Hilary paid for Steele's contacts with Russian agents......meaning she colluded with foreigners to influence a US election, which was a fact known to Mueller.... so why didn't Robert Mueller follow the evidence where it led?
7
I've noticed that many of Donald A+'s supporters have every tiny detail of this story memorized according to right wing alternate reality rules--Wikileaks are heroes, the FBI and CIA are villains for example. What's important to them is not the findings of the Mueller report, but findings from investigating the investigators to confirm their foregone conclusions such as Peter Strozk's potentially successful one-man overthrow of the government not as an FBI agent, as a "deep state" agent of the Democratic party.
2
If Trump isn't trying to obstruct this report, as he did with the Mueller report, nobody can trust that it isn't just a political hit job ordered by Barr.
I don’t understand the consternation over the Steele Dossier: Who cares where it came from or in the final analysis who paid for it? By the time the FBI got it in September 2016, the real question is how factual was it, and how much of it correlated with their own evidence. Moreover, Steele himself never claimed that some parts of it were absolute fact, only that there was enough evidence to put them in a field-report and hand it over to the FBI.
If one of our former CIA agents discovered strong evidence that Britain’s Prime Minister was double-dealing, wouldn’t we want them to at least investigate? . . . . I would. They are our closest ally.
8
Intelligence community evaluates intelligence on a 7 point scale from true, to highly likely true, to likely true, to fifty-fifty, to likely false, to highly likely false, to false. This range is also represented as a range from 100% true to 100% false.
Taking all statements contained in the Steele memoranda into account, they are more likely true now than they were when they were written and revealed by Buzzfeed. Many statements, particularly those having to do with Trump business in Russia--which were fervently denied by Team Trump at the time--have been revealed to be accurate.
Steele himself estimated that as raw intelligence, he had 70% t0 90% confidence in it. Recent analysis has placed the level of confidence at about 74%, on average.
Only one statement, the one placing Michael Cohen in Prague for a meeting, has been proven false, although only regarding Prague: the meeting could have happened, or could have happened in Prague but with Cohen.
It should be noted that Robert Mueller did not set out to prove or disprove the Steele elements; his task was to ferret out illegal acts. Many Steele statements remain therefore untested, at least in the public's knowledge.
If it were true that Michael Steele created the elements of his memoranda out of whole cloth, as the hard Right alleges, then he has turned out to be psychic.
3
Much of what Steele uncovered has been authenticated. That which is still out there can’t be verified without Russian cooperation. Let’s say that only a third of the report is accurate...well, then...
17
Horowitz is also the guy who said McCabe had a lack of candor and ultimately provided the rationale for the justice department to fire McCabe less than a week before his pension. I don't have much faith that he's objective.
3
Now it gets interesting.
I think we may be about to find out if the lady with the scales gets the fidelity she deserves.
5
A rotting smell. From the heads of our intelligence services.
Find one American whose vote was changed by what they see on social media. MSM is pounding 24/7 against %50 of the voters. We are getting upset....again. 2020 we will come out...again!
5
Steele was a former professional intelligence officer used to operating at the highest level. Having read his dossier it comes across to me as particularly damning on Trump's vulnerabilities as seen from the Russian perspective. Of course Trump's acolytes will be fixed on discrediting it, given their attempts to cover up his vulnerabilities at home. Isn't that obvious? Why are Republicans so stressed about this since their man seems completely unaffected? As Trump himself said, he could shoot someone on Fifth Ave without consequences.
27
@G Rayns It is obvious by now that the Republican Party has no interest in defending democracy in any way.
8
Mr. Steele is well known for being very helpful to FBI investigations in the past, so goes the reporting. That's fine. I always surmised he was a good guy. But where in all this is any mention of the CIA? I understand why the FBI goes to London to speak under authority of a US Federal inquiry, but when the subject mentions you may not have the equipment to understand what he's telling you, you call your buddies over at Langley, don't you?
2
Just remember, it wasn't until much later, when AG Sessions recused himself for testifying untruthfully about his Russian contacts, that Mueller was appointed.
By then the FISA warrants were already in play.
To buy the conspiracy argument, one would have to assert the Steele dossier, turned over to the FBI by Steele himself, gave the FBI the "goods" they were looking for to hatch a conspiracy to get Republican judges to rule on a FISA warrant. And somehow, by using the FISA warrant, there would be damning evidence they would use to "start the Mueller investigation".
But, without Sessions recusal for (Lying) no Mueller investigation would have ever existed. Pretty convoluted, but hey, Republicans.
3
@Almighty Dollar
Wan't it George Demetrios Papadopoulos getting drunk and spilling the beans to Alexander Downer the Aussie diplomat (oxymoronic phrase that one). The Australians notified the FBI.
Wikipedia (I love Wikipedia) says: "Senator Richard Burr, the chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee that is investigating Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections, said in October 2017 that the panel was interested in Papadopoulos because he had sent e-mails attempting to set up meetings between Trump and Putin. The recipients of emails about outreach to the Russian government reportedly were Clovis, Corey Lewandowski, Manafort, Gates, representative of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs Ivan Timofeev, and others."
Anyone for one more cup of coffee? Hey George! Milk and two sugars please
3
I am a retired FBI Agent. I did not like what Comey did in again politicizing the FBI. Furthermore, the activities of Peter Stzrok, Lisa Page, Andrew Mc Cabe, and others on the "7th Floor" did additional damage to the agency that I gave 28 years to. My trust in the FBI as an independent and objective body has been diminished. FISA warrants are easy to obtain. Only 12 of over 33,000 FISA applications were ever declined by the FISA Court. The Mueller investigation yielded nothing as to Russian collusion. With regards to obstruction, one cannot obstruct a matter for which there was no underlying crime. In all of this, I place my trust in IG Michael Horowitz and look forward to his investigative report.
8
Ahem, this article fails to mention that the ORIGINAL people that contacted Christopher Sterle were REPUBLICANS and that the information was only offered to the Cl8nton campaign AFTER their candidate dropped out.
It also fails to mention that Carter Page originally came to the attention of U.S. intelligence agencies after his drunken comments in a London bar were reported by an agent if another allied intelligence service.
These two factors appear to me to be major justifications in the chain of contact that resulted in both the investigation and the seeking of a FISA wiretap authorization.
Get it right, NYT.
7
@James,
Your post fails to note that Christopher Steele wasn't even hired until after the Republican client of FusionGPS had pulled-out, and both the DNC and the Hillary Campaign were paying FusionGPS. There was no dossier until HRC and the DNC paid for one.
You've also conflated Carter Page with George Papadopoulos. Page was never drunk in a bar in London.
You clearly have NO IDEA what you are talking about.
Please go back to the kiddie table; the adults are discussing extremely important matters.
5
The only element missing from the Trump/Barr GOP dream team plan to make up a conspiracy is Johnnie Cochran.
6
What a waste of tax payer's dollars. But BAU from this administration.
Inspector General Horowitz graduated from Brandeis University, whose motto is “Truth even unto its innermost parts.” There is a lot of truth in the Steele dossier parts and Horowitz is just the man to verify it.
4
To investigate the investigation would be something- the dream of any criminal. It's ridiculous.
The name of the more important investigation is "Report On The Investigation Into Russian InterferenceIn The 2016 Presidential Election". (Remember? Its the one involving a hostile foreign power- so more important than looking into the American investigation: it says
"Manafort also twice met Kilimnik in the United States during the campaign period and conveyed campaign information. The second meeting took place on August 2, 2016 , in New York City. Kilimnik requested the meeting to deliver in person a message from former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, who was then living in Russia. The message was about a peace plan for Ukraine that Manafort has since acknowledged was a "backdoor " means for Russia to control eastern Ukraine. Several months later, after the presidential election, Kilimnik wrote an email to Manafort expressing the view-which Manafort later said he shared-that the plan ' s success would require U.S. support to succeed: "all that is required to start the process is a very minor ' wink' (or slight push) from [Donald Trump ]." The email also stated that if Manafort were designated as the U.S. representative and started the process, Yanukovych would ensure his reception in Russia "at the very top level."
Looks like collusion doesn't it? The clear and present danger is the attack on America. Not the American agents looking into the attack.
Americans, read it
10
Hmmm. Let me guess. If the report shows that Trump's "From Russia with Love" connection was under investigation before Steele contacted the FBI and the Steele allegations that the FBI looked into were legit, then we will likely see...
Barr "summarizing" the report without releasing it and Trump saying pretty much whatever he wants about the conclusions of the report and his base believing everything Trump says.
Sigh.
10
This is a fast moving story which is like a train headed for a collision with the upcoming release of the IG report and Barr’s continued investigations into the origins of the FBI’s role in the matter. The NYT puts the best face it can on things, but the very fact that the FBI is now on the defensive proves that the game is already over.
10
What game? Have you read the Steele dossier, or is it just fake news?
@G Rayns,
Did you read THIS ARTICLE? It clearly states that by January of 2017, the FBI had discredited one of Steele's main sources? Do you have any idea how many, or which, of the various tall tales in that Dossier were from this discredited source?
We also know that at least one of the most damning claims in the dossier, that Michael Cohen met with Russian agents in Prague on a specific date, was an abject fail. We now know that Cohen NEVER traveled to Prague, and was at a sporting event in NYC with his son on the date in question.
Then there's the infamous golden showers video. If such a video actually existed, don't you think it would have surfaced, by now? Do have any idea how much the Bezos Post would pay for that video (if it existed)?
There are only two claims made in the Dossier that have been confirmed, and they are general claims (and in both cases, most of the specific related claims have been disproven, or else can't be confirmed). Those are that there had been contacts between members of the Trump Campaign and Russians (one of the only specific examples being the now-disproven Michael Cohen in Prague claim), and that Trump had been looking into a real estate deal in Moscow in the build-up to the election. That's it.
Finally, let's not forget that, under oath (in the UK, during a civil suit), Steele admitted that he REPEATEDLY used unverified sources for his dossier claims, including CNNiReports.
3
Regardless if it’s Trump or not, smells like a coup d’etat.
7
This is more than unbelievable, this is crazy. No, it's beyond crazy - the CIA and FBI being attacked just for doing their jobs, desperately trying to defend us from being sabotaged and destroyed by Russia?! Have the politicians and Congressmen gone insane -or, have they become so corrupt, so immoral, that outright treason seems like nothing to them??
