April 14, 2018
April 13, 2018
Just Released: USDoJIG Report – McCabe Firing
|
|
|
Here is a link to the cover letter and the 39-page report of the Office of Inspector General, US Department of Justice, released April13, 2018.
April 12, 2018
How Will They Know?
Senate Majority Leader Addison Mitchell McConnell Jr. and Speaker of the House of Representatives Paul Davis Ryan Jr. are among several Fools on the Hill urging President Trump to just let Special Counsel Robert Mueller finish his investigation. Just let him finish the job he started, they’re saying.
That certainly sounds like a reasonable suggestion. Except it’s not.
How will McConnell, Ryan, and the other Fools on the Hill know when the investigation is finished?
What are the clearly enumerated defined investigative criteria being used to judge the sufficiency of the Mueller Hit Squad’s investigation?
Who has been designated and empowered to be the person to say that the investigation has reached its conclusion?
The answers to those questions should have been clearly enumerated and included in the authorization for the Special Counsel, but they weren’t.
Why not?
The answer to that last question may be in what was not included in Order 3915-2017 signed by Acting Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein on 5/17/17. That was the order which appointed the Special Counsel to investigate Russian interference with the 2016 Presidential election and related matters. Paragraph (b) of that Order gives Mueller almost unlimited authority to investigate “any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump“. [emphasis mine]
Notice, however, the Order does not authorize as well the investigation of “any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and inviduals associated with the campaign of nominee Hillary Clinton.” Had the Clinton campaign been mentioned specifically with the Trump campaign in the Order, it would have forced Rosenstein to include the kind of specificity I suggested. It would have made it difficult for Mueller to ignore the Clinton campaign’s and the DNC’s now-proven financial relationship with the Russian government to create the fictional Steele dossier. It would have made it difficult for Mueller to focus his entire inquisition on Trump.
By specifically excluding the Clinton campaign from the Order, Rosenstein gave Mueller complete authority to ignore Clinton campaign complicity with the Russians and also to ignore other crimes committed by the Clinton campaign and others.
For an exceedingly clear explanation of just how corrupt the US Department of Justice has become, read ‘Talk to Mueller? No, Trump Should Use His Bully Pulpit to Expose Mueller’s Corruption‘. It was written by Kurt Schlichter and was posted April 12, 2017, on townhall.com.
April 10, 2018
Renewed Request for Presidential Commission
My OpenCdA posts on January 10, 2018, entitled ‘So It Never Happens Again …‘ and February 13, 2018, entitled ‘Appoint a Presidential Commission‘ urged President Trump to appoint a Presidential Commission with the same stature and authority as the 1963 Warren Commission. The Commission I advocated first in January 2018 would examine the depth and effects of corruption by politicization of both the US Department of Justice and its subordinate agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
There were two underlying reasons for my belief that a national Presidential Commission was more appropriate than a second Special Counsel.
- The job was too big for a Special Counsel. The scope of DoJ and FBI malfeasance, criminal abuses of authority, and other criminal conduct infected other federal agencies during the Obama presidency. Some of those agencies, notably the CIA, the NSA, the Department of State including then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the Internal Revenue Service, the Executive Office of the President under and including then-President Barack Obama, and employees and members of the US Congress (e.g., Deborah Wasserman Schultz, D-FL 23rd District) had personnel with varying degrees of criminal complicity involving national security compromises and outright apparent violations of Title 18 US Code sections.
- Ordering authoritative measures to identify and correct the abuses and criminal conduct by the DoJ and FBI and to reestablish the public’s confidence in both the DoJ and the FBI is more important than prosecuting offenders except for the most egregious violations of criminal law. Criminal prosecutions sound good, but in the end, the results are often unsatisfying. That outcome would still leave a corrupt DoJ and FBI intact after a few low-level sacrificial stooges are convicted in skewed show trials that would likely take years to convene and conclude.
I believe those original reasons remain valid, but now there are more.
- My August 16, 2017, post entitled ‘Understanding the Subversion of the Trump Presidency‘ linked to documents explaining several levels of plans that were put in place immediately after President Trump’s election to subvert his presidency and undermine the national security. Little did we know at the time that the ‘lawfare’ mentioned in the written plans of Brock, et al, would result in the appointment of an overzealous Special Counsel and his employment of several DoJ attorneys who had in numerous prosecutions been excoriated by federal trial courts for withholding excuplatory evidence from defense counsels. Several of the convictions in those prosecutions were overturned on appeal.
