McCabe Fires Back

[Sgt Meowenstein]

Well he is pretty tall ... and darned neat too.

Well, we know his hands are bigger than Trump’s

 

[bubbabgone]

Well, we know his hands are bigger than Trump’s

Probably ... but if the news reports are correct it sure doesn't look like he's been getting near as much use out his, um, hands.

 

[Excon]

Thanks Excon. Well, it looks the IG investigation was requested by congress...

While those two articles were sufficient to establish a possible reason, I should have provided this to you instead.

pdf | The Office of the Inspector General
Department of Justice​

... which is important considering that the GOP congress is protecting Trump.

iLOL No.

McCabe was the Deputy Director of the FBI and had the authority to disclose to the media...in fact it was part of his job. And 'lack of candor' is a broad, subjective accusation and very difficult to prove.

So basically, all we really know is what AG Sessions told the media...and he has lied to congress...on multiple occasions, too.

There is a difference between Officially releasing information to the Press and leaking. Or didn't you know that?
In this case it was leaking.
Please note that the Press are quick to point out when something is Officially released (Named sources) versus that which is leaked (Unnamed sources).

Sessions made the decision under great pressure from Trump.

iLOL No. Two separate Offices made recommendations which the AG agreed with.

 

[Moderate Right]

This is getting good

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/03/16/politics/andrew-mccabe-fired/index.html

In a blistering statement Friday night, McCabe said his firing is part of a larger effort to discredit the FBI and the special counsel's investigation.

"This attack on my credibility is one part of a larger effort not just to slander me personally, but to taint the FBI, law enforcement, and intelligence professionals more generally," McCabe said. "It is part of this Administration's ongoing war on the FBI and the efforts of the Special Counsel investigation, which continue to this day. Their persistence in this campaign only highlights the importance of the Special Counsel's work."

The FBI has discredited itself for decades. This is nothing new.

 

[Roadvirus]

The FBI has discredited itself for decades. This is nothing new.

It's just as bad as the J Edgar Hoover days.

 

[Sgt Meowenstein]

The FBI has discredited itself for decades. This is nothing new.

When is the last time a president went out of his way on a daily basis to discredit the FBI and an independent investigation?

sorry, did I say “out of his way?”. His phone is physically attached to his hand.

 

[Sgt Meowenstein]

It's just as bad as the J Edgar Hoover days.

You misspelled Nixon

 

[Parrish]

The FBI has discredited itself for decades. This is nothing new.

Please, enumerate?

 

[Moot]

While those two articles were sufficient to establish a possible reason, I should have provided this to you instead.

https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2017/12/doj-oig-investigation.jpg[img]
[URL="https://oig.justice.gov/press/2017/2017-01-12.pdf"]pdf | The Office of the Inspector General
Department of Justice[/URL][/INDENT][/INDENT] [/quote]

Thanks again. :thumbs:


[QUOTE]iLOL No.[/QUOTE]

iLOL Yes.

[url]https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/06/donald-trump-enablers[/url]

[url]https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/31/16579204/trump-finances-mueller[/url]

[url]https://www.thedailybeast.com/trumps-gop-a-conspiracy-of-dunces[/url]

[QUOTE]There is a difference between Officially releasing information to the Press and leaking. Or didn't you know that?
In this case it was leaking.
Please note that the Press are quick to point out when something is Officially released (Named sources) versus that which is leaked (Unnamed sources).
[/QUOTE]
Yes, and McCabe in his official capacity assigned to FBI officials to meet with the press. The only leaks that I'm aware of come from Nunes and WH staff...and Trump tweets.


[QUOTE]
iLOL No. Two separate Offices made recommendations which the AG agreed with.[/QUOTE]

Well, if you look at the OIG press release, at the bottom it says "The review will not substitute the OIG judgments for the judgments made by the FBI or the Department regarding the substantive merits of investigative or prosecutive decisions."

So that just leaves one office, the OPR that made the recommendation...and it appears that recommendation was rushed...because they weren't given the final report containing the details.​

 

[Excon]

iLOL Yes.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/06/donald-trump-enablers

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/31/16579204/trump-finances-mueller

https://www.thedailybeast.com/trumps-gop-a-conspiracy-of-dunces

iLOL
Again; No.
Delusional left wing opinions do not support your claim of "protecting" by the GOP, nor do they refute my dismissal of your hilarious claim.

