It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Investigators for the inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz, uncovered errors and omissions in documents related to the wiretapping of a former Trump campaign adviser, Carter Page — including that a low-level lawyer, Kevin Clinesmith, altered an email that officials used to prepare to seek court approval to renew the wiretap, the people said.
The NY Times writes, A highly anticipated report by the Justice Department’s inspector general is expected to sharply criticize lower-level F.B.I. officials as well as bureau leaders involved in the early stages of the Trump-Russia investigation, but to absolve the top ranks of abusing their powers out of bias against President Trump, according to people briefed on a draft.
Mr. Horowitz’s report, to be made public on Dec. 9, portrays the overall effort to seek the wiretap order and its renewals as sloppy and unprofessional, according to the people familiar with it.
Comey and McCabe are in the clear...In particular, while Mr. Horowitz criticizes F.B.I. leadership for its handling of the highly fraught Russia investigation in some ways, he made no finding of politically biased actions by top officials Mr. Trump has vilified like the former F.B.I. director James B. Comey; Andrew G. McCabe, the former deputy who temporarily ran the bureau after the president fired Mr. Comey in 2017; and Peter Strzok, a former top counterintelligence agent.
President Trump prematurely told the Fox & Friends audience this morning that the findings would be ‘historic,’ but that doesn’t appear to be the case.
Spy Joseph Mifsud, Steele, the dossier, MEH! The report is also said to conclude that Joseph Mifsud, a Russia-linked professor...was not an F.B.I. informant.
None of the evidence used to open the investigation came from the C.I.A. or from a notorious dossier of claims about Trump-Russia ties compiled by Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence agent whose research was funded by Democrats, the report concludes, according to the people briefed on it.
It’s best to reserve judgment until the IG report is released December 9th, but it doesn’t look good. If Kevin Clinesmith is the only person implicated in this mess, then the IG investigation is a failure. It could even be a cover up. It will certainly get the left saying, “See, there was no conspiracy against the President.”
Some will say this is the smoking gun and the fact that Clinesmith was a low-level player doesn’t mean he wasn’t working on behalf of bigger fish. They will still point to James Comey, James Clapper, Peter Strzok, John Brennan, and other higher-level Department of Justice players who were working against President Trump. But that’s not what the IG report will say, according to news stories being published about it. The report will essentially clear the big boys while laying out Clinesmith as the scapegoat.
It (the report) will say he did this of his own accord and without the knowledge or prompting of his superiors. It will not point to a Deep State conspiracy but will instead say a low-level employee snuck in his own thoughts to help the cause.
originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: shawmanfromny
Note that the New York Times first wrote the piece. One hour later, the Washington Post followed suit. Now, as usual, all the little guppies are copying the story.
The New York Times quickly composed their article just 8 hours after President Trump described the contents of the I.G. Report as "historic". Trump was briefed on it by his Attorney General (William Barr) last week.
Two days after that briefing, Barr gave an amazing speech, pointing out how desperate Democrats are to take out President Trump.
originally posted by: shawmanfromny
a reply to: carewemust b
Both articles are from Conservative publications. If the story was BS, they would've ignored it, right?