- On April 9, 2018, FBI special agents executed search warrants and seized documents from the permanent home, the temporary hotel residence, and the office of one of President Trump’s personal attorneys, Michael Cohen. Since we have not seen either the affidavits prepared in support of the search warrants or the search warrant return itemizing the material seized, we don’t know for sure if the warrant service was related to the so far unproven allegations of illegal conduct by President Trump. We do know that the warrants were sought by the Office of the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York based at least in part on a referral from Special Counsel Robert Mueller and with the approval of Main Justice. Significantly, we also know that some of the material seized contained privileged communication between President Trump and attorney Cohen.
- The seizure by FBI agents of privileged communications between President Trump and attorney Cohen should have resulted in the material being immediately turned over to a DoJ “taint team” before any of the material was examined by anyone. The taint team comprises DoJ attorneys who are supposed to segregate privileged information from other material so that FBI agents and DoJ attorneys do not taint an investigation by the unauthorized examination and illegal use of attorney-client privileged information. Some of the DoJ attorneys on Mueller’s Special Counsel have been chastised for Brady decision violations (For a brief discussion of Brady, see my August 27, 2014, OpenCdA post entitled From Arfee to Brady). Their professional credibility has already been tainted in earlier times by documented misconduct.
- The FBI and the DoJ misrepresented or withheld material facts from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in securing warrants to surveil a US citizen, Carter Page. Agencies and their agents who will lie to the Court may also be willing to fabricate evidence. When those agencies and their agents are part of the US Intelligence Community, they have access to the resources who could fabricate false but convincing documentary evidence that would be difficult to detect forensically or linguistically, particularly if the forgers had access to contextual documents that might be found in an attorney’s files.
- The FBI and DoJ have intentionally delayed their responses to Congressional subpoenas for information about the numerous acts of alleged criminal conduct by Hillary Clinton, her campaign, her husband, and their Foundation.
- The DoJ Inspector General’s report (actually six reports), originally to have been released in March, then April, may not not be released until May or later. AG Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III should, but likely won’t, ask the President to declassify that report and immediately release it without redactions to the public by posting it on the White House website. A Presidential Commission’s recommendation to do exactly that could hardly be ignored by Sessions whose love for the DoJ as an institution appears to exceed his loyalty to the US Constitution or the American people.
- The efforts of the DoJ, the FBI, and the Special Counsel seem now to be a concerted effort to intentionally obstruct the performance of the duties of the President and Congress. By design, our “free press” heartily endorses and furthers that objective. The skews media are protected by the First Amendment, however as those same media are quick to point out when it serves their purposes, there can be reasonable restrictions on the freedoms guaranteed by our Bill of Rights. There needs to be a reasonable discussion about an appropriate and reasonable reaction when the supposedly untouchable skews media become co-conspirators with agencies and agents of the US Government to intentionally obstruct the lawful operation of a duly elected government. A Presidential Commission, not an overzealous Special Counsel hell-bent on taking down the President of the United States, is the proper venue for that discussion.
March 15, 2018
Letter 03-15-2018: Senators Demand AG Appoint Second Special Counsel
US Senators Charles Grassley (Chairman, Senate Committee on the Judiciary), Lindsey Graham (Chairman, Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism), John Cornyn, and Thom Tillis sent this letter today to the US Attorney General (AG) Jeff Sessions and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. The attachment letter sent to DOJIG Michael Horowitz earlier is attached to today’s letter and included with the link to it.
The letter demands that AG Sessions appoint a second Special Counsel to work with the DoJ Inspector General (DOJIG) to investigate a range of issues concerning FBI improprieties in the application and renewal of FISA warrants, the FBI’s apparent unauthorized release of classified [national security] informationi to the press, and the FBI and DoJ’s investigations of General Michael Flynn.
The letter, supported by attachments, explains that the Special Counsel’s authority includes the ability to obtain testimony from persons not currently employed by the DoJ as well as having access to special tools available to prosecutors that are not available to the DOJIG.
