themarketswork

a common sense approach to a liberal world

The Inspector General’s Quiet Investigation

by

Yesterday, as part of a larger post, I wrote these words:

Via an orchestrated FBI leak, a get-in-front-of-the-news Washington Post article was released yesterday:

The former top FBI official assigned to special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s probe of Russian interference in the 2016 election was taken off that job this summer after his bosses discovered he and another member of Mueller’s team had exchanged politically charged texts disparaging President Trump and supporting Hillary Clinton.

Peter Strzok, as deputy head of counterintelligence at the FBI, was a key player in the investigation into Clinton’s use of a private email server to do government work as secretary of state, as well as the probe into possible coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia in the 2016 election.

During the Clinton investigation, Strzok was involved in a romantic relationship with FBI lawyer Lisa Page, who worked for Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.

The Post article – along with an accompanying NYT piece, was released only when it became clear that details of an ongoing Inspector General Investigation into the matter would be forthcoming.

In that moment, I initially missed the significance contained in that final sentence:

…was released only when it became clear that details of an ongoing Inspector General Investigation into the matter would be forthcoming.

In my defense, I had initially assumed that the IG Investigation pertained only to the biases of Peter Strzok and Lisa Page against President Trump.

CNN printed this quote from Jeff Sessions as part of an article on Strzok’s removal from the Mueller Investigation:

[These allegations] if proven to be true, would raise serious questions of public trust. I look forward to receiving the Inspector General’s report. We will ensure that anyone who works on any investigation in the Department of Justice does so objectively and free from bias or favoritism. My job is to restore confidence in the Department of Justice in all aspects of our work and I intend to do so.

As such, I have directed that the FBI Director review the information available on this and other matters and promptly make any necessary changes to his management and investigative teams consistent with the highest professional standards.

Still seemingly related only to the specific investigation into Strzok.

But this small paragraph, located at the very bottom of a New York Times article on Strzok, gave insight into a much larger picture:

The inquiry into Mr. Strzok is being conducted by the Justice Department’s inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz, who is leading a broad examination of how the F.B.I. handled the Clinton email investigation. It is not clear whether Mr. Horowitz will make the text messages public as part of his report in the inquiry. Mr. Horowitz, who announced the beginning of his investigation in January, declined to characterize his findings but said that he hoped to have a copy of his report released by March or April [2018].

Later, the good folks at The Conservative Treehouse noticed this release from the Office of Inspector General, issued after AG Sessions made his statement:

The Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General released the following statement in response to inquiries today:

The January 2017 statement issued by the Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General (OIG) announcing its review of allegations regarding various actions of the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation in advance of the 2016 election stated that the OIG review would, among other things, consider whether certain underlying investigative decisions were based on improper considerations and that we also would include issues that might arise during the course of the review. The OIG has been reviewing allegations involving communications between certain individuals, and will report its findings regarding those allegations promptly upon completion of the review of them.

Re-read that release again.

The January 2017 statement issued by the Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General (OIG) announcing its review of allegations regarding various actions of the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation in advance of the 2016 election…

I was aware of other OIG investigations – including some originating in 2016 surrounding Clinton and her illegal server.

But not this one.

Here is the January 12, 2017 statement from the Office of Inspector General:

DOJ OIG Announces Initiation of Review

Department of Justice Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz announced today that, in response to requests from numerous Chairmen and Ranking Members of Congressional oversight committees, various organizations, and members of the public, the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) will initiate a review of allegations regarding certain actions by the Department of Justice (Department) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in advance of the 2016 election. Cognizant of the scope of the OIG’s jurisdiction under Section 8E of the Inspector General Act, the review will examine the following issues:

  • Allegations that Department or FBI policies or procedures were not followed in connection with, or in actions leading up to or related to, the FBI Director’s public announcement on July 5, 2016, and the Director’s letters to Congress on October 28 and November 6, 2016, and that certain underlying investigative decisions were based on improper considerations;
  • Allegations that the FBI Deputy Director should have been recused from participating in certain investigative matters;
  • Allegations that the Department’s Assistant Attorney General for Legislative Affairs improperly disclosed non-public information to the Clinton campaign and/or should have been recused from participating in certain matters;
  • Allegations that Department and FBI employees improperly disclosed non-public information; and
  • Allegations that decisions regarding the timing of the FBI’s release of certain Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) documents on October 30 and November 1, 2016, and the use of a Twitter account to publicize same, were influenced by improper considerations.