Why is it that I imagine that every night, Trump has a secret telephone call with Putin, and he asks Putin, “Duh-h, what do you want me to do now?”
12
Doing their job? They should never have gotten mixed up with politics. It was very foolish of them. Now they’re scrambling to justify themselves. It was the worst thing they could do to the very institutions which they represent and claim to hold dear and to the country. I think those involved are traitors. They may have thought they were doing their job, but they have done worse to our nation than the Russians could ever do. This is both a travesty and a tragedy.
8
“They are trying to determine [that] the F.B.I misstepped in the inquiry”
1
It all comes out to whether the FBI KNOWINGLY used the false dossier to spy on Trump.
Or, it turns out, a high raking woman called Cadillac HAD warned them that the dossier was garbage. BEFORE they used it as "VERIFIED"
By the way, the dossier claims that the Russians paid Americans through their consulate in Miami.
Any kid can check that there is no Russian consulate in Miami, the closest one is 300 miles away, in Tampa...
10
re: who commissioned Steele dossier-- the Washington Free Beacon (funded by Paul Singer) are the original party who commissioned Fusion GPS to investigate Trump in 2015. That investigation featured Felix Sater as well as the financing for Trump's real estate projects and, at that time, the probe was not just focused on Russia. In 2016, with the nomination of Trump as the Republican candidate, Fusion GPS's client changed to the DNC/Clinton At that point, Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS brought in Steele, former head of Russia Desk for MI6; it was Steele's field memos which alleged, among other things, that Russia had been cultivating Trump for years and had provided his campaign information on political opponents including Clinton.
8
We’ve now moved beyond the ridiculous charges of Russian collusion and the fail-safe obstruction charges to question the basic charge that Russia interfered in the election to help Trump or even wanted him to win. There is no evidence that one vote was changed by anything they did, but the false threat of a red scare was used by the Democrats as the backdrop and justification for their own meddling into the Trump campaign. It goes under the category of the big lie which always was a tool for Communist propaganda but which the Democrats now found useful for their own purposes.
11
Forgive me if I am confused to an extent.
Another investigation justified concerning Trump is a bit sad.
Mr Trump is a sad guy.
The recent news today suggests that the US wants allies to contribute payment for an allied military incursion into the Gulf of Hormuz.
Ally fatigue and derision.
Why when most US oil supplies are local ?
Allies did not leave the Iran deal.
Politics this week is somewhat directionless and is now a daily cliff hanger.
NYT happily is an adult in the room as are other media sources.
The report by Mr Horowitz is very important.
The attack and derision of the UK Ambassador publicly is tantamount to ripping up civilised discourse excluding professional diplomacy from rational discussion.
News is the US wants allies to sort Iran.
Gosh.
Perhaps tweet the local UK Ambassador to commit British troops to Iran containment.
Normally US presidents confine remarks concerning global issues to cables.
Allies are now informed by Fox News and Tweets.
Allies will think very carefully about consultation.
The sale of weapons to Taiwan and issues in Hong Kong may have been raised by the UK Ambassador.
Equally the UK ambassador may have briefed the president that a joint statement concerning the anniversary this week of the World Bank and the IMF would have global appeal.
The droning on by Mr Trump denying involvement in sundry scandals may have the effect of isolating America as a serious global player.
2
The article fails to acknowledge how effectively the accused, in this case, the Trump campaign and the President himself, have moved the inquiry from a straightforward investigation into massive election interference into “a bitter partisan feud.” Facts, such as the one that Russia was deeply involved with the Trump organization and the Trump presidential campaign, have been demoted to the status of "he said, she said."
It's disheartening in the extreme to see how well Trump himself has turned the spotlight from himself and his campaign's documented improprieties. Once, we might have expected the NY Times to insulate itself from the effect of continued gaslighting, having observed at close proximity Trump's pattern of bald lying in NYC over the previous four decades. But, alas, we've come to expect far less from the Times, and this article lives down to that. The tone of this article all but complies with the framework for debate that Trump himself has defined. It's an example of how the demagogue ascends over right thinking.
12
It's been a good run since 1776 U.S.A., congrats. Time to cede to China, and possibly Russia. India in 20-30 years?
8
“In August 2016, a month before agents on the Russia investigation received the Steele dossier, they had already started discussions with the Justice Department about seeking a wiretap order targeting Mr. Page, according to people familiar
with the investigation’s timeline.” Based on what? “Because he had he had supposedly met with the Kremlin-linked president of an energy firm and discussed energy cooperation.”—?? Supposedly? What happened to Papadopoulos? No mention of him for some reason, but news of his claiming Russia had the “dirt” on Hillary supposedly got the whole thing going. Obviously, the FBI was desperately looking for some independent reason because the Steele dossier was already being discredited even as suggested in their infamous footnote. It was not enough. Their target was a political party, yet they were relying on a dossier which was not only funded by the Hillary campaign and the DNC, but totally uncorroborated by any other evidence at the time of the FISA application. Now the flimsy evidence they did have is being used to whitewash the whole thing.
8
Why do media outlets, including the Times, persist in writing that the dossier was funded by entities connected to the Clinton campaign without noting that the Fusion GPS research was begun ant the behest of a conservative media outlet (The Washington Free Beacon), which provided the initial funding?
16
@KLM,
Probably because Christopher Steele wasn't even hired by FusionGPS until Hillary and the DNC were paying the bill!
The Washington Free Beacon funded research related to Trump's potential financial ties to foreign governments all around the world. The ONLY item in the research performed for the WFB that wound-up in the Steele Dossier was discussion of the Trump Tower Moscow deal, which never wound-up happening.
THAT is why.
3
Trump and Putin - old news.
The investigation should be into McConnell, to determine if anyone has been ‘encouraging‘ him to bring US democracy to its knees.
He has certainly delivered.
8
Seems to me it doesn’t matter who funded the research at all. What matters if any of Steele’s finding are credible.
5
This is not even a warm up act. The real show will be coming when Mr. Durham begins issuing indictments and forcing Comey and company to start doling out big money for high priced legal help just like they, and Mueller’s corrupt crew, did.
This can’t happen soon enough!
9
@JC Nah - you’re engaging in wishful thinking. Every investigation into the dossier only tends to improve its credibility.
7
And Sean Hannity has been touting the IG report as the end all be all. what will he gaslight with once it comes out as by the book? maybe he'll text his lover Paul M for some direction...
4
Politico is reporting that after investigators grilled Steele for 16 hours, in the end they found his testimony “credible” and even, at times, “surprising.” That doesn’t sound to me like they’re closing in on some dark conspiracy to undermine a President, but rather like they’ve encountered someone who operates carefully and is good at his job. The administration’s spin that the Mueller probe is somehow corrupt takes yet another fatal blow from investigators following the facts. Maybe it’s time for Trump apologists to accept that he’s as corrupt, incompetent, and dangerous as he’s seemed all along?
12
@Mr. Bubble,
Actually, if you read that same Politico article, you would note that it states that several parties previously interviewed by Horowitz are now being called back to "clarify their positions on their testimony," based on the credible information that Steele provided to them.
My personal guess would be that Bruce Ohr and Andrew McCabe are among them, though that's just my guess. Since both already have criminal referrals out there, and we know that McCabe's case has seen the inside of a grand jury, I'd imagine that they have the most to lose, and are most likely to have been contradicted by Steele.
1
Despite all of Donald Trump administration's stonewalling in the many investigations encircling the White House, this report should provide some push back to why the Trump campaign welcomed help from abroad. Right-wing Republicans will seize on any tiny misstep by the FBI, CIA, and other investigators.
While Trump complained about the many investigations of Hillary Clinton and crying Crooked Hillary, the evidence points to far more ethical violations by the 2016 campaign. Remember he denied over and over that he did not pay off porn star Stormy Daniels until paper documentation proved he was lying.
Any 2020 Democratic candidate should goad Trump with an even more pointed and valid nickname. Repeat it at every turn.
Trump may withdraw at the last moment, just like President Lyndon Johnson in 1968, especially if polls show him losing by next summer. I have a feeling that people that just wanted a change in 2016, will tire of his denigration of the Presidency and his lying.
4
We can only hope.
2
DC voted a ridiculous 96% Clinton last election. All the government workers seem to be democrats. That goes for the intelligence workers too. All across the country the government workers at the federal, state and local level seem to be democrats. I am afraid that the CIA and FBI workers have become like the teachers union. Help elect democrats to get a pay raise. There is a bias for sure here.
9
@Jim - Show proof of bias, instead of simply projecting what you wish to be true.
1
The 17 hours of testimony of Steele are so bad for the Democrats, that a whole bunch of them are "realigning" now, that is, testify again contradicting what they first said.
It will be all a lot of fun. Basically, the DNC acted as a criminal organization...
Trump is seriously considering a civil suit getting them to pay for the Mueller 2 years of harassment... A billion + penalties would be appropriate at this point.
11
@novoad: Nonsense. Opposition research is perfectly legal and Mueller is a staunch Republican who went by the book in his investigation. The only one who has ample reason to sue anyone for years of harassment through frivolous investigations is Hillary Clinton to sue the RNC and the leadership of the Republican party.
10
@novoad Really? Because Politico started their coverage with this lovely sentence, which seems to belie your conspiracy theory:
“The interview was contentious at first, according to two people familiar with the matter, but investigators ultimately found his testimony credible and even surprising.”
I can’t wait to find out what is surprising!
5
i would feel better about this if our current Attorney General showed more loyalty to the laws of our country and less groveling loyalty to Trump. The Trump gang clearly showed an unusually close relationship with various Russians and their intermediaries, and Trump clearly tried to shut down any and all investigations into these issues. He also seem to have an unusually intimate relationship with Putin. Much more intimate than he has with our allies.
8
This article fails to indicate sponsors of M Rubio's campaign such as Paul Singer funded the initial research and memos in the dossier origin. This omission credits the democrats too directly in the footnotes in question and can perhaps explain why it was left vague.
5
When this is all over, I’ll be waiting to hear about the 8-figure settlements for damages from the wrongful prosecution for Page, et.al. If it doesn’t happen we’ll know there is no justice in the legal system anymore, if there ever was.
8
@JC Keep waiting! It’ll be a long one.
3
I only have a seven figure “settlement” for dodgy Carter Page — N-O-T-H-I-N-G.
