CONFIRMED:
Conspiracy nontheory officially dieded today under the sheer weight of logic.
“The bulk of the application consists of allegations against Page that were disclosed to the FBI by Mr. Steele and are also outlined in the Steele dossier,”
“The application appears to contain no additional information corroborating the dossier allegations against Mr. Page.”
Chuck Grassley-Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman
Steele was frustrated
lolWhiteChris didn't read the rest of it.Steele was frustrated
Report on DOJ’s Handling of Clinton Email Probe Nears Release
Subjects of report have been notified they can review the do ent and comment on any criticisms
Michael Horowitz, inspector general, Justice Department, in a July 2017 hearing before a Senate committee. PHOTO: RON SACHS/ZUMA PRESS
By Aruna Viswanatha and Sadie Gurman
Updated May 16, 2018 4:38 p.m. ET
16 COMMENTS
Multiple subjects of a report on the Justice Department’s handling of a 2016 investigation into Hillary Clinton’s email use have been notified that they can privately review the report by week’s end, signaling the long-awaited do ent is nearing release.
The report is likely to reignite the volatile debate over the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s handling of the Clinton probe, and it will put Michael Horowitz, the Justice Department’s inspector general, in a familiar place—taking aim at members of the law enforcement community.
Those invited to review the report were told they would have to sign nondisclosure agreements in order to read it, people familiar with the matter said. They are expected to have a few days to craft a response to any criticism in the report, which will then be incorporated in the final version to be released in coming weeks.
Mr. Horowitz told lawmakers last month he expected to issue the report in May, but Tuesday’s notification is the first indication that Mr. Horowitz has largely completed his inquiry. Congressional committees are expected to review the report in coming weeks.
Mr. Horowitz’s office issued a related report last month, which laid the groundwork for the firing of former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, finding that he misled investigators probing his role in providing information to a reporter for The Wall Street Journal. Mr. McCabe disputed the allegations, which have been referred to the Washington U.S. attorney’s office to determine whether he should be charged with a crime.
The inspector general’s yearlong review is expected to yield sharp criticism of actions by several top officials, including former FBI Director James Comey’s announcement in July 2016 that Mrs. Clinton had been reckless with the nation’s secrets but he was recommending against prosecuting her.
The report is also expected to scrutinize whether Mr. McCabe should have recused himself from the Clinton investigation, since his wife’s campaign for the Virginia legislature was aided by then- Gov. Terry McAuliffe, a Clinton ally. And it is likely to criticize the numerous texts exchanged by two FBI employees critical of President Donald Trump and others.
Beyond that, the do ent’s release will shine an unusual spotlight on Mr. Horowitz, the Justice Department’s in-house watchdog since 2012.
Inspectors general, appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, don’t automatically change with administrations, a way of maintaining their independence. Their probes often involve interviews with dozens of witnesses and can produce reports months or even years after a problem comes to light.
In January 2017, Mr. Horowitz announced a review of Mr. Comey’s public statements on the Clinton investigation and related matters. Since then, officials have been bracing for his report, which has occasionally been in the news, such as when he released the related report on Mr. McCabe last month.
The McCabe report drew the ire of one of Mr. Horowitz’s predecessors, Michael Bromwich, an attorney who now represents Mr. McCabe and who said he had evidence that contradicted the initial report’s findings.
No stranger to antagonizing his colleagues, Mr. Horowitz spent several years as chief of the public-corruption unit in the Manhattan U.S. attorney’s office in the 1990s. In that role he helped prosecute more than a dozen police officers from New York’s 30th Precinct who were accused of stealing money and drugs from criminal suspects and reselling the drugs.
He authorized the arrest of the officers just as a colleague was planning to use them as witnesses in a major drug case.
“It not only involved proceeding against law enforcement, which is your day-to-day partner in fighting crime...it also had negative impacts on other cases in the office, and needed to be handled with skill, sensitivity and all those things Michael has,” said Mary Jo White, who was U.S. attorney and Mr. Horowitz’s boss at the time.
Mr. Horowitz also served as an official at Justice Department headquarters in Washington and spent a decade in private practice. He was appointed by President George W. Bush to the U.S. Sentencing Commission and nominated by President Barack Obama to the inspector general post, which his supporters cite as a sign of bipartisan respect.
At his confirmation hearing, Mr. Horowitz cited the police corruption case and another prosecution involving the Teamsters that also disrupted colleagues’ work, saying they showed he could maintain his independence from people he had worked with for many years.
“I wasn’t interested in winning popularity contests as the head of the corruption unit,” he said. “I was instructed by the U.S. attorney to doggedly pursue corruption, to be independent of the other units in the office, and that’s precisely what I did.”
