quote:

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) is ringing alarm bells about the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court [FISC], saying that it is culpable, along with the FBI, for the improper wiretapping of former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page, and needs to be dismantled.

I don't think I remember anyone suggesting that the FISA judges might be in on the coup as well. Why not? Surely there are never-Trumper judges out there, and I'm sure Comey et al know who they are.

If the FISA Judges were notified over two years ago, why didn’t one of them call in one of the liars in the application affidavit and find them in contempt?

The answer is in their inaction.

quote:

Originally posted by MikeinNC:
If the FISA Judges were notified over two years ago, why didn’t one of them call in one of the liars in the application affidavit and find them in contempt?

The answer is in their inaction.

Contempt? I would call it perjury. And they should be prosecuted for it.

Then sent to one of those Pribilof Islands up near Alaska.

The judges did nothing wrong and all of you bitching about them are missing the point.

The warrants were signed long before Nunes write his letter so the court couldn't undue that.

The court has no investigators of their own to conduct an investigation.

Nunes writing to them carries little weight. Nunes is a politician writing, for all purposes, a Republican driven investigation. It's no different than if Schiff wrote one saying the warrants were legit. The court doesn't entertain political whims or conclusions.

It waited for the IG report which is non-partisan or loyal to D or R and from there, it dumped on the FBI by calling it untrustworthy. Have you read the order? All if it?

The judges did absolutely nothing wrong in this debacle. They didn't get the truth from the FBI and Horowitz gave them the evidence in a non-political report.

You guys are full of shit if you think judges are going to get marched off to jail. Think it through and don't have knee jerk reactions. Sedition and treason and perjury? At times you guys are as bad as Schiff and Nadler. Focus on the people who hoodwinked the court.

quote:

The warrants were signed long before Nunes write his letter so the court couldn't undue that

I have no idea what your point is. Nunes asked what arguments were made to get the warrants

"Nunes is a politician writing, for all purposes, a Republican driven investigation"

Nunes has been the most honest and best questioner in this whole mess. Schiff has lied repeatedly

"a Republican driven investigation"

You have to be kidding. This was a coup attempt by federal agencies

Perhaps you could argue that Collyer was most easily duped because that was before the dossier came out.

But the last two were after the dossier came out. Did the last two judges demand more verification be presented ?

I never said the judges should go to jail.

I did say because of their lack of demands for real verification, in one of the most explosive political FISC cases in history, all 4 judges should never be FISC judges again.

That sends a message. If you are a FISC judge you better ask a lot of questions and see a lot of evidence

They needed the IG report to prove the FBI lied to them ? We've been pointing the lies out in this thread for a long time. There is no indication they raised any questions or challenges to those warrants. (perhaps they did in classified venues)

"You guys are as bad as Schiff and Nadler"

What a ridiculous comment

"Focus on the people who hoodwinked the court"

Well at least we agree on something. The FBI agents who wrote the justifications should be prosecuted

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Andrew McCabe on CNN:

"We were shocked and horrified at the FISA mistakes uncovered by the DoJ IG report"

more likely he was horrified that the FBI got caught

"Our biggest mistake was that the process left so much responsibility on the lowest level of FBI agents, that once the mistakes were baked in, they were hard for oversight to uncover"

they weren't "mistakes" but they were baked in

https://dailycaller.com/2019/1...-mccabe-fisa-report/

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:

Andrew McCabe on CNN:

"We were shocked and horrified at the FISA mistakes uncovered by the DoJ IG report"

more likely he was horrified that the FBI got caught

"Our biggest mistake was that the process left so much responsibility on the lowest level of FBI agents, that once the mistakes were baked in, they were hard for oversight to uncover"

they weren't "mistakes" but they were baked in

https://dailycaller.com/2019/1...-mccabe-fisa-report/

Hey asshole, you signed the applications so this shit is on you and Comey

https://dailycaller.com/2019/1...itz-carter-page-fbi/

Horowitz: FBI Should Have Considered Shutting Down Investigation Of Carter Page

Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz said Wednesday that the FBI should have considered shutting down its investigation and surveillance of Carter Page much earlier than the bureau did, because the probe was not yielding any evidence that the former Trump campaign adviser was working as a Russian agent.

