McCabe authorized criminal probe of Sessions, sources say

originally posted by: gpols
More of a catch-22. McCabe should have been fired when he blocked the attempt to expand the investigation into the Clinton foundation.

If Jeff Session's was under investigation for making misleading statements to Congress it shows that McCabe has a bias.

McCabe should have been fired for blocking a deeper investigation into Clinton Foundation, Comey should have been fired for exhortating Hillary Clinton with the email scandal. The problem is that it looks like the Trump admin is firing people trying to gum up Muellers obstruction and Russian collusion investigation.

None of them care about us, they only care about themselves and their friends.

Except Sessions DID lie to Congress.

In fact, Sessions himself recused himself from the investigation precisely bc he had to "revise" his answers.

So, exactly what is supposed to happen if someone comes before Congress and lies about their testimony? Especially important stuff?

Are we all just supposed to pretend that Sessions DIDN'T lie?

Interesting, Sessions just fired the guy in charge of investigating him. In some areas, that would cause a problem. However, Sessions has my trust on this bc Sessions recused himself when he knew he did wrong, so I don't believe Sessions knew that McCabe was in charge of investigating him.

McCabe has obviously not recommended charges, so I am not sure why you people are all up in arms.

Actually, I am very sure WHY you're up in arms. Trump people expect to be able to sit there and lie their asses off and get away with it bc MAGA, I know, I know.

originally posted by: Scrubdog

So, exactly what is supposed to happen if someone comes before Congress and lies about their testimony?

Over the last four presidential terms, apparently absolutely nothing.

Need I list all of the examples?

But now Session's example is the one that goes too far?

I'd be laughing if this wasn't such a serious example of how ridiculous things have become.

MSM knows that Jeff Sessions is going to appoint a Special Prosecutor after the big Inspector General report is released.

It will implicate many of the top government people that CNN/MSNBC/ABC, etc.. support/have supported, and also many executives and top on-air personalities in the MSM itself.

The Mainstream media is running scared, and are desperately FABRICATING dirt on Sessions that they hope will reduce his credibility...and by extension, this damning report's credibility.

a reply to: Scrubdog

Sessions had every right to "talk" (like say Hell-o How are You) to that Russian Ambassador.

He was a Senator at the time right ?

And, he knew who the guy was when he was approached ("approached" as in "set-up")

Sessions was on the Judiciary and Armed Services Committees for God sake.

And he was on the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Refugees (Chairman),
and the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Technology, and Homeland Security.

Why wouldn't he "talk" to the Russian Ambassador ?

🤣

a reply to: Scrubdog

You misread everything I just said.

What I said was, there are reasons to investigate Sessions, but McCabe's unwillingness to investigate the Clinton's with the same blind eye for justice makes the firing suspect.

Same thing with Comey being fired. There are legitimate reasons for both of their dismissals, but the Trump admin dismissed them so they could CTA, not because they were in Clintons pocket.

originally posted by: gpols
a reply to: Scrubdog

You misread everything I just said.

What I said was, there are reasons to investigate Sessions, but McCabe's unwillingness to investigate the Clinton's with the same blind eye for justice makes the firing suspect.

Same thing with Comey being fired. There are legitimate reasons for both of their dismissals, but the Trump admin dismissed them so they could CTA, not because they were in Clintons pocket.

My apologies for misreading what you said. Evidently i did. I am sorry.

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Scrubdog

Sessions had every right to "talk" (like say Hell-o How are You) to that Russian Ambassador.

He was a Senator at the time right ?

And, he knew who the guy was when he was approached ("approached" as in "set-up")

Sessions was on the Judiciary and Armed Services Committees for God sake.

And he was on the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Refugees (Chairman),
and the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Technology, and Homeland Security.

Why wouldn't he "talk" to the Russian Ambassador ?

🤣

And he also talked with them as part of the campaign and he damn well knew it, and knows it.

He recused himself as a means of avoiding prosecution for the lie, therefore I believe that he is largely on the up and up with respect to at least upholding the law, much as I disagree with him on how he chooses to do it.

I do not believe he fired McCabe to get out of the investigation, nor do I believe that McCabe did something nefarious by authorizing the investigation itself.

However, the fact that Sessions recused himself from the investigation of Trump and yet ended up firing McCabe who was IN the investigation of Trump will almost surely allow McCabe an "out" on getting the pension he deserves, that is if a Dem congressman doesn't just hire him for 2 days and make him eligible, as has been discussed.

McCabe is just more human collateral damage in Trump destroying whatever need be destroyed to preserve himself.

a reply to: Grambler

I would rather not have to speak up and
say this, but we have to remember everything
that has taken place, right?

Let's take a moment and recall that insurance
policy that was discussed in Andy's office.

Also let us remember Strzok texts, and
there was zero chance Mueller would
find wrongdoing.

If this is true, that Andy McCabe
did this it is just another way
he was trying to screw Trump and Co.

In other news, Session's attorney
denies he is under this gun.

www.foxnews.com...

Not sure if that interprets to he was never though.

To be sure, McCabe was a bad actor.

a reply to: burntheships

U R 100% Correct, as usual. Also, McCabe quit his job IMMEDIATELY upon his boss seeing a portion of the upcoming I.G. Report.

McCabe knows that the only hope for avoiding prosecution, is a DEAL. He needs to tell all he knows about his former bosses, COMEY / LYNCH / OBAMA, or his life of relative freedom is virtually over.

originally posted by: Kharron
I'm not a fan of either of them, but wouldn't this termination then qualify as retaliation? I don't know if that means anything in D.C. but any place of employment has protection from retaliation.

edit to add following...

