The Trump Card...
- Thread starter muttly
- Start date
At the risk of parsing words, the FBI is investigating, and has been for many months, whether the Clinton Foundation accepted donations in exchange for political favors while Hillary Clinton was secretary of State.
Now, I don't know for a fact, but I'm willing to go out on a limb and say that she might be a targeted party of that investigation.
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
On what data do you base that conclusion on ?
I suspect, at best, the IG report will address the FBI's conduct in how the matter was handled (process) and may not even address any of the allegations the investigation was predicated on.
Did you actually read that article ?
"A senior law enforcement official said the Justice Department was exploring whether any issues from that probe should be re-opened but cautioned the effort was not at the stage of a full investigation.
One challenge for any Clinton-era investigation is that the statute of limitations on most federal felonies is five years, and Clinton left office in early 2013.
View attachment 16999
Why is the above imaged locked and unviewable by myself ? (And possibly others ?)
Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums[/b]
Last edited:
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
She might be .., but as we've seen from Trump-Russia, at the outset of investigations, parties who may eventually be a target often aren't ...
Whether they eventually are, is largely dependent on the evidence discovered in the course of the investigation.
Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums
I don't presume to speak for muttly, and I'll let him answer for himself if he so chooses, obviously, but there have been a whole slew (as opposed to half a slew) of people within the DOJ and FBI (and Mueller's probe) who have been fired, reassigned, removed or taken sudden early retirement as a direct result of information that IG Michael Horowitz has unearthed. I mean, it's like 15 or 20 people, a much longer list that I would have suspected. So the IG report could very well be devastating, not only to Justice and the FBI, but to Mueller's probe.
You're right about the probe not addressing the allegations which prompted the investigation. That's not the IG's job. Not even as a consequence. It's explicitly not his job. The IG is not evaluating the merits of the now-closed criminal inquiry into Hillary or is it challenging the conclusions not to prosecute her. Rather, it will focus solely on Justice and FBI policies that guided the probe. The problem for Mueller is, not only has he used on his investigatory team some of the people named by the IG, ahead of his report to Session, Rosenstein and Wray, as being particularly problematic, but many of the policies that guided the Clinton email probe are some of the same policies that prompted the creation of the Mueller probe in the first place. The little tidbits of disclosures from Horowitz's investigation have already supplied a sizable hammer for Republicans, especially Trumpites, who are escalating their criticisms of the legitimacy of Mueller's probe. Depending on the IG Report, the Mueller probe could be hammered to a pulp.
Cryin' Chuck cautioned Trump about tangling with the FBI, because they can get you 6 ways from Sunday (or whatever it was he said). The Inspector General, on the other hand, can rip entire agencies a new one. Horowitz has more than 400 investigators at his disposal, and he's interviewing everybody from Comey to Clapper to Brennan to Lynch, and he doesn't ask many questions that he doesn't already know the answer to.
On a side note, did you see through the dog and pony show Rosenstein put on with the indictment announcement? What a hoot. That was a straight-up attempt to put a good face on the FBI after screwing the pooch on the Florida school shooter. They know there is virtually zero chance of actually prosecuting anyone on the list. And half the names of the indicted are (were) bit players at the troll farm, some of whom didn't even work there during the times alleged by the indictments. Oooohhhh! 17 indictments! Yeah, no, it's lipstick and a wig on a pig. It looks like most of the information from the indictments came directly from the reporting last year in a Russian business newspaper. Here's a taste of that to whet the appetite: Russian journalists just published a bombshell investigation about a Kremlin-linked "troll factory"
Yes read the article. Just pointing out there are matters (lol) still being investigated about her.
How the FBI higher ups handled the various matters goes to the heart of the Clinton Email investigation, the FISA warrant application, the Flynn interview, and genisis of the Trump Campaign Russian probe. Very telling that there have been so many demotions, resignations because of how they handled the 'process'. #releasemoreofthetextmessages
The IG report should shed more on that though.
In the meantime, the Flynn plea and possibly others appear to be on shaky grounds because of it.
#poisonousfruitwillmakedefendantsscoot
http://thefederalist.com/2018/02/19/michael-flynns-plea-reversal-uncover-federal-corruption/
Last edited:
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
It's an organization of roughly 35,000 people ... the numbers you mention represent 0.0571428571429 of a percent of the total workforce ... using the larger number you mention (20)
If I used the smaller number it would be even lower.
