https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/539510-john-durhams-endgame-dont-expect-criminal-charges John Durham's endgame: Don't expect criminal charges It is becoming apparent that the prosecution of former FBI attorney Kevin Clinesmith may be the zenith of special counsel John Durham’s investigation into the roots of the FBI’s “Crossfire Hurricane” investigation involving Russia and Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign. Recent reporting suggests no other senior FBI or Department of Justice (DOJ) officials will face criminal charges. Clinesmith pleaded guilty to lying to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Court and was sentenced on Jan. 29 by U.S. District Judge James Boasburg. As evidence of Clinesmith’s political bias as a possible motive, the government’s sentencing memo cited Clinesmith’s 2018 suspension for “sending improper political messages to other FBI employees,” including, “viva la resistance.” Boasburg, a FISA Court judge, sentenced Clinesmith to probation, community service and no fine. Exhibiting no indignation regarding the fraud perpetrated on his court, Boasburg accepted Clinesmith’s defense that he never intended to defraud the court (though he pleaded guilty to doing so). In April 2019, before the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee, former Attorney General William Barr testified: “Spying on a campaign is a big deal; I think spying did occur. The question is whether it was adequately predicated. I am not saying that improper surveillance occurred; I am concerned about it. There is a basis for my concern.” This was the impetus for Barr’s assigning Durham in May 2019 to investigate activities during and after the 2016 election. There are hints that Durham’s 20-month autopsy of Crossfire Hurricane may amount to findings of violations of FBI policies and investigative procedures, and other noncriminal matters. Other than additional false statement charges, the activities under investigation may not reach a criminal threshold. Moreover, since Durham’s appointment, the government has declined to prosecute former FBI director James Comey and deputy director Andrew McCabe on criminal referrals arising from Office of Inspector General (IG) investigations. In February 2020, the DOJ declined to charge McCabe with making false statements. In an FBI administrative inquiry, McCabe was questioned about his role in an October 2016 leak to the Wall Street Journal. IG investigators also interviewed McCabe, prompting a criminal referral to the DOJ in April 2018. The IG found that McCabe “lacked candor, including under oath, on multiple occasions” and his decision to publicly confirm the existence of an FBI investigation was done “to advance his personal interests at the expense of department leadership.” A McCabe prosecution may have been problematic. First, the IG’s referral came about through an internal FBI investigation. Usually, when someone is charged with lying to the FBI, it is part of a larger investigation of substantive criminal violations, not an administrative inquiry. Second, as president, Trump criticized McCabe, calling for his firing, so charging McCabe may have created the perception that the DOJ capitulated to pressure. Lastly, a grand jury simply may have refused to indict McCabe. In August 2019, the DOJ announced that Comey would not face charges for releasing internal FBI memos (not classified at the time) documenting his conversations with President Trump. Comey provided the memos to a friend, with instructions to pass them to the New York Times. The IG referral indicated the memos may have contained sensitive information and that Comey violated FBI policy by sharing them. Comey rationalized that the memos were his personal property, a diary of sorts. Since there was no proof of Comey’s intent to mishandle classified information, the DOJ declined to prosecute. Although McCabe and Comey avoided criminal charges, they have been excoriated in IG reports that describe their brazen transgressions and falsehoods. Evidently, the two held an arrogant disregard for DOJ policy guidelines and FBI investigative standards, believing the country had elected a compromised president who must be removed by any means necessary. Though Trump fired Comey over his handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation, an IG review concluded: “We did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that improper considerations, including political bias, directly affected the specific investigative decisions we reviewed.” But investigators know the lack of documentary or testimonial evidence of bias-influenced decisions is not proof that it did not exist or did not influence decisions. Let’s be honest: No one will admit when interviewed, or divulge in emails, their antipathy for Trump as their primary motive for any official decision. The IG cannot divine a person’s true motive or intent, unless there is an abundance of circumstantial evidence, such as private texts between colleagues that indicate state of mind. Official decisions covertly influenced by political bias will always be cloaked in some aura of legitimacy. The Office of Inspector General published three reports that focus on the actions of Comey and McCabe. They are lengthy but easy to read, and the executive summaries alone are jaw-dropping: A Report of Investigation of Certain Allegations Relating to Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe (February 2018) These testimonials chronicle the epic fall from grace of the FBI’s top two leaders. The conclusions are rooted in facts and testimony gathered through a meticulous, objective investigation. For Comey and McCabe, and possibly others, Durham’s efforts may not find much more than what the IG unearthed. The IG’s reports are likely Americans’ best opportunity to learn the truth about what happened. It’s no substitute for a criminal prosecution, but it is some measure of justice and accountability. Some will believe that anything less than criminal charges resulting from Durham’s efforts will demonstrate a disappointing failure by an inept justice system. And tragically, it may take a long time for the FBI to overcome the perception that the bureau was a corrupt tool of “deep state” operatives committed to a political agenda. In truth, a small faction appears to have hijacked the most consequential investigations in FBI history for their own partisan, selfish motives — cases that should have been worked by capable field offices. Barr’s December 2020 order naming Durham as special counsel required that Durham “submit to the Attorney General a final report, and such interim reports as he deems appropriate, in a form that will permit public dissemination.” The final Durham Report may not be as gratifying as criminal indictments, but if it is anything like the IG reports, it will come darn close.