There is a difference between Officially releasing information to the Press and leaking. Or didn't you know that?
In this case it was leaking.
Please note that the Press are quick to point out when something is Officially released (Named sources) versus that which is leaked (Unnamed sources).

Yes, and McCabe in his official capacity assigned to FBI officials to meet with the press. The only leaks that I'm aware of come from Nunes and WH staff...and Trump tweets.

iLOL
No Moot. You need to read and understand what you actually quoted.
The press never reported the information came from McCabe, did it? There was no such Official release. He leaked, which he is not allowed to do.
So try again.
In addition, Comey, under oath, already said that no such thing was authorized.


And no to your belief about Nunes.
This is about McCabe's malfeasance not about what you think Nunes did.

Well, if you look at the OIG press release, at the bottom it says "The review will not substitute the OIG judgments for the judgments made by the FBI or the Department regarding the substantive merits of investigative or prosecutive decisions."

So that just leaves one office, the OPR that made the recommendation...and it appears that recommendation was rushed...because they weren't given the final report containing the details.

So all you are actually saying is you do not understand that bottom portion.
And were do you get the idea that the OPR did not see the OIG's full report on this McCabe issue.

 

[Moot]

iLOL
Again; No.
Delusional left wing opinions do not support your claim of "protecting" by the GOP, nor do they refute my dismissal of your hilarious claim.

I provided the evidence supporting my claim and you provided lip service. Hmm, who shall we believe?

iLOL
No Moot. You need to read and understand what you actually quoted.
The press never reported the information came from McCabe, did it? There was no such Official release. He leaked, which he is not allowed to do.
So try again.

McCabe had the authority to approve the disclosure of any information that he saw fit to the press. You can read what he allegedly leaked in the WSJ.


So who does the OIG rely on to do it's investigations?

In addition, Comey, under oath, already said that no such thing was authorized.

Link.

And no to your belief about Nunes.
This is about McCabe's malfeasance not about what you think Nunes did.

No, to your beliefs, too. Whether you care to admit it or not, Nunes has been collaborating with the WH to obstruct and undermine the Russian investigation placing him dead center in the middle of this circus. So don't be surprised if the OIG report has Nunes dirty little fingerprints all over it because I sure won't be.

So all you are actually saying is you do not understand that bottom portion.
And were do you get the idea that the OPR did not see the OIG's full report on this McCabe issue.

I take back what I said... the OIG does make judgements...and bad ones at that. Not releasing the details and leaving the public to speculate the validity of McCabe's firing is one of them. In lieu of that, now Grassley has called for an investigation into the OIGs participation in the railroading of McCabe.

Have faith, Excon...maybe someday the facts will be on your side...just not today.

 

[Excon]

I provided the evidence supporting my claim and you provided lip service. Hmm, who shall we believe?

No Moot you did not provide any evidence to me.
You provided three links to delusional left wing opinions and not once citing any information in those specific links.

McCabe had the authority to approve the disclosure of any information that he saw fit to the press.

Even though you said you understood the difference between Official releases and leaks, you apparently do not.

He has limited authority to make Official releases. That is when the Press reports the source of the information. That didn't happen in this case. They did not cite him or those who he says he authorized.
He does not have the authority to leak (unofficial releases), which is where the Press does not report who their sources are. Which is what happened here.

You can read what he allegedly leaked in the WSJ.

Please supply any news source that at the time cite the sources of the information indicating it was an Official release.

So who does the OIG rely on to do it's investigations?

Wut?
What does this question (that you should be able to figure out on your own) have to do with what you quoted?

Link.

Asking for a link to information that you should already know tells me you do not know enough about this topic to even be discussing it.

[...]

McCabe is accused of misleading investigators about allegedly giving information to a former Wall Street Journal reporter about the investigation of Hillary Clinton and the Clinton family’s charitable foundation. McCabe asserts in his post-firing statement that he not only had authority to “share” that information to the media but did so with the knowledge of “the director.” The FBI director at the time was Comey.

“I chose to share with a reporter through my public affairs officer and a legal counselor,” McCabe stated. “As deputy director, I was one of only a few people who had the authority to do that. It was not a secret, it took place over several days, and others, including the director, were aware of the interaction with the reporter.”