At that hearing, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R., Iowa) pressed Mr. Horowitz on whether he could be impartial toward the then-head of the Justice Department’s criminal division, Lanny Breuer, whom Mr. Horowitz had publicly supported. Mr. Horowitz said he would pursue “every avenue in that case, no matter who’s involved.”
Several months later, Mr. Horowitz’s office released a report on the botched “Fast and Furious” gun-trafficking operation, in which officials lost track of guns sold to suspected smugglers. The report faulted Mr. Breuer for not promptly informing superiors about a similar operation he had learned of in 2010.
Some Obama Justice Department officials criticized that report as applying simplistic hindsight to complex episodes during which the proper course of action wasn’t always clear.
Officials generally say they expect Mr. Horowitz to reach good faith conclusions in the coming report. “Horowitz is open-minded and fair,” said Matthew Miller, who ran the Justice Department’s public affairs office when the “Fast and Furious” operation first became public.
Write to Aruna Viswanatha at [email protected]
Corrections & Amplifications
Michael Horowitz has been inspector general, Justice Department, since 2012. An earlier version of this article incorrectly stated that he started in the position in 2011. (May 16, 2018)
https://www.wsj.com/articles/report-...use-1526495401
Which brings us back to believing the FBI was able to show probable cause that Carter Page was an “agent of a foreign power” who is “knowingly engaging in clandestine intelligence activities". That is ing laughable. Until Horowitz releases his findings on possible FISA abuse we are all just pissing in the wind.
well at least you're backtracking off your claim that the standard is higher than probable cause
you've been pissing in the wind for 1.5 years now
Nah, you could present a plausible conspiracy theory without the OIG report if one existed.
You can't.
You're the one that's pissing in the wind.
You're waiting for blog to read the report for you and tell you how to spin it.
No backtracking, I said the standard is higher for a FISA warrant than a regular warrant.
you've been standing on the fence getting pissed on from both sides for 1.5 years now
i said the standard is probable cause. you said it's a higher standard. i showed you the law that says the standard is probable cause.
i haven't made extravagant claims based on information i don't have. if that's fence sitting, then yeah, sure. i'll ive done is assess the info we currently have and go from there.
in the meantime, you still haven't told us the standard for having a fisa warrant renewed/extended and how it differs from the original application
tell me though, before the OIG releases their report on the FISA process... if the report doesn't expose this whole thing as an obvious witch-hunt/setup/entrapment, are you going to point to some other unknown future event? as in, are you going to say "this doesn't mean anything! we're still waiting for _______"
or are you all-in on the OIG report? if not, tell me now what future events you'd be waiting on.
Chucho trying to come in here talking about OIG reports. gtfo scrub
You're "all in" on something that is going to be, at the very best, as ineffectual as the Mueller report. I'd bet my worthless ST account against your even more worthless ST account that this useless report doesn't net half the results as Mueller's investigation.
You're the absolute same person as djohn- a re ed partisan that doesn't understand what they're reciting 50% of the time and you're mind frame is wired to the "us vs them" rhetoric.
TSA isn't re ed, he has far fetched concepts and theories, but he understands what he's talking about. You, not so much and hence you're the punching bag you are here. You're the kind of Conservative that makes other people who do practice some conservative values re-think even identifying with these values because of the stink of the stigma you give them. You make Leftists feel the way people like Boots make Righties feel.
or you'll just write him off as an obama guy?
dudleygetsdunkedonbyshaqandthenpushedtothegroundan dthenthrowstheballbackatshaq.gif
I don't see how linking to Section 702, which was reauthorized in 2018 by a majority Republican vote, contradicts anything I said. Care to expand, dip ?
Trumpbots called their representatives and did exactly that
https://intelligence.house.gov/fisa-702/
Did Trumpbots call the wrong reps/Senators?
The OIG report on the FISA process isn't going to be out for a while, Sessions just recently told Horowitz to expand and investigate it. But yes I'm all in on the OIG report.
Did I need to link you to every single amendment Nunes added before it was passed?
What's the best case OIG scenario that apparently would complete your conspiracy theory that is currently too fluid to discuss?
No, you can just link to the one that stipulates that information must be verified prior to issuance of a FISA warrant.
Anyone who committed crimes is held accountable and charged accordingly.
so your best case scenario could be members of the trump campaign going down and having no democrats or clinton/obama loyalists being punished at all?
So if it finds no one committed crimes and no one is charged with anything, that's the best case scenario for you?
lol
"So what you're saying is..."
Typical Liberal gibberish.
Where exactly would crimes be uncovered by the OIG concerning Trump/Trump campaign considering the scope of their investigation?
There are currently 6 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 6 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