1
Wasn’t Hillary Clinton’s charity foundation investigated because of the hacked campaign emails? There was concern over a quid pro quo? But no new evidence resulted from the investigation. Maybe we should investigate those investigators. How dare they use Trump’s “opposition research”. Maybe that’s a terrible comparison. An ex MI6 agent stumbling across compromise with a hostile foreign nation and said foreign nation stealing information and releasing it incrementally with Trump’s campaign to subvert the election.
There just came word that Steele has testified for 17 hours in June...
2
@novoad Yes, and that he was found by the DOJ investigators to be credible.
1
Notwithstanding the particular findings, Mueller concluded that the Russians did attack us.
And it was concluded that the Russians made contact with certain of Trump's people, during and after the Trump's campaign, regardless of what was said...
...and that Trump stated, and the our whole country saw Trump state on national television offering that it was okay for the Russians to perpetrate actions against the US...
...and since then, Trump has concluded not to protect our nation and the rest of us, against further incursions by Russia, which is totally wrong.
And it must be investigated and concluded that all, or almost all of Trump's subsequent contacts since the campaign, and as President to date, with Putin have been without other unbiased, professional US officials there to confirm Trump's meetings with Putin and other Russians, which is also totally contrary to every prior action of the US, whenever we meet with our enemies, including but not limited to Russia, China, and North Korea.
And it has been stated that Kushner has inappropriately conducted foreign affairs with other foreign leaders, without appropriate prerequisite security clearances as most recently stated by former Secretary of State Tillerson...
Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, Barr's actions are biased, political, inappropriate, and without precedent, and should be viewed that way.
And Barr, as AG, took an oath and should protect us, and the US, and not just Trump and his allies!
10
I hope Mr. Horowitz releases the report a day before Robert Mueller testifies in Congress next week. It will make Mueller's findings more compelling as he reads his report to the public.
2
No doubt Trump, Republicans and Fox News are already working on how to spin this report if it upholds the validity of the FBI investigation into Trump team's ties to Russia. They don't want to know the truth about wrong-doing; they don't even want to admit there was a legitimate well-founded suspicion of collusion. All Republicans do is bob and weave and deflect blame into others.
7
This RJ Reynolds tobacco financing research showing cigarettes are safe for your consumption.
(Mr. Steele, whose work was financed by Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee).
4
@NOTATE REDMOND His research was originally funded by Republicans hoping to knock Trump out of the primaries. And the dossier was given to the FBI by John McCain and Lindsey Graham, neither of whom are Democrats. It seems like you’re possibly applying an outcome you wish for, rather than the one that is presenting itself in reality?
4
Of course the FBI was obligated to investigate trump, a failing TV producer grazing on hostile pastures, and his campaign and branding endeavors. Keep digging and most likely it will come out that the dirt Putin has on trump is not only "golden rain' and similar infantile actions, but also that his bedmates were underage (see his neighbor Epstein). Trump's lifelong depravement, from sexual assaults to destroying US institutions of law proves to be without limit. The dereliction of duty is his and his cohort of enablers, McConnell, Graham et al.
6
What about July 27, 2016 statement by then Presidential candidate inviting Russians to break Hillary's email openly. It was surprising for the whole country that a Presidential contender can say like that. It was insane. Again at that time Trump never thought he will win presidency. Actually statement on that by Trump made him UNQUALIFIED to be POTUS.
6
If anything, this report may backfire on Donald J. Trump and the Republican Party.
This has already been fully investigated and nothing was found to be incriminating. If our nation’s intelligence agencies didn’t investigate a possible national security breach by the new president-elects staff and enablers, it would have been a dereliction of duty to protect the United States of America.
Note to Republicans: Be very careful what you wish for. The Mueller Report is specific in detailing contacts between the Russians and Trumps campaign staff. It really doesn’t matter, for if the conclusions are not in line with Trumps narrative, he’ll just proclaim it all Fake News!
5
Based on the many and interconnected relations that Trump and members of his election committee had with Russia and the Ukraine, it would have been total malpractice for the FBI not to investigate these contacts. Does anyone really think that even today that Trump's relationship with Putin and his regime is "normal" for an American President?
8
I am not a lawyer and I do not play one on television.
That said, I do wonder why Mr. Barr, whom I consider to be a long-time "fixer" for Republican presidents in need of BIGLY FAVORS---think Bush 41 and Donald Trump---and a clear and present danger to the quaint notion that even presidents are not "above the law," has not recused himself from virtually any involvement in any investigation regarding the Trump campaign's interaction with Russia-related entities during the 2016 campaign.
Again, I'm not a lawyer, but his "unsolicited memo"---read, his job application---questioned the credibility/viability/legality of the Special Counsel's investigation. Given that he had expressed such sentiments prior to being offered the AG job and accepted the job while still holding such sentiments, why should we trust that he would objectively investigative the details of the investigation's inception or the way in which it was ultimately carried out?
We shouldn't.
7
There seems to be a general belief that the US is the beacon of fairness and an ideal Democracy. The current state of affairs seems to question these notions.
May be the constitution assumes that the President and the elected officials are honest and decent people who would serve the country and its overall interests. The two party system is not working as it is being manipulated in self interest. May be the constitution needs updates to provide for remedies when thugs take over the government.
15
So, according to the Republican philosophy-of-the-day....running for president immunizes you against Title 18 Espionage crimes. Novel. Of course, that's what they think today and they'll have no problem changing their opinion tomorrow, next month or next year if they perceive it may help them hang on to a $180,000 a year job.
The key point that needs to be repeated over and over in discussing this issue is, wouldn't the FBI been negligent if it had NOT begun an investigation into the Trump campaign, given all of the information it had before it? What seems to get lost in the background noise is that an investigation is started to gather information to determine if a crime has been committed.
17
@KCF
Excellent point. The investigation into the American investigation is just trying to distract from the real danger- the next attack. Who would want to do their job, if they get hammered for doing it? This is why Trump's quislings are so dangerous. They are deconstructing the pillars of America from within as Bannon boasted that he wanted to do. It's not that hard to read the report, America. Let there be a spectacle as disBarr calls it. The bigger the spectacle the better- that is the whole point.
5
This makes me wonder about what "propaganda" or investigative "reports" we'll get from Barr. It's my impression that his primary role is supporting Trump at all costs bending the "law" to the breaking point.
It's frustrating to see one person work within the law to provide the public information by & another undermining the law to disinform.
17
Barr the toady stand in for Roy Cohn the mob lawyer who mentored Trump on how to act like a mob boss. Barr is Trump's protector no matter what any felony Trump commits he cannot be indicted and with McConnell he cannot be impeached . In other words Trump is above the law and feels free to act as our dictator. Trump is compromised by Putin which is why he cowers in his presence.
23
The House impeaches (it literally means “to charge” and then Senate votes on conviction after a trial that has to take place and is presided over by the Chief Justice with the House of Representatives appointing the “Managers” who present the case for removal to the Senate in the form of a “trial” that is not an optional exercise. I get that the Republicans in the Senate can then vote not to remove Trump but that can ONLY occur after the trial at which point the vote might not be as much of a slam dunk IF the case is as solid as it would have to be for the House to take it up in the first place under Speaker Pelosi’s leadership.
@ Rebco - Lots of smoke in your personal indictment, is there any fire?
@Lyndon
Did you see Trump cower before Putin in Helsinki siding with him over his own intel agencies. Trump has attacked everyone from prime ministers to military heroes but when he is attacked by UK ENVOY he is outraged. Trump is not our King his job is temporary .
Do you ever wonder what would have happened to trump’s campaign if this information was shared with public at the onset? Clinton’s email server and the other favorite thrown around, “Benghazi!” seems like small potatoes compared to trump Russia. Oh and I do agree that comey handed the election to trump. When comey says that trump asked him for his loyalty I think comey proved that in November 2016.
11
@Nycgal "if this information was shared with public at the onset?"
WHAT info? Trump had not done anything whatsoever, which is what the Mueller report found too...
5
Thank you for disproving all of your many comments on this forum by this one central one. Read the report.
2
@novoad
Could you cite the page in the report where Mueller said that even once? I bet you haven't read it.
*"Russia if you are listening..."
*The denial of the Trump Tower negotiations for the TT in Moscow plan that Donald ranted at an election rally
*The Trump Tower meeting in NY with Junior and Natalia Veselnitskaya
Those three examples alone, that disprove your assertion, are things you could observe without even reading the report. Though I believe you have not read the report
But again where in Mueller's report is Trump exonerated? Page numbers please.
1
The Republican strategy is not to take responsibility for anything but to call for an investigation of the investigators. If Obama had done this the Republicans would have said he was undermining our legal system and the patriots in the FBI and CIA. And then they would have started impeachment proceedings. The Dems need to do the same to Trump. And now.
19
@Bobby We cannot start the impeachment until we establish that the start of the Mueller investigation was a criminal act.
So, not while Clinton, Obama and Biden are still on the lam and not put safely away.
However, generous Mr. Trump may pardon Obama, like Ford pardoned the much more benign Nixon...
2
Should a criminal not be charged because the authorities were notified by someone of the opposite political party?
16
@Cassandra That is what is happening now. Clinton and possibly Obama and Biden will be put away...
2
Mueller wrote that if he could have exonerated Trump (on obstruction charges) he would have. He couldn’t and he didn’t.
27
For weeks now, right-wing squawking heads have been batting around this new conspiracy theory excuse for why no one will get in trouble for investigating the Trump campaign:
"liberal privilege."
They make sure every issue is divided along party lines.
It's exhausting.
18
I have liberal privilege. I have had the advantage of education and the genetics of a well working brain to understand behavior different form my own, to accept new ideas, and respect an individuals rights and freedoms.
5
If the President really put America first, he would defend it and the integrity of its elections, the true voice of the people, against all attempts, foreign and domestic, to compromise, influence, or subvert them. That he has dismissed them is profoundly troubling and suggests that he failed to discharge the constitutional duties of his office. That is an impeachable offense.
28
So, help me out, since when is it 'novel' or inappropriate to reporting foreign meddling to an ally?
If I were Christopher Steele I would have told Justice Dept investigators to take a hike. As a private investigator, he has every right to reach independent conclusions and report them as he sees fit.
Let the chips fall where they may, and let's hope this report will help to put the nail in the coffin of the Trump administration.
28
Wasn’t the Steele dossier first funded by the republican candidates for president, before it was offered to Clinton? Why is this never mentioned?
