If you stick with the partisan accusations and the media interpretations of what was said, then yes, it's a very big deal. In the same way that Trump's words in the video were characterized as admitting to sexual assault when the actual words said something else, go back and listen to Giuliani's actual words, what he actually said, and you'll see he never actually said that he himself was talking to current FBI agents. And if you go back and watch the video of Baier he never said he was wrong, just that his phrasing was inartful. If you watch the video of his original statement, he never said an indictment was imminent or soo or any other time frame. Listen to what Giuliani and Baier actually said, and not what meaning might be molded from it or ascribed to it.
The "sources" are Guiliani and James Kallstorm, the ex-Director of the FBI NYC office.
Neither of which are current FBI agents.
There is a good bit of reporting on the above from a variety of outlets on all this ..
Oh, well then, it must be true, because the media is, as we all know, totally unbiased and truthful, like totally.
. as well as the mindset of some of the agents in the NYC FBI office - many Catholics apparently (wonder why they might pissed ... lol) who
I'll have to take your word on that one, as I haven't read or heard anything from current FBI agents regarding the mindset of the agents in the NYC FBI office.
You might wanna read up on it, because it appears as though you aren't fully in the loop.
Oh, I'm totally out of the loop. One hundred percent out of the loop. I can't even see the loop I'm so far out of it. I haven't talked with a single current or former FBI agent about this. As far as I know I've never met or talked with anyone who has. So yeah, out oif the loop. I have read up on it, though, and I heard Giuliani's and Baier's statements live when they made them, I've read up on the book, and I've read and heard all of the characterizations and interpretations presented as fact that isn't fact, so I'm not completely unfamiliar with any of it. But our of the loop, yes.
Some pretty nasty history there ... some of it not all that old.
But no real evidence, other than partisan accusations, that any of that is current. I'm not saying n none of this isn't going on, or that it can't happen only that there's no real evidence for it at present.
You're correct about the Hatch Act and who handles it ... but that don't mean DOJ OIG or others (think US Attorneys) won't get involved. There are more there are more than just employees involved.
I'm pretty sure I said, "unless there's some kind of related criminal charges involved beyond the Hatch Act." Your original premise was giving odds on the DOJ OIG investigating the NYC FBI office for possible violations of the Hatch Act. I'm standing by my odds on that premise. If there are non employees involved (who cannot violate the Hatch Act even if they tried), or criminal violations involved, the DOJ OIG would certainly handle those. But the DOJ OIG does not deal with Hatch Act violations in any way, shape or form.