I chose to share with a reporter through my public affairs officer and a legal counselor. As deputy director, I was one of only a few people who had the authority to do that. It was not a secret, it took place over several days, and others, including the director, were aware of the interaction with the reporter.Comey:
Asked if he had “ever been an anonymous source in news reports about matters relating to the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation” or whether he had “ever authorized someone else at the FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports about the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation,” Comey replied “never” and “no.”.
It's literally impossible to reconcile these two statements, without accepting that one or the other is not telling the truth. As far as we can assume, both statements were made during hearings, investigative questioning, and likely under oath (we know Comey was under oath).
Since misleading the authorities is considered a heinous crime now that we have entered the Trump era (thank you James Mueller)... can anyone tell me why neither of these people has been charged with the same criminal act?
Wouldn't be too hard to figure out who is telling the truth and who is a hardened criminal like George Papadopoulos and General Flynn. In fact, the FBI probably already knows. I am sure it was (or could be done) without having to hire 17 prosecutors and provide an unlimited budget to them. Generally it doesn't take that much to investigate actual crimes.
111 comments:
can anyone tell me why neither of these people has been charged with the same criminal act?
they're democrats. that's why.
if we as a nation were in the business of evenly enforcing our laws, hillary clinton would be giving interviews not in india but from leavenworth.
"It's literally impossible to reconcile these two statements, "
Not really. For won thing, Comey testified that HE, Comey, had never authorized an anonymous source from the FBI. McCabe testified that he, McCabe, authorized the release of information - a leak if you will - and that Comey was aware of it Aware, not authorized.
Either or both could be misleading to Congress. Not lies, not contradictory, but misleading.
Rather than speculating out of ignorance, wouldn't it be better to reserve judgement until the full IG report is release when you'll actually know what the allegations are?
Either or both could be misleading to Congress. Not lies, not contradictory, but misleading.
"mislead" the FBI and you wind up ruined and likely in prison.
at some point wp, federal law enforcement in this country needs to be held to the standards they are charged with enforcing.
there's nothing worse than a dirty cop, and both comey and mccabe are filthy dirty to the core.
little scotty opines that...
without accepting that one or the other is not telling the truth.
and as we can assume, both
Gee, making an ass out of "u" and me makes quite a stretch for you first tenet....I choose to believe neither of them leaked anything...they are both honorable servants of the constitution and you have nothing but your opinion gleaned for others for your rabid support of trump and his lies....why do you hate the FBI and DOJ????
"there's nothing worse than a dirty cop, and both comey and mccabe are filthy dirty to the core.:
Don't you need to know what the actual allegations are, before you decide that McCabe is guilty of them, let alone filthy to the core?
This, I think, illustrates why Trump's tweeting is irresponsible. Trump rants on twitter, and then people take it seriously :(
WP...
With all due respect, when you are the Director of the FBI, any thing that happens with your knowledge is happening with your authorization.
By definition of the term itself... if you have even tacit approval to do something (as in your superiors are aware and are allowing it to happen) then that "authorization" has been delegated to you.
Your semantic argument is once again a distinction without a difference...
"This, I think, illustrates why Trump's tweeting is irresponsible. Trump rants on twitter, and then people take it seriously :("
Don't need to read Trump's tweets to know that these guys are dirty.
Lack of candor is a serious offense, committed by both of them.
The obama criminal element is getting pissed off. Their arrogance is on display for all to see.
Don't you need to know what the actual allegations are, before you decide that McCabe is guilty of them, let alone filthy to the core?
By your own logic, shouldn't YOU just wait until you get an official report from Robert Mueller, before you accuse the President of being guilty of anything? As it pertains to the President, you have a very vivid imagination that seems to dominate over the fact that you have yet to see "any" evidence of collusion or conspiracy between Trump and the Russians.
You seem more than willing to accept any rumor, any leak, any report, any opinion that supports your personal feelings that the President is a rotten to the core criminal. You are willing to allow as much cognitive dissonance as possible to ignore the lack of actual evidence.
Why should you demand something different from others?
Certainly in this case, we all know that the Inspector General has provided a report that recommended that McCabe be fired.
We know that once certain initial reports were provide to the powers to be that the FBI director took the action of putting McCabe on leave. We know that just this past week, that A.G. Sessions took the recommendation of the I.G. and fired McCabe.
At this point, we have no reason to believe that the I.G. is corrupt or out to get anyone. There has been no allegations of wrong doing. There has been no reports that he is doing things in a manner that suggests it's anything other than by the book.
Trump draining the swamp. Damn right.
"By your own logic, shouldn't YOU just wait until you get an official report from Robert Mueller, before you accuse the President of being guilty of anything"
I have never accused Trump of collusion with Russia, CH, and I have always advised to wait for the facts of the investigation. Which you argue strenuously against by the way, claiming consistently that there is no evidence whatsoever because you haven't seen it.
This blog has really gone off the deep end, alternate facts and alternate reality.
The obama criminal element is getting pissed off. Their arrogance is on display for all to see." Myballs
It has the left here tied in knots.
WimP is funny.
Again, factually wrong " that A.G. Sessions took the recommendation of the I.G. and fired McCabe."
Please review my posts for your error here.
WimP, how are you handling more money in your take home pay due to Trump?
He has to politicize the FBI and Justice Department by arguing that they already were politicized.
