POLITICS -  It's Going To Blow Up On Mueller (9757 views) Notify me whenever anyone posts in this discussion.Subscribe
 
From: WEBELIAHU DelphiPlus Member Icon9/14/20 9:21 AM 
To: All  (509 of 612) 
 9333.509 in reply to 9333.508 

September 14, 2020

        "The phones were all conveniently wiped after the DOJ IG asked for the devices to be handed over — some phones wiped themselves, according to the DOJ!...The phones were all conveniently wiped after the DOJ IG asked for the devices to be handed over — some phones wiped themselves, according to the DOJ!"

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/09/gop-senators-grassley-johnson-want-answers-doj-records-reveal-muellers-team-wiped-31-phones/

GOP Senators Grassley and Johnson Want Answers After DOJ Records Reveal Mueller’s Team Wiped Up to 31 Phones

Republican Senators Chuck Grassley (IA) and Ron Johnson (WI) want answers after newly released DOJ records reveal Mueller’s team ‘accidentally wiped’ up to 31 phones.

Newly released DOJ records show “pitbull” Andrew Weissmann and multiple Mueller henchmen claiming to have “accidentally wiped” at least 31 phones used in the anti-Trump Russia prob

The documents were uncovered thanks to a Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit.

The phones were all conveniently wiped after the DOJ IG asked for the devices to be handed over — some phones wiped themselves, according to the DOJ!

The records show virtually all of Mueller’s lawyers used the same tactic: Put their phones in airplane mode, lock them and then nuke the phones by repeatedly entering the wrong password.

Mueller’s “pitbull” Andrew Weissmann wiped two out of three of his Special Counsel phones — he wiped one by ‘accident’ and nuked the other by entering the wrong password too many times.

One phone assigned to James Quarles “wiped itself without intervention from him.”

Senator Grassley this week sent a letter to Attorney General William Barr and FBI Director Christopher Wray “pressing for details on what actions were taken to recover material deleted from the mobile devices assigned to Mueller’s team” reported Fox News. Grassley wrote “based on this new information, the number of times and the stated reasons for the deletions calls into question whether or not it was a widespread intentional effort.”

Senator Ron Johnson asked Obama-appointed DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz to investigate the wiped phones.

“These reports are troubling and raise concerns about record retention and transparency,” Johnson wrote in a letter to DOJ inspector general Michael Horowitz. “Therefore, I respectfully request that your office open an investigation into this matter to determine what, why, and how information was wiped, whether any wrongdoing occurred, and who these devices belonged to.”

Recall, the DOJ did NOTHING after the OIG found that Peter Strzok and Lisa Page both wiped their phones and set them to “factory settings” so why would Horowitz do anything about Weissmann and the rest of Mueller’s team??

 
 Reply   Options 

 
From: WEBELIAHU DelphiPlus Member Icon9/15/20 7:50 AM 
To: All  (510 of 612) 
 9333.510 in reply to 9333.509 

September 15, 2020

          "Although this wasn’t a criminal proceeding – but rather an IG investigation – the data at issue constitute something the agency is entitled to recover. It’s a set of federal records, and the agency is the contract customer."

https://www.wnd.com/2020/09/phones-wiped-mueller-team-members-might-able-un-wiped/

Phones wiped by Mueller team members might be able to be 'un-wiped'

FBI uses collection tool to harvest text messages sent from and to agency-issued devices

Records responsive to a FOIA request were posted by the Department of Justice this week, and they show that 14 members of Robert Mueller’s special counsel team “wiped” data from their government-issued smartphones after the DOJ inspector general requested the phones from them for review.

The special counsel geniuses used several methods, including entering the wrong passcode 10 times to automatically trigger a data wipe. Some individuals set phones in airplane mode with incorrect passwords or no passwords provided, making the data inaccessible when the phone was turned over.

The latter situation might prompt a law enforcement request to the phone vendor to unlock the data. Although this wasn’t a criminal proceeding – but rather an IG investigation – the data at issue constitute something the agency is entitled to recover. It’s a set of federal records, and the agency is the contract customer.

 

 
From: WEBELIAHU DelphiPlus Member Icon9/15/20 8:30 AM 
To: All  (511 of 612) 
 9333.511 in reply to 9333.510 

September 15, 2020

           “You think you are mad about the phones being wiped?” Graham said on Fox News' “Hannity” last week. “Stay tuned. We’ll talk in about 10 or 12 days and we’ll see if there is something else you can get mad about...Durham “does not want this to be viewed political,” and the closer it gets to November, Durham could “punt it to after the election.”

