Mueller’s FBI, Special Agent Joy was terribly mistreated. Orders came down from on high that he was not to participate in any criminal investigation again, which is the FBI management’s way of forcing an agent out of the FBI. On the other hand, the FBI agent who was said to have manufactured evidence against Senator Stevens while hiding evidence of his innocence was treated wonderfully and continued to work important criminal cases for Director Mueller. If you wonder if mistreatment of an FBI agent who exposed impropriety was an anomaly in Mueller’s FBI, the
Alaska Dispatch noted this about another case:
https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/article/why-lead-fbi-agent-botched-ted-stevens-case-still-employed/2012/06/07/
“Former FBI agent Jane Turner was treated much like Joy (the
whistleblower agent in the Stevens case) after she blew the whistle on fellow agents who had taken valuable mementos from Ground Zero following the 9-11 terrorist attacks. She took the FBI to court over her treatment and ended up winning her case against the agency after a jury trial.
When you blow the whistle on the FBI, ‘it’s death by a million paper cuts,’ she told Alaska Dispatch. Turner said
that agents who violate the FBI’s omerta — those who internally challenge the agency — are undercut and isolated. They (Mueller’s FBI supervisors) do everything they can to get you to quit’ she said.”
On at least three separate occasions, officers in the Able Danger unit attempted to pass information on the Atta al-Qaida cell to the FBI, only to be blocked by attorneys attempting to follow Clinton policies and guidance. None other than Gorelick promulgated the policy, and later served on the 9/11 Commission.
Did anyone really buy the line that Able Danger identifying the Atta al-Qaida cell as terrorists is “historically insignificant,” as the commission just stated, after it denied three times even knowing of Able Danger. Army Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer said the Able Danger unit identified an al-Qaida cell led by 9/11 terrorist-pilot Mohamed Atta. He also said that in 2003, he told the commission staff member about efforts to pass the information to the FBI. He offered to brief the 9/11 Commission fully in January 2004, but they declined....-——
Where are answers to the 9/11 commission hoax?
TheReporter.com ^ | 10/14/2005 | Sally Chaney, Fairfield