If you’re getting information that isn’t advancing and, in fact, potentially undercutting, your primary theme or theory, as was happening here with the Carter Page FISA, you look at the Carter Page file and say, ‘Should I keep going on this Carter Page–related matter?'” Horowitz testified before the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee regarding the findings of a report on the FBI’s surveillance of Page and the Trump campaign.

Horowitz was responding to a line of questioning from Republican Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson, the chairman of the Senate panel. Johnson asked Horowitz whether he believed the FBI should have shut down Crossfire Hurricane, its counterintelligence investigation of the Trump campaign, months after opening it in July 2016

The FBI initially investigated whether members of the Trump campaign worked with Russia to influence the 2016 election. The Horowitz report and one released by the special counsel’s office found no evidence of a Trump-Russia conspiracy.

Horowitz said one of the criticisms in his 480-page report, released Dec. 9, was that the FBI failed to reassess information that investigators collected on Page, as well as about Christopher Steele, the former British spy whose dossier alleged a “well-developed conspiracy of co-operation” between the Trump campaign and Russia.

The FBI relied heavily on the unverified dossier to assert in applications to wiretap Page that the Trump aide was a Russian agent.

Horowitz found that the FBI was unable to corroborate any of the allegations in the dossier regarding Page.

In some cases, FBI agents withheld information that called Steele’s reliability and credibility into question.

“One of our criticisms that we’ve laid out here is that as the team was gathering this evidence as to the Carter Page FISA, in particular, they weren’t reassessing it, including the information from the primary sub-source … that was inconsistent with the Steele reporting,” said Horowitz.

Horowitz pointed to a section of the report about FBI agents discussing before April 2017 why Page was still a subject in the investigation.

"They were actually asking that question, not just as to the FISA, but to the foundational question of ‘Carter Page, we’re not finding anything as to him, why aren’t we reassessing?'” Horowitz said.

The report said two FBI supervisors considered whether Page “was a distraction in the investigation” given that he was “not a key player in the Trump campaign, and was not critical to the overarching investigation.”

Nevertheless, the investigation persisted. FBI officials applied for two additional FISA renewals to continue wiretapping Page after that conversation.

Horowitz’s report sparked an unprecedented rebuke Tuesday from Rosemary Collyer, the president judge on the FISC. In an order released Tuesday, Collyer said the FBI submitted “false” and “misleading” information in its applications to wiretap Page.

I know this is being discussed in a couple places, but it is a very very significant report

Devin Nunes is spot on.

https://www.breitbart.com/poli...fbi-abuse-last-year/

House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Devin Nunes (R-CA) said Tuesday evening that he warned the court granting Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants to the FBI on a former Trump campaign aide of problems with the FBI’s warrant applications twice last year but that the court did “absolutely nothing” about it.

Nunes said he first warned the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) in February 2018 of “very serious matters” based on a memo House Republicans wrote outlining issues with the FBI’s use of FISA to get a warrant on former Trump campaign aide Carter Page.

“They did nothing about it,” he told Fox News’s Martha McCallum.

Nunes’s remarks come a day after the FISC issued an order condemning the FBI for its “misconduct” related to its warrant applications on Page and accusing the FBI of not meeting its “heightened duty of candor” in its applications.

Nunes said he also told the court when they found out that “Source Two” — a source other than the “pee dossier” and news stories used to get warrants to surveil Page — had begun spying on the Trump campaign before the FBI got the warrant and provided exculpatory evidence for Page and another former Trump campaign aide, George Papadopoulos.

This is evidence [the FBI] should have put forward on both Page and Papadopoulos, and I think Papadopoulos is really key because he’s the reason that they started the entire investigation and he denied it clearly . So at that point, when you have a full-blown [counterintelligence] investigation going on, you should do something ,” Nunes said.

“The court knew about all of this, so I’m not saying that. I’m glad they’ve acted. I’m glad they’ve said something, but I think the court … has to be ended,” he said. “The way the courts conducted themselves is totally inappropriate — they ignored clear evidence that we presented to them. … They did absolutely nothing about it .”