Significantly, the Senators’ letter concludes with this rather blunt wording: “If you are unwilling to take this step, please send us a detailed reply explaining why not.” It seems the Senators are getting tired of Rosenstein’s nonresponsiveness to their inquiries and requests.
February 24, 2018
Schiff (HPSCI) Memo Released Today
Today the Democrat Minority on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) released its own version of events concerning the FBI’s alleged misuse of a FISA warrant to intercept Trump campaign conversations. Here is a link to the 10-page memorandum released today.
The Republican Majority on the HPSCI released its version of events in a memorandum on February 2, 2018. Our OpenCdA post on February 2, 2018, entitled Nunes (HPSCI) Memo Released includes a link to the Republicans’ memorandum.
As you would expect, the Democrats and Republicans have differing accounts of how the FBI obtained the FISA warrant and renewals to intercept Carter Page.
The best information about the representations made to the FISA Court by the FBI would be in the applications and supporting documentation and, if available, transcripts of those FISA Court hearings. That information is being sought by Judicial Watch in the lawsuit cited and linked in my February 2, 2018, post Nunes (HPSCI) Memo Released. It is likely that the House Committee on the Judiciary would also be interested in reviewing the FISA applications material.
February 21, 2018
‘Adept’ Is Not Enough …
President Trump met today at the White House with students and families from Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. The meeting was scheduled as a listening session for the President. It was an opportunity for him to listen to comments and pleas from some of those affected by the mass murder at the school on February 14, 2018. By all accounts I’ve seen, the President listened attentively and respectfully and was appropriately engaged with those who attended the meeting.
As reported in the Fox News story headlined Trump on preventing mass shootings: ‘we’re going to get it done’, a parent suggested “… that a select few teachers, administrators, or other school employees volunteer to become a designated “undercover police officer,” to manage a potential tragedy prior to the arrival of first responders.”
There followed some discussion about allowing volunteers on school staff to carry concealed weapons after receiving the appropriate training.
President Trump said, “It takes five to eight minutes for first responders. So the attack is over. If you had a teacher who was adept at firearms, they could very well end [the attack].”
My opinion is that it is not enough to be “adept at firearms.”
Though initial and then regularly recurring safety and proficiency training are unquestionably essential as the President suggested using the word “adept,” it is even more important that volunteers be first properly selected and then prepared to do something that will forever affect their own lives: Before volunteering or being employed, trained, and entrusted with both the duty and authority to use lethal force, they must first be competently assessed to be psychologically prepared to shoot and kill the attacker, even if the attacker is a child.
Before even applying to be an armed volunteer or employee, applicants must self-evaluate. ” Do I really have the mental preparation and resolve to prevent an attack by shooting and killing an armed attacker before the attacker can attack his or her first victim?” “What if the armed attacker is someone I know? Maybe a child, maybe even a child I know? Can I do it?”
Applicants to be armed volunteers or employees must initially and then regularly be psychologically screened and evaluated to determine if they have the ability to kill a person, maybe a child, who has a weapon. The psychological evaluation must also determine insofar as possible how the volunteer will react after neutralizing a potential attacker. Will the volunteer be so emotionally distraught that he or she is unable to effectively engage a second or third attacker?
When the idea of armed volunteers in schools is discussed, people often suggest that retired law enforcement and military members from the community would be good choices.
I don’t think so. At least, not automatically.
If I were a parent, I wouldn’t necessarily want some retired geezer with a gun protecting my child or grandchild.
We geezers retired from law enforcement or the military for a reason. I retired from the US Secret Service after 23 years and before age 50 because I recognized my reactions were slowing and my eyesight was getting fuzzier. I did not want the life of someone our agency was protecting or a fellow employee’s life to be dependent on me.
Neither would I want your child or grandchild’s life dependent on me. Your child or grandchild’s life is no less important than the President’s.
Maybe in the next OpenCdA post I’ll put up my thoughts on how schools can be made safer.
February 16, 2018
Really Bad Idea, Scotty! You Too, Little Marco
Within hours of the mass murders on February 14, 2018, at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, Florida’s knee-jerk Republican Governor Rick Scott and half-cocked Republican US Senator Marco Rubio have demanded that FBI Director Christopher Wray resign.
