Just keep in mind that nearly every judge and lawyer involved in these type of legal situations in the U.S. is calling the actions taken against McCabe two days before his retirements highly unusual. I am willing to bide my time to see what further information comes out, however the entire situation is highly suspect... and is likely to cause the end of Jeff Sessions career within weeks. EDIT: Keep in mind that the IG Report on the FBI Hillary investigation is due for public release this spring. McCabe was supposedly send packing due to information in this I.G. report. We will see what this I.G. report contains, and make some assertions based on this information. If the I.G. report shows McCabe was deeply involved in wrong doing then I will change my opinion on his firing.
Okay well, "unusual" is just a characterization- not a statement of violation of due process or that they did not have the authority to fire him. Let his lawyer know when you have something there. What would be suspect is if the Department had knowledge of actionable violations by McCabe while he was a still an employee but the Department just let him run out the clock and leave without firing him. That would rightfully be seen as yet another clear attempt by the swamp to look the other way and protect one of their own. THAT WAS NOT ALLOWED TO HAPPEN.
Seriously? I haven't heard any judges commenting on it. Indeed, it would be improper for them to do so. Catching the Deputy Director of the FBI lying to the DOJ about leaking is pretty unusual as well. Sleepy Sessions should have canned him much sooner. Waiting until two days before his pension vests seems vindictive. Sessions has had ample grounds to fire him and put a grand jury on him and Comey for months. What's the holdup?
I am not there on that view yet. Both Sessions and Trump did not walk into a trap that was set for them. The left would have loved to have Trump or Sessions flat out fire McCabe and they crucify them for doing a politically motivated firing. Instead, Sessions said that he would not make a decision until the OPR had completed its review and they went all the way up until Thursday on it and even gave McCabe a chance to come back in and respond and argue against. It's frustrating because I don't like Sessions and I don't like McCabe either but they followed the process in a way that removed the political firing argument that the lefties and media want to make - or at least they struggle now with how to square the fact that the independent IG recommended it. I don't have any reason to believe that Sessions would not have fired McCabe a month ago if the IG and the OPR completed their review a month ago. It's the same thing with the appointment of an independent counsel. The lefties are gunning for a chance to accuse Sessions of being political in appointing a special counsel but now he has seen major elements of the IG's report and Congress is also beginning to line with appointing one. That will leave the lefties having to deal with the fact that the need for an independent prosecutor arises out of allegations from the independent inspector general and demand from Congress rather than Sessions trying to save his job. Yup. I hate it too. But Sessions avoided walking into the trap- admittedly because he does nothing anyway- and now the timing is better for an independent counsel. I don't see McCabe or the timing of it being vindictive at all. McCabe is the one who knew that he was under negative review from the IG and that it would lead to an OPR review so he suddenly moved up his resignation and departure date to outmaneuver them knowing that it would be difficult to do the full review given the notice, hearing, review period allowed under statute and departmental regulations. Sorry if that went down to the wire and he lost. Fuck him. OPR completed their review and re-hearing of McCabe's argument on Thursday, and Sessions fired him late on Friday and his actions were approved/allowed by the OPR. Even though it is an agonizingly longer and frustrating strategy to follow, if congress appoints the independent counsel rather than the AG, it is exponentially better. Because that means that if/when the republicans lose the house in November that the independent counsel will still be sniffing around even though the dems control the House Intel Committee and are able to kill any further investigation there. An argument could be made that if the dems wanted an even more independent review of the McCabe scenario rather than having it in the hands of the IG and Sessions, then they could have supported an independent counsel long ago. But they didn't. So screw them too. Yes, to the grand jury appearances for both Comey and McCabe. Either Comey or McCabe have publicly committed perjury. McCabe defended against the attempt to fire him by arguing that he had approval to speak to and release information to the press. But Comey directly testified to Congress under direct questioning that he never authorized anyone to speak or leak information to the press or outside sources. Grand jury can sort that out, and really they do not need to sort anything out. They just need to agree that there is a basis to go forward with prosecution.
This where you are coo-coo for Cocoa Puffs. McCabe’s actions are not consistent with your claim he was pro Hillary. As a matter of fact, his actions are of him doggedly pursuing an investigation against her and are the crux of his current predicament. Stop trying to spin this as something that it isn’t. It was the same thing with Comey. You are trying to make people who stepped out of the lines investigating Clinton into some anti- Trump conspiracy, which it is not.
Actually no... the earlier reports on the Clinton investigation is that he white-washed the results, and failed to vigorously pursue the investigation -- even changing language in the report to make her email server appear to not be a significant issue. What McCabe is in trouble for is arranging for two agents to meet with the media about the Hillary investigation stating there is nothing further going on and then (supposedly) being less than truthful about the arrangement of the meeting when questioned about it.
There is sufficient information on the record to support an independent investigator. Until that happens they have not been investigated. The IG advanced the ball within his scope but only within his scope. Unleash a full blown witch hunter on to all of them. Then we will see what is what in regard to those issues, and hopefully get convictions on all sort of other issues that are totally unrelated. No reason why Mueller should have all the fun. I would get all of McCabe's wifes emails and communications with the DNC/Viriginia dem party and see if I could bring her down for starters. Just to set everyone on edge right from the get go- Mueller style.
Always a head-scratcher when Comey pipes up about a bunch of notes that he allegedly took contemporaneously when talking to trump and emphasized that it has been his practice to do that as a professional FBI investigator so people can be assured that he was diligently recording things. Now, McCabe pipes up in the last couple days doing that same routine- about how he is a professional investigator and always makes it his habit to make notes during or after any important meeting. BUT, then when BOTH of them were asked for their notes after meeting with Hillary as part of their various interactions and investigation with/of her, they both testified that they did not have any and never took any and he testified that he was in the room for Hillary's interview but not all of it. Similarly, after Comey testified that he met with Loretta about closing out the Hillary case and that he was uneasy with her comments the Committee asked if he had notes from during or after that meeting and he said, no, he did no take any. Anyone think that doesn't pass the smell test?
I didn’t read anything about McCabe white washing anything. What you’re referring to is editing a conclusion of an investigation where they were not pursuing charges against Clinton. That’s not a white wash.