That's why this whole thing is Trump's attempt to destroy the credibility of the DOL and FBI. Even if the investigation provides evidence that beyond reasonable doubt that he colluded and/or objected justice, he would say that it's WITCH HUNT! Most Republicans would stand with the President. And every Truther would stand side by side with the President.
Heather Nauert Sec. Of State. Great pick. Begging Dems , please attack HER.
You believe the Presidents lies.
He did not lie, he corrected a WSJ story, which is in his authority to do, and he said there were misunderstandings, which he corrected. This was nothing but a political hit job by Trump to try and discredit a witness in the Russia investigation.
How goes things with Mccowards diary notes?
Bombshell?
We know that once certain initial reports were provide to the powers to be that the FBI director took the action of putting McCabe on leave. We know that just this past week, that A.G. Sessions" ... accepted the recommendation of an FBI Review of the IG report and fired him.
And you jump straight from that to lying under oath and corruption. Why, because Ytump tweeted something stupid, and you have to agree with him?
Misleading vs lying under oath is not a matter of semantics CH. Well, I guess based on this idiotic "Since misleading the authorities is considered a heinous crime now that we have entered the Trump era (thank you James Mueller)" you might not agree, but if so I can only urge, get a grip.
What do you have against finding out the facts first, before accusing someone based on those facts? Why do you want to prosecute, without even having an accusation for that matter? Because you erroneously think that they're both "liberals"?
We have never before seen such turmoil and ineptitude in history." Broken Alky
Your missed the Carter years.
According to CH everything done in the FBI is "authorized" by Comey because Comey is the boss. And he says that with a straight face while accusing someone else of semantics LOL.
As the FBI Director Comey was a figurehead, so said WimP.
K
So if Comey knew about the intent to leak as McCabe said and didn't do anything about it.
Doesn't that mean he didn't object to the leak?
And since Comey is McCabe's immediate supervisor and he knew about the leak and didn't object to it doesn't that mean he authorized it?
And if Comey authorized the leak doesn't that mean he committed perjury in his testimony to senator Grassley?
I can bet you Grassley thinks so and he's right now preparing a referral to the DOJ.
None of any of this would have been learned if Hillary would have won.
Thank You President Trump for out working Hillary and beating that brittle bitch.
None of any of this would have been learned if Hillary would have won.
True statement.
I have never accused Trump of collusion with Russia, CH, and I have always advised to wait for the facts of the investigation.
That's a complete bullshit answer and everyone here knows it.
Which you argue strenuously against by the way, claiming consistently that there is no evidence whatsoever because you haven't seen it.
I will give you the same answer Trey Gowdy is giving. There is no evidence that he (as a member of the House Intelligence committee) has seen of collusion between Trump or his campaign and Russia. He's reviewed all the relevant evidence and interviewed over 70 people associated with that evidence.
If he hasn't seen it... then I have not seen it. You have not seen it. Roger has not seen it. The NY Times has not seen it. The Washington Post has not seen it. Anyone who suggests that they have seen it, is either lying or has a vivid imagination.
That being said...
As I have stated on numerous occasions, Special Counsel likely has interviewed more people than the Congressional intelligence people will interview... so Special Counsel will be a more complete investigation.
But... none of the indictments handed down by Mueller have shown evidence of collusion. In fact, the only indictment specific to Russian meddling, specifically denied collusion.
To what point, Mueller has secret evidence in a secret evidence drawer, I find it possible, but more than highly unlikely.
According to CH everything done in the FBI is "authorized" by Comey because Comey is the boss.
Strawman.
I stated that if Comey is aware that his second in command is doing something, and does nothing to prevent it... then he is implicitly providing authorization to do it.
To clarify.
To the degree that McCabe leaked information to the press about an ongoing investigation with his boss having specific knowledge of action, the boss is also held liable. He is ultimately as responsible for that as McCabe.
To the degree that McCabe sat down and apparently mislead the FBI oversight branch and was less than honest with the Inspector General, that is obviously on McCabe. Unless Comey was aware that McCabe was going to lie, and did nothing to prevent it or warn anyone... then Comey has no responsibility for McCabe's actions.
Wouldn't you agree?
That's a complete bullshit answer and everyone here knows it.
It's the absolute truth, and you're projecting you're strange prejdudice onto "everyone here". I may have accused Trump of a number of things, but I have ALWAYS said that we don't know about collusion until Mueller is finished. In fact, I have said it was unlikely.
Anyone here that is honest, and able to read for themselves, would know that.
To the degree that McCabe sat down and apparently mislead the FBI oversight branch and was less than honest with the Inspector General, that is obviously on McCabe.
WTH is "he FBI oversight branch", are you talking about Congress? Where do you get that he was less than honest with the IG, since that isn't indicated in anything that I've read about this?
"
To the degree that McCabe leaked information to the press about an ongoing investigation with his boss having specific knowledge of action, the boss is also held liable"
While that is debatable, what it does NOT mean is that the Boss lied to Congress when he said he didn't authorize it. McCabe didn't leak either - he authorized his subordinates. You do know what "authorized" means, right? Or is this an alternate fact, that means what you want it to?
Where do you get that he was less than honest with the IG, since that isn't indicated in anything that I've read about this?
Sigh!!
Sessions said he acted on the recommendation of FBI disciplinary officials who said McCabe had not been candid with a watchdog office investigation.
