FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe fired

[Mountain Man]

And now a little something for those trying to link McCabe's ouster to Trump...

Source: FACT: McCabe Firing was Recommended by FBI Ethics Office, Based on Nonpartisan IG's Findings

(1) McCabe's firing came as the result of information gleaned by the Justice Department's nonpartisan Inspector General. Michael Horowitz was appointed to that position by President Barack Obama and was confirmed by a Democratic Senate. Not only that, his discovery of McCabe's apparent wrongdoing (unauthorized media leaking, about which McCabe later "lacked candor" with investigators) came in the context of a sprawling IG examination of the FBI's handling of various Clinton-related scandals and investigations in the run-up to the 2016 election. That investigation was demanded by Democrats, who cheered its announcement (McCabe's current lawyer even referred to the probe as "welcome news" in a Washington Post op/ed). Also, when did that soon-to-be-concluded investigation commence? Early January 2017, before Donald Trump took office. To recap: McCabe's fireable misconduct was unearthed by a Democrat-demanded inquiry that was launched during the Obama presidency, led by an Obama-appointed and Democrat-confirmed watchdog.

(2) After the IG discovered what McCabe had done -- remember, the current, respected FBI Director immediately ceased defending McCabe upon seeing the evidence, and placed him on terminal leave -- those facts were relayed to the Bureau's nonpartisan Office of Professional Responsibility. That office is overseen by an official who was originally elevated to her role by...Robert Mueller. It was OPR, which serves as the FBI's internal ethics department, that recommended McCabe lose his job due to his actions. Sessions did not drop the hammer on McCabe out of nowhere; he did so because the ethics office (populated with non-political, career employees) reviewed the independent IG's findings and rendered a verdict that McCabe should be fired. Those are crucially important facts. Relatedly, I'll add that the American people deserve to see the evidence against McCabe, and the entire IG report, as soon as possible; plus, looking into whether the president's obnoxious lobbying had an inappropriate impact on the timing of McCabe's final dismissal is a legitimate line of inquiry, as well.

(3) As part of his pushback, McCabe is arguing that he was not responsible for any unauthorized media leaks -- asserting specifically that the press "interaction" in question was discussed with, and approved by, then-Director Comey. This claim may open up a new can of worms, based on previous sworn testimony by Mr. Comey...

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guyben...nding-n2462159

© Copyright Original Source

[carpedm9587]

And now a little something for those trying to link McCabe's ouster to Trump...

Source: FACT: McCabe Firing was Recommended by FBI Ethics Office, Based on Nonpartisan IG's Findings

(1) McCabe's firing came as the result of information gleaned by the Justice Department's nonpartisan Inspector General. Michael Horowitz was appointed to that position by President Barack Obama and was confirmed by a Democratic Senate. Not only that, his discovery of McCabe's apparent wrongdoing (unauthorized media leaking, about which McCabe later "lacked candor" with investigators) came in the context of a sprawling IG examination of the FBI's handling of various Clinton-related scandals and investigations in the run-up to the 2016 election. That investigation was demanded by Democrats, who cheered its announcement (McCabe's current lawyer even referred to the probe as "welcome news" in a Washington Post op/ed). Also, when did that soon-to-be-concluded investigation commence? Early January 2017, before Donald Trump took office. To recap: McCabe's fireable misconduct was unearthed by a Democrat-demanded inquiry that was launched during the Obama presidency, led by an Obama-appointed and Democrat-confirmed watchdog.

(2) After the IG discovered what McCabe had done -- remember, the current, respected FBI Director immediately ceased defending McCabe upon seeing the evidence, and placed him on terminal leave -- those facts were relayed to the Bureau's nonpartisan Office of Professional Responsibility. That office is overseen by an official who was originally elevated to her role by...Robert Mueller. It was OPR, which serves as the FBI's internal ethics department, that recommended McCabe lose his job due to his actions. Sessions did not drop the hammer on McCabe out of nowhere; he did so because the ethics office (populated with non-political, career employees) reviewed the independent IG's findings and rendered a verdict that McCabe should be fired. Those are crucially important facts. Relatedly, I'll add that the American people deserve to see the evidence against McCabe, and the entire IG report, as soon as possible; plus, looking into whether the president's obnoxious lobbying had an inappropriate impact on the timing of McCabe's final dismissal is a legitimate line of inquiry, as well.

(3) As part of his pushback, McCabe is arguing that he was not responsible for any unauthorized media leaks -- asserting specifically that the press "interaction" in question was discussed with, and approved by, then-Director Comey. This claim may open up a new can of worms, based on previous sworn testimony by Mr. Comey...

