Posted on 01/30/2018 2:13:30 PM PST by Hojczyk
The Justice Department’s inspector general has been focused for months on why Andrew McCabe, as the No. 2 official at the FBI, appeared not to act for about three weeks on a request to examine a batch of Hillary Clinton-related emails found in the latter stages of the 2016 election campaign, according to people familiar with the matter.
The inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz, has been asking witnesses why FBI leadership seemed unwilling to move forward on the examination of emails found on the laptop of former congressman Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) until late October — about three weeks after first being alerted to the issue, according to these people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive matter.
A key question of the internal investigation is whether McCabe or anyone else at the FBI wanted to avoid taking action on the laptop findings until after the Nov. 8 election, these people said. It is unclear whether the inspector general has reached any conclusions on that point.
A major line of inquiry for the inspector general has been trying to determine who at the FBI and the Justice Department knew about the Clinton emails on the Weiner laptop, and when they learned about them. McCabe is a central figure in those inquiries, these people said.
The FBI declined to comment, as did a spokesman for the inspector general. An attorney for McCabe did not respond to a request for comment.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Who leaked to Devlin Barrett this time?
I think they’re doing this out of the Postal Inspector’s playbook.
Whenever they suspected an employee was a thief, they would conduct their surveillance for months. They would collect reams and reams of data; camera footage, audit trails, customer complaints, witnesses, everything they could marshal.
When the hammer came down they would handcuff the thief and proceed to march him (or her) throughout the ENTIRE facility, for all the employees to see, including in the break rooms.
I had an opportunity to witness a few of these in the Bulk Mail centers, I forget exactly which ones; there were many in that project. These were huge facilities. A real live walk of shame.
“When the hammer came down they would handcuff the thief and proceed to march him (or her) throughout the ENTIRE facility, for all the employees to see, including in the break rooms.”
That would be a great start. As harvey keitel said, ‘someone has got to go to prison, ben’. In this case a lot of people do or the rule of law is truly dead
It is not foiled yet - not by any means.
Republican Grassley is IG Horowitz's ally. The leaks are being used to tell Mueller he can't immunize specific people because they're going to be targets of referrals.
OIG is most assuredly not corrupt.
IG Horowitz was thwarted repeatedly by 0bama admin, who used Eric Holder's very dubious interpretation of the IG statute to keep OIG from investigating the Justice Department, specifically to cover up Fast and Furious. OIG has had it out for DOJ/FBI ever since.
Grassley, a REAL Republican, pushed for a new IG law that would allow IG to go after FBI, it was finally signed by 0bama when it couldn't hurt him anymore, in December 2016.
OIG has been investigating DOJ/FBI for over a year (a month after the new law was passed.) They're going to bring the hammer down on the corruptocrats at FBI.
When the FBI told Congress "we lost 5 of the most crucial five months of texts," OIG stepped up and said, "we can get those, don't worry."
Doesn’t the State Department also have an Inspector General (or perhaps something similar with a different title), but the position was left unfilled during the entire time that Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State?
Comey was asked in direct testimony before Judiciary Cmte: "Why is this the first Congress gets to hear about an ongoing investigation?" (in response to hearing about FBI "Russia" probe.)
Comey replied because it was "sensitive," to which an irate Congressman, clearly not happy that a "sensitive" investigation was being hidden by Feebs, said, "Who was responsible for that decision." Comey replied "The Director of Counter-Intelligence."
Comey is scum. He would have had to--at the very least-- have acquiesced in that decision, but instead defenestrated Priestap without even naming him by name."
“OIG is most assuredly not corrupt. “
They would be the exception then. Even if they are on the up and up, they could only present evidence to the AG for prosecutions, right?
They may have to do a lot more leaking to move the needle with Sessions.
Strzok was Priestap’s deputy...
I don't know if it went unfilled throughout the full duration of Hillary's time, but the State Department, like DOJ and one or two others, claimed that the IG law only obligated them to provide "summary" information to "IG requests."
In other words: "We'll tell you what we feel like telling you, but you aint going to 'inspect' our operations."
So, with ZERO government accountability, and a personal server to block FOIA public access, Hillay was shielded from any scrutiny whatsoever.
Their referrals will more likely trigger a second Special Counsel, and Sessions will have no part of it.
Someone should start a McCabe indictment pool, but just for starters. I’m thinking there’ll be more.
He won’t turn on them. His refusal to talk will earn him their “gratitude” in terms of employment opportunities and other financial support so that he can maintain the lifestyle to which he has become accustomed.
As a former FBI official, he will never do time. Sure, he’ll suffer some indignities due to exposure of his role in this nefarious scandal, but he will be otherwise free to find a cushy job in some liberal think tank or in academia. Political elites are not subject to the same laws that we are.
The Democrats clear strategy is going to be to stall the appointment of a second Special Counsel so they can run out the clock until Mueller gets something--anything--he can use.
Comey, McCabe, et al clearly realized the night Trump won that this day would surely come. Mueller was intended to be their backup beyond Trump's reach to protect them.
Not even close to being over. Republicans need to do a much better job at turnout in November than we've done in Special Elections so far, or the seditious conspiracy will be getting the last laugh.
Remember Hellary refused to take any of the required basic InfoSec training. I think she included Huma in that also. The flaw in any security system set up is the top of the pyramid. If “the boss” refuse to follow the rules who makes them. In Hellary’s case, Zero force her to obey the rules?
Not likely he’s busy subverting them himself!
Spot on comment.
“The Democrats clear strategy is going to be to stall the appointment of a second Special Counsel so they can run out the clock until Mueller gets something—anything—he can use.”
They have that base covered. The dems & the corrupt state OWN Jeff Sessions.
Not entirely, but mostly. The plot was basically about electing Hillary. Had she been elected, there’d be zero risk to any of these guys, and the objective would be completed. After Trump got elected, the plot evolved, first maybe he won’t be seated, and then maybe he’ll be removed. But I think most of the post-election activity is basically to cover up for the pre-election activity. The Russian Collusion narrative confers a post-hoc basis for the wiretapping, etc., plus the Mueller team keeps a lid on all of the information. But no, Trump is not entirely out of the woods until Mueller’s probe is put to rest.
True, but I think Sundance’s point is that if Priestap turned even as of that date, he’d have a much better chance of emerging unscathed. Basically a member of the mob turning state’s witness.
if he is fired before he has enough time in he can lose his immediate pension but still collect a deferred reduced pension at a later age
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.