Regardless of what anyone might think about Paul Manafort individually, the fact that a federal judge is willing to put a white-collar defendant behind bars until trial is absurd. Paul Manafort has been charged with tax avoidance and financial crimes stemming from 2006 and 2009. [Detention order pdf below] Manafort is accused of contacting a possible witness in the case; however, the prosecution refuses to tell Manafort who the witnesses or victims are. His defense argues that it’s impossible to avoid contact with witnesses when the prosecution won’t tell the court who the witnesses are. So the judge throws him in jail.
Mueller is a rogue agent willing to tear down the constructs of the justice system in order to defend the inherent corruption within his beloved institutions. Harvard Law School professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz said today it was “obnoxious to our Constitution” to put former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort behind bars prior to a trial.
“He has never been convicted of anything. He is as innocent as you and I,” Dershowitz said in an interview on MSNBC on Friday. “And the idea of locking somebody up before a trial is so obnoxious to our Constitution that every civil libertarian should be up in arms. What they can do if they think that he’s tampering with witnesses is: They can subject him to home arrest, take away his computer … they can have all kinds of restrictions, but the idea of putting somebody in jail before they’ve been convicted is an enactment of civil liberties.”
Dershowitz comments come after Manafort was taken to a federal jail on Friday after U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson revoked his current bail that permitted him out on house arrest and after he pleaded not guilty to charges of obstruction. He will stay at the federal jail until his trial in September. (read more)
One of the information issues with the IG report is that it’s written entirely from an insiders perspective. Therefore without an understanding of how divisions within Main Justice related to the discussed activity within FBI main DC offices it can be very confusing to understand.
The ‘insider narration’ makes it difficult to see what happened with the Huma Abedin and Anthony Weiner laptop; and how the Clinton emails were discovered. However, because the issue is so important the IG report spends three chapters on this time-frame between September 28th and October 29th, 2016; and ultimately the next day, Oct. 30th, when a search warrant was executed for the laptop content.
IG Horowitz takes this aspect of the investigation into granularity and nuance (Chapters 8, 9 and 10).
At the heart of the activity during this critical period is FBI lawyer #1 Tashina “Tash” Gauhar who was on a video conference call with the FBI New York Field Office (NYFO) as the discoveries of hundreds of thousands of Clinton emails were relayed internally to the Mid-Year-Event (MYE) team in DC on September 29th, 2016.
Almost a full month went by until October 27th, 2016, when the MYE team all gathered with James Comey to talk about the laptop issues and the emails. Within the IG review of this period, there is a bunch of ass-covering documentation that takes place in hindsight to the events. The IG is careful to point out each time his investigation is presented with documentary evidence that was clearly written long-after the events being questioned.
The central IG question is: why didn’t the FBI take immediate action to review 725,000 Clinton-centric emails on the Huma/Weiner laptop? Why did they wait a month before seeking a search warrant? Why were they doing nothing?
With these three basic questions Horowitz enters a matrix of FBI excuses, obtuse claims, he-said/she-said, and ultimately a bunch of statements by the MYE team that simply didn’t make a lick of sense. Or put more diplomatically in IG language: “we found most of the explanations offered for this delay to be unconvincing.” (pg. 324)
IG REPORT pg 324 – By no later than September 29, the FBI had learned virtually every fact that was cited by the FBI in late October as justification for obtaining the search warrant for the Weiner laptop, including that the laptop contained:
Over 340,000 emails, some of which were from domains associated with Clinton, including state.gov, clintonfoundation.org, clintonemail.com, and hillaryclinton.com;
Numerous emails between Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin;
An unknown number of BlackBerry communications on the laptop, including one or more messages between Abedin and Clinton, indicating the possibility that the laptop contained communications from the early months of Clinton’s tenure;178 and
Emails dated beginning in 2007 and covering the entire period of Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State
The IG boiled down the FBI team excuses into four categories.
The explanations given to the OIG for the FBI’s failure to take immediate action on the Weiner laptop fell into four general categories:
1. The FBI Midyear team was waiting for additional information about the contents of the laptop from NYO, which was not provided until late October.
2. The FBI Midyear team could not review the emails without additional legal authority, such as consent or a new search warrant.
3. The FBI Midyear team and senior FBI officials did not believe that the information on the laptop was likely to be significant.
4. Key members of the FBI Midyear team had been reassigned to the investigation of Russian interference in the U.S. election, which was a higher priority.