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/durham-speculation-reaching-fever-pitch-resignation

Durham speculation reaching fever pitch after aide resignation, Graham comments, phone-wipe mystery

What is the next shoe to drop in U.S. Attorney John Durham’s investigation?

That's one of the big questions in Washington this month, even as lawmakers' attention is torn among coronavirus, school reopenings, economic uncertainty, wildfires, social unrest and the presidential election.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Last week, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., hinted that developments in Durham’s investigation were on the horizon. This was after newly released Justice Department records showed numerous phones belonging to members of former Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team were wiped of information because of forgotten passcodes, irreparable screen damage, loss of the device, intentional deletion or other reasons—all before the Justice Department inspector general’s office could review the devices.

“You think you are mad about the phones being wiped?” Graham said on Fox News' “Hannity” last week. “Stay tuned.”

He added: “We’ll talk in about 10 or 12 days and we’ll see if there is something else you can get mad about.”

Republicans, like Sens. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Ron Johnson, R-Wis., demanded answers last week as to whether there “was widespread intentional effort” to wipe the devices and suggested it could amount to “anticipatory obstruction of justice.”

It is unclear, at this point, whether Durham’s team is reviewing the matter.

When asked whether he anticipated further charges coming, Johnson told Fox News: "I sure hope so."

"There was an awful lot of wrongdoing that people need to be held accountable for," Johnson said. "We continue to be slow-walked obtaining information, so the public is still in the dark regarding specifics. That said, it's not easy to find smoking guns."

He added: "People cover their tracks or don't leave tracks."

Durham was appointed by Attorney General Barr last year to investigate the origins of the FBI’s Russia probe shortly after Mueller completed his yearslong investigation into whether the campaign colluded with the Russians to influence the 2016 presidential election.

In the year and a half since, he has questioned former law enforcement and intelligence officials — former CIA Director John Brennan among them — about decisions made during the course of the Russia investigation.

Durham’s timeline is focused on July 2016, when the FBI’s original Russia probe began, through the appointment of Mueller in May 2017.

Trump himself has indicated that he wants results soon, saying at a White House press conference on Thursday that Durham was a “very, very respected man” and that his work would involve a “report or maybe it’s much more than that.”

The investigation has produced one criminal charge so far, against former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith, who was accused of altering an email related to the surveillance of a former Trump campaign aide. But that prosecution did not allege a broader conspiracy within the FBI, and the conduct it involved had largely been laid out in a Justice Department inspector general report from last December.

It is not clear if Durham will be able to conclude his work before the election, though Barr has not ruled out the possibility of additional criminal charges. Barr, during an interview with NBC News last week, said that there “could be” more charges stemming from Durham's review.

“Yeah, there could be,” Barr said while declining to say whether any such charges would be announced prior to Election Day.

In July, though, Fox News reported that Durham could wait to reveal his findings or initiate further prosecutions until after the 2020 presidential election.

Two sources familiar with Durham’s investigation told Fox News at the time that Durham was working expeditiously to try to finish the probe before Labor Day — which he did not — but that several lines of investigation had not yet been completed.

“He believes it’s critical to do them,” one source said at the time. “He is feeling more pressure to get this done and wrapped up.”

The source also told Fox News that Durham “does not want this to be viewed political,” and the closer it gets to November, Durham could “punt it to after the election.”

 

 
From: WEBELIAHU DelphiPlus Member Icon9/17/20 7:58 AM 
To: All  (512 of 612) 
 9333.512 in reply to 9333.511 

September 17, 2020

        "Fitton said the president should instruct the agencies to: "Get it all out. Stop with the fake redactions. Stop with the abusive exemptions that black out information. We want the world to know about what happened here on this terrible corruption."

https://justthenews.com/accountability/tom-fitton-calls-criminal-investigation-pandemic-wiped-phones-among-mueller-team

Judicial Watch’s Fitton calls for criminal probe into Mueller team’s wiped phones

Fitton says the question is whether people willfully broke the law in an effort to destroy government records.

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton is calling for a criminal investigation into the "pandemic of wiped phones" among members of Robert Mueller's prosecution team. Fitton, who leads the government watchdog organization, said the question is whether people purposefully broke the law by destroying government records.

"And when you have people wipe two or three phones like Andrew Weissman did—I think two of the three phones he had were wiped—it just strains credulity," Fitton said during an interview on the John Solomon Reports podcast, noting that there should be more investigation.

