Horowitz Is Coming To Town
(With apologies to: HAVEN GILLESPIE, J COOTS, J. FRED COOTS)
You better watch out, you better not lie
He's gonna find out, I'm telling you why
Horowitz is comin' to town
He's making a list, of sedition and vice
You are corrupt, now you pay the price
Horowitz is comin' to town
He's knows who's been conspiring
Page and Strzok are singing too
He's been reading all their messages
And they've implicated YOU
So, you better watch out, you better not lie
He's gonna find out, I'm telling you why
Horowitz is comin' to town
Jeff Sessions is sly, and John Huber too
They laid out the traps, to see what you'd do
Horowitz is comin' to town
His title is Inspector General
He's on to your mistakes
If he offers you a plea bargain
That's a deal that you should take
Oh! You better watch out, you better not lie
He's gonna find out, I'm telling you why
Horowitz is comin' to town
He nailed lyin McCabe, soon James Comey too
Two dirty rats, let's see who else they chew
Horowitz is comin' to town
4
Article is a not so subtle attempt to impugn the impartiality of Horowitz. Right from the headline's insinuation of "tested".
The NYT may itself be tested, as more revelations of illegal leaks to reporters and their associated complicity, surfaces.
6
I suspect the conclusion will be "Things have really changed in terms of what you can do to somebody against their will." Newsflash....Bill....you were never supposed to do something to someone against their will.......you just got away with it so much you thought it was legal. BTW it is extremely unlikely NYT will let this comment through either.
4
My my when things start looking bad for Trump you attack Bill and Hillary, newsflash they aren't running the Country into the ground. And the economy isn’t growing because of Trump that trajectory started years before like other economic expansion, yes they started under Democrats.
16
What a joke was Clinton'e e-mail "investigation". many folks did get immunity before they talked, FBI "interviewed" Hillary. No tapes , no records of it. Comey and clowns did not take any notes. Hillary's devices (laptops/cell phones) destroyed, 10's of thousands on e-mails deleted, Hillary's private email server and the distribution of classified e-mails all the way to Antony Weiner's laptop, so on. All are serious crimes, but Hillary was given a free pass! Unbelievable, a joke. Why our dishonest media do not cover this?
5
As a trial attorney (1990s) in the Public Integrity Section of DOJ's Criminal Division-where we routinely looked at matters referred by the DOJ IG when there was the possibility of criminal prosecution, as we were in essence DOJ's Internal Affairs unit: there is a significant vein of both ineptness and corruption within Main Justice. This arises from the careerism of a % of the attorneys, the bureaucratic nature of the process, the often limited line experience of the supervisors (my immediate bosses-the Chief of Public Integrity, then Lee Radek, and the Principal Deputy Chief, then Joe Gangloff-only had a total of 3 jury trials they had conducted as prosecutors between them in their professional histories, to my understanding-far too low for them to have a sense of how to prosecute a case in the courtroom), and the presence of political appointees higher up intent on protecting those in power. It is likely that the DOJ IG's report will examine whether laws, policies, practices and procedures were violated, but not that it will go beneath the surface to examine and analyze the concealed culture of the DOJ bureaucracy that allows this corruption and ineptness to persist. An example is that DOJ will state that career prosecutors examined a matter and made a particular decision, but in fact the career prosecutors were not only overseen but were directed by their supervisors-who in turn were in communications with political appointees higher up that never come to light.
11
I already don't consider this fellow honest, having heard snippets of his upcoming report. Who says tRump, and the Republicrooks, can't buy friends, who will do as they're told? I'm sure glad Andy McCabe decided to sue the DOJ. That should be very telling.
4
With Trump's use of unsecured phones, I really don't see why this is happening at all (oh right, the Republican addiction to wasting money on frivolous investigations into Democrats...) unless Trump's phones are the subject of the next IG investigation. And while we're investigating, let's look into the Trumps' profits from their positions. And notice, I'm not even TOUCHING the stink of the Russian scandal.
18
Independence or life loyalty? In the era of Trump and extreme partisanship these are battle cries, like “give me liberty, or give me death!” If Horowitz is truly a man of principles he has nothing to fear from Trump, a man who is tethered to nothing. Clinton has slithered through scandal after scandal without indictment. If she were so charged it would be a precedent in post 9/11 America. No one highly placed pays for their incompetence or malfeasance. But Trump should not gloat because if this is a new wave of neutral justice the bell will toll for him, too!