34
I think that Jeb Bush's campaign hired Cambridge Analytica initially, but Steele,who was contracted by Cambridge Analytica, didn't start his investigation until after the DNC took over after it was offered to them when Bush dropped out. Steele and the DNC immediately turned the dossier over to the FBI.
7
@Pinktalia
It is mentioned. It's not terribly relevant as the report's full value on materialized when Steele was brought on board for the Clinton campaign.
Do you think Rubio and/or Bush wouldn't have used the report against Trump to secure the nomination for themselves? They didn't use it because there wasn't much to it. That's why they passed it on to someone else.
1
Christopher Steel wasn’t even in the picture until after Trump got the nomination. It wasn’t that there was nothing in the dossier. It was because it didn’t exist until after Fusion GPS was hired by the Clinton campaign. Thus, Bush and Rubio has nothing to go on. Unlike the dossier, which has many verifiable pieces.
2
As long as Bill Barr has anything to do with the Department of Justice, I have as much faith in what is coming out of that agency than I do with Trump's comments and tweets. If they wanted to taint one of the most important agency's in our government, they did their jobs. But if Trump thinks that he will be president forever, he can think again and New York state has much waiting for him when he leaves office. We should have no compunction to putting away the worst and most destructive criminal for the rest of his life, no matter how short it is.
43
Imagine if they spent the same level of effort investigating Comey re-opening the bogus Clinton email investigation days before the general election and then Chavetz leaking it to the press. The poles show this was the main reason Clinton lost the election. Comey essentially handed the election to Trump and then got a book deal from it that made him millions more than anything he'd ever have gotten working for the FBI.
16
The FBI - is tasked with investigations into election meddling, such as this.
The situation was very chaotic - and new conditions the country hadn’t seen yet.
There’s newer media, newer types of communications ( email, etc).
It seems that once character and good intent is verified ( which presumably it would be with US intelligence agencies) - then it’s a situation of our intelligence professionals doing the best they can, reasonably - in an ever complex and shifting milieu.
Get real - US intelligence, isn’t our enemy.
But we do, in fact, have enemies - and we should get serious about that. Russia, to begin, for one thing.
21
@ mk - Russia is an adversary. Which Facebook ad that they placed won the election for Trump?
1
Kudos to the NYT digital headline writer for creating the subhead "They are trying to determine whether the F.B.I. misstepped in the inquiry." Yes, surveillance on an opposing party's political campaign and using a foreign national's dossier as justification to the FISA court without telling them it was funded by the opposition's campaign is just a misstep. Jeez Louise.
22
Why does it matter where the information comes from? And shouldn’t anyone who’d come across this information then pass it along to the FBI? (If not, please explain.) Once the FBI gets it, if it merits investigation, why shouldn’t they then investigate? Isn’t all of it Patriotism 101?
Your spin fascinates me. The sarcasm was a great touch.
9
@Rob
The FBI is not an 'opposing party', and in fact is traditionally weighted in favor of the GOP.
Further, stop the nonsense that this was first funded by Democrats. As others have noted, it was originally funded by Republicans looking for dirt on Trump.
Wake up.
8
The FISA warrant was issued before the dossier because the FBI monitors Russian government communications in the US and members of Trump's campaign were regularly communicating with Russian officials. It was Carter Page's communications that tripped the FISA warrent.
1
Nothing will come of this report. Whatever the conclusions, they will be attacked relentlessly by the other side. As a cohesive nation, we have been torn asunder and I fear we cannot recapture that which has been lost.
13
Conclusions have such a thing as "the other side"? By "conclusions" you mean Republican propaganda, right?
2
The question is not where the evidence originated, the question is whether the evidence is true. Questioning the source is simply a smokescreen.
28
Looking forward to the IG's report to put the whole Page FISA warrants battle to rest. I doubt it will be a complete and thorough indictment of the Page FISA application and the top FBI officials at the time which is what Trump and the republicans want. Expect to see that Trump rant tweet where he attacks Horowitz and his team as incompetent or biased; probably calling them all angry democrats.
13
""The president’s allies have vilified Mr. Steele""
Would not it be easier and shorter to name persons who have not been vilified by Mr.Trump and his groping minions?
None the less, heretofore unequaled familiarity and communication between Trumpians and patriots of a state known for it's wily and cunning abuses did occur.
Call it business, call it supporting adoption agencies, call it what ever ,, but stop acting so indignant about your baggage being checked after prevailing with illegitimate assistance.
14
The Person to listen to is Putin and he is pleased by the results of his Investment in Trump. I find the fact we are still arguing about it mind boggling.
14
It seems so above board and legitimate. The FBI would have been derelict in their duties if they had not investigated the Russian connections to the Trump campaign.
22
@SusieQue
Yes, that's true, but the connections had nothing to do with the election itself, instead to do with a potential business coup for Trump's business. However that's not what this is about. Election fraud is very difficult to detect, and even more difficult to prove; yet that is probably what happened. I for one do not think that Trump won the 2016 election; electoral college or otherwise. Voting machines were tweaked in pivotal states giving Trump victory via the votes for H. Clinton registered for Trump route. But there was more to it than that. Collusion between H.Clinton and Trump.
I am interested in this spin you have, can you put out a link to where others are discussing this HRC - DJT collusion to elect the Donald? It makes perfect sense to me, in that I believe Americans as a whole have become complacent with the way our government functions, and ignored the potential pitfalls inherent in a system which depends on honest and moral leaders to act in the best interest of the country, with personal ambition taking a back seat to improving the lives of our citizens. It took the Russian government’s skulduggery and a willing actor to show just what could happen when the traditions and institutions forming the heart of our Democratic Republic are trashed in favor of a Populist platform espousing division and exclusion, catering to racist and misogynist themes. In other words, Trump is the bad example we did not think was possible here, and Hillary and crew set him up to energize truly patriotic Americans to take back their government. Very interesting! So we should expect a turnover in the Senate, a new executive administration, and maybe an expansion of seats in the SCOTUS to eliminate party influence, as well as eliminating gerrymandering, now that the public has a concrete example of just how bad it can be to lose sight of our national values. So, a website you can recommend? Love to comment there or at least find some like minded folks!
@SusieQue
There are no Russian connections to the Clinton campaign
It's about time. Whatever the outcome, I hope its the truth. After more than two years of unending lies, citizens deserve nothing less than the ugly truth.
14
I can't trust anything our of this fake presidency and fake justice department.
I won't believe the report a bit.
10
@P2
What if they do something totally unexpected and provide evidence? Can you imagine backing up claims with provable facts? Unprecedented!
2
Let’s review here, shall we?
Mueller Report: No collusion, no obstruction.
Any Russian election interference began under the Obama administration, yet he did nothing about it.
Comey, Brennan, Clapper, Lynch, McCabe, Yates, Strzok, Page, Rice, Ohr, et al, are sweating bullets over these subsequent investigations. As they should.
15
The Mueller Report did not say no obstruction.
30
Barr said no obstruction, no collusion.
14
Trump & Barr both said "no collusion, no obstruction". Mueller did not clear Trump on obstruction. Here's Muller's quote on the matter:
"If we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, however, we are unable to reach that judgment.”
18
I'll look forward to what the Office of Inspector General releases in their report.
All I can say is "Thanks" to all the employees of all the Inspector General offices at multiple US agencies/departments.
You are doing the important work of making sure our tax dollars and the departments funded by them are operating in the best interest of our country. We are counting on you to interpret and clarify the abuses and possibly partisanship of political appointees.
84
@MotownMom They've worked hard, no doubt. The IG may have a different take on the information.
Why the confusion over the Mueller information at this point? DOJ owes America some answers.
9
@Sean Berry
Trump wants a report that Barr can say shows he was mistreated. Barr has already said that wiretaps on Russian agents which included when they went to speak to Trump were spying on Trump. It's pure honey to Republicans to complain about others saying they are victims while claiming victimhood for not getting exempted from every law.
17
@MotownMom
When you say "...interpret & clarify THE (my emphasis) abuses..." I'm not aware that any abuses that have been found. If you're aware of any abuses found so far could you share them with us?
6
Now the House of Representatives needs to get Mr. Steele to testify in open session, fully televised for as long as it takes to allow him to fill in all the details.
213
@R. Zeyen Nonsense, You're fixated on the Fox News-alibi, The "details" are online, if you know how to read critically. The dossier is simply a distraction from the money-laundering and now the lechery. Everything the Tea Party claims about the dossier evaporates in sunlight. Everything it "leaked" in the first place has really been ignored even since.
16
It's my understanding that Steele was doing his Russia research and when the Russia activities were alarming and he became worrisome, he checked with people he knew in the FBI to alert them to the involvement of Russia and thought they should know. He was hired only to do research on Trump and Russia for other Republicans and then Clinton when the Rs dropped it. He is not an American but he acted as an honorable American would.
42
@R. Zeyen
Mr. Steele is not a US citizen. He provided these materials at some risk to himself, and actually had to disappear for a while because of those risks. He was alarmed, as so many of us are, by the dubious connections of the Trump administration and the money people of so many dictatorships abroad, and the obvious corruption and likely uses foreign powers would put it to.
The Trump organization and all its satellites, enablers, and dupes are far less reliable.
31
Anyone who has actually read the dossier knows much of it has proven accurate and little if anything to date has been proven wrong. My major issue is that of attribution. It seems to always be noted that Steele's "work was financed by Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee" however early reporting noted that it was initially Republicans who got this ball rolling and only later that Dems took it up.
502
@Larry. Exactly! But no one mentions that important little tidbit.
105
@Larry - thanks Larry. It drives me nuts when the press keeps repeating incorrectly that Clinton and the DNC were responsible for the Dossier, when it was republican oppo initiated by a never trumper zillionaire who then abandoned it when he got the nomination. That's when DNC/HRC picked it up - why not - it was there for the asking.
104
@Larry
There are numerous, glaring omissions of established facts in this article...
30
I'm glad that this will be the first results of this "investigate the investigators," since Mr. Horowitz does sound relatively objective.
We know that William Barr's investigation won't be, as he already tipped his hand by calling out the FBI for "spying" on the Trump campaign.
People don't seem to remember that all this was coming down fast and furiously, no pun intended. Never before had such evidence from intercepts been collected before, of conversations between a political campaign for president and a foreign adversary.