The IG walks through each of the four points, and identifies why each of them makes absolutely no sense against events that were taking place at the time. Ending with this summation:
Page #330: In sum, we concluded that the explanations given for the failure of the FBI to take action on the Weiner laptop between September 29 and the end of October were unpersuasive.
The FBI had all the information it needed on September 29 to obtain the search warrant that it did not seek until more than a month later. The FBI’s neglect had potentially far-reaching consequences. Comey told the OIG that, had he known about the laptop in the beginning of October and thought the email review could have been completed before the election, it may have affected his decision to notify Congress. Comey told the OIG, “I don’t know [if] it would have put us in a different place, but I would have wanted to have the opportunity.”
And then the IG gets to the heart of the matter:
Page #331: We found that what changed between September 29 and October 27 that finally prompted the FBI to take action was not new information about what was on the Weiner laptop but rather the inquiries from the SDNY prosecutors and then from the Department [Main Justice]. The only thing of significance that had changed was the calendar and the fact that people outside of the FBI were inquiring about the status of the Weiner laptop.
And right there, this becomes a great example why we see so much criticism of the IG report. The report clearly says why the excuses make no sense and were false. The IG report also clearly says what is most likely the real reason for the re-opening of the investigation. Both good points.
However, what is missing from the report is an explanation for: ‘why the FBI didn’t initiate the review’?
The IG give a reason for the excuses not to be believed; gives a reason for the FBI finally taking action; but it never gives the reason why the Clinton email review was not undertaken….. the report leaves the actual biggest point as a dangling question.
Every intellectually honest person reading knows the MYE team didn’t investigate the laptop because they didn’t want to re-open the investigation; and the FBI team (Via McCabe, Page, Strzok and Tashina Gauhar) figured it could simply be avoided. However, the IG cannot prove that, because the participants deny it. So the IG can only disprove the FBI assertions and excuses…. and he did. But that leaves the FBI getting away with the corrupt part of it…. and leaves all of us frustrated, again.
It’s October 27th, 2016, the day before James Comey announces his FBI decision to re-open the Clinton investigation. Jim Rybicki still saying McCabe should be recused from input; everyone else, including FBI Legal Counsel James Baker, is disagreeing with Rybicki and siding with Lisa Page.
Meanwhile the conversation has shifted slightly to “PC”, probable cause. Read:
While Lisa Page is leaking stories to Devlin Barrett (Wall Street Journal), the internal discussion amid the “small group” is about probable cause.
The team is now saying if there was no probable cause when Comey closed the original email investigation in July 2016 (remember the very tight boundaries of review), then there’s no probable cause in October 2016 to reopen the investigation regardless of what the email content might be.
This appears to be how the MYE “small group” or “tight team” justify doing nothing with the content received from New York. They received the emails September 28th and it’s now October 27th, and they haven’t even looked at it. Heck, they are debating if there’s even a need to look at it.
Then on October 28th, 2016, the FBI and Main Justice officials have a conference call about the entire Huma Abedin/Hillary Clinton email issue. Here’s where it gets interesting.
George Toscas and David Laufman from DOJ-NSD articulate a position that something needs to happen likely because Main Justice is concerned about the issue of FBI (McCabe) sitting on the emails for over three weeks without any feedback to SDNY (New York).
Thanks to Deputy Director McCabe, Main Justice in DC, specifically DOJ National Security Division, now looks like they are facilitating a cover-up operation being conducted by the FBI “small group”. [which is actually true, but they can’t let that be so glaringly obvious].
As a result of the Top-Tier officials conference call, Strzok is grumpy agent because his opinion appears to be insignificant. The decision is reached to announce the re-opening of the investigation. This sends Lisa Page bananas…
…In rapid response mode Lisa Page reaches out to Devlin Barrett, again to quickly shape the media coverage. Now that the world is aware of the need for a Clinton email investigation 2.0 the internal conversation returns to McCabe’s recusal.
Please note that at no time in the FBI is anyone directing an actual investigation of the content of the Clinton emails. Every single second of every effort is devoted to shaping the public perception of the need for the investigation. Every media outlet is being watched; every article is being read; and the entire apparatus of the small group is shaping coverage therein by contacting their leak outlets.
Michael Horowitz: FBI Agent Peter Strzok walks like a biased duck… looks like a biased duck… sounds like a biased duck… has all the same characteristics of a biased duck… and took the exact action a biased duck would take; therefore “We do not have confidence” FBI Agent Peter Strzok is not a biased duck.