The FBI has already acknowledged that it failed to properly categorize and forward a good citizen’s potentially critical report called in on January 5 to the FBI about alleged shooter Nikolas Cruz.
Properly, both Director Wray and AG Sessions have ordered an investigation to determine exactly what happened that led to the FBI’s mishandling critical information. Until that investigation is completed, any adverse actions against any FBI employee including Director Wray are premature.
Wray was installed as the FBI Director on September 28, 2017, exactly 140 days before the Parkland murders.
For two opportunistic political hacks, Florida’s Governor Rick Scott and Senator Marco Rubio, to call for Wray’s resignation over the breakdown of a program put in place long before be became Director is not only unfair but monumentally stupid. Firing Wray for not having first found and then fixed every FBI problem in his first 140 days on the job is not the way to rehabilitate the FBI.
The damage done to the FBI and DoJ by eight years of Obama and Biden, Holder and Lynch, and Mueller and Comey appears to have originated at the top and flowed downhill. Their politicizing damage needs to be assessed by a Presidential Commission, not aggravated by firing Christopher Wray.
Right now, the FBI needs a strong Director. It may have one in Christopher Wray. Fire him for political expedience rather than just cause, and the next qualified and competent Director will almost certainly be much harder to find.
Comments Off on Really Bad Idea, Scotty! You Too, Little Marco
Special Counsel Issues Indictment of Russians – 2016 Election Interference
|
On Friday, February 16, 2018, Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s office released a federal grand jury indictment naming 13 Russians and 3 Russian companies as defendants. The indictment alleges the defendants interfered in the 2016 presidential election.
Here is a link to the 37-page indictment issued today.
The indictment itself is a far more reliable and complete information source than the news media for the details of when, how, and by whom the offenses against the United States were allegedly committed.
February 13, 2018
Appoint a Presidential Commission
With American citizens finally becoming more aware of the scope and gravity of the institutional corruption involved in and around the 2016 election, members of Congress are receiving increasing demands to appoint another Special Counsel.
As I opined in my OpenCdA post on January 12, 2018, entitled So It Never Happens Again …, merely appointing yet another Special Counsel to look into the allegations of apparent criminal wrongdoing associated with the 2016 national general election would be an incomplete approach.
I don’t dispute there are grounds for such a Special Counsel. However, I believe the job of rehabilitating corrupted and crippled agencies whose missions are critically important to the national security is too much for a Special Counsel.
Before you conclude I’m overstating the scope of work required for rehabilitation, consider this:
Credible evidence released by diligent House and Senate committees has provided solid reasons to believe that the following government bodies have some involvement either as alleged violators or as victims in the numerous and various statutory and administrative rule violations:
- Central Intelligence Agency (alleged violator)
- Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) (victim)
- Department of Justice (alleged violator)
- Federal Bureau of Investigation (alleged violator)
- Department of State (alleged violator)
- Federal Election Commission (victim)
- Former President Obama and his Executive Office of the President (alleged violator)
- Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (victim)
- Internal Revenue Service (alleged violator)
- National Security Agency (alleged violator)
- US Congress (victim)
Very arguably the most important objective of rehabilitation has to be to restore the public’s confidence in our federal agencies to perform their duties honestly and diligently. (Lest we forget, the honest and diligent employees of all the alleged violator agencies are ‘the public,’ too.) Thus far, the Mueller Special Counsel effort has produced little or nothing to accomplish that objective.
There is another objective that no Special Counsel will have the courage to touch: An open and frank discussion of the miserable failure of our First Amendment-protected news media to provide timely, accurate, and complete reporting of verified information (not opinion) to We, the People.
That discussion must include but not start with the performance of reporters or editors or news directors. It must start with media owners’ lack of understanding the importance of timely, accurate, complete news reporting. Then these owners must be questioned about their lack of commitment to that same reporting.
In part the failures of federal agencies have apparently been aided and abetted by the First Amendment-protected news media’s decisions to ignore or under-report those failures. The media owe We, the People, some answers for their seemingly aiding and abetting alleged crimes that have been committed against all the people of the United States.
If the public’s confidence in the integrity of some critical agencies and their employees is to be restored, we need a Presidential Commission with far more horsepower, moral courage, and integrity than we are likely to ever see from another Special Counsel like Robert Mueller.