New York Times
Your invincible ignorance is tiresome.
McCabe fired 2-days before his retirement and may now lose most of his pension. He served 21-years to this Country and Trump orders his firing 2 days before he is eligible for his full pension benefits. Trump has been taunting this man for the last 90 days on Twitter about his retirement and then waits just hours before to fire him. This is as low as low can get. We have an unhinged, vindictive, vicious, sick, lying, embarrassment of a leader for this country. Trump is now celebrating this and encouraging others to do the same. If you do, I hope there is a new place in hell for you...right next to Trump.
Trump Attacks Special Counsel
"For the second straight day, President Trump was unrestrained in his commentary about Robert Mueller’s expanding investigation, which is probing not only Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election and possible links to his campaign, but also whether the president has sought to obstruct justice,” the Washington Post reports.
Trump tweeted, “Why does the Mueller team have 13 hardened Democrats, some big Crooked Hillary supporters, and Zero Republicans? Another Dem recently added… does anyone think this is fair? And yet, there is NO COLLUSION!”
_________
New York Times: “The attack on Mr. Mueller, a longtime REPUBLICAN who was appointed F.B.I. director under a Republican president, George W. Bush, followed a statement by Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer published Saturday calling on the Justice Department to end the special counsel investigation. Together, the comments raised the question once again about whether the president might be seeking to lay the ground to try to fire Mr. Mueller.
_____________________________________
Later today:
'When You Are Innocent… Act Like It’
Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) urged President Trump and his lawyer to stop flailing at special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation and to let the probe continue unimpeded, Politico reports.
Said Gowdy: “When you are innocent… act like it. If you’ve done nothing wrong, you should want the investigation to be as fulsome and thorough as possible.”
_____________________________________
Still later today:
Graham Says Firing Mueller Would Lead to End of Trump
Sen. Lindsey Graham warned President Trump not to fire special counsel Robert Mueller, Reuters reports.
Said Graham: “The only reason Mr. Mueller could ever be dismissed is for cause. I see no cause when it comes to Mr. Mueller. I pledge to the American people as a Republican, to ensure that Mr. Mueller can continue to do his job without any interference.”
He added: “As I have said before, if he tried to do that, that would be the beginning of the end of his presidency, because we’re a rule of law nation.”
WTH is "he FBI oversight branch", are you talking about Congress?
The Council of the Inspector General was established as an independent entity within the executive branch. Michael Horowitz is one of those Inspector Generals who has been investigating the FBI's handling of the Clinton and Trump investigations.
Perhaps "branch" is not the correct term. But the Inspector Generals are considered oversight. Bottom line, unless everyone in Congress who has been talking about it has wrong information... firing McCabe was a decision made by the IG, and not a decision made by Trump or by Sessions.
I see the political_lire poster boy still at it.
What a waste of bandwidth and oxygen he is.
What an example of a "pastor" he is.
BUT WHO'S HIS DADDY ? I AM.
ROFLMFAO !!!
CHT, I do think it was Sessions who fired McCabe and this was his statement:
"Based on the report of the Inspector General, the findings of the FBI Office of Professional Responsibility, and the recommendation of the Department’s senior career official, I have terminated the employment of Andrew McCabe effective immediately."
If Trump fires Mueller, there will be enough Republicans to vote for impeachment hearings in the House of Representatives. If Ryan permits it to be voted upon.
If Ryan does not allow it to come to the floor, he will be handing the Democrats the greatest opportunity for a complete reversal of the congressional leadership to Chuck and to be determined. Unless he resigns, Trump will be the first President to be impeached and convicted of his duties to protect and defend the United States of America.
We will make America Decent Again .
IMPORTANT
We may now know why Trump and his lawyer made their most brazen calls yet for the Mueller investigation to be shut down
_____
Shortly before President Donald Trump and one of his personal defense attorneys made their most brazen calls yet for the Russia investigation to be shut down, they apparently received a list of questions from the special counsel Robert Mueller.
The development comes as Trump's legal team has been working for months to sidestep or significantly narrow the scope of an interview between Mueller and their client, who has shown a tendency to exaggerate the facts and make misleading statements.
According to The New York Times, Trump's tweets this weekend came after Mueller sent the questions as part of his negotiations with Trump's legal team over an interview with the president. Mueller is still seeking an interview, sources told The Times, but sent the list as a starting point that he can later use to ask follow-up questions.
Soon after, Trump embarked on one of his most heated, weekend-long tirades against Mueller, former FBI director James Comey, and former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe. Attorney General Jeff Sessions fired McCabe late Friday night, hours before he was set to retire with full pension benefits.
Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
Andrew McCabe FIRED, a great day for the hard working men and women of the FBI - A great day for Democracy. Sanctimonious James Comey was his boss and made McCabe look like a choirboy. He knew all about the lies and corruption going on at the highest levels of the FBI!
11:08 PM - Mar 16, 2018
On Saturday morning, Trump's personal defense attorney, John Dowd, told The Daily Beast the Russia investigation should be shut down.
"I pray that Acting Attorney General Rosenstein will follow the brilliant and courageous example of the FBI Office of Professional Responsibility and Attorney General Jeff Sessions and bring an end to alleged Russia Collusion investigation manufactured by McCabe's boss James Comey based upon a fraudulent and corrupt Dossier," Dowd said in a text message, according to the report.