[…] when one senior FBI official, Strzok, who was helping to lead the Russia investigation at the time, conveys in a text message to another senior FBI official, Page, that “we’ll stop” candidate Trump from being elected—after other extensive text messages between the two disparaging candidate Trump—it is not only indicative of a biased state of mind but, even more seriously, implies a willingness to take official action to impact the presidential candidate’s electoral prospects.
This is antithetical to the core values of the FBI and the Department of Justice. Moreover, as we describe in Chapter Nine, in assessing Strzok’s decision to prioritize the Russia investigation over following up on the Midyear-related investigative lead discovered on the Weiner laptop in October 2016, these text messages led us to conclude that we did not have confidence that Strzok’s decision was free from bias. (p.420)
Christopher Wray: “I take these findings seriously, and we accept these findings and recommendations.” … “This report did not find any evidence of political bias or improper considerations actually impacting the investigation under review.”
This is the infuriating part. Think about this carefully. This is not some arbitrary irrelevant institution within the bureaucracy of government. The FBI is the “premier” law enforcement investigative apparatus within the entirety of the United States homeland security apparatus. We rely upon the FBI’s investigative skills, training and application of common sense as they carry out their official responsibilities.
In essence the FBI has the primary responsibility for ensuring the internal safety and security of Americans through a process of evaluating evidence and threats; and more importantly taking action on clear evidence of those threats to avoid public safety issues.
Yet, the most important investigative body; within the system of U.S. law and order; cannot identify, admit, accept and take action upon a clear and present threat within its own organizational ranks. A political bias that is transparently obvious to the rest of America.
Allow me to put the IG/DOJ/FBI principle, at the heart of the matter, another way…
…It looks like a terrorist; it acts like a terrorist; it communicates like a terrorist; it behaves in the same manner a terrorist would behave; it carries an exploding vest; it is heading to an event where a large number of people are gathered;….we do not have confidence it is not a terrorist – and yet, the FBI takes no action.
All of a sudden,… with specific thanks to the clear inability of the FBI to apply common sense as outlined within the IG report on politicization inside the FBI: The Boston Marathon, San Bernardino, Orlando Pulse Nightclub, Las Vegas Mandalay Bay and Broward County Parkland School massacres take on a transparent outlook.
Additionally, the popular talking point presented by those who defend the DOJ and FBI is about how the “rank and file” shouldn’t be blamed for the politicization and corrupt behavior of the senior DOJ and FBI leadership.
Oh really?
Well, lets take a look at the “Rank and File”:
On August 29, 2016, Agent 1 and Agent 5 exchanged the following instant messages as part of a discussion about their jobs. The sender of each message is noted after the timestamp.
10:39:49, Agent 1: “I find anyone who enjoys [this job] an absolute fucking idiot. If you dont think so, ask them one more question. Who are you voting for? I guarantee you it will be Donald Drumpf.”
10:40:13, Agent 5: “i forgot about drumpf…”
10:40:27, Agent 5: “that’s so sad and pathetic if they want to vote for him.”
10:40:43, Agent 5: “someone who can’t answer a question”
10:40:51, Agent 5: “someone who can’t be professional for even a second”
On September 9, 2016, Agent 1 and Agent 5 exchanged the following instant messages.
08:56:43, Agent 5: “i’m trying to think of a ‘would i rather’ instead of spending time with those people”
08:56:54, Agent 1: “stick your tongue in a fan??”
08:56:58, Agent 5: “i would rather have brunch with trump”
08:57:03, Agent 1: “ha”
08:57:15, Agent 1: “french toast with drumpf”
08:57:19, Agent 5: “i would rather have brunch with trump and a bunch of his supporters like the ones from ohio that are retarded”
08:57:23, Agent 5: “:)”
November 9, 2016, the day after the presidential election. FBI Attorney 2 and another FBI employee who was not involved in the Midyear investigation exchanged the following instant messages
09:38:14, FBI Attorney 2: “I am numb.”
09:55:35, FBI Employee: “I can’t stop crying.”
10:00:13, FBI Attorney 2: “That makes me even more sad.”
10:43:20, FBI Employee: “Like, what happened?”
10:43:37, FBI Employee: “You promised me this wouldn’t happen. YOU PROMISED.”
10:43:43, FBI Employee: Okay, that might have been a lie…”
10:43:46, FBI Employee: “I’m very upset.”
10:43:47, FBI Employee: “haha”
10:51:48, FBI Attorney 2: “I am so stressed about what I could have done differently.”
10:54:29, FBI Employee: “Don’t stress. None of that mattered.”
10:54:31, FBI Employee: “The FBI’s influence.”