Fitton also highlighted the news that despite Mueller's claim that he did not interview with President Trump to apply the position of FBI Director, an email indicates that Mueller withdrew from consideration for the top FBI spot.

An email sent by former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein on May 17, 2017 had "Mueller" as the subject and included the message, "Withdrew from consideration for FBI director." That was the exact same day that Mueller's appointment to serve as special counsel for the Russia investigation was announced.

President Trump has said that Mueller did interview for the position. 

"And now we have confirmation that the president was right and that Mueller was potentially lying to Congress about whether or not he was up for the job and whether he wanted to be considered for it," Litton said during the podcast.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Fitton said the president should instruct the agencies to: "Get it all out. Stop with the fake redactions. Stop with the abusive exemptions that black out information. We want the world to know about what happened here on this terrible corruption ... If it's the worst corruption scandal in American history then it should be all hands on deck in terms of transparency. And enough with the abuse of FOIA that's been allowed to fester for years here."

 

 
From: WEBELIAHU DelphiPlus Member Icon9/17/20 8:12 AM 
To: All  (513 of 612) 
 9333.513 in reply to 9333.476 

September 17, 2020

         "the Republican-led committee's probe into the roles that Obama administration officials might have played in the Russia-Trump campaign collusion investigation...the committee decided not to vote separately on whether to authorize a subpoena to U.S. Ambassador to Slovakia Bridget Brink as part of members' separate probe centering on the overseas business dealings of Hunter Biden, the son of 2020 Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden."

https://justthenews.com/government/congress/senate-panels-authorizes-dozens-subpoenas-deposition-probe-obama-officials

Senate panels authorize dozens of subpoenas, depositions in probe of Obama officials

The probe focuses on roles that Obama administration officials might have played in the Trump-Russia collusion probe.

A Senate committee on Wednesday voted in favor of authorizing dozens of subpoenas and depositions as part of the Republican-led committee's probe into the roles that Obama administration officials might have played in the Russia-Trump campaign collusion investigation. 

The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee voted to authorize nearly three dozen subpoenas and depositions, according to Politico.

However, the committee decided not to vote separately on whether to authorize a subpoena to U.S. Ambassador to Slovakia Bridget Brink as part of members' separate probe centering on the overseas business dealings of Hunter Biden, the son of 2020 Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden.

 

 
From: WEBELIAHU DelphiPlus Member Icon9/23/20 7:54 AM 
To: All  (514 of 612) 
 9333.514 in reply to 9333.513 

September 23, 2020

          “It’s treason. [James] Comey and all the sleaze bags, they spied on my campaign and we caught ’em,” Trump said. “Let’s now see what happens. Trump cited reports of Republican-led investigations currently underway, suggesting that there was some hope of accountability.”

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/09/21/donald-trump-im-so-angry-at-republicans-for-slow-investigations/#

Donald Trump: ‘I’m So Angry at Republicans’ for Slow Investigations

President Donald Trump on Monday expressed his frustration with Republicans for failing to prosecute Democrats for what he viewed as obvious crimes.

The president spoke about Biden’s son Hunter cashing in on his father’s influence with foreign companies such as Ukraine, and then his father boasting that he forced the firing of a Ukrainian prosecutor.

“Does anything happen? Nothing happens,” Trump continued. “I’m so angry at Republicans. I am. I’m so angry.”

The president spoke about his frustrations to a group of workers in Dayton, Ohio.

Trump also noted that Biden and former President Barack Obama spied on his presidential campaign.

“It’s treason. [James] Comey and all the sleaze bags, they spied on my campaign and we caught ’em,” Trump said. “Let’s now see what happens.”

Trump cited reports of Republican-led investigations currently underway, suggesting that there was some hope of accountability.

The Senate Republicans’ probe of Biden and his son in Ukraine is nearing it’s completion, according to the Wall Street Journal. The investigation into the Justice Department’s investigation of Trump’s 2016 campaign by U.S. Attorney John Durham is also expected before the election.

“A lot of things are happening, you’re seeing. You’re reading the papers also: a lot of things are happening,” Trump said.

The president said he would continue to stay out of the Justice Department’s investigations and prosecutions.

“I stay out of it. I just say, ‘I’m trying like hell to stay out of it,'” he said. “But it’s a disgrace that it’s taken so long.”