He said the FISC has left Congress “no choice” but to step in and fix the FISA process.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


?? is source 2 Stefan Halper ?

Did the FBI plant a spy (Stefan Halper) to engage Carter Page in conversation then selectively use parts of those conversations in the FISA warranrs ?

video at link

Nunes: The FISC court is also culpable in this madness

FBI statement on the FISA Court Order

with explanatory notes

"As Dir Wray has stated, the IG's report describes conduct by certain FBI employees that is unacceptable and unrepresentative of the FBI as an institution.

thank goodness it wasn't the FBI DIR, deputy DIR, General Counsel, & Counter Intel group

The DIR has ordered more than 40 corrective steps to address the Report's recommendations

more than 40 !!

including some improvements beyond those recommended by the IG

improvements beyond those recommended !

FISA is an indispensable tool to national security investigations,

and to spying on political campaigns !

and in recognition of our duty of candor to the Court

we are starting the McCabe & Comey Integrity award. First winner is Peter Strzok

and our responsibilities to the American people,

and much more important to the deep state actors

the FBI is committed to working with duping the FISA Court

it is so easy

and DoJ

they are on the deep state team too

to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the FISA process"

or at least not get caught again when we lie and leave stuff out

FBI Monitored Trump Campaign Aide Months Before Launching Crossfire Hurricane

https://www.theepochtimes.com/...42a905ae74-238318549

The FBI began monitoring Carter Page shortly after he joined the 2016 Trump presidential campaign and months before the bureau opened a formal investigation of the campaign, according to details from a report released on Dec. 9 by the Department of Justice (DOJ) Office of Inspector General (OIG).

One week after the Trump campaign named Page as one of its foreign policy advisers on March 24, the FBI headquarters instructed the New York field office to open a counterintelligence investigation into Page.

After receiving the instructions from headquarters, the New York field office opened the investigation of Page on April 6, 2016. The New York field office told the inspector general they opened the investigation because of Page’s contacts with Russian intelligence officers and because Page told Russian officials that he was one of the unnamed witnesses in a U.S. indictment of Russian intelligence officers.

After opening the investigation, the New York field office monitored Page to see if Russian intelligence officers would contact him again, according to the report. An FBI counterintelligence officer told the IG that she drafted national security letters to obtain Page’s cellphone numbers and residence information. The officer said she conducted “limited investigative activity” in the case before transferring it in August 2016 to the team running the investigation of the Trump campaign.

The monitoring of Page’s contacts began around the time that FBI Director James Comey and Deputy Director Andrew McCabe briefed Attorney General Loretta Lynch about intelligence linking Russian intelligence to Page. Lynch told DOJ Inspector General (IG) Michael Horowitz that in spring 2016, Comey and McCabe pulled her aside after a weekly meeting at FBI headquarters and shared information about Page that Lynch believed they learned from a member of the intelligence community.

“According to Lynch, Comey and McCabe provided her with information indicating that Russian intelligence reportedly planned to use Page for information and to develop other contacts in the United States, and that they were interested in his affiliation with the campaign,” the Dec. 9 report states.

The inspector general’s finding about the FBI’s April investigation of Page substantiates the claims long lodged by House Intelligence Committee ranking member Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), who told The Epoch Times in October that there is evidence the Trump campaign was being investigated long before the FBI opened a formal probe in late July 2016.

“There are many indications that surveillance was being conducted against the Trump campaign before the official opening of the investigation,” Jack Langer, spokesman for Nunes, told The Epoch Times. “If this is the case, we want to know what exactly happened, why it happened, and who ordered it. This is an issue of continuing concern to Intelligence Committee Republicans.”

The timing of the encounter between Lynch, Comey, and McCabe raises questions about what actions the nation’s law enforcement and intelligence agencies took in connection to the Trump campaign before formally opening a counterintelligence investigation—code-named Crossfire Hurricane—on July 31, 2016.

Comey and McCabe both told the inspector general they don’t remember briefing Lynch about Page in spring 2016. Comey said he didn’t become aware of Page until mid-2016; McCabe said he wasn’t aware that the New York field office was investigating Page, according to the report.