Dowd, who is the primary point of contact between Trump and the special counsel, initially said he was making the statement in his capacity as Trump's attorney, but later walked that back and said he was acting in his own capacity and not on Trump's behalf.
Hours later, Trump blasted out a tweet which echoed Dowd's statement about the "fraudulent" Trump-Russia dossier.
"The Mueller probe should never have been started in that there was no collusion and there was no crime," he tweeted. "It was based on fraudulent activities and a Fake Dossier paid for by Crooked Hillary and the DNC, and improperly used in FISA COURT for surveillance of my campaign. WITCH HUNT!"
Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
As the House Intelligence Committee has concluded, there was no collusion between Russia and the Trump Campaign. As many are now finding out, however, there was tremendous leaking, lying and corruption at the highest levels of the FBI, Justice & State. #DrainTheSwamp
12:11 PM - Mar 17, 2018
Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
The Fake News is beside themselves that McCabe was caught, called out and fired. How many hundreds of thousands of dollars was given to wife’s campaign by Crooked H friend, Terry M, who was also under investigation? How many lies? How many leaks? Comey knew it all, and much more!
12:34 PM - Mar 17, 2018
McCabe was a decision made by the IG, and not a decision made by Trump or by Sessions.
Scott, are you really that gullible? Of course, they are using the IG as an excuse. The timing of the firing was deliberately designed to make it appear as a result of the IJ report issued much earlier but not implemented. It was a smoke screen Scott, and you were blinded by the fog.
Trump's tweetstorm continued into Sunday morning.
Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
Wow, watch Comey lie under oath to Senator G when asked “have you ever been an anonymous source...or known someone else to be an anonymous source...?” He said strongly “never, no.” He lied as shown clearly on @foxandfriends.
7:02 AM - Mar 18, 2018
Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
Spent very little time with Andrew McCabe, but he never took notes when he was with me. I don’t believe he made memos except to help his own agenda, probably at a later date. Same with lying James Comey. Can we call them Fake Memos?
7:22 AM - Mar 18, 2018
Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
Why does the Mueller team have 13 hardened Democrats, some big Crooked Hillary supporters, and Zero Republicans? Another Dem recently added...does anyone think this is fair? And yet, there is NO COLLUSION!
7:35 AM - Mar 18, 2018
___________
What Mueller wants to know
The exact content of Mueller's questions to Trump is unclear. But public reporting and updates from Congress indicate there are a few broad topics that Mueller has inquired about.
Trump is currently the focal point of Mueller's obstruction-of-justice investigation, which stems from Trump's decision to fire Comey last May. Comey and McCabe, both of whom kept detailed memos about their conversations with Trump, are critical witnesses in the obstruction probe.
Mueller is also scrutinizing Trump as he investigates whether his campaign colluded with Russia during the 2016 election. In particular, Mueller is said to be looking into whether Trump had any advance knowledge of Russia's hack of the Democratic National Committee and the subsequent dissemination of stolen materials.
The Times reported on Thursday that Mueller has subpoenaed the Trump Organization for documents related to its efforts to build a Trump Tower in Moscow. The revelation appears to be a breach of the "red line" Trump told Mueller he would cross if the investigation ventured into the Trump family's personal finances.
On Friday, Felix Sater, the Russian-born businessman who acted as an intermediary between the Trump Organization and Russia on the deal, confirmed that the company was actively negotiating with a sanctioned Russian bank to secure financing for the building at the height of the 2016 election.
Not exactly behaving like he's innocent, is he?
If Trump fires Mueller
If Trump fires Mueller it will be with the majority of the American people supporting him and Congress will know it.
If I was president, I would write an executive order for Mueller to report to the judiciary committees of both houses within 30 days and and show cause why his investigation should continue.
Right now Mullier has spent 14 months chasing conspiracies theories with nothing to show for it and now that the Russian collusion investigation has hit a dry hole, he's looking into anything in Trump's past to charge him with.
This is less like a American investigation and more like a Soviet investigation where, as Stalin said, "show the the man and I'll show you the crime."
His lawyer must be appalled. Trump is acting like a guilty client.
Adam Schiff: Andrew McCabe's firing 'may be justified'
The top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee said Sunday he feels the firing of FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe may be justified, contrary to his party’s messaging in the last two days.
Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., said on ABC’s “This Week” said he’s waiting to see more information on McCabe’s dismissal before making an ultimate judgment. Democrats and ex-intelligence officials have roundly criticized the decision by Attorney General Jeff Sessions — seen as imposed by President Trump — to fire McCabe two days before his pension would have vested.
“You know, his firing may be justified,” Schiff said.
Even a broken clock is right sometimes.
ROFLMFAO !!!
Sounds like there are some specific questions Trump doesn't want to have to answer.
Nope, sounds more and more like the witch hunt Trump said it was.
His lawyer must be appalled. Trump is acting like a guilty client.
Hey shit for brains, Gowdy was referring to the lawyer not Trump.
The question was "So which liberal hero is lying?"
Answer : Both
Trick question, couldn't catch me.
ROFLMFAO !!!
SUMMING IT UP QUICKLY:
-----just before President Donald Trump and his lawyer made their boldest appeal yet for the Russia investigation to be shut down, the special counsel Robert Mueller reportedly sent over a list of questions to the president.