10:59:36, FBI Attorney 2: “I don’t know. We broke the momentum.”
11:00:03, FBI Employee: “That is not so.”
11:02:22, FBI Employee: “All the people who were initially voting for her would not, and were not, swayed by any decision the FBI put out. Trump’s supporters are all poor to middle class, uneducated, lazy POS that think he will magically grant them jobs for doing nothing. They probably didn’t watch the debates, aren’t fully educated on his policies, and are stupidly wrapped up in his unmerited enthusiasm.”
11:11:43, FBI Attorney 2: “I’m just devastated. I can’t wait until I can leave today and just shut off the world for the next four days.”
11:12:06, FBI Employee: “Why are you devastated?”
11:12:18, FBI Employee: “Yes, I’m not watching tv for four years.”
11:14:16, FBI Attorney 2: “I just can’t imagine the systematic disassembly of the progress we made over the last 8 years. ACA is gone. Who knows if the rhetoric about deporting people, walls, and crap is true. I honestly feel like there is going to be a lot more gun issues, too, the crazies won finally. This is the tea party on steroids. And the GOP is going to be lost, they have to deal with an incumbent in 4 years. We have to fight this again. Also Pence is stupid.”
That’s the rank and file, reflecting how the rank and file feel about us.
On Page Xii of the IG report the Department of Justice Office of Inspector General (DOJ-OIG) highlights numerous FBI officials who accepted bribes from multiple media outlets including: “tickets to sporting events”, “golf outings”, “drinks and meals” as well as exclusive invitations and admission to “nonpublic social events”.
The OIG investigative finding was disturbing enough to launch a separate set of investigations that will be included in follow-up reports.
IG REPORT – We identified numerous FBI employees, at all levels of the organization and with no official reason to be in contact with the media, who were nevertheless in frequent contact with reporters. Attached to this report as Attachments E and F are two link charts that reflect the volume of communications that we identified between FBI employees and media representatives in April/May and October 2016. We have profound concerns about the volume and extent of unauthorized media contacts by FBI personnel that we have uncovered during our review.
In addition, we identified instances where FBI employees improperly received benefits from reporters, including tickets to sporting events, golfing outings, drinks and meals, and admittance to nonpublic social events. We will separately report on those investigations as they are concluded, consistent with the Inspector General Act, other applicable federal statutes, and OIG policy.
The harm caused by leaks, fear of potential leaks, and a culture of unauthorized media contacts is illustrated in Chapters Ten and Eleven of our report, where we detail the fact that these issues influenced FBI officials who were advising Comey on consequential investigative decisions in October 2016.
[…] We do not believe the problem is with the FBI’s policy, which we found to be clear and unambiguous. Rather, we concluded that these leaks highlight the need to change what appears to be a cultural attitude among many in the organization. (link to pdf – page Xii of executive summary)
FBI Director Christopher Wray will be holding a 5:30pn press conference to discuss the issues and fallout from the DOJ Inspector General report released earlier today.
UPDATE: Video Added
.
Those reading the report will note the executive summary and conclusions were not written by the same IG officials who wrote the body of the investigative findings. The investigation doesn’t match the summary. The media is using the summary for their narrative; however the content within the IG report is entirely devastating.
The 18-month Inspector General review of the DOJ/FBI investigation of the Hillary Clinton email has been released – OIG RELEASE LINK HERE
This IG inquiry is specifically looking into whether the FBI investigation was corrupted by political influence in their determination of the Clinton outcome. The IG report provides background on the overall issues, the potential crimes; the subsequent coverup; and the corruption that infested the 2016 Department of Justice and the FBI.
The 18-month Inspector General review of the DOJ/FBI investigation of the Hillary Clinton email is going to be made public tomorrow at 3:00pm EDT.
This IG inquiry is specifically looking into whether the FBI investigation was corrupted by political influence in their determination of the Clinton outcome. The preliminary investigative outcomes speak for themselves.
This following series of video reports provides background on the overall issues, the potential crimes; the subsequent coverup; and the corruption that infested the 2016 Department of Justice and the FBI.
Part I
Part II
Part III
Part IV
Part V
.
The video below is the final installment of six segments. This report covers the Clinton and Abedin email that were discovered after the investigation was closed in July 2016. {Go Deep} The emails along with the fact that they were on Anthony Weiner’s laptop was kept secret and not investigated for four weeks (Sept 28th, through Oct 27th) by top officials at the FBI.
Who stalled the investigation and why? And what was in those emails? That’s the focus of this segment.