Comey’s lack of recollection is notable because the New York field office provided information to the FBI headquarters to be used for a “Director’s note” and a separate “Director’s brief” to be held on April 27, 2016, according to a footnote in the IG report. The inspector general noted that investigators were unable to question Comey on the matter because he declined to have his security clearance reinstated.

Comey and McCabe told Lynch they were considering providing a defensive briefing to the Trump campaign, but Lynch believed the possibility was “preliminary” and “something that might happen down the road,” the report states. The FBI never provided the defensive briefing, according to the report.

The FBI opened the investigation into Page’s contacts with Russians in April 2016 despite being aware, since as early as 2009, that Page regularly provided information about his contacts with Russians to the another government agency. Page has identified that agency as the CIA.

The bureau also didn’t label the Page probe a “sensitive investigative matter,” a designation usually given to investigations of persons tied to political parties and campaigns.

FBI officials told the inspector general that the announcement that Page joined the Trump campaign didn’t influence their decision to open the investigation. According to the report, “their concerns about Page, particularly his disclosure to the Russians about his role in the indictment, predated the announcement.”

The White House didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Within days of taking over the case from the New York field office, the Crossfire Hurricane team sought to obtain a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant on Page, according to the IG report. On Aug. 15, 2016, a Crossfire Hurricane case agent submitted a request to the FBI’s general counsel for a FISA warrant on Page. The effort fizzled on Aug. 22, 2016, when the general counsel determined that there wasn’t enough evidence to warrant surveillance.

The Crossfire Hurricane team renewed its efforts to surveil Page immediately after receiving several reports compiled by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele on Sept. 19, 2016. The FBI obtained the FISA warrant on Page on Oct. 21, 2016.

Horowitz concluded that the FISA warrant applications on Page contained 17 “significant errors.” Among the stated errors, the FBI concealed from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) its knowledge that Page was reporting his contacts with Russian intelligence officers to another U.S. government agency.

The FISC presiding judge, Rosemary Collyer, issued a rare order (pdf) on Dec. 17 in response to the DOJ OIG’s findings. Collyer ordered the Justice Department to submit a formal explanation of what will be done to prevent the court from being misled again.

“The FBI’ s handling of the Carter Page applications, as portrayed in the OIG report, was antithetical to the heightened duty of candor described above,” Collyer wrote. “The frequency with which representations made by FBI personnel turned out to be unsupported or contradicted by information in their possession, and with which they withheld information detrimental to their case, calls into question whether information contained in other FBI applications is reliable.”

Horowitz concluded that the failures implicated the entire chain of command at the FBI. The inspector general said he didn’t find evidence to suggest that bias against then-candidate Donald Trump contributed to the FBI’s failures.

According to Horowitz, Lynch’s recollection about the spring 2016 conversation with Comey and McCabe is “consistent” with the information related to the New York field office’s investigation and subsequent indictment of Russian intelligence officers.

It is unclear who, if anyone, Lynch identified as the member of the intelligence community who she believed was the source of information on Page from Comey and McCabe. Notably, then-CIA Director John Brennan and then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper began receiving foreign intelligence about alleged links between the Trump campaign and Russia in spring 2016, concurrent with the conversation of Comey, McCabe, and Lynch. Brennan has testified that he forwarded the intelligence to the FBI. That intelligence “served as the basis for the FBI investigation,” Brennan said.

Attorney General William Barr appointed U.S. Attorney John Durham earlier this year to investigate the origins of the FBI’s investigation of the Trump campaign, among other issues. Brennan said in October that “I am supposedly going to be interviewed by Mr. Durham as part of this non-investigation.”

Special counsel Robert Mueller investigated the allegations of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia and couldn’t find evidence to substantiate the claims.

A very small snip from a NYT article

AG Barr: “The president bore the burden of probably one of the greatest conspiracy theories — baseless conspiracy theories — in American political history,”

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/1...ohn-brennan-cia.html

Barr Says Comey Lying Over Attempt To Distance Himself From FBI Quagmire

https://www.zerohedge.com/poli...himself-fbi-quagmire

James Comey's claim that the FBI's Trump-Russia investigation was run "seven layers" below him is a total lie according to Attorney General William Barr, who said that the FBI's probe was actually handled by a "very small group of very high level officials."