-----Mueller is still seeking a face-to-face interview with Trump, but the questions are said to be a starting point he wants to use for follow-ups.
-----Shortly after, Trump and his lawyer, John Dowd, called for Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to shut down the Russia investigation and fire Mueller.
James Boswell of Normal, Illinois is a pedophile and admits it.
Yeah, because you know, the whole investigation started with a phony dossier.
Wherever you stole that assumes that the majority of Americans agree with the shithole President.
He is the one acting like Stalin. He has repudiated DOJ and FBI in order to remove their credibility.
We don't know how much Mueller and his team have discovered, because he has tightly controlled access to the information and gathered details information. Stalin's justice department system was controlled by the executive, not as required to comply with the Constitution as they were sworn in. Not to protect the President
ROGER: His lawyer must be appalled. Trump is acting like a guilty client.
COMMENSA: Hey shit for brains, Gowdy was referring to the lawyer not Trump.
________________
JAMES: Commensa only sees what he wants to see:
Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) URGED PRESIDENT TRUMP AND HIS LAWYER to stop flailing at special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation and to let the probe continue unimpeded, Politico reports.
Said Gowdy: “When you are innocent… act like it. If you’ve done nothing wrong, you should want the investigation to be as fulsome and thorough as possible.”
Trump Calls Out Comey For Lying Under Oath
Wow, watch Comey lie under oath to Senator G when asked “have you ever been an anonymous source...or known someone else to be an anonymous source...?” He said strongly “never, no.”
Indeed, it does appear that Comey may have misrepresented the truth during his congressional testimony in 2017. The following is an excerpt from his questioning before Congress:
"Director Comey, have you ever been an anonymous source in news reports about matters relating to the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation?
COMEY: Never.
GRASSLEY: Question two, relatively related, have you ever authorized someone else at the FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports about the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation?
COMEY: No."
http://dailycaller.com/2018/03/18/trump-calls-out-comey-for-lying-under-oath/
WINNER BOTH LIED !!!!!
ROFLMFAO !!!
What an example of a "pastor" he is.
______________
He doesn't have a church.
The facts in the dossier are sustained by evidence.
McCabe and Comey, rotten to the Corp
I haven't c/p anything today.
Loretta, people don't care about James and his churches.
We don't know how much Mueller and his team have discovered, because he has tightly controlled access to the information
We don't know because there is none. And none of Mueller's action are saying he's even investigating Russian collusion anymore.
He actions are saying he's going on an undirected fishing expedition to find anything on Trump.
That's what the Soviet Union did.
And if you were honest you would have admitted that.
James Boswell of Normal, Illinois is a pedophile and admits it.
The facts in the dossier are sustained by evidence.
The facts have shown that the dossier was so fake the author didn't even believe what he wrote.
The evidence show all of the "facts" in the dossier came from Russian operatives conducting a disinformation campaign.
GREAT NEWS - Something james can contribute to for his "church":
Andrew McCabe Legal & Pension Fund
https://www.gofundme.com/gqaky4-andrew-mccabe-pension-fund
GoFundMe for McCabe started by mega Silicon Valley funder just a tad short of its goal
https://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2018/03/18/gofundme-for-mccabe-started-by-mega-silicon-valley-funder-just-a-tad-short-of-its-goal/
ROFLMFAO !!!
Your list of assumptions would fill a swimming pool
Everything I said can be backed up with news reports.
Can you say the same?
Byron York: If Mueller didn't charge Flynn and Manafort with collusion, then who was colluding?
But all have faced charges and none of those charges, at least so far, has involved allegations that Flynn, Manafort, Gates, or Papadapoulos played a role in a scheme of collusion, or coordination, or conspiracy, or whatever it is called. And that could tell the public something about the state of the collusion allegation inside the Mueller investigation.
To put it briefly: What kind of collusion scheme between Russia and the Trump campaign could have existed without Michael Flynn being part of it? What kind of collusion scheme could have existed without Manafort? And Gates? And yet none of them -- nor Papadapoulos, either -- has been charged with taking part in a collusion scheme.
No Collusion, no obstruction of justice, no crime, investigation should end.
Byron York
Wing nut
Graham said no.
Sessions said he acted on the recommendation of FBI disciplinary officials who said McCabe had not been candid with a watchdog office investigation.
New York Times
Your invincible ignorance is tiresome.
He says this, and he has no idea what "a watchdog office investigation" refers to. He doesn't even realize that there's something he doesn't know LOL.
Here's a clue, Mr "Invincible Ignorance": he's probably referring the Office of Professional Responsibility. Another clue, to try to pierce your Dunning Kruger armor, is that it's NOT of the Inspector General.
Lord it must be embarrassing to lay on insults of someone's intelligence, and then be corrected to that degree.
The facts have shown that the dossier was so fake the author didn't even believe what he wrote.
Funny how this kind of conspiracy theory seems so self-evident to the loony that spouts it, and so stupid to everyone else.
To put it briefly: What kind of collusion scheme between Russia and the Trump campaign could have existed without Michael Flynn being part of it
One that involved campaign officials other than Flynn? LOL what a dumb rhetorical question. But I guess we shouldn't expect better from a columnist who thinks Manafort couldn't be involved since he wasn't initially charged with it. As if Manafort hasn't been subsequently charged with bank fraud and tax charges ... as we all know, Coldheart's reasoning that "there must be nothing there because Manafort wasn't charged" has already been proven utterly incorrect.