The review will not substitute the OIG’s judgment for the judgments made by the FBI or the Department regarding the substantive merits of investigative or prosecutive decisions. Finally, if circumstances warrant, the OIG will consider including other issues that may arise during the course of the review.

The Office of Inspector General has been investigating the Department of Justice and the FBI for almost a full year.

It appears the OIG is looking at just about everything.

Some thoughts on each of the bullet points.

  • Allegations that Department or FBI policies or procedures were not followed in connection with, or in actions leading up to or related to, the FBI Director’s public announcement on July 5, 2016, and the Director’s letters to Congress on October 28 and November 6, 2016, and that certain underlying investigative decisions were based on improper considerations.

People likely to be examined: FBI Director James Comey, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, Bill Clinton (Meeting on Tarmac).

This is fairly broad – and would include anyone involved in the FBI’s investigation of Clinton’s email scandal.

It would also include Huma Abedin – and the thousands of “cleared” emails found on her husband’s (Weiner) laptop. Thus the reference to Comey’s October 28, 2016 and November 6, 2016 letters.

It’s likely that this part of the investigation uncovered Peter Strzok and Lisa Page.

  • Allegations that the FBI Deputy Director should have been recused from participating in certain investigative matters.

People likely to be examined: FBI Director James Comey and FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.

Andrew McCabe is currently under investigation related to Conflict of Interest charges in the Clinton Email Investigation:

Virginia Governor and longtime Clinton confidant Terry McAuliffe donated $467,500 to the 2015 Senate campaign of Dr. Jill McCabe. The Virginia Democratic Party donated an additional $207,788 for a grand total of $675,288. This equated to more than a third of Dr. McCabe’s campaign funds.

Mr. McAuliffe met with the McCabe’s on March 7, 2015 – the purpose of the meeting was to convince Dr. McCabe to run for office – her first run at any public office.

Mrs. Clinton’s private server was uncovered by the New York Times on March 2, 2015 – five days before Mr. McAuliffe’s first meeting with the McCabe’s.

You can read more on McCabe here.

  • Allegations that the Department’s Assistant Attorney General for Legislative Affairs improperly disclosed non-public information to the Clinton campaign and/or should have been recused from participating in certain matters.

People likely to be examined: Peter Kadzik.

Kadzik sent a “heads up” email to John Podesta May 19, 2015 regarding the start of the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s illegal server.

May 19 2015 – Department of Justice (DOJ) Assistant Attorney General Peter Kadzik sends “heads up” email to John Podesta regarding Hillary Clinton’s server investigation. Both email addresses – Kadzik’s and Podesta’s – are private email accounts. The email is revealed in the WikiLeaks Podesta emails hacks.

“There is a HJC oversight hearing today where the head of our Civil Division will testify. Likely to get questions on State Department emails. Another filing in the FOIA case went in last night or will go in this am that indicates it will be awhile (2016) before the State Department posts the emails.”

Kadzik will later have dinner with Podesta the day after Clinton testifies to Benghazi Committee.

October 23 2015 – Leaked emails show Clinton Campaign head John Podesta meets with DOJ official Assistant Attorney General Peter Kadzik the day after Clinton testifies to Benghazi Committee. On May 19 2015, Kadzik had given Podesta a “heads up” email on Clinton’s server investigation status.

Interestingly, on January 17, 2017, a federal judge issued an order requiring the Justice Department to secure emails from Kadzik’s personal Gmail account.

  • Allegations that Department and FBI employees improperly disclosed non-public information.

People likely to be examined: Anyone who leaked information. As such, this is a deceptively broad category. It likely includes the network of information sharing that existed between the FBI, the DOJ and State. And possibly the Obama Administration.