There was no precedent to go by, so the FBI was really left holding the bag, once Mitch McConnell refused to join President Obama in announcing that the Russians were responsible for the hacking of Hillary Clinton's emails and the DNC server.
They did the best they could under frightening circumstances. Of course that's not good enough for the likes of Jim Jordan, who surely would have screamed bloody murder to the press had the tables been turned and it was suspected the Russians were helping the Democrats.
Hindsight is always 20-20.
157
@ChristineMcM There is precedent and each time it was Republicans at work in nefarious ways.
The Nixon campaign had backdoor contacts with the North Vietnamese, promising them better terms for peace, undercutting the negotiations of the LBJ administration. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/02/us/politics/nixon-tried-to-spoil-johnsons-vietnam-peace-talks-in-68-notes-show.html
The Reagan campaign secretly met with with Iran to sabotage Carter's reelection.
https://www.nytimes.com/1991/04/15/world/new-reports-say-1980-reagan-campaign-tried-to-delay-hostage-release.html
Such treachery seems to be a Republican habit.
16
If the FBI didn't investigate the Trump campaign they would have been derelict in their duty.
The Trump campaign had over 140 contacts with Russians at the same time the Kremlin was attacking our electoral system, the foundation of our democracy.
590
So? And of course. And so?
That doesn’t mean “trump” is not going to look to gut the FBI and subvert it for his own ends. Revenge. Corrode all norms. And relaunch as your own tool. Machiavelli 101.
29
@L It's also notable that trump has discredited and/or fired every government official who is expert on Russia - including Bruce Ohr.
16
@L -- The dubious number of 144 contacts includes contacts like Jeff Sessions speaking briefly to the Russian Ambassador at a public event in Washington, DC.
It's silliness like this that the Dems try to make into a conspiracy. If a conspiracy did occur I think it likely that the contacts would never have become publicly known.
1
I have no idea who -- if anybody -- is in charge of our government anymore.
It reminds me of one of those carousels you see at country fairs where people ride up and down on wooden animals until the music stops they know not where.
Except that the people on the wooden horses seem happy, while the people on the White House and Cabinet carousels come off as desperate, anxious and in a terrible hurry to get out of there.
55
I’m all for them getting out of there. The White House, the Cabinet, the Senate and certainly the AG’s office. Immediately if not sooner.
4
"Robert S. Mueller III, concluded that while the campaign welcomed and expected to benefit from Russia’s election interference, the evidence did not prove any conspiracy."
This is not what Mueller wrote. A more accurate summary would be that Mueller "concluded that while the campaign welcomed and expected to benefit from Russia’s election interference, it was not appropriate for his team to make allegations against the president."
224
@Cradle Episcopalian
Sure, go ahead. Rewrite Mueller. Feel better now?
8
@Cradle Episcopalian
The obstruction worked and that's why Mueller could not prove conspiracy.
31
@Cradle Episcopalian Then it is or isn't a witch hunt?
2
The deeper authorities dig into the credibility of Christopher Steele, and his dossier, the more credible they become.
NOTHING has yet been DISPROVED that Christopher Steele wrote in those series of memos that became known as the dossier.
Apparently the Justice Department Inspector General believes Steele and the memos Steele wrote that became the dossier.
What about the video recordings Steele referred to of Trump in Moscow?
You know which one I'm talking about.
94
Every time Putin and Trump meet, you can see "dossier" in little thought bubbles above both Putin's and Trump's heads while Trump fawns and sweats. Putin wears a Cheshire smile.
15
@Barrie Grenell Hah! True that. Thx.
5
"Attorney General William P. Barr, who has accused the F.B.I. of “spying” on the Trump campaign, has begun his own review that will include intelligence agencies as well."
That may be true if by "investigation" you mean hatchet job to protect his boss.
17
@Ken-Ironic given Barr's connections. Barr's former law firm Kirkland & Ellis represents not only pedophile/child sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein but Alfa Bank, a Russian criminal cartel-controlled led by Mikhail Fridman with ties to Putin and Manafort. Barr received dividends from Vector Group, also suspected of laundering money through NY real estate--including through Trump Org holdings; a popular destination for Russian kelptocrats' money. Vector Group CEO Howard Lorber introduced Trump to the Moscow real estate market in the 1990’s. Barr, worth $20 million, has money in Deutsch Bank; rumored to be a conduit for Russian money laundering and fined multiple times for illicit practices. Despite this--Barr was awarded the AG role without being fully vetted and has repeatedly lied as AG. Surely this should concern patriotic Americans.
https://www.newsweek.com/so-many-conflicts-so-little-time-1396435
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirkland_%26_Ellis
8
And if Trump does not like the report, calls by Republicans to investigate the investigators who investigated the investigators incoming in 5... 4... 3...
This reminds me of the closing scene of Monty Python's The Argument Sketch -- except this entire mess is not a fair cop.
12
And except for the author, aren’t we all “arguing in our spare time”? Thanks for reminding me of that most excellent example of humorous absurdity, just watched it again and it is still hilarious. I only wish our current situation was funny instead of just absurd.
1
Who cares? The Conservatives hold this country and they actually like the interference. They think it is totally lawful and constitutional because Trump says so. Gerrymandering totally negates the fact that only 40% support Trump. The majority is represented by the Dems who are inept beyond belief.
4
@gratis Gerrymandering has nothing to do with Presidential elections. This is the second comment I've read today in the NYT that associates Trump's victory with gerrymandering. I thought NYT readers were smarter?
1
The Mueller report's timeline of events appears to defy logic. According to its narrative, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange (A central figure who claims Russia was NOT behind the hack.) announced the publication of Democratic Party emails not only before he received the documents, but before he even communicated with the source that provided them. Yet Mueller never sought to interview Julian Assange. Why?
8
I guess Julian was not available at the time for a visit? Seriously. Come on, man
No collusion.
No obstruction.
Hillary lost on her own.
13
Compromised
Obstructed
Stolen Election.
1
I sure hope this post is irony.
@Dr. John Obviously, you can't be bothered to read the Mueller report on your own. Much easier to be spoon-fed.
1
All IG has to do is ask AG what to say to blame FBI and clear Trump. The results of this enquiry will be passed on to Putin to protect their interference in 2020 elections.
9
If, after what they heard, someone DIDN'T investigate Trump, it would be dereliction of duty.
I keep seeing references to the Strzok texts, but never anyone asking whether his criticisms of Trump were based on what they learned about Trump's involvement with Russia (or any other questionable dealings).
The exchanges are a lot more understandable if the context is "this guy is doing some really suspicious stuff that we can't allow" as opposed to "he always seemed like a blowhard on The Apprentice and I just don't like him."
14
This article reads like it assumes Steele will get a pass. Lots of Swamp political pressure being exerted on the IG. I doubt he’ll fold....but one never knows. The AG’s office has spent a lot of time reviewing the findings. Too long not to raise suspicions.
6
@Siwanoy You're crazy. Steele doesn't need a pass in the first place. He's British, for starters, and British Intelligence in the background. Leave the swamp out of it; check the facts sometime. The AG's office has spent lots of time reviewing this matter because it's the only way to keep Nunez, Jordan, and Chaffitz out of jail, in the final analysis, as they kept Trump's head out of the water in order to let the rest of us drown. That's all they have to feed the Fox narrative, which was lies when they first tried to paint Carter Page as a patriot. You must be a Russian troll.
13
@Siwanoy
Huh? Were you as concerned that the Mueller investigation lasted over two years and came up with zilch regarding the Dems favorite Trump-Putin Treason Conspiracy theory?
5
You mean as long as it took him to read and give a summary of the Mueller report?
2
Recall please that this entire investigation is based on a nutty Republican lie--the conspiracy theory that the FBI was spying on the Trump campaign. The Republicans are attacking Mr. Mueller and his team, in order to discredit their results.
50
@Robert
Well, Bob; we'll all be finding out how "nutty" this idea is. You may discover the old saying still applies: "Life is stranger than fiction." And a lot of Dems may suffer mentally from the intensive cognitive dissonance forced to confront a hard reality that sometimes Fox News gets it right.
8
If anything about all this is hilarious—even, Hillaryious—it’s Trumpists trying to pretend that they and their boy aren’t nuts.
1
It's all a big witch-hunt!!!
Did anyone in the Trump campaign tell Putin to go ahead and steal the emails of his opponents and publish them?
Oh wait. Let me think about that for a minute.
39
@Christine We don't know who "stole" the emails. The Mueller report uses qualified and vague language to describe key events, indicating that Mueller and his investigators do not actually know for certain whether Russian intelligence officers stole Democratic Party emails, or how those emails were transferred to WikiLeaks.
6
@Hank
Are you for real? That is precisely what Mueller indicted them for.
https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2018/07/Muellerindictment.pdf
1
Must be a very quiet night in Moscow. Lotta Russian Republicans posting here.
64
@jr
Certainly something strange going on here.
A lot more energy being expended than usual.
Why?
Those of us street smart enough to understand that when the highest paid news celebrity (Rachel Maddow) repeats "Russia" 10,000 (or so) times over two years, something's up, and it's not Russia.
This curious parroting of a meme piques our interest, so we then go to the Internet (NOT more cable news or the NTY, Wash Po, etc.), where great journalists (Matt Taibi, Michael Tracey, Glenn Greenwald, Noam Chomsky, Aaron Mate', Ben Norton, & Chris Hedge) do their work without that ubiquitous fear of all status quo media employees, "I will lose my job if I think for myself!" and instead actually practice journalism. We learn there the Russia investigation is a huge hoax. The Steele dossier is garbage. And it's all going to eventually hit the fan.
Aaron Mate' just wrote a brilliant summary statement in Real Clear Investigations re the Mueller Report. Of course all you had to do to know his points was to be street smart, and to have watched various TV paid hacks repeat the word "Russia" until they finally wore it out and turned it into steaming poo.
So, herein the Mueller Report is reduced to ashes: "CrowdStrikeOut: Mueller’s Own Report Undercuts Its Core Russia-Meddling Claims" by Aaron Mate':
https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2019/07/05/crowdstrikeout_muellers_own_report_undercuts_its_core_russia-meddling_claims.html
15
@CK
"Those of us street smart enough to understand that when the highest paid news celebrity (Rachel Maddow) repeats "Russia" 10,000 (or so) times over two years, something's up, and it's not Those of us street smart enough to understand that when the highest paid news celebrity (Rachel Maddow) repeats "Russia" 10,000 (or so) times over two years, something's up, and it's not Russia"
By that same criteria, you could say that when Trump says "no collusion" 10,000 times, something is up and its hiding in plain sight where those with eyes can see. And what we see is that Putin's friend has hijacked the Whitehouse.