To review, Comey told "Fox News Sunday" that as the director of the FBI, he was "seven layers" above the investigation, and that he left things to the career professionals when '17 serious errors' occurred which were later uncovered by the Inspector General.

"The idea that this was seven layers below him is simply not true," Barr told Fox's Martha MacCallum in a Wednesday interview, adding "I think that one of the problems with what happened was precisely that they pulled the investigation up to the executive floors, and it was run and birddogged by a very small group of very high level officials."

According to the Inspector General's report, the FBI withheld exculpatory information on former Trump campaign aide Carter Page when submitting an application to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to spy on him.

And according to the Daily Caller, the report also noted that Comey was directly involved in plans to open operation Crossfire Hurricane after reviewing the initial FISA application on Page.

“The federal prosecutor probing the origins of the government's Trump-Russia investigation is examining the role of former CIA director John O. Brennan and has requested his communication records.

U.S. Attorney John H. Durham, the top federal prosecutor in Connecticut, is investigating the origins of the FBI's investigation into Russia led by Attorney General William P. Barr in May.

At first the inquiry was an administrative review in October, but later turned into a criminal investigation.

Now Durham is honing in on the communications of ex-CIA Director Brennan by requesting his emails, call longs and other documents from the CIA, a source briefed on the inquiry said to the New York Times.

Durham wants to know what Brennan told other officials - including former FBI director James B. Comey - about his and the CIA's views of the dossier that first raised concerns about Russia and Trump associates…”

https://mol.im/a/7812343

The Wall Street Journal opinion piece about the FISA court’s failure to do anything when first notified by Nunes.

======================================


FISA Court Owes Some Answers
Why did the presiding judge stonewall Rep. Devin Nunes when he reported FBI abuses?

By Kimberley A. Strassel

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court this week blasted the Federal Bureau of Investigation for “misconduct” in the Carter Page surveillance warrant. Some would call this accountability. Others will more rightly call it the FISC’s “shocked to find gambling” moment.

Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer issued her four-page rebuke of the FBI Tuesday, after a Justice Department inspector general report publicly exposing the FBI’s abuses. The judge blasted the FBI for misleading the court by providing “unsupported or contradicted” information and by withholding exculpatory details about Mr. Page. The FISC noted the seriousness of the conduct and gave the FBI until Jan. 10 to explain how it will do better.

The order depicts a court stunned to discover that the FBI failed in its “duty of candor,” and angry it was duped. That’s disingenuous. To buy it, you’d have to believe that not one of the court’s 11 members—all federal judges—caught a whiff of this controversy until now. More importantly, you’d have to ignore that the court was directly informed of the FBI’s abuses nearly two years ago.

On Feb. 7, 2018, Devin Nunes, then chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, sent a letter to Judge Collyer informing her of its findings in his probe of the FBI’s Page application. He wrote that “the Committee found that the FBI and DOJ failed to disclose the specific political actors paying for uncorroborated information” that went to the court, “misled the FISC regarding dissemination of this information,” and “failed to correct these errors in the subsequent renewals.” Mr. Nunes asked the court whether any transcripts of FISC hearings about this application existed, and if so, to provide them to the committee.

Judge Collyer responded a week later, with a dismissive letter that addressed only the last request. The judge observed that any such transcripts would be classified, that the court doesn’t maintain a “systematic record” of proceedings and that, given “separation of power considerations,” Mr. Nunes would be better off asking the Justice Department. The letter makes no reference to the Intelligence Committee findings.

Mr. Nunes tried again in a June 13, 2018, follow-up letter, which I have obtained. He told the court that Congress “uncovered evidence that DOJ and FBI provided incomplete and potentially incorrect information to the Court,” and that “significant relevant information was not disclosed to the Court.” This was Mr. Nunes telling FISC exactly what Inspector General Michael Horowitz told the world—18 months sooner. Mr. Nunes asked Judge Collyer to “initiate a thorough investigation.” To assist her, the same month he separately sent FISC “a classified summary of Congress’s findings and facts” to that point. The letter was signed by all 13 Republican members of the Intelligence Committee.