  • Allegations that decisions regarding the timing of the FBI’s release of certain Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) documents on October 30 and November 1, 2016, and the use of a Twitter account to publicize same, were influenced by improper considerations.

People likely to be examined: Unknown FBI Leakers. Also possible – but unlikely, Bill Clinton, The Clinton Foundation, AG Eric Holder, James Comey, John Podesta, Jack Quinn, Mary Jo White – for their role in the Marc Rich pardon (more info below).

This references FOIA documents released through a Twitter account on October 30, 2016 and November 1, 2016. This account had been dormant for over a year until these sudden releases.

The documents were dropped into the FBI Vault.

These are the documents dropped on October 30, 2016:

Fred C. Trump
General Telecommunications Policy 0862D
Records Management Standards for Scanned Documents 0774D
Nikola Tesla
FBI Ethics and Integrity Program Policy Directive Policy Guide
FBI Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide (DIOG)
FBI Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide (DIOG) 2013 Version
Hillary R. Clinton
David Howell Petraeus
Protests in Baltimore, Maryland 2015, Aerial Surveillance Footage
Honoraria Policy 0867D: The FBI Honoraria Policy
Protests in Baltimore, Maryland, 2015
Security Division Processing of Forms Involving Activities Outside of the FBI
Stay-Behind Special Agent Program in Alaska
Social Networking Sites and FBI Employee Guidance
Physical Fitness Program Policy Directive and Policy Guide 0676PG
Policy Directive 0481D
FBI Seal Name Initials and Special Agent Gold Badge 0625D
FBI Student Programs Policy Guide 0805 PG
Laboratory Reference Firearms Collection Policy LD0020D

These are the documents dropped on November 1, 2016:

William J. Clinton Foundation

Some of these documents appear innocuous. Others less so.

The Hillary R. Clinton and William J. Clinton Foundation releases were of obvious interest. There may be additional details of import that are less obvious.

I was aware of these at the time of release and have used some of the released information in previous posts.

The Hillary documents pertain primarily to the FBI Email/Server Investigation. The Bill Clinton documents come from the FBI’s investigation into then-President Clinton’s pardon of Marc Rich.

Rich was pardoned after his ex-wife made a series of donations to the William J. Clinton Presidential Foundation. With Rich’s financial expertise, this later became the Clinton Foundation.

The Bill Clinton documents are heavily redacted.

It’s also worth noting the final sentence of the OIG release:

Finally, if circumstances warrant, the OIG will consider including other issues that may arise during the course of the review.

The OIG is providing notification that they may investigate anything of import that arises from the investigation of the bullet-pointed items. The OIG investigation can be looking at almost anything they want, anywhere they want and anyone they want.

This investigation has the potential to be of enormous scope and impact.

The Clintons – and folks from the Obama Administration – may have very real reason to be feeling skittish right about now.

I don’t yet know much about the Inspector General, Michael E. Horowitz. This is from his DOJ Bio:

Mr. Horowitz previously worked for DOJ in the Criminal Division at Main Justice from 1999 to 2002, first as Deputy Assistant Attorney General and then as Chief of Staff. Prior to joining the Criminal Division, he was an Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York from 1991 to 1999. From 1997 to 1999, Mr. Horowitz was the Chief of the Public Corruption Unit, and from 1995 to 1997, he was a Deputy Chief of the Criminal Division. In 1995, he was awarded the Attorney General’s Award for Distinguished Service for his work on a complex police corruption investigation.

Horowitz was an Obama appointee who previously worked in top roles at the Justice Department under Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.

A July 2017 article by Politico discusses Horowitz and his investigation but does not have specific detail.

He has kept details of his investigation surprisingly quiet, despite many information requests by Congress, as evidenced by a short letter which can be found here.

In October 2015, he wrote an op-ed for the Washington Post, asking that Inspector Generals be given greater access to all agency records.

He also testified before the House Oversight Committee. You may find his prepared remarks here.