46
@CK
When trying to point out bias on someone else's part...it would help if you didn't include a link to a known biased site!
11
@CK
"Those of us street smart enough to understand that when the highest paid news celebrity (Rachel Maddow) repeats "Russia" 10,000 (or so) times over two years, something's up, and it's not Russia."
Well, it looks like you aren't very street smart. First, Maddow is not the highest paid news celebrity; that would be Hannity, who makes about 5x what she makes. And second, by your logic we should believe Hannity about 5x more than Maddow - is that what you meant to say?
17
After the reports of Epstein’s parties and Trump accusers that attended them, I have no doubt that the tapes in Russia are most likely real and exist.
34
@Debbie That's a point worth making. Everyone gave him the benefit of the doubt when the tale surfaced. and look at what we were expected to believe since then. If those tapes do exist, then Trump was "compromised" during the Miss Universe pageant, as reflected in the makeup of the Trump Tower meeting, not in Manafort's phone notes of the event. If we simply allow hypothetically that the alleged tapes sound like Trump in action, his whole run for office and conduct in it becomes more consistent, more consistently what Putin might want for Hillary, especially, and the rest of us by extension. Obscenity has been the hallmark of his Administration; his association (and Clinton's) with Epstein is just icing on that cake.
7
That this meeting even took place is a sign of how decadent and corrupted our whole government is thanks to that despicable excuse for a human being in the WH
27
This report isn’t likely to be broad enough. The fact is that, according to the Mueller Report and articles from this newspaper, the Trump campaign was surveilled very early on simply for its foreign policy positions that were deemed too Russian being inserted into the platform by Trump’s minions. That is a big intervention into politics by the FBI and CIA. I would say that the agencies stepped over the line by seeming some things political and some things not political, with the foreign policy consensus anti-Russia Beltway view seen as non-political. Given that Jill Stein’s platform was pro-detente and Bernie Sanders also took some unorthodox positions, there needs to be an investigation into whether they faced surveillance. Heck, Hillary Clinton could have been spied on to avoid the pretence of bias. Comey made a major intervention. We need to work this out right now while the debates are happening and policies are being unveiled to make sure elections aren’t swirled in by spooks again.
7
@Alina Starkov You live alone, do you?
2
@Alina Starkov How do you divide politics into orthodoxy? Come again? Is there new dirt on the Inspector General you would like to share? When we "work this out right" will we too get to see this halo on Trump that the FBI and CIA intervened against? Including the ones that Trump fired, slandered, or otherwise drove out of town.
2
@Bruce Mincks
This isn't about Trump, Clinton, Stein, Johnson, Sanders, Cruz or any of the 2016 candidates, it's about the idea that the FBI or CIA can open investigations into political figures or parties for their foreign policy positions.
All I was saying is that the report that is likely to come out will be a pro-Trump document which will ignore the wider issues around parties having investigations, such as "Crossfire Hurricane," which the New York Times exposes, launched due to a change in the Republicans' Ukraine stance.
I plan to vote Democrat in 2020 and did so in 2018 and 2016. I don't want intelligence investigations against Bernie Sanders or Warren if they want to, say, establish a no-first-strike nuclear policy as Warren wants to (such a thing could be seen as "pro-Russia" or "pro-China."), stop the war in Syria ("helps Russia" which makes it illegitimate according to the elite consensus) or other pro-peace and pro-detente policies.
5
How much public shame do the FBI agents that did the texting deserve? It kinda seems egregious to keep publishing the names of the FBI agents that privately texted things millions of Americans have texted among themselves, especially when there are very impressive FBI careers and wholesome people behind those names.
15
@Stevie B. It's quite likely there were FBI agents texting messages similar to Strozk's and Page's, except about HRC rather than about Trump. But we've not heard about those.
11
Hopefully if at the end of the day there was improper behavior within the IC. These people will serve time, and not the typical slap and the hand with a wink. This whole thing stinks to high heavens. Spygate using circular references to implicate a sitting President, that had nothing to do with this, Russia Russia Russia, heap. Created by haters of the President and fed by the rampant Press. Who also thought they could bring down a President, if they tag teamed him. A repeated the same lies over and over.
7
@John Pfaffinger You must have missed Putin at Helsinki, not to mention Kisliak in the Oval
16
@John Pfaffinger
Over 200 contacts by trump surrogates with Russians before the election. How many hundred lies denying any contacts? How many times did trump himself lie about no contacts.
Doesn't the kool-aid start to taste rancid after a while?
20
Horowitz prepares to deliver verdict on the Russia investigation.
Too little. Too late.
Who cares anymore, except historians?
The damage is already done by the resistance.
Trump has achieved so much despite all that .. starting with jobs and economy. Looking forward to greater achievements in his second term.
7
@Bhaskar Very clever. Before an investigation started, it was all about the wrongs that the FBI did. Now that you can begin to see the handwriting on the wall from this article, it's time to switch gears and tell everyone the investigation doesn't mean anything.
3
@Bhaskar
"Trump has achieved so much despite all that .. starting with jobs and economy." ...
Did you give Obama credit for fixing a very messed up economy and handing it to Trump? And yes, it continued on an up slope. But 2 of his major acts: the tax cut and relaxing environmental standards, will cost in the future. Do you want your children to breathe worse air than we have now?
See, it's clear: The idea of tax cuts generating more growth has never quite worked out, tho Nixon, Raegan, Bush, Bush etc all tried it.
What works better? You tax corporations which are making decent money and use that money to create industries & jobs in areas which improve the country.
Eisenhower, that flaming commie, taxed corporations up to 70% to build the interstate hi way system.
What we need now is to use tax revenue to build green infrastructure and jobs.
Simple, no? It's called 'vision' and progress.
Ever hear of the concept?
4
@Jim Cricket
I have a feeling you will be rooting for the losing side when Horowitz releases his findings. And then the liberals start throwing insults at him like with Barr, a reputed lawyer.
@CD
I supported higher taxes to improve the lives of our citizens who are in need .. until the democrats started using our tax money for open borders, sanctuary cities, and caring for illegal immigrants more than our homeless.
2
@CCForbes, likewise I too am frustrated by the media's failure to disclose the original funding for the Steele Dossier. I also remain perplexed why the NY Times continues to omit an essential fact contained in Volume I of the Mueller report: the Mueller investigation could not produce sufficient evidence to support "criminal charges" because "several individuals affiliated with the Trump Campaign lied to the Office, and to Congress...," pleaded the Fifth and used encryption technology to obstruct justice (p.9-10).
These efforts are no different than that efforts of those who lied to protect the criminal wrongdoings of Nixon.
57
@Little Pink Houses The original funding came from a Republican looking for opp research against Trump, then dropped it when he was nominated. The Dems picked up the account with Fusion, but Hillary never ever saw the research. This is no secret, and Mueller's report, Volume I, reads like a continuing series of Trump obstructing justice, demanding that someone deny it for him, then shooting himself in the foot the next morning with some tweet. The difference with Nixon is about treason, not burglary, and the threat of pardons for the conspiracy instead of Nixon's conspiracy getting pardoned as the law was left corrupted by the malfeasance. Which begs the question: are Weapons of Mass Destruction real things or concepts that came from above the law? We didn't seem to learn much from Vietnam after Watergate, either.
4
If the FBI and/or the Justice Department had even a whiff of information that hinted to the possibility that someone on Trump's campaign was possibly linked in anyway to the Russian government it would have been a dereliction of duty and treasonous to ignore that information or toss it into the closed files.
51
@Richard You should refer to Special Counsel indictments against the GRU and the Internet Research Agency that the Russian's can't seem to answer. That's just a whiff . . . Trump doesn't think so, though; he takes Putin at his word, the British Ambassador as the enemy. Check the Report for more information, preferably before you handicap the Inspector General's findings. Hello? Are you a robot?
4
This, because of its supposedly spectacular nature, is more grist for the mill of making Russia a scapegoat for something which never happened. What perhaps needs more scrutiny is what, potentially, Mr. Steele, in his capacity as MI6 agent, in the wake of the Pan Am 103 bombing, knew of the role (s) of that intelligence agency's assets in the planting of the bomb and the attendant revenge garnered by certain parties, which could be seen as ongoing. If it is true that the British and U.S. governments know exactly what happened and are "...never going to tell." it is high time they did, for although justice has not been done, it would be revealing to learn just how and to what extent it has been perverted. This is a murky business which only a shadowy figure such as Mr. Steele could make an attempt to clarify.
1
@Disinterested Party The sources of this interest? What never happened? Who's the scapegoat? Check your editor for details, not the Inspector General's function. Forget about what Steele knew about the Pam Am bombing, at least until you know Steele. Only you can bring yourself current on what the last three years have shown.
4
@Bruce Mincks
Is one required to believe everything which one reads, or is available in print? I submit that this item of interference in the 2016 election by the Russian Federation is a very contrived notion designed to obscure two things: one, collusion between H.Clinton and candidate Trump in order to assure the latter's victory, while giving the impression that it was a substantial upset. The reason for it was that H. Clinton feared that because of her checkered record of service in the government, that if elected, things would go wrong for her. Ergo, she did not visit the pivotal states during the campaign, which supposedly gave Trump the victory. Two, the influence of one of Trump's main backers, and his brain trust of successful computer whizzes tweaked the voting machines in those states in order to register votes cast for H. Clinton for Trump, thus giving the appearance of an electoral college win for Trump. Over all, the raison d'etre for this travesty was the great fear on the part of the Republican Party of obsolescence. There was no Russian interference. These people who are involved in this substantial fraud are more or less lackeys for an ultra-conservative, plutocratic organization which will have things only their way. Now, at least on the surface, they have it. There was an insurance man in Britain, who was obliquely connected to the Pan Am incident who stated shortly afterwards that there was evidence of MI6 involvement. Steele was there.
Disinterested, you have figured it out! I thought I was the only one. Also, the moon landing was a huge fake. And Bush caused 9/11. And the earth is flat.
I will be surprised if they find that FBI did not act properly, truth has been sidelined. Trump and his cohorts always come on top.
9
It “could have been” opposition research?