Judge Collyer blew him off. Her letter on June 15, 2018, is four lines long. She informs Mr. Nunes she’s received his letter. She says she’s also received his classified information. She says she’s instructing staff to provide his info to “the judges who ruled on the referenced matters.” She thanks him for his “interest” in the court.

This is stunning, given the House Intelligence Committee has oversight jurisdiction of FISA. And Mr. Nunes didn’t come to the court with mere suspicions; he provided facts, following a thorough investigation. The court at the very least had an obligation to demand answers from the FBI and the Justice Department.

It didn’t—because it didn’t want to know. One of the biggest criticisms of the FISA court since its inception is that it is a rubber stamp for law enforcement. The FISA process is one in which government lawyers secretly and unilaterally present their case for surveillance to judges, with no defense attorney to argue in opposition. The system relies on judges to push back, but they don’t. Until recently, the FISA court routinely approved 100% of the applications before it.

Just as it rubber stamped the Page warrant. That application made clear the FBI was asking to spy on a U.S. citizen associated with a presidential candidate. And the court was provided a footnote indicating political operators were involved in producing the allegations. If ever there was time to grill a few government lawyers, this was it. Yet from the inspector general’s evidence, the court whipped through the warrant with barely a blink.

The secrecy of FISA had always shielded the players from scrutiny. But Mr. Nunes’s inspection of the Page applications threatened to highlight this rot in the system. Judge Collyer’s dismissive letters made clear just what the court thought of Congress poking its nose into the secret club.

After the Horowitz report, the court had no choice but to respond. It’s predictably pointing fingers at the FBI, but the court should itself account for its failure to provide more scrutiny, and its refusal to act when Mr. Nunes first exposed the problem. The FBI is far from alone in this disgrace.

Link

“Attorney General William Barr on Thursday said that he does not expect U.S. Attorney John Durham’s report on the origins of the Russia investigation “for quite a few months.”

“He is moving very diligently,” the attorney general told Fox News' Martha MacCallum in an interview.

But he cast doubt on some estimates that Durham could file his report as soon as the next few weeks, citing the scope of the investigation. Barr added that he has not been involved in the day-to-day operations of the probe, nor had he given Durham a specific timeline for completion.

“Just based on my general knowledge of the things that he is looking at or has to look at in the future,” he explained, “I would not think that he would be in a position for quite a few months.” …”

www.politico.com/amp/news/2019...gation-report-088416

Kimberly Strassel has done some very good reporting on the coup conspiracy. Too bad there aren't more like her at WSJ.


On the previous page there is the Nunes ltr of 7 Feb 2018 to Collyer.

Here was Judge Collyer response to that ltr





"we make no systemic record of questions asked or responses given"

I wonder why

"novel and significant questions" into our secret little world where no light shines

oh, just go talk to DoJ and stop bothering us

Yeah, go talk to Rod Rosenstein and James Comey. They'll explain it.

Also consider that the Steele dossier had been public for over a year when Collyer wrote her letter. And she doesn't "get it" ???

Translation:

"Your request is sooo cute! Congress has never cared before. Anyhoo, this stuff is all, like, "classified" and anyway we don't keep notes. Why don't you ask Daddy DOJ?

We totally loved hearing from you, write again soon!"

this shows that Barr isn't being fooled by Comey. Pretty strong and damning for Saint James

https://hotair.com/archives/ed...ained-away-mistakes/

The former FBI director took a swipe at the Attorney General on Sunday after Barr declared that he has reason to doubt Michael Horowitz’ conclusion about a lack of evidence of bias in Operation Crossfire Hurricane. In his interview with Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday, Comey insisted that Barr had no “factual basis” for such a claim:

Comey repeatedly defended the men and women of his former agency throughout the segment and appeared to take particular offense to Barr’s comment that the inaccuracies and omissions in the FBI’s applications for Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants for former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page may have been committed in bad faith.

“He does not have a factual basis as the Attorney General of the United States to be speculating that agents acted in bad faith,” Comey said. “The facts just aren’t there, full stop.” …

Comey blasted Barr for claiming that these failures could possibly have been done in bad faith.

