What has become increasingly visible is the largest political scandal in the history of U.S. government. A political conspiracy at the highest levels of the prior administration and across multiple agencies within the U.S. intelligence apparatus. The scale of corruption being exposed is astounding.
The investigative effort to unravel and bring justice is almost overwhelming. It is also very likely the issues surrounding Andrew McCabe are only just beginning.
Within the response letter from Michael Bromwich, the attorney representing fired FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, you might note the following (emphasis mine):
[…] The investigation described in the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) report was cleaved off from the larger investigation of which it was a part, its completion expedited, and the disciplinary process completed in a little over a week. Mr. McCabe and his counsel were given limited access to a draft of the OIG report late last month, did not see the final report and the evidence on which it is based until a week ago, and were receiving relevant exculpatory evidence as recently as two days ago. (pdf link)
Within the Office of Professional Responsibility guidelines for Attorney Representation you might also note the following (again, emphasis mine):
The majority of OPR investigations are administrative in nature, and employees are not entitled to counsel as a matter of law. However, counsel may be permitted if counsel does not interfere with or delay the interview. Counsel must be actually retained by the employee as his legal representative, not as an observer. Counsel are not permitted access to certain confidential criminal investigative information and may not be permitted access to grand jury information.. (link)
Put both of those statements together, along with the underlying issues that Inspector General Michael Horowitz was investigating, and there’s even more likely evidence of the “outside Washington DC” prosecutor noted in the following statement from Attorney General Jeff Sessions:
… I have appointed a person outside of Washington, many years in the Department of Justice to look at all the allegations that the House Judiciary Committee members sent to us; and we’re conducting that investigation. (read more)
I would strongly encourage readers to review the OPR standards –SEE HERE– and also review the information –HERE– to understand the process used by the Office of Inspector General and the Office of Professional Responsibility, as well as the conclusions reached. It is an exhausting process and it is NOT easy to be fired. Not by a long shot.
A few more important points:
♦First, the question: If Jeff Sessions has appointed a prosecutor to work with Inspector General Horowitz, why do congressional reps keep asking for a second special council?
The answer is a lot simpler than we might think: They don’t know.
The legislative branch of the government doesn’t know what the criminal investigations are of the executive branch of government; AND AG Jeff Sessions has repeatedly said his intention is to restore the proper, appropriate and professional standards of the U.S. Department of Justice. (ie. no talking about criminal investigations)
Within this specific investigation there is a triple role. ¹A DOJ Inspector General conducting an internal investigation; ² Appropriate congressional oversight; and ³ the collection of evidence that might also be used in criminal indictments.
Within the IG collection of evidence there are two competing issues: #1) Evidence of misconduct and political bias (shared openly with congress and oversight); and #2) evidence of illegal activity (retained from congress to preserve integrity of evidence for later used in criminal proceedings); this is where the “outside DC prosecutor” comes in.
Which brings us to point #2
♦Accusations of DOJ hiding evidence from congress.
Several congressional representatives have stated the information about Judge Rudolph Contreras was not readily know because his association with Peter Strzok was redacted within text messages sent from DOJ to congress. Therefore the DOJ is trying to hide damaging information. That claim is not the correct framework/context.
Congress as a whole (reps, staff and investigators) can go to the DOJ and look at ALL unredacted text messages. However, if congressional staff wish to take copies with them the copies must be redacted. Why? Because, just like the Contreras issue within the Strzok and Page text messages, there’s a possibility specific texts are evidence of a crime.
Go back to December 2nd, 2017, when the first reports of the IG investigative findings were hitting the news media and you’ll note IG Horowitz said he has no issues with congressional oversight getting his investigative evidence with the approval FROM the DOJ. In this example the “prosecutor”, working with Horowitz, has to make a determination if a potential criminal case would be compromised by allowing the release of specific information/evidence gathered by the Inspector General.
♦Lastly, where all this appears to be going. It is not likely there will be a ‘second special counsel’ per se’. With a prosecutor already working with Inspector General Horowitz that person already has a thorough knowledge of all the evidence. As soon as the IG publishes his report, the prosecutor can begin subpoenaing witnesses. It’s more than likely there’s already a Grand Jury seated somewhere hearing the criminal evidence he/she has carved out from the overwhelming IG evidence as collected.
You and I might be frustrated with the pace of the activity for a myriad of righteous reasons. However, we must also remind ourselves of the scale and scope of the corruption here that is inherent within the BIG PICTURE. All of this was done on purpose. None of this was accidental.
The prosecutor could, likely would, be having to outline the biggest political conspiracy in the history of politics. It is entirely possible officials within the CIA, NSA, DOJ, FBI, State Department, ODNI, and national security apparatus along with the Obama White House, Clinton campaign officials, politicians, career bureaucrats and possibly judges are all entwined and involved.
Add into this likelihood the complicit ideological media who will go absolutely bananas about any single member of their team being indicted; and a better than average chance the media will follow instructions from their leadership and send tens-of-thousands of low-info sycophants into the streets in protest, and well… you see the picture.
The left only know one narrative: “Jeff Sessions is doing Trump’s evil bidding.” That’s it. That’s the drumbeat. 24/7/365 That’s the narrative pushed over and over.
Look at their reaction to Andrew McCabe’s simple firing, which Trump had nothing to do with, and think about what their response would be to indictments?…