Furthermore, you seem to identifying a causation (IG report) that would be nearly impossible to assess with any degree of certainty without having access to the report itself and it's findings ... which are not yet available.
Just to be clear:
Who has been fired ?
Who has been reassigned ?
Who has been removed ?
Who has taken sudden early retirement ?
And how has each of the above mentioned individuals you will name in response to my queries been as a direct result of information that IG Michael Horowitz has unearthed ?
Understand - I am not saying there none - as clearly there was.
But I'm not sure that the number you mention is necessarily attributable to the cause you want to assign.
And even in cases where it is attributable, it may not be an indication of anything improper.
There are other possible reasons for people being reassigned ... including a new agency head bringing in their own leadership team.
Having said that, I think it's a fairly safe bet that by the time this is all side and done - including Trump - Russia - there's a whole bunch of people that end up getting covered in crap ... on both sides of the aisle.
Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums
Last edited:
Is it about colluding with Russia to influence the 2016 election? Didn't think so.
It's not imporant how many total FBI employees there are in the organization.Not relevant.
What is important is that there were lead investigators involved in the Clinton Email investigation, Russia meddling investigation, the Flynn interview that were demoted, resigned because of it. That number should be zero.
You are the master of creating new context to shoehorn in a narrative, I'll give ya that. When Joe Special Agent in the St Louis Field office gets fired, it doesn't make the national news. When high ranking Justice and FBI officials in the DC offices do, it does, especially when they are all involved int he same investigations. I would love to hear how percentages are even wildy relevant to that.
I'm not identifying anything. Most of that came out in congressional testimony, some in MSM reporting. For example, when Horowitz made Mueller aware of the Strzok-Page text messages, he removed them from the team. I didn't make that up. When Horowitz made Wray aware of Andrew McCabe's actions, he was gone. I didn't make that up, either.
Yeah, no, I'm not jumping through hoops for your entertainment. You are either already aware of the answers to those question, or it's brain dead easy to find.
It's a ballpark figure. I am making some assumptions with a few of them, obviously, and there may be a few exceptions to the case, but it's damned peculiar that so many people so closely bunched up together in Justice and the FBI who all worked on the same investigations (and most of whom got outed in the text messages), would suddenly have their statuses changed like that. It could certainly be a total coincidence that the the chief of the Justice Department’s Counterintelligence and Export Control Section suddenly resigned last week, for personal reasons. He was the guy in charge of the Hillary email probe, as well as most of the aspects of the Russian meddling in the election, which he handed off to Mueller.
Sure there are. But, Occam's Razor.
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Yeah Captain Pizzagate himself was on that like a dog on a bone ... maybe Alex Jones too.
Justice Dept. official who helped oversee Clinton, Russia probes steps down
Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Theoretically there's all kinds of things one can do with context to drive a narrative.
One thing would be to leave out important details - particularly exculpatory ones.
There others as well though.
Fired ?
15 or 20 people actually got fired at FBI/DOJ HQ ?
Who ?
I would need more data to determine relevance, if any ... specifically, on the macro level:
What is the overall historical picture Bureau-wide, in terms of removals, reassignments, demotions, firings, retirements, and "sudden unexpected retirements" ?
Additionally, the same, on the micro level at HQ.
Beyond that, what is the historical picture at HQ in the type of personnel changes mentioned as it relates to changes in Administrations.
So not necessarily relevant ... but not necessarily irrelevant either.
Same for DOJ (whose total personnel numbers I did not include previously)
But you're about to below ... but not enough to fully support the previous assertion.
Ok.
Actually, you partially did: Page had already returned back to the FBI by the time Mueller was informed of the text messages. Reported in media. Unclear why.
You are correct about Strzok though - he was removed ... and was sent back to the FBI, where he remains employed as far as I know.
I'm not so sure that your characterization is entirely accurate ... I'm not saying definitively it isn't ... just that I'm not sure.
There was some reporting that McCabe was planning on retiring in March ... so that in itself doesn't seem completely unexpected.
In any event the full details of what all was behind McCabe taking leave until his retirement fully vested in March are not fully known at this point.
The following is known or has been reported however:
"Trump has repeatedly criticized McCabe, and in January it was reported that Attorney General Sessions had been pressuring FBI Director Wray to fire McCabe. However, Wray refused and reportedly threatened to resign if McCabe was removed."
Hostile work environment, working under the authority of, and in relatively close proximity to, a sociopathic psycho (Cheeto ... just to be clear)
I'm sorry ... have I upset you ?
