The Inspector General's Criminal Referral
It has been a while since the Justice Department's IG Michael Horowitz filed his report on the FBI & DOJ's handling of the Hillary Clinton e-mail server investigation. Because of the political war going on in Congress, we sometimes forget the findings and the recommendations made in the report. Most notably would be the IG's criminal referral of former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. He is accused of lying to federal investigators, which is a federal crime and one which is a huge priority for the FBI. Example # 1 would be Michael Flynn. Now it involves one of the FBI's own. Unfortunately, r eferrals don't guarantee charges will be brought or require prosecutors to act in any way. We have heard nothing from the U.S. Attorney's Office or the Justice Department. Prosecuting McCabe, who was in fact a leaker and a liar, would be a first step in cleaning up the deep state corruption that flourished under the Obama administration.
Is the DOJ, which is supposed to be under the leadership of Jeff Sessions (who seems to have reduced himself to a deputy), going to sweep this under the rug?
Is it possible to prosecute high level officials of federal agencies?
We know Ms Clinton got a pass. We know Lois Lerner got a pass. How about the questionable actions of the last two AGs, Lynch & Holder?
How about getting the current DOJ to provide information the Congress oversight committees have been demanding for many months?
Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act request & subsequent lawsuit back in March of this year against the Justice Department for all records of communications between former FBI director James Comey and the FBI regarding the book he was writing. Why such stonewalling on something like that?
Then of course is the double standard.
Example: We learned recently that Tony Podesta, a key democratic operative, has been offered immunity by the Mueller team to testify against Paul Manafort. Both men worked together on behalf of the Ukraine, yet one gets offered immunity while the other already charged with multiple counts is sitting in jail!
https://m.washingtontimes.com/multimedia/image/2_ap_040928010434jpg/
Why is that? Maybe because one was briefly connected to Trump, while the other was a major democratic fundraiser?
We can't even seem to prosecute violent protesters.
Example: The riot charges were quietly dropped for those inauguration day protesters!
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/01/19/prosecutors-dropping-rioting-charges-against-129-inauguration-day-protesters.html
We need to hold everyone in our society accountable to the same standards. If Michael Flynn gets the book thrown at him for lying to the FBI, then so should any high ranking FBI official. Otherwise, the President should immediately pardon Michael Flynn.
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Who is online
115 visitors
Opposing views welcome.
Trump is off topic
Then why did you cite him in your seed?
Flynn DIDN'T 'get the book thrown at him'. He pled to a lesser charge. BTFW, Flynn could also have been charged by the Military. As it is, Flynn retains his rank and military pension.
It's very simple, I am stating what should be done if we believe in fairness under the law.
Flynn DIDN'T 'get the book thrown at him'.
No?
"In a court filing made public on Friday morning, prosecutors alleged that Flynn “did willfully and knowingly make materially false, fictitious and fraudulent statements” to FBI agents during a Jan. 24 interview about his conversations with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak in the weeks before Trump took office."
You may recall:
"FBI investigators who interviewed Michael Flynn last January - one of which was anti-Trumper Peter Strzok - thought Flynn was telling the truth about his conversations with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak, and that any inaccuracies in his answers were unintentional - according to accounts of a closed-door March 2017 briefing given to lawmakers by former FBI Director James Comey.
According to two sources familiar with the meetings, Comey told lawmakers that the FBI agents who interviewed Flynn did not believe that Flynn had lied to them, or that any inaccuracies in his answers were intentional. As a result, some of those in attendance came away with the impression that Flynn would not be charged with a crime pertaining to the January 24 interview . - Washington Examiner
Yup, somehow, somebody on the Mueller team found a way to charge him with lying to the FBI
Yes it is simple, your need to cite Trump to do so opens the door for Trump being on topic.
No. There were at least half a dozen other charges that the Feds could have prosecuted Flynn for, in addition to the Military's charges. Flynn got off with a slap on the wrist...
BTW, blah, blah, blah. Flynn pled GUILTY to lying. HE LIED. Just because he was good at it doesn't mean he shouldn't be prosecuted for it...
No it dosen't. There are plenty of places for you to go and slam Trump. Not here
Side note: "blablabla1234565" is the screen alias for one of the Russian defendants, cyber-attack commander Nikolay Yuryevich Kozachek.
He certainly changed my mind....I was a Clinton supporter until I saw some statement on facebook! That changed my entire view!/ s
How about you are imagining things?
Rather than deal with the bird in the hand Russian interference with the election , which will surely include Trump associates and perhaps Trump himself in it's net, you are wishing and hoping that Democrats be investigated. Not very patriotic Vic.
How I'm imaging things?
Rather than deal with the bird in the hand Russian interference with the election , which will surely include Trump associates and perhaps Trump himself
I guess progressives just can't stop themselves. Those are two VERY DIFFERENT THINGS! I know how much you want to get it into this discussion, but Trump is off topic. Would you care to discuss why Andrew McCabe is not being charged as Michael Flynn was?
Big difference between "I was authorized to talk with the press" and "No, I haven't talked with the Russians"
Come to think of it someone else kept saying "Nobody from my campaign has had contact with the Russians"
How many indictments and plea deals now???
I maybe wrong on the number but there are two immunity deals in play. As mentioned above Tony Podesta is involved in one. I know that the Paul Manafort charges are outside the parameters of Russian interference, but it does go to the double standard question. If Podesta was involved in the same activity as Manafort and we already have two dozen counts against Manafort, then the obvious question is why is it that Podesta is offered immunity?
As reported by that hard hitting journalist Tucker Carlson.../s
Better than the Times & Post and all their corrections
Better to make corrections than not.
Yes, the Russians interfered in the election. No, there is no proof that they did it to help Trump. It is unlikely that they would have done it to tip the election since everybody thought Trump was a joke with no chance of winning at all. Yes, people have been indicted. But no one has been indicted for colluding with the Russians.
Hillary lost because she and her party platform stinks. And Democrats will get Trump re-elected because they’re too fucking stupid to understand that what turns them on (like abortion on demand, gender confusion, and encouraging illegal immigration), turns everybody else off.
What do you think of the reluctance of the DOJ to handle the matter of Andrew McCabe?
Where do you all come up with these websites? This one I had to laugh about. Here there is talk about the investigation with Russian interference and this is the description of the website you source,
Hilarious. You are citing a pro Russian blog.
Good question
We seem to be drifting into something other than the topic. Let's just confine ourselves to that
They come up with these web sites because the "theories" appeal to them.
Let me conclude this little discussion by saying that it is now obvious that the FBI & DOJ have most likely committed criminal acts in spying on a political campaign, using fraudulent documents to spy on an American citizen and launch an investigation without criminal pretext, leaking information & disinformation to their allies in the media and lying about all of the above.
The left has fought all of these facts either by obstruction within the DOJ or in congress and within the media. The denials have been based either on 1) the claim of conspiracy theories, 2) the obtuse belief that there was collusion or 3) that the FBI was right to do whatever they thought necessary.
This discussion is now closed until we get some moderation of all the off topic comments