No Criminal Charges for McCabe

by Daveda Gruber:

On Friday the Justice Department has indicated that it will not indict former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe on criminal charges.

An investigation into accusations from the agency’s independent watchdog that lasted almost two years found that McCabe lacked sincerity when he was questioned about leaking information to the media.

McCabe’s attorneys Michael Bromwich and David Schertler, received a letter from Justice Department attorney J.P. Cooney and Assistant U.S. Attorney Molly Gaston which said that the criminal investigation into McCabe is now closed.

Cooney and Gaston wrote, “We write to inform you that, after careful consideration, the government has decided not to pursue criminal charges against your client, Andrew G. McCabe. Based on the totality of the circumstances and all of the information known to the government at this time, we consider the matter closed.”

In statements given to media, Bromwich and Schertler confirmed that they received a phone call from the U.S. Attorney’s office in Washington, D.C.

The call in question was followed by the letter notifying them that “the criminal investigation of Andrew McCabe has been closed.”

Bromwich and Schertler  added that “This means that no charges will be brought against him based on the facts underlying the Office of the Inspector General’s April 2018 report. At long last, justice has been done in this matter.”

The two went on to say, “We said at the outset of the criminal investigation, almost two years ago, that if the facts and the law determined the result, no charges would be brought. We are pleased that Andrew McCabe and his family can go on with their lives without this cloud hanging over them.”

McCabe served at the FBI for 21 years. He became the acting director in May 2017 after President Trump fired former FBI Director James Comey.

The Attorney General at the time, Jeff Sessions fired McCabe in March 2018. That came after the inspector general found he had repeatedly misstated his involvement in a leak to The Journal regarding an FBI investigation into the Clinton Foundation.

DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz released a report in 2018 that showed McCabe lacked candor with FBI Director James Comey, FBI investigators, and inspector general investigators about his authorization to leak some allegedly sensitive information to the Wall Street Journal that revealed the existence of an FBI investigation into the Clinton Foundation.

Comey said he did not permit McCabe to tell the media. Horowitz wrote that McCabe’s actions were “designed to advance his personal interests at the expense of Department leadership” and “violated the FBI’s and the Department’s media policy and constituted misconduct.”

McCabe’s legal team, on the other hand, said McCabe’s story changed because he was surprised by and unprepared for the question during his May 2017 interview. The attorneys also said that he was preoccupied with other major events. They went on to say that once Comey was fired later that day, he didn’t think about his answers again as he dealt with leading the bureau for a time.

Horowitz concluded that McCabe misled his team too.

Horowitz said, “It seems highly implausible that McCabe forgot in May what he recalled in detail during his November inspector general testimony. In our view, the evidence is substantial that it was done knowingly and intentionally.”

McCabe has maintained his innocence and said the inspector general’s conclusions relied on mis-characterizations and omissions, which included information that was said to be favorable to McCabe.

McCabe also known as Andy was allegedly the “Andy” who former FBI agent Peter Strzok and former FBI lawyer Lisa Page texted about in the famous texts between the two lovers, at the time.

Honestly, I have believed that McCabe was going to be indicted. I have alleged that Strzok, Page and McCabe were in a big part of backing the “insurance policy” that turned out to be the Russian Witch-hunt that came from the Dossier written by Christopher Steele.

Can I say that I am deeply disappointed that the people who I see as potentially guilty are all going free so far?

Why is it that most people who were investigated for being on the side of President Trump are usually indicted and some have been found guilty of crimes that are similar to the allegations against people on the left?

It appears to me that there is a distinct two tier judicial system in play here.

I can always be reached on Twitter to discuss political views.

@DavedaGruber

What Did the FISA Report Show?

by Daveda Gruber:

On Monday the inspector general for the Justice Department finally released the internal review concerning the origins of the Russia investigation.

The report concluded that there was no intentional misconduct or political bias surrounding efforts to seek a highly controversial Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant found by investigators. The warrant was, in fact, to monitor former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.

Page was observed during the months at the start of the Russia investigation dealing with election interference.

At least 17 significant errors were found by the IG probe and a new audit into the FISA process and procedures will be launched.

The report, which is nearly 500 pages, said, “We did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced the FBI’s decision to seek FISA authority on Carter Page.”

The unverified dossier that was compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele was undoubtedly anti-Trump but former FBI bosses James Comey and Andrew McCabe were shown as not acting with political bias.

Even the overall surveillance efforts targeting Page to secure the original FISA warrant for him in October 2016, were shown to have no bias, as reported by IG Michael Horowitz and his investigators.