Good lord, you guys are grasping at straws.
" he's probably referring the Office of Professional Responsibility" which is NOT "an oversight branch" Coldheart. It belongs to the FBI. Which I was kind enough to tell you in the first place, but you somehow needed to compound your error with insults - I wouldn't rub it in otherwise.
Opie, jane and HomelessBaked have called Trump Nazi, yet you all take the tax cut. How two faced .
Obumble assured America the Russians had stop all intervention into the US Election, famously telling Putin to "cut it out".
What changed. Hillary lost.
So the Trump Win had to have been won, illegally.
Yet, we know not one vote was change, not one.
he's probably referring the Office of Professional Responsibility. Another clue, to try to pierce your Dunning Kruger armor, is that it's NOT of the Inspector General.
or it could've been both.
Sessions said he acted on the recommendation of FBI disciplinary officials
"officials" as in plural as in more than one.
also, the OPR and OIG often work hand in glove:
ABOUT OPR
The Office of Professional Responsibility, reporting directly to the Attorney General, is responsible for investigating allegations of misconduct involving Department attorneys that relate to the exercise of their authority to investigate, litigate or provide legal advice, as well as allegations of misconduct by law enforcement personnel when related to allegations of attorney misconduct within the jurisdiction of OPR. Learn more.
OPR OBJECTIVES
The objective of OPR is to ensure that Department of Justice attorneys continue to perform their duties in accordance with the high professional standards expected of the Nation's principal law enforcement agency.
RELATIONSHIP WITH THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
Some allegations of misconduct by Department attorneys do not fall within the jurisdiction of OPR and are investigated by the Office of the Inspector General (OIG). OPR's jurisdiction is limited to reviewing allegations of misconduct made against Department of Justice attorneys and law enforcement personnel that relate to the attorneys' exercise of authority to investigate, litigate, or provide legal advice. The OIG is required to notify OPR of the existence and results of any OIG investigation that reflects upon the professional ethics, competence or integrity of a Department attorney. In such cases, OPR will take appropriate action.
this whole thing has become the theatre of the absurd. we're witnessing a blatant and active coup attempt in progress, yet we're picking nits between disciplinary bodies within the DOJ.
He has repudiated DOJ and FBI in order to remove their credibility.
where have you been?
the FBI pissed away it's credibility under the guidance of j edgar crossdresser, and the DOJ was an absolute fucking criminal laughingstock between holder and lynch under 0linsky.
once again you have it exactly backwards. these are the types of extremely corrupt and very powerful organizations that a guy like stalin used to murder his own people.
if we were smart we'd disband the FBI and fire not only mccabe but all of them. we have layers upon layers of redundant law enforcement agencies at the federal level. none more corrupt than the FBI.
Lord it must be embarrassing to lay on insults of someone's intelligence, and then be corrected to that degree.
Well it would be if the "correction" wasn't such unmitigated bullshit.
Wherever you stole that assumes that the majority of Americans agree with the shithole President.
Gee I don't know, where could I've possibly gotten that idea.
Drudge poll: Three-quarters say Trump should fire Mueller
Granted it's an online poll so it should be taken with a huge grain of salt. But neither can it be completely dismiss.
If I had to adjust for the bias in the poll, I would still say 45% want Mueller fired.
This is what perfectly broke and broken looks like.
"Roger AmickMarch 18, 2018 at 5:25 PM
The facts in the dossier are sustained by evidence."
There is no coming back to reality for Alky
Mueller’s Investigation Flouts Justice Department Standards
The special counsel, moreover, has become a legislature unto himself, promulgating the new, grandiose crime of “conspiracy against the United States” by distorting the concept of “fraud.”
Why does the special counsel need to invent an offense to get a guilty plea? Why doesn’t he demand a plea to one of the several truly egregious statutory crimes he claims have been committed?
“Conspiracy against the United States”, Mueller's office has truly become a star chamber.
mccarthy has done an excellent job throughout this coup attempt in describing how mueller has been making it up as he goes along the entire time.
Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime.
- Lavrentiy Beria
"Roger AmickMarch 18, 2018 at 5:25 PM
The facts in the dossier are sustained by evidence."
There is no coming back to reality for Alky
and the alky will go to his grave believing that nonsense.
Does anyone really know what WP is babbling about?
There is only "one" simple fact related to the McCabe firing that matters here. That there are people who have been investigating the behavior of the FBI during the Clinton and Trump investigations... and the recommendation of McCabe's firing came from those investigators.
Blogger C.H. Truth said...
Does anyone really know what WP is babbling about?
i lost track several trolls ago.
splitting semantic hairs at the nano level holds no real interest for me.
Date Sample
Democrats (D)
Republicans (R)
Spread
RCP Average 3/1 - 3/14 -- 46.3 38.1 Democrats +8.2
NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl 3/10 - 3/14 930 RV 50 40 Democrats +10
Economist/YouGov 3/10 - 3/13 1291 RV 43 38 Democrats +5
Reuters/Ipsos 3/9 - 3/13 1411 A 38 30 Democrats +8
GWU/Battleground 3/4 - 3/8 1000 RV 49 40 Democrats +9
Quinnipiac 3/3 - 3/5 1122 RV 48 38 Democrats +10
Monmouth 3/2 - 3/5 708 RV 50 41 Democrats +9
Rasmussen Reports 3/1 - 3/4 1000 LV 46 40 Democrats +6
The tide is receding, just like your hair line rat hole....Maybe these #'s will hold your interest as the R ship sinks...