If the “interaction” means leaking the information, then McCabe’s statement would seem to directly contradict statements Comey made in a May 2017 congressional hearing. Asked if he had “ever been an anonymous source in news reports about matters relating to the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation” or whether he had “ever authorized someone else at the FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports about the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation,” Comey replied “never” and “no.”

The Justice Department’s inspector general clearly saw this “interaction” as problematic in seeking answers from McCabe. If the inspector general considered this to be a leak to the media, any approval by Comey would be highly significant. Comey already faces serious questions over his use of a Columbia University Law School professor to leak information to the media following his own termination as director.

[...]

McCabe just made life tough for Comey and the special counsel | TheHill​

No, to your beliefs, too. Whether you care to admit it or not, Nunes has been collaborating with the WH to obstruct and undermine the Russian investigation placing him dead center in the middle of this circus.

Hilariously wrong Moot.
Your delusions are not facts. Nor is Nunez relevant to this discussion.

Not releasing the details and leaving the public to speculate the validity of McCabe's firing is one of them.

No Moot. Idiots are those speculating nonsense beyond the Official reason given.

And the report will be released supposedly in April.

In lieu of that, now Grassley has called for an investigation into the OIGs participation in the railroading of McCabe.

No Moot, he did not call for an investigation into any "railroading". That is your lame characterization.


Maybe you didn't notice it but the Official announcement I provided for you referencing the OIG's investigation was dated prior to Trump taking Office. It was done under the Obama Administration.

McCabe was already under investigation to see if he should have recused himself.

Have faith, Excon...maybe someday the facts will be on your side...just not today.

More hilarious nonsense.
The facts are on my side, not yours. The only thing on your side is your made up beliefs.

 

[Moot]

No Moot you did not provide any evidence to me.
You provided three links to delusional left wing opinions and not once citing any information in those specific links.


.....

I don't see the point in having a discussion with you if you're going to dismiss and ignore my evidence and everything I say....so I'm just going to ignore your post. Have a nice day.

 

[Excon]

I don't see the point in having a discussion with you if you're going to dismiss and ignore my evidence and everything I say....so I'm just going to ignore your post. Have a nice day.

You didn't provided any evidence to me so stop with the dishonesty.

You provided three links to leftist opinion and cited absolutely nothing in those opinions.
1. That is not providing evidence.
2. That isn't even debate, especially as you cited nothing in those opinions

The only reason you are running is because you know you have no valid argument and can't deal with actual facts, as usual.

 

[Major Lambda]

This is getting good

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/03/16/politics/andrew-mccabe-fired/index.html

In a blistering statement Friday night, McCabe said his firing is part of a larger effort to discredit the FBI and the special counsel's investigation.

"This attack on my credibility is one part of a larger effort not just to slander me personally, but to taint the FBI, law enforcement, and intelligence professionals more generally," McCabe said. "It is part of this Administration's ongoing war on the FBI and the efforts of the Special Counsel investigation, which continue to this day. Their persistence in this campaign only highlights the importance of the Special Counsel's work."

Ahhhh - His own people fired him. The Professional Standards folks at the Bureau fired him.


His own people kicked him out on the street and left him to fend for himself.



Major Lambda

 

[Hatuey]

Good job providing evidence Moot.

Sent from a memo written by Nunes and edited by Trump.

 

[Excon]

Good job providing evidence Moot.

Sent from a memo written by Nunes and edited by Trump.

1. iLOL What you are doing is stupid.
2. Moot did not provide any evidence, making what you are doing even more stupid.

 

[Bucky]

This is getting good

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/03/16/politics/andrew-mccabe-fired/index.html

In a blistering statement Friday night, McCabe said his firing is part of a larger effort to discredit the FBI and the special counsel's investigation.

"This attack on my credibility is one part of a larger effort not just to slander me personally, but to taint the FBI, law enforcement, and intelligence professionals more generally," McCabe said. "It is part of this Administration's ongoing war on the FBI and the efforts of the Special Counsel investigation, which continue to this day. Their persistence in this campaign only highlights the importance of the Special Counsel's work."

Let's remember the FBI is a discredited organization that was supposed to be disbanded under JFK.

The FBI is already tainted. I am not suprised about Trump's stance on the the FBI. We saw how the FBI has treated former presidents. Chucky Schumer indicated how going against the FBI almost like a death sentence. Considering they were involved in a cover up presedential assasination, Trump would be wise in not trusting that organization.