Representative Devin Nunes, R-Calif., and the Republicans have contested the FISA warrant and the subsequent renewal applications. They claim that the FBI misrepresented key evidence and omitted exculpatory information used to support the warrant application came from the dossier compiled by Steele, who the Horowitz team has questioned why the FBI considered him to be a credible source.

The question of why news reports were used to make Steele look more credible was also brought to the FBI.

The Inspector General claims that his team has reviewed over one million records and has conducted over 100 interviews, including several witnesses who agreed to be interviewed just recently.

Page, who has been investigated as a foreign agent, has been vocal about his belief that he was unjustly targeted and not interviewed for the Horowitz probe and never charged with a crime.

Horowitz is scheduled to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday morning to answer questions about his probe.

This investigation is over as far as Horowitz is concerned but Barr has assigned the U.S. attorney for Connecticut, John Durham, to conduct an inquiry into alleged misconduct and alleged improper government surveillance, which are criminal in nature, on the Trump campaign during the 2016 presidential election.

At this time, former Deputy Director of the FBI, Andrew McCabe, has been criticized by Horowitz in a separate inquiry for statements that were made by McCabe during a Hillary Clinton related investigation of which he has maintained no wrong doing and has not been indicted but he is facing possible federal charges.

Did FBI Lawyer Falsify FISA Document?

by Daveda Gruber:

Reports are flying around about Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz finding evidence that a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) lawyer changed verbiage on a document that was used to obtain the FISA warrant from the court.

The word usage that was changed lead to manipulating a rather important document.

There is now alleged evidence that is said to come out on December 9th that contains information that a document relating to Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant abuse against former Trump campaign aide Carter Page was altered by a lawyer.

The alleged lawyer in question has not been name, as yet but it is alleged that he worked beneath former deputy assistant director Peter Strzok. Now that report is being disputed.

The story unfolds that the lawyer was allegedly a low level employee of the FBI but was involved enough in the FISA process to falsely state that he had documentation to back up a claim he had made in discussions with the Justice Department about the factual basis for the FISA warrant application.

The alleged employee allegedly altered an email to substantiate his inaccurate version of events.

On January 15, 2019 the Washington Examiner published an article that noted that former FBI general counsel James A. Baker was under criminal investigation for unauthorized leaks to the media.

The development was made public in a letter  that was sent to the office of U.S. Attorney John Durham for the District of Connecticut by Republican Reps. Jim Jordan of Ohio and Mark Meadows of North Carolina.

Former FBI Director James B. Comey selected Baker as the FBI’s general counsel. Baker was an associate general counsel for Bridgewater Associates, LP.

After clerking for the Honorable Bernard A. Friedman in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, Baker joined the Department of Justice (DOJ) with the Criminal Division through the Attorney General’s Honors Program in 1990 and worked as a federal prosecutor with the division’s Fraud Section.

In December, 2017 Baker was replaced as general counsel and reassigned to a different position within the FBI. It was revealed on April 19, 2018 that he was a recipient of at least one memo from Comey.

On May 4, 2018, Baker resigned the FBI and joined the Brookings Institution.

In January 2019, Baker left Brookings to become the director of national security and cybersecurity at the R Street Institute.

Is Baker going to be thrown under the bus? I believe and it is my opinion that he is the person going down for the FISA warrant discrepancy.

Did I just uncover something? I just may have done that.

DOJ Will Not Prosecute Comey for Leaking Classified Information

by Daveda Gruber:

The Conservative watchdog group, Judicial Watch, announced that it had obtained an FBI log about special agents arriving at former FBI Director James Comey’s home in June 2017 to retrieve his memos.

Comey handed over four of them and said that two of them, to the best of his recollection, were missing.

Still, it is now allegedly been decided that Comey will not face prosecution on this matter. The Department of Justice has declined to prosecute in this case.

During congressional testimony, Comey admitted that he had hand written notes of his meetings with President Trump in the days before he was fired. He took those notes and shared them with a friend who passed them to The New York Times.

That, folks, is called leaking information.

Two of the memos were classified by the FBI as “confidential,” but after the fact.

Comey became a critic of the president ever since he was fired from his position at the FBI.

Look what Comey tweeted:

Comey’s feelings towards Trump are not hidden. He holds hate for the president.

And Comey is not out of hot water just yet. He is a possible target of Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s separate investigation into alleged Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act abuse.
The former FBI director also signed three out of the four FISA applications targeting former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.

Comey’s actions as an FBI Director will now probably be scrutinized in the “investigate the investigators,” which is a review of the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation that is being led by Attorney General William Barr and the U.S. attorney in Connecticut, John Durham.

It has been said that the bigger you are, the harder you fall. Comey is a tall man who stands 6 feet 8 inches tall. I predict that he falls hard.