 

 
From: WEBELIAHU DelphiPlus Member Icon9/27/20 9:19 AM 
To: All  (515 of 612) 
 9333.515 in reply to 9333.514 

September 27, 2020

         "In other words, the primary sub-source, now known to be Igor Danchenko, who is a Russian national with a checkered past, was investigated for being a Russian agent...Failure of the FBI to inform the court that the Primary Sub-source was suspected of being a Russian agent is a breach of every duty owed by law enforcement to the judicial system...Agents on the Russia collusion probes were so concerned that what they were doing was illegal that they purchased liability insurance just before Trump’s inauguration."

         Danchenko was more than a primary sub-source, he was the primary SOURCE, and this article actually says this.

Primary Source For Bogus Steele Dossier Was Deemed A National Security Threat

Newly declassified information reveals that the primary source used for the discredited, DNC-funded Steele dossier was a suspected Russian agent who had been the subject of an earlier FBI investigation. The investigators running the Crossfire Hurricane team knew this by December 2016 but withheld that information from the court that authorized using the dossier as a basis to go after President Donald Trump and spy on his affiliates.

According to documents released by Attorney General William Barr to Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., declassified Thursday, a previously redacted but now-unveiled footnote in Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s December report shows the primary sub-source “was the subject of an FBI counterintelligence investigation from 2009 to 2011 that assessed his/her documented contacts with suspected Russian intelligence officers.”

In other words, the primary sub-source, now known to be Igor Danchenko, who is a Russian national with a checkered past, was investigated for being a Russian agent.

The documents further show that those running the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, which relied on the fake Steele dossier deriving its information from the sub-source, knew that Danchenko had been under a counterintelligence investigation. Federal officials pushed forward with their deep-state operations anyway as part of the conspiracy theory that the president was serving as an undercover agent for the Russian government.

"Failure of the FBI to inform the court that the Primary Sub-source was suspected of being a Russian agent is a breach of every duty owed by law enforcement to the judicial system,” Graham said in a statement.

A more than two-year investigation led by Special Counsel Robert Mueller would later conclude in the spring of 2019, finding no evidence at all that the president or any other American colluded with the Russian government to capture the 2016 election. The Kremlin did, however, attempt to interfere in the U.S. election, purchasing between $200,000 and $300,000 worth of Facebook ads with the primary goal of sowing division and “undermining public faith in the U.S. democratic process.”

The Democratic witch hunt, orchestrated by deep-state operatives using the Steele dossier, which in turn collected its information from a suspected Russian agent, appears to have done just that, with Democrats now raising hysterical Post Office conspiracies and dystopian fantasies just weeks from the November election, which they claim Trump might refuse to concede. In fact, Democrats are now gaming how to steal the election again if Trump wins, even after launching an impeachment over a phone call and perpetuating a four-year Russia hoax still ongoing.

Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee faced no investigation for the use of the dossier, which was authored by the unregistered agent of a Russian oligarch and sourced to the Russian national who had been investigated as a Russian agent.

The news that Crossfire Hurricane officials weaponized the FBI to accuse Trump of being a Russian asset — by using a suspected Russian asset — comes on the heels of another major revelation to emerge from The Federalist Thursday. Agents on the Russia collusion probes were so concerned that what they were doing was illegal that they purchased liability insurance just before Trump’s inauguration.

 

 
From: WEBELIAHU DelphiPlus Member Icon9/29/20 9:09 AM 
To: All  (516 of 612) 
 9333.516 in reply to 9333.515 

September 29, 2020

       "According to the summary of Barnett’s interview, he said there was never any basis for the bizarre “collusion” theory the agency and the special counsel relentlessly pursued, to the point that agents made jokes about how they could take any piece of information and claim it was evidence of collusion. He said the Special Counsel Office (SCO) pursued Flynn simply as a means to “get Trump”...In a stunning and detailed interview conducted September 17 by U.S. attorney Jeff Jensen"

        Jeff Jensen is a U.S. attorney that Durham brought into the investigation, because there was just too much illicit activity for him to handle alone.

‘Get Trump’: FBI Whistleblower On Mueller Team Details Real Reason Flynn Was Targeted

The case agent managing the FBI's investigation of Flynn told Department of Justice attorneys that a desire to "get Trump" was a major factor underlying the case against Flynn.

In a stunning and detailed interview conducted September 17 by U.S. attorney Jeff Jensen, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) case agent for the original investigation of former White House National Security Adviser Michael Flynn and who later worked on Robert Mueller’s Special Counsel blew the whistle on myriad problems that plagued those investigations from the very beginning.