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guyben...nding-n2462159

© Copyright Original Source

I'll wait for the emphasized part to happen before drawing judgment.

[rogue06]

And now a little something for those trying to link McCabe's ouster to Trump...

Source: FACT: McCabe Firing was Recommended by FBI Ethics Office, Based on Nonpartisan IG's Findings

(1) McCabe's firing came as the result of information gleaned by the Justice Department's nonpartisan Inspector General. Michael Horowitz was appointed to that position by President Barack Obama and was confirmed by a Democratic Senate. Not only that, his discovery of McCabe's apparent wrongdoing (unauthorized media leaking, about which McCabe later "lacked candor" with investigators) came in the context of a sprawling IG examination of the FBI's handling of various Clinton-related scandals and investigations in the run-up to the 2016 election. That investigation was demanded by Democrats, who cheered its announcement (McCabe's current lawyer even referred to the probe as "welcome news" in a Washington Post op/ed). Also, when did that soon-to-be-concluded investigation commence? Early January 2017, before Donald Trump took office. To recap: McCabe's fireable misconduct was unearthed by a Democrat-demanded inquiry that was launched during the Obama presidency, led by an Obama-appointed and Democrat-confirmed watchdog.

(2) After the IG discovered what McCabe had done -- remember, the current, respected FBI Director immediately ceased defending McCabe upon seeing the evidence, and placed him on terminal leave -- those facts were relayed to the Bureau's nonpartisan Office of Professional Responsibility. That office is overseen by an official who was originally elevated to her role by...Robert Mueller. It was OPR, which serves as the FBI's internal ethics department, that recommended McCabe lose his job due to his actions. Sessions did not drop the hammer on McCabe out of nowhere; he did so because the ethics office (populated with non-political, career employees) reviewed the independent IG's findings and rendered a verdict that McCabe should be fired. Those are crucially important facts. Relatedly, I'll add that the American people deserve to see the evidence against McCabe, and the entire IG report, as soon as possible; plus, looking into whether the president's obnoxious lobbying had an inappropriate impact on the timing of McCabe's final dismissal is a legitimate line of inquiry, as well.

(3) As part of his pushback, McCabe is arguing that he was not responsible for any unauthorized media leaks -- asserting specifically that the press "interaction" in question was discussed with, and approved by, then-Director Comey. This claim may open up a new can of worms, based on previous sworn testimony by Mr. Comey...

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guyben...nding-n2462159

© Copyright Original Source

This part cannot be over-emphasized: To recap: McCabe's fireable misconduct was unearthed by a Democrat-demanded inquiry that was launched during the Obama presidency, led by an Obama-appointed and Democrat-confirmed watchdog.

[Mountain Man]

This part cannot be over-emphasized: To recap: McCabe's fireable misconduct was unearthed by a Democrat-demanded inquiry that was launched during the Obama presidency, led by an Obama-appointed and Democrat-confirmed watchdog.

It destroys the liberal narrative that Sessions was being vindictive or acting in a partisan manner.

[myth]

I do all that myself, especially if it's about a subject likely to embarrass my organization.

And I also prefer face to face meetings with people I care about.

Shoehorning Bill and Loretta into a tarmac conspiracy to end the Hillary email investigation has just as many issues, and more. His staff would have to contact her staff, leaving more breadcrumb records and further expanding the conspiracy, which has already expanded to include Loretta's husband.

More, heads would roll if anyone official hacked the phone of a former president or the attorney general. The difference with Snowden is that he had every reason to believe the planet's foremost communications interceptor was actively engaged, with full legal support, in attempts to hack his phones and the phones of anyone with whom he was likely to be in contact.

That's a big difference.



I assess a planned meeting as unreasonable. A more reasonable suggestion is that he may have sought to influence the proceedings just by his presence. Discussing the grandkids naturally casts Hillary and Loretta as sharing the grandmothering experience, evoking sympathy.

But here's the thing. There was never a real concern that she would be charged. The email issue was a political foil, designed to embarrass. The FBI, appropriately, took the investigation seriously, but without an intent by Hillary or her team to release classified information to unauthorized persons, the wheels could turn all they want, but that truck wouldn't be budging from that ditch.

The conspiracy media can have its field day, but in the end, charges have to go before a judge, and no judge was ever going to try this case.

Right. 'Planned' may have been a strong word (thought I'd leave that possibility open). Perhaps 'intentional' would have been better. And yes, I know the difference with whom was after Snowden and whatnot. My point is that the NSA didn't have to be after them, the Russians, social activist hacker groups, anyone could try to hack their phones. My point was that it's possible, and these are famous people that are probably targeted by hackers frequently.