I stopped reading with this troll comment...
"Where do you get that he was less than honest with the IG, since that isn't indicated in anything that I've read about this?"
Embarrassing isn't it. Every time WP is on the wrong side of an argument he puts up a fusillade of semitic BS.
It's tiresome.
Actually I agree with Howdy Gowdy for once....and WP has more logic in his arguments than the women hating follower cultist cramps could ever dream of....Nothing new there!!!
Rep. Trey Gowdy To Trump's Lawyer: If You Have An Innocent Client, 'Act Like It'
Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) pushed back against President Donald Trump’s lawyer on Sunday, after attorney John Dowd said the special counsel’s Russia probe should end following the firing of FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe.
“To suggest that [special counsel] Robert Mueller should shut down and that all he is looking at is collusion [is wrong],” said Gowdy in a “Fox News Sunday” interview. “If you have an innocent client, Mr. Dowd, act like it.”
from the "be careful what you wish for" files:
A Democratic congressman from Long Island implied that Americans should grab weapons and oppose President Trump by force, if the commander-in-chief doesn’t follow the Constitution.
Rep. Tom Suozzi made the remark to constituents at a town hall last week, saying that folks opposed to Trump might resort to the “Second Amendment.”
https://nypost.com/2018/03/19/congressman-suggests-second-amendment-as-means-of-opposing-trump/
How convenient Rat holes memory is when it comes to his side advocating a "coup"e LOLOLOL
http://theweek.com/articles/489942/gop-candidate-violent-overthrow-government-table
The video: Texas GOP congressional candidate Stephen Broden has found himself in the spotlight after suggesting that the government may well need to be overthrown. In an interview this week, Broden was asked if he was actually calling for violence against the government when he told a crowd of Tea Party supporters last year that the "tyrannical" Obama administration might justify a "revolution." If any government destroys our liberty, Broden replied, "we have a right... to get rid of it by any means necessary." Under further questioning, the self-described "constitutionalist pastor" said that this option was "on the table" this year, though "it is not the first option." Republican Party officials denounced Broden's remarks, but did not withdraw support for him.
The reaction: Many of us have warned of "serious unpleasantness ahead" if the Tea Party's "planned takeover of the government" somehow doesn't happen, says David Neiwert at Crooks and Liars. Clearly, this Tea Party candidate agrees with me. The Tea Party is actually a "positive force in American politics," says Peter Wehner at Commentary. But its leaders and allies must make clear that this kind of "incendiary rhetoric" has no place in what is otherwise a "responsible political movement." Watch the interview with Broden here:
Seems to me the tea baggers have always advocated violence, just like rat the hole...
"Rep. Tom Suozzi made the remark to constituents at a town hall last week, saying that folks opposed to Trump might resort to the “Second Amendment.”"
LOL, probably a very bad idea.
suozzi's constituents are as smart as d0pie:
"A listener then blurts out, “What’s the second amendment?”
The left-leaning Democrat says “The second amendment is the right to bear arms.”
The spectators laughed — some nervously. Republicans were not amused."
LOL, probably a very bad idea.
well, if they stay put down on long island they might be ok, but if they cross the tappan zee it will be on like donkey kong.
"A listener then blurts out, “What’s the second amendment?”
Rat the hole postulates that the above is relevant....Yeah....sure as he once again ignores the tea parties roots in violence....and tries to change the subject...
Yer an idiot!!!!!
"Lock her up."...and trump smiled....LOLOLOL
Yep, that sure says a lot about your side....
"well, if they stay put down on long island"
They're not smart enough...
Loathsome loser lesbian loretta thinks...
if they stay put down on long island"
They're not smart enough...
Yep... they are plenty smart to have voted against trump, unlike you and rat hole the walking time bombs of stupidity.....there is more money made in Nassau County then in any 6 rat hole counties.....
*than
Got the name of the people who's vote was changed?
There is only "one" simple fact related to the McCabe firing that matters here. That there are people who have been investigating the behavior of the FBI during the Clinton and Trump investigations...
That's all CH needs, to call for prosecution. LOL. Even though, for all he knows, McCabe is "guilty" of misleading the FBI equivalent of the HR Department.
But no, it must be a Deep State Conspiracy that he isn't being charged. I don't know whether this crowd is losing a step or three due to age, or just trying to be funny.
That's all CH needs, to call for prosecution. LOL. Even though, for all he knows, McCabe is "guilty" of misleading the FBI equivalent of the HR Department.
well wp, what you must be implying is that the FBI exempts itself from its own rules.
lie to the FBI and you go to jail.
an FBI employee lies to the FBI and the crisis is that everyone gets a whopping case of the sadz because he isn't getting his full pension.
and i would like to think that the OPR and IG are a little more than just the FBI's HR dept..
well wp, what you must be implying is that the FBI exempts itself from its own rules.
No, I'm implying that there is a difference between misleading HR and lying to federal agents investigating a crime. One gets you reprimanded or fired, the other is a federal crime. Even though both may work for "the FBI".