What the right wingers will never admit is that the biggest “deep state” maneuver in 2016 was when Comey publicly admitted to reopening the investigation against Hillary Clinton.
Not really a deep state maneuver. It was actually an area where McCabe put him in an extremely difficult position. Comey went out on a controversial limb by shutting down the Hillary investigation by saying there was no there there or they had completed their work or whatever. He tried to give himself an out when testifying to Congress by promising them that if any new material came up that he would tell them or reopen. Then he called it a day. Meanwhile McCabe was sitting there with a pantload of material that came from the Weiner laptop but was not known to Comey at the time, nor had Congress been informed. Then one of the prosecutors in the Southern District leaked that he had given that information to McCabe even though McCabe had kept it quiet. McCabe had told then in the southern district that they should not review the laptop but should send it over to his office. So Comey was fucked if he released it and also fucked if he did not because he knew it was being reviewed and would come out after the election and he would take heat for not keeping his promise to Congress to notify them of any new info. Yeh, Comey got caught in his mess in that scenario. That particular maneuver was not deep state against Hillary or Trump, he was just trying to save his own arse. Which he was not able to do. McCabe was trying to keep the laptop stuff hidden because- as we know- he and his wife- were in the tank for the dems and did not want it out before the election. Comey wanted Hillary to win too but was not willing to blow both legs off in front of congress to do it. McCabe was willing to blow Comey's legs off and he did, and then McCabe got one or two blown off on the way out.
Hey Fuck Face... is the Weiner laptop still at the Genius Bar? WTF happened to your boy Durham? Biden had him killed? He's been awfully quiet.
Is Horowitz available to do a Fauci investigation? Can he juggle both taks? Surely this one is wrapping up? Maybe have Durham assist?
well this is embarrassing: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...d-phone-data-reps-schiff-swalwell/7651271002/ DOJ inspector general to review Trump Justice Department's seizure of Democrats' phone data WASHINGTON – The Justice Department’s independent watchdog on Friday announced that it was launching a broad investigation into whether the Trump administration and its two attorneys general improperly seized phone records of House Democratic lawmakers, their staff and journalists as part of an aggressive 2018 leak investigation. Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz confirmed that he would launch an investigation into it, as well as on the use of subpoenas to obtain journalists' phone records. Horowitz also said his watchdog agency would look beyond subpoenas to “other legal authorities (used) to obtain communication records … in connection with recent investigations of alleged unauthorized disclosures of information to the media by government officials.” “The review will examine the Department’s compliance with applicable DOJ policies and procedures,” Horowitz said, “and whether any such uses, or the investigations, were based upon improper considerations. If circumstances warrant, the OIG will consider other issues that may arise during the review.” The Office of Inspector General can initiate investigations based on information received from a variety of sources, including its own hotline, referrals from agencies or Congress. In this case, Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco made the request. The announcement came after Democratic Reps. Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell confirmed that Trump-era Justice Department officials secretly seized their Apple phone data as well as that of 10 or so other House Intelligence Committee members and their relatives. The subpoena, which Apple received in early 2018, appeared to have cast a wide net, seeking data on more than 100 phone numbers and email addresses, according to the company. It also included a gag order that, for three years, prevented Apple from telling lawmakers their data had been seized. Senate Democratic leaders demanded on Friday that then-President Donald Trump’s two attorneys general, William Barr and Jeff Sessions, testify about the seizure of phone records.
Heard Durham was preparing some j-walking charges in his Russia investigation? Anyone care to clarify?
Y'all will remember that yesterday or so I said that CuddleCorpses would probably post something about Paul Manafort or Roger Stone to try to divert from the AFG Bay of Pigs disaster in progress. I REST MY CASE YOUR HONOR!