As far there never being a real concern that Hillary should be charged...yeah, that's the problem. She probably should have been. And if not her, the staff involved in the cover-up should have. It's insane to me that she can put that stuff on a private server, refuse to turn it over the FBI when requested, and instruct the 3rd party IT company holding her back-up data to delete the backup when the investigations starts...but NO ONE gets charged with obstruction of justice. Seriously? That's a failure of our justice system. I look forward to reading the IG report on the issue when it comes out later this year.

[Cerebrum123]

Right!



(is there a sarcasm emoji for the sarcastically impaired? )

For the sarcastically impaired the following is said in jest

Of course there is!

Not! We have sarcasm tags for that instead.

[carpedm9587]

For the sarcastically impaired the following is said in jest

Of course there is!

Not! We have sarcasm tags for that instead.

I'll have to remember that,

For the sarcastically impaired the following is said in jest

for times when I'm engaged in a meaningful discussion with MM

Now THAT was fun..

[Mountain Man]

You should take everything I say with the utmost seriousness.

And I refuse to use sarcasm tags because it's more fun to keep people guessing.

[carpedm9587]

You should take everything I say with the utmost seriousness.

And I refuse to use sarcasm tags because it's more fun to keep people guessing.

It's not a big guess...

[Mountain Man]

Hmmmm!

Source: One Day After Felony DOJ Charges Against FBI Agent for Media Leaks, Andrew McCabe Starts Legal Defense Fund�

https://theconservativetreehouse.com...-defense-fund/

© Copyright Original Source

[Mountain Man]

Source: Congressman: FBI Report Says Andrew McCabe �Lied Four Times� About Media Leaks

http://dailycaller.com/2018/03/29/fb...e-media-leaks/

© Copyright Original Source

[Mountain Man]

Source: Important CTH Confirmation � Catherine Herridge Confirms Lisa Page Statements Contradicted Andrew McCabe, Ultimately Leading to His Firing�

Fox News Catherine Herridge reports today, per her FBI investigative sources, it was an investigative interview with FBI Attorney Lisa Page, in July 2017, that contradicted FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, and ultimately led to his firing.

That revelation is exactly what we anticipated was the origin to Inspector General Michael Horowitz gaining the text messages between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok. The issue is actually more stunning than presented.

McCabe instructed FBI lawyer Lisa Page and FBI public affairs chief Michael Kortan

https://theconservativetreehouse.com...to-his-firing/

© Copyright Original Source

This strongly suggests that Lisa Page is a cooperating witness, that when her testimony contradicted McCabe's, she gave up the text messages to investigators to prove her side of the story, and this has massive implications for the ongoing investigation into the corruption in Obama's FBI and DOJ.

[Mountain Man]

OIG report about McCabe is released, and it is devastating.

Trump in his typically low-key manner said, "DOJ just issued the McCabe report - which is a total disaster. He LIED! LIED! LIED! McCabe was totally controlled by Comey - McCabe is Comey!! No collusion, all made up by this den of thieves and lowlifes!"

Anyway, read the analysis. But the short version is, McCabe is screwed.

https://theconservativetreehouse.com...andrew-mccabe/

[carpedm9587]

OIG report about McCabe is released, and it is devastating.

Trump in his typically low-key manner said, "DOJ just issued the McCabe report - which is a total disaster. He LIED! LIED! LIED! McCabe was totally controlled by Comey - McCabe is Comey!! No collusion, all made up by this den of thieves and lowlifes!"

Anyway, read the analysis. But the short version is, McCabe is screwed.

https://theconservativetreehouse.com...andrew-mccabe/

This time, the report does NOT contain idle speculation and guesswork. Someone would have to raise questions about the integrity of the OIG to question these findings, and I have no reason to raise those questions. It appears that McCabe "lacked candor" (to use the OIG's language) on four occasions, three of which were under oath. Specifically, the instances had to do with revealing that he (or those he authorized) were the sources of the leaks to the media about FBI investigations. FBI policy is to NOT comment on investigations currently underway.

[Stoic]

Apologies to anyone who is put out by my resurrecting this ancient thread, but this seemed like the appropriate place to put this.

It's very likely that McCabe broke the law and violated his oath. There are rumors that he will be indicted in the very near future. By denying him his pension, it effectively prevents taxpayers from footing the bill for his legal defense.

And I will admit deriving some satisfaction from seeing the strings of someone's golden parachute get cut for once. It doesn't happen as often as it should in my opinion.

Turns out that McCabe was not indicted, and that he will get his pension, including $200,000 in missed pension payments, and his legal fees will be paid by the government.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/14/u...d-pension.html

And I will admit deriving some satisfaction from seeing McCabe get what he deserves.