It WAS opposition research, paid for by the Clinton Campaign and its wholly-owned subsidiary the DNC, through a corrupt law firm to try to hide the connection.
The FISA Court should have been informed the warrant request WAS based on political opposition research. No subjunctive.
15
@Frank
It started with anti-Trump republicans and was continued by Democrats.
This info is readily available and to cite that it was paid for by the Clinton Campaign is misleading since Dems took it up where the Republicans left off.
21
@Frank It was. What part of....
"Investigators flagged, in a lengthy footnote in the wiretap application, that Mr. Steele’s research was funded by someone “likely looking for information that could be used to discredit” Mr. Trump’s campaign."
....do you not understand?
5
Christopher Steele‘s dossier generated so much interest and attention in the US, because Trump called Steele a „lowlife“ on Twitter and described the dossier as „phony“, „discredited“ and paid for by „Crooked Hillary.“
In August 2018, Steele won a legal battle in the US against three Russian oligarchs, who sued him over allegations made about the Trump campaign and its links with Moscow.
Judge Anthony Epstein in the District of Columbia didn‘t determine whether the dossier – which Trump has repeatedly called “fake” – was “accurate or not accurate”. But he concluded that it was covered by the First Amendment.
He ruled that the oligarchs had failed to prove a key part of their case - Steele knew that some information in the dossier was inaccurate, and had acted “with reckless disregard as to its falsity”.
Steele is said to have sent 17 memos between June and October 2016 to Fusion GPS, an intelligence company based in Washington DC, which investigated the then candidate Trump’s alleged links with Moscow. It in turn hired Steele.
It remains to be seen what the Justice Department’s watchdog is going to say about Trump’s criticism of the FISA warrant on Carter Page.
7
@J. von Hettlingen Not true. Steele contacted the FBI before he reported his concerns to Fusion, his employer, precisely because he hadn't expected to see so much collusion. Can you specify the inaccurate information "with reckless disregard as to its falsity"? Funny, neither can Devin Nunes or Jim Jordan as they try to resurrect Carter Page as an alibi for Trump, unlike the "foreign policy expert" Trump's campaign had hired, a vigorous fan of Putin's at a time we weren't supposed to prefer Russia to NATO at the State Department in order to remain loyal to the art of the deal/trade wars.
2
We can all look forward to Barr's non-summary summary of the Inspector General's report.
24
@Paul Not this time, if I'm not mistaken. The Inspector General's Office was set up to be independent as possible of political bias. It's not under Barr's supervision or jurisdiction. There's real hope of hearing something more than noise out of Washington here.
7
The Times here treats respectfully what is essentially disinformation from Trumpworld, including claims that the Russia investigation began with a FISA warrant on Carter Page (it didn't), the notion that Bruce Ohr played some nefarious role (he didn't). The fact is that there has never been any basis to treat these allegations seriously. But Trumpworld knows that if enough highly placed Republicans, from Devin Nunes and Jim Jordan to the President of the United States, now with the eager collaboration of William Barr, just keep repeating them, they will eventually be treated seriously by the mainstream media.
The story here, which has been plain now for years, is that the Republican party has gone all in on campaigns of lies and disinformation as explicit political strategies.
31
Buckle up, left America. The road’s going to get very, very rough for you. But there’s always 2028.
9
Trump and Barr are acting like guilty men.
16
Could we get a special investigation on why William Barr is on the government's payroll instead of Trump's payroll ...say out of that special account for Stormy Daniels?
17
@Blanche White That "special account" is also where Cohen kept his bribes for promising access to Trump. So it will probably figure into the conspiracy that involves all the money laundering, unlike the fortunes of child molesters.
4
I'm trying to decide whether sales of John Le Carre novels are taking a dip because our reality has outstripped the need for them, or whether sales of John Le Carre novels are going to enjoy a surge because our reality is not slaking our thirst for conspiracy thrills.
27
@Jim Cricket, I predict they will take a dip, because they will be seen as woefully unrealistic, given the conspicuous lack of tweets and public, on-air confessions by the conspirators...
7
@Jim Cricket
I have been wondering what John leCarre thinks of our American mess.
3
@Jim Cricket - This case is trivial. It's the public's naivety and low standards for evidence and willingness to be led by the nose that are surging.
The reports are that after 16 hours of interviews the DOJ has found Steele and the dossier to be very "credible." They were shocked to hear some of his documented details. I don't know quite why this article does not get around to mentioning that. "The author of a controversial dossier about Donald Trump and Russia has reportedly been found credible by the Department of Justice." And this from Politico: "The interview was contentious at first, the sources added, but investigators ultimately found Steele’s testimony credible and even surprising. The takeaway has irked some U.S. officials interviewed as part of the probe — they argue that it shouldn’t have taken a foreign national to convince the inspector general that the FBI acted properly in 2016. Steele’s American lawyer was present for the conversation."
163
@JFMACC You sir have put the cart before the horse. Wait for the IG report. It will not say that the fake Dossier is anyway real. You are just repeating the same old information, before the truth has arrived. Wait watch. And be sure and post back, when the news breaks.
6
@John Pfaffinger And you likewise?
3
@JFMACC I see a strong likelihood that Barr is ready to cozy up to the Steele Dossier because he knows the Carter Page defense won't fly, that Donald can't pardon in New York, and that his connections with Epstein won't be going away from his appearances on TV. He also finds FBI spying "credible," you will recall, but as the guy who auditioned for his job last Fall and two months after taking power, has given himself the power to decide which evidence is going to be classified and which District Court needs to be fixed next, is torn between two lovers in Miami and Manhattan these days. He was AG before, you know? The Steele Dossier is something that he and Dershowitz might find surprising before we find out just how "heavily" Dorshowitz came down on Acosta. Barr has blown his own cover over the Mueller Report, so everything looks "credible" until he can stitch together an alibi out of patchwork. That's my take. Tomorrow is sure to offer new proof that he's a liar. The whole Harvard/Yale/Columbia establishment of lawyers/politicians may well be sinking at the tip of this Epstein plea.
1
The writer writes: "No evidence of such a recording has surfaced" - referring to a supposedly compromising sexual video of Trump in a Moscow hotel room. The writer's statement is incorrect: the video hasn't surfaced, but there is evidence of it, evidence that it exists or that it may exist. This is an important distinction about "evidence" that Times reporters keep getting wrong.
46
There is no evidence of this unless you exclusively read the Times comment section, the Huff P and their ilk, or watch MSNBC. If this was even slightly credible it would have placed a prominent place in the Mueller’s report.
9
@Atheologian NY Commentators, like good Leftists everywhere, love to convict their enemies as being guilty, because their target can't disprove something never happened.
4
@Atheologian
If there's evidence of it, then why haven't investigative journalists who went to Russia found it.
But let's suppose that a tape exists. How does the tape narrative even make sense? Russian prostitutes/oligarchs filmed Trump having sex and possibly beginning for loans.
So what? In what way is this supposed to be damning information given that we already know about Trump?
We already know he paid for sex. We already know that he defaulted on his loans, but banks kept him on because the brand name was worth more to them than that real properties.
Again, so what? In what logical universe does it make sense to count this as "leverage" against Trump and install him as President?
Leverage is supposed to be something heinous and shocking. Literally nothing in the Steele dossier is that, even if it's 100% true.
The thing is that Steele already admitted to UK courts that he has no evidence for at least some of the the claims in his report. He already discredited himself when he falsely alleged that Michael Cohen had been to Prague. If you can't even that basic fact straight, what makes the rest of the "report" credible? It reads like a cheap drug store novel.
2
The question is whether Horowitz's findings will be made public, or rather whether Barr will completely mischaracterize them to the public in a deceptive manner.
138
@Jonathan Reports are made public. You can see recent ones at the OIG website.
https://oig.justice.gov/
2
@Jonathan Barr has no authority over the Inspector General. Trump has intimidated him, I understood, but it's a non-partisan office in its conception. It may well confirm what Mueller doesn't want to say beyond the public, redacted Report.
3
“Mr. Steele told them that he believed the F.B.I. probably was underequipped to judge the inherently murky intelligence he was relaying.”
It seems like the FBI’s investigation at some point crossed over into the CIA’s area of expertise and jurisdiction what with foreign state actors and all that. Why is the CIA never brought up in this story?
16
My guess is that the CIA is enjoined from investigating the actions of American citizens and does not do criminal investigations. This was and is a difficult crossover, liminal matter: would the actions of a US candidate's campaign for office which enlisted the cooperation (or whose cooperation was enlisted) with and by a hostile foreign power come under the nature of criminal conspiracy or would it be a matter of espionage bordering on treason? The CIA would not need a brief to investigate the actions of a foreign power, but they could not prosecute US citizens. The FBI could do investigations which might lead to prosecution, but they would not have as much relevant experience engaging in the kind of sleuthing that would be needed. So it would appear that they treated it as something akin to an investigation of organized crime.
6
@Martin, great explanation.
Until now we never knew we needed an agency to investigate these types of potential crimes that cross over between criminal, international and political campaigns.
6
@Hugh Crawfordn Another theory might be that the CIA's surveillance of the whole population (since 9/11 and by means of the Patriot Act) had compromised their intelligence-gathering as the Russians proved they had a better game of espionage, something Donald helped to put into full display by his theatrics against Hillary and for Putin. Another reason why "the Russian thing"-- that didn't go away for Donald--had also gone beyond the law that intelligence isn't supposed to be "above," either.
1
Nice for Mr. Goldman to try to sell readers on Horowitz's ability to cross the aisle and be non-partisan.
Hillary Clinton should be in jail for the # of federal laws she violated while putting up a private email server in her bathroom, let alone communicating with Obama on said server while she was still in Russia.
No wonder Russia hated her. They heard and saw and read every single memo she sent out over her email server, and she had Abedin and Mills cover it up for her along with the guys from Platte River Networks (indictments expected soon).
IF he puts out the same "we couldn't determine intent" excuse as he used in the Hillary report..he can pack his bags.
11
@Erica Smythe I don't hear you talking about Ivanka's private email server that was used for official business. We all know how Trump and his supporters like double standards and hypocrisy.
23
The sore “winners” are worse than the sore losers.
7
No. We need to start with the truth, and not cater to partisan garbage that falsely accuses. Hillary was rebuked by the federal government. That is over, no matter how much you dislike her or the outcome. The actions of the sitting president are receiving additional scrutiny, given the incredible amount of evidence that he committed high crimes and misdemeanors. Horowitz’s job is to be a skeptic and investigate thoroughly. Which he is doing.