So, Sessions first of all should not have been the one terminating him since he already recused himself from any such proceedings and now it seems he should also have recused himself since he was being investigated by the same man he fired. He should have been far removed from anything to do with this man, but it would appear he couldn't help himself.

He's still the boss.

Doesn't mean he is retired.

Idiots.

a reply to: carewemust

Great point there about McCabe and the IG Report.
He stands to lose a lot more than a few benefits.

Sessions really kicked off a sheet storm in firing McCabe.
Not since Comey have we seen such vile from
the MSM, and the Deep State supporters.

I know I am repeatedly calling for Sessions
to act, though I am giving him credit where
credit is due. He may be under duress, judging
from the media swarm. I want to believe he
is doing everything he can in this situation.

Hopefully the IG report, and the "outside"
Washington person Sessions has appointed
will be the fuel on the fire to appoint a
special counsel or prosecutor.

originally posted by: Kharron
I'm not a fan of either of them, but wouldn't this termination then qualify as retaliation? I don't know if that means anything in D.C. but any place of employment has protection from retaliation.

edit to add following...

So, Sessions first of all should not have been the one terminating him since he already recused himself from any such proceedings and now it seems he should also have recused himself since he was being investigated by the same man he fired. He should have been far removed from anything to do with this man, but it would appear he couldn't help himself.

Sessions recusal has become so vague as to be non-existent, and since his near Donkey nods to congress, if I was McCabe, I guess that I would do the same in his capacity. Sessions went into memory loss I guess..



The thing is,
As we are seeing now, all the hooh hah is not just about Trump is it? IMHO, there are a lot of....not so pretty faces yet to join in the RG picture, some we might never see even.

originally posted by: Lab4Us
Why does everyone coveniently ignore that the FBIs own internal affairs division recommended McCabe be dismissed? ...and that the recommendation was based on the FBI IG investigation?

There is no nefarious anything here, unless you consider a LE organization actually policing its’ own a nefarious action. I thought a lot of the liberal leaning folks had been screaming for such actions; now that they have it, seems the screaming has become about an actual investigation being completed with resulting consequences.

I posit that ANY AG would have had to fire McCabe based on the recommendation or risk being derelict in their duty.

No one is ignoring who recommended, but in the end only Sessions could make the final decision and do the actual firing. Giving his recusal into the election and the supposed reason for the firing being McCabe actions during the election. (The report isnt out yet so we dont know what is really going on at this time.) It puts a pretty big cloud over the whole affair. Remember Comey and the "reason" for firing him? Didnt turn out quite the way it was originally presented as the facts came out later.

originally posted by: Grambler
I am one of McCabes biggest critics, but allow me to sort of defend him in this instance.

I dont think the fact that he was investigating Sessions is any more nefarious than the rest of the investigation into trump associates.

If mccabe was looking in to people with russsian contacts, sessions seems to have benen someone worth looking in to.

Now how he acted in that investigation could be an area of conflict, and definitely the fact McCabe orederd no look into hillarys peoples connections to russia is shady.

But I dont see how this story changes anything.

It doesn't change anything - but the usual associations are being made to get people to believe Sessions fired McCabe because he was investigating him. It's just another play. The media rely on people not thinking beyond "McCabe was investigating Sessions... Sessions fired him...hmmm...burn the witch!!!"

a reply to: carewemust

MSM knows that Jeff Sessions is going to appoint a Special Prosecutor after the big Inspector General report is released.

This is more a hope of yours than actual fact. Unless the I.G. Report is a bunch of lies I'm pretty sure it's going to be a bust for trumps "get this out of my hair" agenda. But you can still hopes at this juncture. When is this report due out?

a reply to: EngineOfDoubt

yeah, but it's impossible to know if it would have been for better or worse.

True leakers--people who expose absolute wrongdoings and blatant abuses (known as whistleblowers)--have an absolute place, and have protections already in place against retaliation for speaking out.

"Leakers" who just share unsubstantiated gossip and hearsay cause more problems than are worth most of the time.

Also, welcome to ATS.

originally posted by: Lab4Us
Why does everyone coveniently ignore that the FBIs own internal affairs division recommended McCabe be dismissed? ...and that the recommendation was based on the FBI IG investigation?

There is no nefarious anything here, unless you consider a LE organization actually policing its’ own a nefarious action. I thought a lot of the liberal leaning folks had been screaming for such actions; now that they have it, seems the screaming has become about an actual investigation being completed with resulting consequences.

I posit that ANY AG would have had to fire McCabe based on the recommendation or risk being derelict in their duty.

They ignore it because it doesn't fit the narrative that this is somehow Trump's doing. Also never mind that the IG is an Obama appointee. That also gets ignored, for the same reason.

a reply to: loam

You do know this public for a while now.

Crazy, if accurate that Sessions claimed to be unaware of it??

June 2017...Complete with letters to the FBI requesting the investigation of Sessions testimony for perjury
www.nytimes.com...

originally posted by: soberbacchus
a reply to: loam

You do know this public for a while now.

Crazy, if accurate that Sessions claimed to be unaware of it??

June 2017...Complete with letters to the FBI requesting the investigation of Sessions testimony for perjury
www.nytimes.com...

Man...you know whats going on. Stories are printed with some truth thats propagandized. Normal folks don't have time to fact check severap details on each story, so we assume its accurate. Initial responses dont dispute the central fact, amd the propaganda tied to it goes unchallenged in the first news cycle.

Meanwhile, the opposition fact checks and begins providing counterpoints to the propagandized elements tied to that core truth. The next day or two the counterpoints start rolling out, sometimes with their own propaganda elements. But everyones moved on.

The war is waged in our minds. Thats the battlefield.

I dont like feeling manipulated.

a reply to: EngineOfDoubt

Why DT leaked and why these people do have nothing in common.