4
I wonder if IG Horowitz's report will explain how Rudy Giuliani and Erik Prince allegedly appeared to have foreknowledge of the second Clinton investigation involving former Rep. Anthony Weiner's laptop. Giuliani's public comments about a coming surprise seemed to suggest inside knowledge, potentially classified, about the new and then ongoing investigation of Hillary Clinton, and he also allegedly admitted FBI insiders leaked info (https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/rudy-giuliani-fbi-clinton-emails_us..., so I hope that among the many things IG Horowitz and his team have found, they will be able shed some light on this really murky strange moment of the 2016 campaign, especially as Giuliani has made yet another controversial reappearance this year.
22
Excellent article. Now I will read the text of Mr. Horowitz's findings and form "my" own opinion.
Thank you.
2
Can't wait for all that it would matter now. Good to know that the inspector general is considered an honest man where few are.
5
Was Mrs. Clinton's house raided? No.
Did Mrs Clinton destroy evidence? Yes
Did Mr. Comey write a letter declaring Mrs. Clinton's innocence before the investigation was complete? Yes.
Was Mrs. Clinton given an HQ special? Yes
18
At the end of the day, no matter what "inconsistencies" and other malarkey you Trump supporters claim, the FBI and the various other Republican-led Congressional investigations found that she did not break the law.
Period!
End of discussion!
Now, those investigations into the Trump collusion with the Russians and Arabs in an attempt to game the election, or the alleged money laundering by the Trumps, those investigations have NOT been finished.
12
And what is the intent of your posting?
To claim that the sitting President of the United States or those closely associated with him should not be investigated?
Or that the FBI is investigating Trump with too much vigor?
Or that you don't like Clintons?
Or your doing as many have suggested pre attacking the results to be presented today for the benefit of Trump?
Or that you want to call attention to your posting from the "USA"?
If not one of these please let us know.
9
That's fine, but has anyone noticed Trump has been using on unsecure phone? He has the benefit from the trouble Hillary got into that that's supposed to be a no-no, but he's doing it even after he was told to stop.
Will there be an investigation into him? (Funny -- right?)
55
Hillary was Secretary of State.
Trump is President and, by definition, decides what information is secret.
Hillary did not have the authority to handle classified data in an insecure way. Trump does.
If there were a determination that Trump had taken actions that were contrary to the interests of Americans, the only recourse is to impeach him, which is a political rather than law enforcement action.
Bill Clinton and Obama broke the law on multiple occasions. Bill was impeached and Obama was not, despite the fact that his violations were even more egregious than those of Bill Clinton.
ebmem, web bay a silly reply.
I cannot say I am convinced that Mr Horowitz is the public servant portrayed. His using the term "lack of candor" instead of specifically stating the lie he believes was told or the misleading story he believes he was told tells me he had no proof of the deception he is accusing McCabe of.
It is very much a deception in itself not unlike how the criminal USAG Ashcroft stepped in to protect a group of rogue FBI agents persecuting Mr Hatfill by stating he was a "person of interest" when asked if he was a suspect. It serves the same purpose of labeling a person suspect without literally saying it. In sick degenerate criminal minds this gives plausible deniability.
If you think there is a difference between the two things your mind does not work properly.
Anyway the cowardly use of "lack of candor" instead of stating that he had lied and quoting it, or that he had mislead the investigators and providing the facts if that, show me that Mr Horowitz is in fact acting as a republican agent of the presidency. Hence his providing grounds to fire McCabe hours before his retirement to steal his pension from him as punishment for not towing the line.
9
The accusations are quite specifically set out in the report. "Lack of Candor" is the technical term, just not "Trumped Up" with inflammatory language.
From the report:
The Offense Codes Applicable to the FBI’s Internal Disciplinary Process punish FBI employees for “lack of candor.” Offense Code 2.5 (Lack of Candor – No Oath) prohibits “[k]nowingly providing false information when making a verbal or written statement, not under oath, to a supervisor, another Bureau employee in an authoritative position, or another governmental agency, when the employee is questioned about his conduct or the conduct of another person.” Offense Code 2.6 (Lack of Candor – Under Oath) prohibits “[k]nowingly providing false information in
a verbal or written statement made under oath.” Under both offense codes, lack of candor is defined to include “false statements, misrepresentations, the failure to be fully forthright, or the concealment or omission of a material fact/information.”
McCabe did not have his pension stolen from him. He was denied the right to a full pension at age 50 and has to wait until retirement age to receive his pension. He is entitled to due process and able to appeal the decision to fire him. He will do so only if he is not guilty of a criminal offense, in which case he will leave well enough alone, rather than demanding he be indicted.
1
Yes the "accusations" are set out (that accusation is "lack of candor") but what exactly are the statements he made that are being described as "lacking candor"?