Of greater interest was Horowitz’s testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee on the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). Horowitz criticizes the lax requirements and enforcement of FARA registrations. You may find his remarks here.

I found this to be of particular note given the recent indictments of Paul Manafort and Richard Gates – and Tony Podesta’s resignation from his lobbying firm. I discuss these three individuals in The Manafort Indictment – Podesta Connections & a Message to Influence Peddlers.

I will be attempting to discover more about Mr. Horowitz in the future.

Of note are some other events that were taking place exactly as the OIG investigation was initiated:

December 29 2016 – General Michael Flynn speaks to the Russian Ambassador. The conversation takes place the same day that outgoing President Barack Obama imposes sanctions against Russia for suspected hacking of Democrats’ emails during the election.

The conversation is recorded by intelligence agencies and later reviewed by the FBI. Recording or releasing Americans’ conversations is prohibited without written approval from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA). The existence of recorded conversations and the contents of the conversation are barred from public release by classification rules and privacy laws.

January 3 2017 – Loretta Lynch signs Section 2.3 of Executive Order 12333 – Procedures for the Availability or Dissemination of Raw Signals Intelligence Information by the NSA – into effect. This order is significant. As I note in, The Suspicious Timing of Obama’s NSA Data-Sharing Order:

Prior to the formal signing of Section 2.3 it appears that there existed more latitude within the White House in regards to collection of information on the Trump Campaign. However, once signed into effect, Section 2.3 granted broad latitude in regards to inter-agency sharing of information. By the time the new order was signed, the information was already in the Obama White House’s possession.

The new order, had it been implemented earlier, might have restricted White House access to information regarding the Trump Team. Once signed, it granted broad latitude to inter-agency sharing of information already held.

Importantly, the transcript of Flynn’s call was already in the possession of the Obama White House.

January 11 2017 – Buzzfeed releases, and CNN reports, a supposed intelligence dossier compiled by a foreign former spy. None of the allegations can be verified and some are proven false.

January 11 2017 – Trump conducts his first sting. In order to identify the people leaking classified information to the press, Trump does not tell his staff that the IC was about to brief him. After the briefing, the news was leaked to the press leading Trump to conclude the leaks are coming from the Intelligence Community.

January 11 2017 – DNI James Clapper speaks to Trump by telephone about the leaks. Clapper issues a statement that the leaks are “extremely corrosive and damaging to our national security.”

January 12 2017 – The Clinton Global Initiative announces it will close for good on April 15 2017 as donations dry up.

January 12 2017 – The New York Times reports on Loretta Lynch’s signing of new NSA Rules – and the increased latitude of the NSA to share intercepted communications.

January 12 2017 –  Mike Flynn’s Dec 29 2016 call is leaked to Washington Post. The article portrays Flynn as undermining Obama’s Russian sanctions.

Make of them what you will. They are certainly timely.

This investigation answers several questions that have been bothering me.

Specifically, why have we witnessed such incredible levels of stonewalling by the DOJ and the FBI.

As I noted in a post just yesterday:

The House Intelligence Committee has been attempting to get answers from the FBI regarding Strzok’s sudden demotion but has been stonewalled by the FBI for several months. The refusal to cooperate by the FBI has been so severe that the Intelligence Committee is in the process of citing the FBI with Contempt of Congress charges.

And in a recent Fox News article:

In an internal House memo obtained by Fox News, a senior counsel for the House Intelligence Committee urged Republican Chairman Devin Nunes three weeks ago to pursue contempt of Congress citations against the Justice Department and FBI.

Congressional investigators accuse those agencies of withholding key documents and an FBI witness that could shed light on whether U.S. officials under then-President Barack Obama relied on the infamous anti-Trump “dossier” to justify surveillance against associates of then-candidate Donald Trump.

Meanwhile, Judicial Watch has been in a seemingly never-ending legal fight with the DOJ, the State Department and the FBI to get documents released under the Freedom of Information Act.

On November 30, 2017, Judicial Watch obtained FBI documents relating to the Clinton-Lynch “tarmac meeting” that showed FBI officials as being more concerned over leaks of the meeting taking place than the actual meeting itself. Judicial Watch’s site is worth a visit if you have not already done so.