So ... could maybe be a little less than the smaller number ... but probably not higher than the larger number ?
Kinda hard to address that real specifically, since "so many people" remains undefined.
Nonetheless ...
Some may have elected to change to their statuses for a variety of reasons ... which may not be at all nefarious.
Here's two individuals not mentioned so far, one was an expected retirement, one was a bit of a surprise apparently.
Two more officials cited in FBI texts step down
So ... by my count we're up to around what ... 5 individuals ? ... that are involved in these personnel changes.
I know there at least 1 or 2 more for sure. Could be more.
Yeah ... exactly.
One last question:
Who has actually been fired ?
(As in terms of actually no longer employed)
Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums
Last edited:
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
James Rybicki, Comey's Chief of Staff was another one.
Reported by Fox on 1/23/18:
"... Rybicki, who served in the same position under Comey and continued his role under Wray, came under scrutiny from Republicans in recent months over his role in the Hillary Clinton email investigation.
But federal law enforcement sources told Fox News that Rybicki was not fired. His departure, they said, has “been in the works for a while.”
"Jim Rybicki notified me last month that he will be leaving the FBI to accept an opportunity in the corporate sector,” Wray said in a statement. “While this is an exciting move for the whole Rybicki family, Jim will be dearly missed by the FBI family -- and by me personally.”
FBI Director Chris Wray replaces James Rybicki, Comey-era chief of staff
Doesn't sound terribly nefarious ... after all: new broom sweeps clean ...
Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums
Reported by Fox on 1/23/18:
"... Rybicki, who served in the same position under Comey and continued his role under Wray, came under scrutiny from Republicans in recent months over his role in the Hillary Clinton email investigation.
But federal law enforcement sources told Fox News that Rybicki was not fired. His departure, they said, has “been in the works for a while.”
"Jim Rybicki notified me last month that he will be leaving the FBI to accept an opportunity in the corporate sector,” Wray said in a statement. “While this is an exciting move for the whole Rybicki family, Jim will be dearly missed by the FBI family -- and by me personally.”
FBI Director Chris Wray replaces James Rybicki, Comey-era chief of staff
Doesn't sound terribly nefarious ... after all: new broom sweeps clean ...
Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
James Baker, FBI General Counsel is another.
This one is a little less clear ... timing may have politically motivated (maybe to keep the Orange Psycho from coming unglued) ... but it wasn't necessarily unexpected either:
"... The sudden reassignment of the FBI's top lawyer, James Baker, last week was not necessarily unexpected.
When FBI Director Chris Wray was appointed to replace James Comey after Comey was fired in May, it was widely understood that he would bring in his own team, including a new general counsel and, potentially, a new deputy.
The timing of Baker's reassignment, however - and a controversial Politico piece published on Friday - has led some former Justice Department and FBI officials to wonder whether it was, at least partially, a political decision made under mounting pressure from President Donald Trump and his allies. ..."
'Trump fears them': Former officials defend FBI leaders swept up in the Trump-Russia firestorm
Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums
This one is a little less clear ... timing may have politically motivated (maybe to keep the Orange Psycho from coming unglued) ... but it wasn't necessarily unexpected either:
"... The sudden reassignment of the FBI's top lawyer, James Baker, last week was not necessarily unexpected.
When FBI Director Chris Wray was appointed to replace James Comey after Comey was fired in May, it was widely understood that he would bring in his own team, including a new general counsel and, potentially, a new deputy.
The timing of Baker's reassignment, however - and a controversial Politico piece published on Friday - has led some former Justice Department and FBI officials to wonder whether it was, at least partially, a political decision made under mounting pressure from President Donald Trump and his allies. ..."
'Trump fears them': Former officials defend FBI leaders swept up in the Trump-Russia firestorm
Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums
Yeah, there's quite a list of them. I have zero interest in trying to litigate each one, one by one, trying to postulate in each case all of the possible reasons behind their change in position of employment, and then trying to find the most or least nefarious reason to use as the most likely cause.
For example, I'm sure that Bruce Ohr has been planning for months to be stripped of two different job titles so he could be reassigned to head up a cubicle that has no phone in it. Nothing out of the ordinary there, move along, move along.
Big picture stuff. Occam's Razor. If it looks, walks and quacks like a duck there's a really good chance it's a duck. Thus far, if you're at the DOJ of the FBI and you're mentioned in the Strzok/Page text messages, you're ducked.