There is nothing listed because there is nothing they can point to. To think you know that an ambiguous phrase like "Lack of Candor" has a specificly applicable meaning is to admit to being rather ignorant of how law works. Specificity of grammar is key to written rules and laws.
It is intentionally phrased like that so that it can be applied to almost anything in situation where the person in authority lacks unambiguous evidence.
You forget the FBI is the spawn of J Edgar Hoover the most Un-American person who ever inhabited a public office in this nation until Mr El Trumpo himself gained office. His history of using the Constitution as his toilet paper is pretty much all of his history. The legacy of that depraved 48 year long abuse of office and authority from 1924 until 1972 corrupts the FBI to this day. They still imagine we the people do not have the right to privacy and that is all Hoover.
Anyway the IG did not supply the offending statements because they do not exist. If they did he would have been charged with lying to the FBI, a Felony, and prosecuted for it.
1
Ten or fifteen years from now we'll be reading about the Justice Department's exhumation of Hillary Clinton's body as the "investigation" continues.
40
I certainly hope you are wrong about 10 or 16 years. Mrs. Clinton is still a relatively young woman.
7
She's only 70- give her more time!
1
She'll die eventually. Adding to the investigation will be the suspicion -- aided and abetted by Fox News -- that Obama himself murdered her in order to protect Susan Rice. Or James Comey. Or, or...
2
Whatever he comes up with, Putin will rejoice. Either Trump will be happy, more chaos, or Trump will be sad, more chaos. Putin wins.
19
No matter what Horowitz’s report actually says, there is a very real risk that the administration and its allies will try to use it as a pretext to shut down the Mueller investigation and consolidate Trump’s reign (a word I use intentionally).
My point is not to be alarmist, but to urge vigilance against the mischaracterization and misuse of the Inspector General’s findings. Even if (as I do not expect) the report reveals serious misconduct in the investigation of the Clinton email affair, that would in no way discredit Mueller’s investigation of the Trump campaign and those connected with it (as well as crimes that may become apparent in the course of that investigation).
31
What if it finds criminal misconduct? HRS
1
If the IG report demonstrates misconduct, a big issue is that the misfeasors are also working for Mueller.
1
Do you have any proof of that? I’m not aware of any,
2
Let's hope we see some light on the Comey investigation or lack thereof, of the Clinton Foundation and money machine.
14
How does the so-called Clinton money machine differ from that of the Koch brothers, the Mercers and the rest of the ultra right wing "think tanks?" Because the right wingers use their machinations to manipulate democracy.
The Clintons never did that
47
The Koch brothers run a profitable business enterprise. They are entitled to use the wealth they earned to express their First Amendment right to free speech.
The Clintons went from millions in debt in 2001 to having hundreds of millions in personal wealth while Bill was collecting a pension and Hillary was ostensibly a civil servant. They collected billions in the Clinton Foundation, none or very little of which was used to fund any philanthropic activities. [It is noteworthy that Hillary never bragged about the good done by the Foundation while running for president, which was not derived from modesty. Had she attempted to draw attention to her philanthropy, the protests by Haitians would have attracted media attention. They were asking what Bill did with the money raised for them after the earthquake.]
Hillary raised more than three times the amount of dark money as the Republicans, and the evil Koch brothers did not endorse or fund Trump. So much for that fake Democrat narrative about the evil Koch brothers.
The Clintons used the funds of the Clinton foundation to fund Chelsea's living expenses [she was "working" for the Foundation] as well as to employ the Clinton political machine while she was Secretary of State and during the "waiting for Hillary" period, despite the fact that the political operatives had zero philanthropic skills or duties.
The Clintons never did anything but manipulate government for personal financial and political gain.
1
Gee, I can't wait for the spin from the trump-Hannity Faux Fox News. In fact I may throw up ala the Exorcist.
No matter the findings, questions of impartiality will be raised and the deep state Clinton cabal will be rehashed into mush yet again.
I suppose this report is necessary? Haven't we all encamped already into our tribal folds?
Somebody needs to remind Trump that Obama and Hillary will not be on the ballot in 2020. But, hey, if that's all you've got why not keep flogging the dead horse.
44
And I can't wait for the NYT and MSM spin if the report shows misconduct and lying (a la the McCabe report that resulted in charges).
7
"Spin?" What to do if it is the truth?
2
So if criminals aren't running for office anymore, they shouldn't be investigated?
1
Great puff piece for another swampy wannabe tv star. Now taking bets on which side he will take; my bet is he will want to avoid clashing with DJT just like he did with the McCabe "investigation".
9
Exactly what in his past leads you to claim he is part of the swamp? Trump's preemptive strike against him, suggests he is anything but a part of Trump's swamp.
10