I had been puzzled over the FBI’s ability to simply ignore Congress during Trump’s Presidency.

Now, with the Inspector General’s Investigation, it all makes sense. Why would the FBI be willing to further incriminate itself by cooperating with Congress. This has become a political fight for survival.

This investigation, if it’s being conducted with integrity, could also explain AG Sessions’ seeming inactivity on many of the unmasking, surveillance and collusion actions undertaken by the Obama Administration.

Perhaps he’s been busier in these areas than suspected…

The New York Times article indicated a report release date of March or April of 2018. Based on recent activity, I wonder if it might not be earlier.

Some folks seem a bit…nervous.

Sharyl Attkisson, a reporter I admire, had this to say:

Followed up by this:

I don’t want to allow myself to become overly excited by this. It could easily turn out to another “big-nothing” investigation.

But it doesn’t feel that way. There have been a number of events that I have touched on recently that seem, when taken in the aggregate, to indicate something big is on the horizon.

It’s also worth noting that it was the Inspector General’s Investigation that directly led to the removal of FBI Agents Peter Strzok and Lisa Page from Mueller’s Investigation. I see this as an indication of the IG’s seriousness.

And unlike Mueller’s Investigation, nothing has leaked from the Inspector General. The removal of Strzok is the first hint of anything.

If this OIG Investigation is being done thoroughly, and in good faith, the ramifications for the Obama Administration and the Clinton Campaign are vast.

One last thing.

Yesterday I added some details missing from the Washington Post story surrounding FBI Agent Peter Strzok:

Strzok was the lead FBI agent in charge of the Clinton email investigation.

Strzok was the FBI Agent who interviewed Hillary Clinton.

Strzok was the FBI Agent assigned to the top level of Mueller’s Russia-Trump investigation.

Strzok was the FBI Agent who served as the contact person between the FBI and Richard Steele – the author of the Trump Dossier.

Three more details surrounding Strzok’s involvement came to light today.

Strzok was one of the two FBI agents who interviewed General Flynn on January 24, 2017. This interview is what led to Flynn’s guilty plea.

Strzok changed Comey’s earlier draft language describing Clinton’s actions as “grossly negligent” to “extremely careless” in the FBI’s Clinton Email Investigation.

Strzok was the FBI official who signed the document officially opening an investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election.

Peter Strzok has his fingerprints on almost everything – and I have yet to even see a verified photograph of him.

A bit odd.

Strzok was certainly no middle-level FBI Agent as portrayed by the Post’s article.

Strzok was removed from the Mueller Investigation because of disparaging text messages he had sent regarding President Trump.

Whose agency maintains records of all cell phone calls? All raw SIGINT?

Admiral Mike Rogers, Director of the National Security Agency (NSA).

At the time of the Russian “reports”, John Brennan was head of the CIA, James Comey was head of the FBI, James Clapper was the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) and Admiral Mike Rogers was the Director of the National Security Agency (NSA).

That final Russian Report – Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent U.S. Elections, highly generalized with very little in the way of substance, was written by James Clapper (DNI).

NSA Director Mike Rogers publicly stated a differing confidence level in the report than the heads of the FBI (Comey) and CIA (Brennan). Rogers qualified the report with only a “moderate” confidence.

NSA Director Mike Rogers reiterated this more strongly at a Senate Armed Services hearing:

“I wouldn’t call it a discrepancy, I’d call it an honest difference of opinion between three different organizations and in the end I made that call.”…“it didn’t have the same level of sourcing and the same level of multiple sources.”

Rogers is the only one of the four men who still holds his position.

Like General Flynn, Admiral Rogers was strongly disliked by the Obama Administration.

The layers on the rotten onion are being slowly peeled back.

I look forward to seeing the Inspector General’s Report.

 

newer post  Recognition of Jerusalem & a Practical Approach to Peace

older post  An Empty Flynn Investigation & Obama-Clinton Complicity