FBI Special Agent William Barnett told Department of Justice (DOJ) investigators that the handling of the probes troubled him so much that he threatened to quit working on it in one case, and threatened to go to the Inspector General in another. According to the summary of Barnett’s interview, he said there was never any basis for the bizarre “collusion” theory the agency and the special counsel relentlessly pursued, to the point that agents made jokes about how they could take any piece of information and claim it was evidence of collusion. He said the Special Counsel Office (SCO) pursued Flynn simply as a means to “get Trump” and viewed FBI investigators as a “speed bump” slowing down the work of the attorneys leading the inquisition.

The broader Trump investigation was “opaque,” the case theory was “supposition on supposition,” the Flynn probe in particular was “unclear and disorganized,” and its predicate was “not great,” Barnett told investigators. According to the interview notes, he felt there was “little detail concerning specific evidence of criminal events.”

When Barnett was first placed on the case in 2016, he said he assumed he’d have a better understanding of why the investigation into the Trump campaign was launched as he read through the evidence. But “after being involved in the investigation for six weeks, Barnett was still unsure of the basis of the investigation concerning Russia and the Trump Campaign working together, without a specific criminal allegation.” Much was made over the Republican National Convention platform amending a proposed change in support of “lethal assistance” to Ukraine to “appropriate assistance.” While some at the FBI attempted to claim this was a sign of collusion with Russia, he characterized the theory as “groping.”

After moving in 2016 to close the Flynn investigation for complete lack of any evidence of criminal wrongdoing, Barnett was instructed in early 2017 to keep it open and investigate Flynn for a Logan Act violation. The FBI didn’t even have a code for the Logan Act, a never-used, centuries-old law prohibiting private citizens from corresponding with foreign governments. Flynn was not a private citizen, but the incoming National Security Advisor for President Trump when he made phone calls with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak, so even if the law were deemed constitutional, it would not have applied to Flynn. Barnett had to research the Logan Act, as he was unfamiliar with it, but “did not see the Logan Act as a serious stand-alone charge.”

When Barnett pushed for a closing interview with Flynn in 2016, as part of the normal procedure for closing cases that were going nowhere, he was rebuffed. But when the FBI later interviewed Flynn, falsely conveying to Flynn that he was not a target of an investigation and not in danger of walking into a perjury trap, Barnett was “cut out” of the January 24, 2017, ambush interview of Flynn, and was not informed of its existence until it had already been conducted. “Typically a line agent/case agent would do the interview with a senior FBI official present in cases concerning high ranking political officials,” the summary of Barnett’s interview noted. While Barnett at first thought the unusual move was part of an effort to close the investigation, he later realized otherwise.

It was not the only time the case agent was cut out of the unusual activity going on in the probe to target Flynn. “[N]either Barnett nor any other line agents were invited to attend” meetings about the Flynn investigation, which was changed to being conducted from the “‘top down,’ meaning direction concerning the investigation was coming from senior officials,” Barnett said. He noted that former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe was personally directing the Flynn investigation. McCabe was later fired for repeatedly lying under oath about his leaks to the media. McCabe was referred for criminal investigation by the department’s Inspector General Michael Horowitz.

 

 
From: WEBELIAHU DelphiPlus Member Icon10/1/20 9:47 AM 
To: All  (517 of 612) 
 9333.517 in reply to 9333.516 

October 1, 2020

        "Mueller’s report, which came out in early 2019, said there was no evidence of criminal conspiracy, cooperation, or coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia...The former investigator, William Barnett, said there was a “get Trump” attitude among some prosecutors on the special counsel"

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/09/29/robert-mueller-pushes-back-on-subordinates-claim-the-special-counsel-could-have-done-more/

Robert Mueller Pushes Back on Subordinate’s Claim the Special Counsel Could Have Done More

Former Special Counsel Robert Mueller criticized his top prosecutor on the collusion probe, Andrew Weissman, for suggesting in his new book that Mueller and his team did not do everything they could have done against President Donald Trump, in an interview with the Washington Post published Tuesday.

Mueller told the Post, “It is not surprising that members of the Special Counsel’s Office did not always agree, but it is disappointing to hear criticism of our team based on incomplete information.”

He also said the team operated “knowing that our work would be scrutinized from all sides” and sought to make clear that he was the office’s ultimate decider.

“When important decisions had to be made, I made them,” Mueller told the paper. “I did so as I have always done, without any interest in currying favor or fear of the consequences. I stand by those decisions and by the conclusions of our investigation.”

Weissmann lamented in a recent interview in The Atlantic that the special counsel team could not do more, and lamented that they were hampered by internal division and Mueller’s integrity.