Following the traditional process for releasing high-profile reports the Department of Justice – Office of Inspector General (DOJ-OIG) report will be released tomorrow with a briefing to congress and the president happening around Noon, and a public release at 3:00pm. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein will brief the President while senior officials from the DOJ will brief congress and their staff.
The 500-page report will cover the DOJ and FBI conduct surrounding the Clinton classified email investigation, and was originally commissioned during the Obama administration to review whether the FBI and DOJ politicized the Clinton investigation and subsequent outcome.
WASHINGTON – […] Inspector general spokesman John Lavinsky said in a statement that the office occasionally gives pre-release briefings to Congress and the media, adding that, “for the Justice Department to brief the White House in the same manner and at the same time as the OIG briefs Congress and the press is consistent with this process.”
OIG refers to the Office of Inspector General.
Lavinsky noted that Justice Department officials had similarly briefed the Obama White House in 2012 upon completion of its report on the gunrunning scandal known as Operation Fast and Furious. He added that “no changes are made to the OIG’s report on account of these briefings.” (read more)
In what can only be seen as a dubious political stunt, Andrew McCabe, through his attorney Michael Bromwich, is suing the DOJ and Inspector General for documents relating to his firing. Apparently the 39-page IG report, documenting the reasoning, along with the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) isn’t enough for McCabe.
WASHINGTON DC – Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe filed a lawsuit Tuesday against the FBI, the Justice Department and its inspector general, alleging the Trump administration violated procedures when it fired him in March just hours before his retirement.
The Justice Department cited “lack of candor” for dismissing Mr. McCabe, who had worked at the FBI for more than two decades. The firing upended Mr. McCabe’s ability to collect his benefits and pension.
In the 36-page complaint filed in federal court in Washington, D.C. Tuesday, his attorneys argue the Justice Department is refusing to hand over documents relating to the policies and procedures for Mr. McCabe’s dismissal because it fears further litigation.
“We don’t create or adjudicate under secret law or procedure,” David Snyder, a lawyer for Mr. McCabe, told The Associated Press.
The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment. (read more)
Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller has taken the concept of the Star Chamber to new levels of dangerous judicial prosecution. In a motion in Washington DC today Mueller’s team scramble to hide their invisible evidence after the people they indicted demand the right to see it.
“Muh beloved institutions”…
Everyone who has researched the actual substance behind the heavily promoted Russian indictments knows the underlying claims are centered on the thinnest of evidence. Given the nature of the politicization behind the Mueller investigation, many people even argue there is no actual evidence; it’s a manufactured ruse created only for purpose of advancing a necessary political narrative, an excuse for media column inches and pundit talks.
And there is a great deal of reason to believe the cynics are entirely accurate; particularly when you overlay the series of events that highlight the prosecution never thought anyone would actually show up in court and challenge their claims.
Greasy Bear hackers and Macedonian Bot Farms might sound like a good justification for a prosecution when pitched to an incurious media. However, when Greasy Bear and the accused Macedonian’s show up in court, well, the prosecutors might just have a problem.
That is the backdrop for this latest series of bizarre requests from the Special Prosecutor to seal the evidence against the accused:
BLOOMBERG – […] Mueller asked a federal judge in Washington for an order that would protect the handover of voluminous evidence to lawyers for Concord Management and Consulting LLC, one of three companies and 13 Russian nationals charged in a February indictment. They are accused of producing propaganda, posing as U.S. activists and posting political content on social media as so-called trolls to encourage strife in the U.S.
The threat of public or unauthorized disclosure of evidence would help foreign intelligence services, particularly in Russia, in “future operations against the United States,” Mueller’s prosecutors wrote in a filing Tuesday.
“The substance of the government’s evidence identifies uncharged individuals and entities that the government believes are continuing to engage in interference operations like those charged in the present indictment,” prosecutors wrote.
Improper disclosure would tip foreign intelligence services about how the U.S. operates, which would “allow foreign actors to learn of those techniques and adjust their conduct, thus undermining ongoing and future national security operations,” according to the filing. (read more)
Last month Robert Mueller attempted to get the trial delayed, and the judge rejected the arguments. Now Robert Mueller is attempting to get the judge to hide the mysteriously important evidence he claims to possess that underpins the entire case.
It appears Team Mueller is doing everything they can to avoid admitting there is no ‘there‘ there and this was all a political stunt. Such an admission would essentially destroy the entire Russian Election Interference narrative.
…. And so the saga of the ruse continues. Stay tuned.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 