I don't especially respect McCabe, and if he was road-blocking on the Clinton investigation(s) I'll be as happy as anyone else to see him pay for it. But good grief, misleading the OPR is not a federal crime! IF that is in fact what he did. Everything points to that, but the point is that we don't know. Until you DO know, accusing him of obstructing the FBI is nothing but an empty rant.
But good grief, misleading the OPR is not a federal crime!
you need to start by being clear on what happened:
Here is the statement issued by Sessions:
After an extensive and fair investigation and according to Department of Justice procedure, the Department’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG) provided its report on allegations of misconduct by Andrew McCabe to the FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR).
The FBI’s OPR then reviewed the report and underlying documents and issued a disciplinary proposal recommending the dismissal of Mr. McCabe. Both the OIG and FBI OPR reports concluded that Mr. McCabe had made an unauthorized disclosure to the news media and lacked candor − including under oath − on multiple occasions.
The FBI expects every employee to adhere to the highest standards of honesty, integrity, and accountability. As the OPR proposal stated, ‘all FBI employees know that lacking candor under oath results in dismissal and that our integrity is our brand.’
Pursuant to Department Order 1202, and based on the report of the Inspector General, the findings of the FBI Office of Professional Responsibility, and the recommendation of the Department’s senior career official, I have terminated the employment of Andrew McCabe effective immediately.”
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-sessions-statement/statement-by-attorney-general-on-firing-of-fbis-mccabe-idUSKCN1GT04O
lacking candor under oath = lying under oath.
what's good enough for flynn is good enough for mccabe, wp.
and dismissing this as an HR issue? not one of your best trolls by a long shot.
But good grief, misleading the OPR is not a federal crime!
Actually it is.
18 U.S. Code § 1001 - Statements or entries generally
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully—
(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact;
(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or
(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry;
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both. If the matter relates to an offense under chapter 109A, 109B, 110, or 117, or section 1591, then the term of imprisonment imposed under this section shall be not more than 8 years.
(b) Subsection (a) does not apply to a party to a judicial proceeding, or that party’s counsel, for statements, representations, writings or documents submitted by such party or counsel to a judge or magistrate in that proceeding.
(c) With respect to any matter within the jurisdiction of the legislative branch, subsection (a) shall apply only to—
(1) administrative matters, including a claim for payment, a matter related to the procurement of property or services, personnel or employment practices, or support services, or a document required by law, rule, or regulation to be submitted to the Congress or any office or officer within the legislative branch; or
(2) any investigation or review, conducted pursuant to the authority of any committee, subcommittee, commission or office of the Congress, consistent with applicable rules of the House or Senate.
Because is said the word "employment", "personnel or employment practices"? You think that anything an employee says to HR is subject to that, because HR deals with "personnel or employment practices".
My advice based on this, please don't represent yourself in court should the occasion arise.
Anonymous wphamilton said...
Because is said the word "employment", "personnel or employment practices"?
couch the language any way you want. lying under oath is lying under oath.
here's the thing wp, in theory, an FBI agent is required to conduct themselves in strict accordance with the laws they are charged with enforcing. now, we all know that the FBI is famous for not imposing upon itself laws that it might charge US with. but, like a broken clock, or the blind squirrel discovering the random nut, the law WAS applied equally and fairly to mccabe. and justice WAS served.
this time. kind of. the sniveling little snot still gets most of his pension.
now stop implying that what mccabe did was breach a codicil of the HR code of conduct employee manual.
Where do you get that McCabe was "under oath" when he was "less than candid" with the OPR? Are you sworn in when you talk to HR where you work?
I think I'll wait until the FACTS are known about this.
now stop implying that what mccabe did was breach a codicil of the HR code of conduct employee
Actually CS went that direction quoting "personnel or employment practices" - he's literally claiming that misleading HR about anything is a federal crime. You quoted me quoting him, so you should know that RRB.
So tell it to him, not me.
wp, you were the first to dismiss the FBI's OPR as their HR dept.
You don't know WHAT McCabe did to get himself fired until the IG report is published.
From what we can piece together from fragmented news reports, the Office of the Inspector General looked into some allegations raised against McCabe. We don't know if it was an actual investigation, criminal or administrative, or an assessment or evaluation. The IG provided their findings to the OPR.
The FBI OPR (Office of Professional Responsibility) investigates allegations of misconduct or crimes, as well as ethical conduct, and provides recommendations for investigation or administrative action. The OPR makes certain disciplinary decisions (a limited range of them). https://oig.justice.gov/reports/FBI/e0902/final.pdf In many cases, if you will review that document, evaluating FBI agent adherence to workplace rules is exactly what the OPR does, and is accurately analogous to an HR department in that respect.
Sessions accepted the FBI OPR's recommendation to fire the Director. OPR reports are not published, so we won't know what was contained therein. We do expect the IG report to be published.
with history as my guide i'll assume that mccabe got off with a veritable slap on the wrist vs. the punishment he deserves.
It depends on the facts from the investigations rrb. If he indeed lied to federal investigators looking into leaks, then he might face criminal referral.
If he simply misled the OPR or some grandstanding Congressman, then the public firing is likely the extent of his discipline.
I've seen all of the same yammering as you have, comparing McCabe to Flynn and so on. But they are all basing their hypotheticals on assumptions, not facts. Who exactly did he mislead, and how exactly did he do that? THOSE are the questions that we MUST answer (sorry, CH) before we can even begin to discuss possible charges.
Post a Comment