“That’s an irresponsible statement,” he said

so says the guy who lied from start to finish in the interview w Chris Wallace

Late yesterday, Barr responded to Comey in his own Fox News interview. He told Martha MacCallum that he has actually “reached no determination” on what drove the FBI’s improper actions in Operation Crossfire Hurricane, but that the totality of all instances of “serious misconduct” doesn’t suggest an accidental nature:

MACCALLUM: Jim Comey came out after you gave your last interview. You responded to the IG Horowitz’s report and spoke out about that. And then he spoke with Chris Wallace and he said that the 17 mistakes and omissions that were uncovered in the FISA process, he attributed it to sloppiness largely. What do you say to that?

BARR: I think there’s some of them very hard to square with the idea that these were just mistakes and sloppiness. I have said that a number of these episodes leave open the possibility of inferring bad faith or improper motive. But I hasten to add that, as I’ve said all along, that I’ve reached no determination on that, nor do I think a final determination on that is appropriate until all the evidence is there. The — Horowitz himself in his testimony, I think pretty well summed it up, which is this could be on the one hand, at the very least, gross incompetence. On the other hand, it could also be improper motive, and he was not in a position to make that call. And that’s why we have the US attorney, John Durham, looking into this. …

MACCALLUM: I want you to listen to this piece of his interview with Chris Wallace and get your reaction.

JAMES COMEY: He does not have a factual basis as the attorney general of the United States to be speculating that agents acted in bad faith. The facts just aren’t there. Full stop. That doesn’t make it any less consequential, any less important. But that’s an irresponsible statement.

MACCALLUM: He said you made an irresponsible statement about these FBI individuals.

BARR: Well, as I said, I made the same statement effectively and substantively as the inspector general, which is there are unexplained misconduct there. It just can’t be easily explained as to what was going on there. And as he said, it could involve bad motive. And he was not in a position, given the limited scope he has, of making that final determination. So, it’s not speculation. But, you know, I think there are episodes there that simply cannot be squared with innocent mistakes. And I think people have to come to terms with that.

"And I think people have to come to terms with that"

Wallace reminded Comey that at least one “mistake” had resulted in a criminal referral for potential perjury — Kevin Clinesmith’s alleged doctoring of e-mail to hide Carter Page’s true status with the CIA — which Comey had sloughed off as “not been resolved.” That’s a pretty glib response over manufactured evidence in a spy case from the man in charge of the bureau that ran it.

MACCALLUM: Yeah, and I want to ask you about that in a moment. Are you surprised that James Comey is so convinced himself that all of this was completely above board? He came out and said there was no treason and there’s no spying at all on the president.

BARR: Well, I think the IG report and the recent letter from the FISA court I think pulls the rug out from under that analysis. There was serious misconduct, as the court itself has said. And one of the things that I object to is the tact being taken by Comey, which is to suggest that people who are criticizing or trying to get to the bottom of the misconduct are somehow attacking the FBI. I think that’s nonsense . We’re criticizing and concerned about misconduct by a few actors at the top of the FBI, and they should be criticized if they engaged in serious misconduct. That doesn’t mean we’re criticizing the FBI, and I think the tact of trying to wrap yourself in the institution and say, gee, people who are criticizing the decisions I made are attacking the institution. I noticed people don’t that as far as I’m concerned, people feel free to criticize me. And I don’t say, gee, you’re attacking the honest men and women of the Department of Justice. I think leaders, you know, have to own their decisions and are fair game if they make bad decisions.

In regard to my post, a few above, about AG Barr not expecting Durham’s report on the origins of the Russia investigation “for quite a few months.”

Note that Mueller indicted several people long before he issued his report. So we might not have to wait “for quite a few months” to see some interesting developments from Durham’s investigation.

quote:

Originally posted by Pipe Smoker:
In regard to my post, a few above, about AG Barr not expecting Durham’s report on the origins of the Russia investigation “for quite a few months.”

Note that Mueller indicted several people long before he issued his report. So we might not have to wait “for quite a few months” to see some interesting developments from Durham’s investigation.

Good point. Maybe Hunter Biden will get an indictment, then Joe can change his campaign slogan to, "Elect me President so I can pardon my son!"