“There was more that could be done that we didn’t do,” Weissman said in the interview. In his book, Where Law Ends, he wrote that the team had not used all available tools to uncover the truth and acted too timidly.

Mueller’s report, which came out in early 2019, said there was no evidence of criminal conspiracy, cooperation, or coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia, and declined to make a judgment on whether President Trump had obstructed justice.

Last week, the Justice Department released a summary of an interview with an FBI investigator who served on the agency’s investigation into former National Security Adviser Lt. Gen. (Ret.) Michael Flynn and subsequently, the special counsel.

The former investigator, William Barnett, said there was a “get Trump” attitude among some prosecutors on the special counsel, and a tendency to dismiss information that did not fit what they already believed.

He also said Mueller’s “all stars” had a conviction that there was “something criminal there” and there was a competition as to which attorney was going to find it. He also said there was a lack of letting the evidence lead the investigation and more of an attitude of “the evidence is there, we just have to find it."

 

 
From: WEBELIAHU DelphiPlus Member Icon10/2/20 2:41 AM 
To: All  (518 of 612) 
 9333.518 in reply to 9333.517 

October 2, 2020

        James Comey testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee probing the (fraudulent) Russia probe.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/comey-claims-ignorance-of-dossier-details-carter-page-warrant-i-dont-know

Republicans grow frustrated as Comey claims ignorance over Russia probe: 'You don't seem to know anything'

Former FBI director James Comey was grilled by the Senate Judiciary Committee over exactly what he knew regarding FBI actions in the early stages of the Russia investigation – but throughout the hearing claimed ignorance of virtually every act that was mentioned during questioning.

A Justice Department Inspector General (DOJ IG) report previously found that the warrant application and subsequent renewals applications for surveillance of former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page contained inaccuracies and omissions and relied on the Steele dossier despite evidence that it was unreliable.

Comey opted not to deliver an opening statement Wednesday but welcomed questions. Committee Chairman Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., got right to the point and asked what efforts the FBI made to verify the dossier.

"I don't know," Comey said.

Graham also asked what Comey knew about former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith, who has pleaded guilty after being accused of altering an email to say that Page was not working with the CIA despite the FBI having knowledge that Page was working with the agency.

"I know nothing of Mr. Clinesmith," Comey said.

Comey passed blame for the warrant, claiming he only signed the certification for it, not the affidavit it was based on, but when asked who the committee should look to in terms of who was accountable for misleading the court, Comey again came up empty.

First Comey said to look at the IG report, but when pressed on whether he knew, he gave a familiar response.

"I do not," he said.

Graham later discussed ex-spy Christopher Steele's sub-source, whom the FBI interviewed. The sub-source told the FBI that the information in the dossier was unreliable and was based on rumor. Graham noted that the sub-source was known by the FBI to be a possible Russian spy. Confronted with these details, Comey again pleaded ignorance.

"I don’t remember learning anything about Steele’s sources," he said. When asked if he knew that the FBI interviewed the sub-source in January 2017, Comey again said, "I don't remember."

Asked again, Comey later said he did "not remember being told of any interview." When asked if he should have been told, Comey said he could not answer.

Graham grew noticeably frustrated by Comey's responses.

"Was this an important case for the FBI or was this a run of the mill thing?" he asked at one point, commenting on the lack of information Comey appeared to have.

Graham also brought up a U.S. intelligence community report that included information that salacious details about Trump in the dossier came from Russian intelligence.

"Did you know that when it came out?" Graham asked, emphasizing that parts of Steele's dossier were believed to be Russian disinformation, yet the FBI continued to rely on it anyway.

Graham went on to cite false details in the dossier, such as a reference to a Russian consulate in Miami that does not exist, and a trip that Trump attorney Michael Cohen was said to have taken to Prague that has since been debunked.

"They never corrected all the misinformation in the dossier," Graham said. "It was used over and over again, and they never told the court about how unreliable it was. Is that a small thing or a big thing?"

"Any time there are material omissions in an application to a judge of any kind, but especially an ex parte proceeding, it's a very important issue," Comey said.

 

Navigate this discussion: 1-8 9-18 19-28 ... 489-498 499-508 509-518 519-528 529-538 ... 589-598 599-608 609-612
Adjust text size:

Welcome, guest! Get more out of Delphi Forums by logging in.

New to Delphi Forums? You can log in with your Facebook, Twitter, or Google account or use the New Member Login option and log in with any email address.

Home | Help | Forums | Chat | Blogs | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
© Delphi Forums LLC All rights reserved.