21
One the obstructionist Trump's side, we find so many of his closest advisors and friends hauled off to prison, indicted or in jail, it is hard to keep count. In his administration, so many top level cabinet heads have resigned for obvious corruption of one kind or another, again, hard to keep count--Acosta being only the most recent.
On the side of the FBI investigation into Trump and his Russian loves and infatuations, we have a severe finger shaking at James Comey and Andy McCabe fired for giving the ok to agents to talk to the WSJ correcting the record on whether or not the FBI had reopened an investigation into the Clinton Foundation-they had.
I will go with the boys and girls who clearly have integrity.
13
McCabe’s wife ran for the state senate here in VA and received an Enormous amount of money from then Governor McAuliffe, which anyone over the age of 30 knows is a Clinton stooge. This self righteous FBI agent didn’t disclose it until several months later. He also lied about leaking. If that is the type of person you want to hang your hat on so be it.
6
MM, Jill McCabe received a total of $675,288 from a political action committee and the Virginia Democratic Party. But it’s free speech. You don’t like it? Complain to the Supreme Court.
1
Let me guess, Barr's conclusions on this investigation will be issued the day after Mueller's testimony.
118
@Character Counts What are you talking about? He's probably already written his conclusions.
8
@RNS - What are you talking about?
@Character Counts said he would issue it the day after, not start writing it then. I think both of you are on the same page essentially.
Any additional writing would only be to fine tune his mockery of our system of justice to more effectively blow off anything substantive provided in Muller’s testimony to obfuscate as always.
4
@Character Counts He's looking for excuses, I tell you. Desperately. Such a pig. He needs a different pitch from the one that got him the job before the Dems got subpoena powers, and he can't shake Epstein, especially if Donald thinks Epstein is still a "terrific guy." Time for popcorn.
2
Can we have an investigation into why Trump and Congressional Republicans like Mitch McConnell refuse to do anything to protect our 2020 elections from foreign interference?
That's the real scandal.
525
This is all of a whole cloth - woven together, tightly.
27
@BearBoy
You mean like how Obama spoke directly to Putin?
You mean like Obama went to McConnell to issue a bipartisan, joint statement to alert American voters but McConnell not only said no but said he would say it was all a Democratic hoax?
Get your facts straight.
103
@BearBoy
Last I checked Obama gave up power, peacefully.
We're gonna hold your guy to the same standard. OK? You think he will? To President Elizabeth Warren?
26
It doesn’t matter what the report indicates. Barr will see that the report exonerates the Trump campaign whether it actually does or not.
If the text of the report proves troublesome, Barr can always delay the release of the report and provide us with his own rewrite. Not a sophisticated strategy, but it’s worked for Barr before. More than once.
After all, the only reason the report was even ordered was to provide cover for the Trump campaign. So that’s what it will do.
This is how “Justice” works in a dictatorship.
109
Generally speaking IGs are not above the political fray. They are employees of the agency or department they are supposed to investigate. They are not independent. They routinely return reports specifically written to placate those demanding the investigation. Expect this guy to find wrong doing that falls well short of illegality but that gives Trump the false victory he and Barr can spin as proof of a conspiracy.
The real purpose of investigating the origins of the Russia investigation is to see if any sources we have close to Putin can be exposed and eliminated. Trump is just following orders and doing a service for his boss.
39
Chris,
Lots of the career FBI agents who were forced out were experts on investigating Russian organized crime.
It does seem like Trump has an order from Putin to get rid of them. We're losing the best and brightest when we need them most.
63
@L
And if they suffer any physical harm Trump should feel responsible ... Oh, I forgot, that concept is not part of his reality.
1
Isn’t it a coincidence that the person(s) who largely backs the tax exempt organization Judicial Watch, Sarah Scaife Foundation, also backed the Trump transition team and that the same organization has sued each of these individuals: Strzok, McCabe, Comey, Ohr, and the FISA process with Carter Page to discredit the FBI. So it’s almost like Trump’s own backers are using their power and money to attack the investigators who initially worked on the Russian investigation.
https://www.post-gazette.com/news/politics-nation/2017/01/15/Trump-transition-Pittsburgh-s-Sarah-Scaife-Foundation-has-Trump-ties/stories/201701150041
19
@BoBOh yes purely purely coincidence
1
Gosh, isn't it "sort of interesting that some guy out of the blue just writes a report."
3
As long as this report is based on facts and is not partisan, let the chips fall where they may.
7
@Tony But you should know by now that partisanship is only defined as something that doesn't go your political way. If the IG report exonerates the FBI, expect Trump to excoriate the IG. If it criticizes the FBI, then expect Trump to praise the IG to the heavens.
7
Can we have an investigation into why Trump and Congressional Republicans like Mitch McConnell refuse to do anything to protect our 2020 elections from foreign interference?
That's the real scandal.
62
The so-called "justice department" - what a hoot! - has been tasked to try to discredit the FBI because the FBI actually uncovered some of the crimes that were supposed to stay hidden.
27
Basically!
1
Can we have an investigation into why Trump and Congressional Republicans like Mitch McConnell refuse to do anything to protect our 2020 elections from foreign interference?
That's the real scandal.
15
After reading the Mueller Report the so called Steele dosier has almost nothing to do with the report's final contents. It seems only one element in the broader investigation and was far from the only reason the FISA court approved wire taps. The FBI had a duty to investigate Steele's finding even if they took it with a grain of salt as they needed to do with all the information coming to them.
Those needing to disparage the Trump campaign investigation somehow need to find reason for to impugn the integrity of those investigating the Trump campaign considering how damning the Mueller Report turned out to be even though it did not flat out declare that Trump may not have worked with Russians. But that is a problem for Trump apologists in the end. The FBI and the Mueller investigation were even handed to the point that they could claim Mueller exonerated Trump and trashing that investigation beyond a certain point might come back to haunt the man they claim can do no wrong, President Trump who after all did in the end did take help from Russian sources to win an election.
33
Soon I will learn how Russia brainwashed me into supporting Trump
11
@William
...if you are in WI or PA and attended one of the rallies the Russians set up in targeted counties in those states via Facebook, you are right. Only one of many of their strategies. In fact you may be in Moscow right now!
33
Well somebody must have. Otherwise there is no rationale for your choice.
21
@William it would be the most honorable reason for your choice
5
While the source of information may make it suspect, even if it is funded by people with an agenda, that does not necessarily make the information itself untrustworthy. This argument is an adaptation of what the philosopher Kant argued in his Second Antinomy.
24
@David, sounds like the same case as fake fake news must therefore be real to me.
2
@David
I generally like good philosophy references, but the connection here to Kant eludes me. The Second Antinomy has to do with whether or not the world is composed of simple substances: Kant tries to show that you can provide equally valid argument both for the thesis and for its denial. What does that have to do with the argument you’ve made?
8
Who's Nellie Ohr? Keep hearing about her. Wasn't she working for a company called Fusion GPS? Weren't they hired by the DNC?
Wasn't she married to Bruce?
14
Trump cowers before his hero Putin who helped elect him in 2016 and now we watch Trump fawn over brutal dictators from Kim to MSB who murder their own people. A.G.Barr was sent in by the GOP bosses to save Trump's presidency and the tax cuts ,right wing judges and deregulation that comes with it. Barr will lie and operate as Roy Cohn the mob lawyer who mentored Trump on how to be a crime boss. Trump and his crime family took over the USA govt and began cashing in right away a billion for Jared ,acting sec of state for Ivanka and free travel for Don Jr to promote the presidents biz accepting bribes at the properties.
52
"Justice Dept. Watchdog"?
Someone appointed by Barr, who in turn was appointed by Trump -- the OBJECT of the real investigation?
Simply laughable! And utterly devoid of validity or credibility!
Who needs (the, sadly, soon-to-be-defunct) Mad Magazine, when Trumpo-reality is right out of the Bizarro Universe?
20
@NYer
FYI, IG Horowitz was appointed to his position by President Obama in 2012 --not by Bill Barr as you state.
13
@William Green LOL! Classic
“By adding further weight to their reasons to be suspicious of Mr. Page, Mr. Steele’s information helped officials overcome bureaucratic reluctance stemming from fears that any leak of the existence of such a wiretap would be politically radioactive.”
Sounds to me like grounds for certain FBI dismissals. Or worse.
6
Yes but Donald Trump doesn't trust the Justice Department nor America's national security intelligence defense agencies.
If Trump doesn't agree with the conclusions and findings of this investigation, perhaps he can get his friend Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin to investigate and give him a 2nd opinion. Trump trusts and respects Russian military intelligence aka GRU, Russian domestic intelligence aka FSB and Russian foreign intelligence aka SVR to give Trump their truth.
32
The Justice Department Report on Russia and the Election was done by Mueller. This is the BARR report intended to sow doubt and confusion into the clear findings of the Justice Department report, even though he now heads it.
It is not being done to find truth. That was done by Mueller.
It is being done to conceal, to obfuscate, to shift and cover truth. Barr is clearly a MASTER at the internecine tactics of using a department to serve an agenda, in his case protecting Trump at all costs.
This is the BARR REPORT OF EXONERATION FOR DONALD J. TRUMP. Might as well give it its official name.
And while doing so, we will eviscerate even further our willingness and preparedness to keep Russian
interference in our free elections at bay.
The GOP would rather sanction Russian interference in our democracy than admit that Trump was their intended beneficiary.
Shameful!
82
One would think that “welcoming and expecting to benefit” from Russian -or any foreign aggression/interference in US elections - would surely be alarming, worthy of the US gov’t investigating.
37
@Em. Has Barr been to Epstein's pads?
6
As far as we can tell, Steele is a straight shooter. He passed his intel on to the FBI because he couldn't believe a U.S. presidential candidate was colluding with the Russians. When they FBI refused to let the public know before the 2016 election, he gave his information to the press to get the story out to warn us of what was going on.
101
@Robert
"...When they FBI refused to let the public know before the 2016 election, he gave his information to the press to get the story out to warn us of what was going on."
The Mueller investigation also interviewed Steele --also in the UK -- because Steele now refuses to travel to the United States. Why? Most likely because he fears being subpoenaed to answer questions under oath before a congressional committee or grand jury.
Since the Mueller report unambiguously contradicted the information in the Steele Dossier (that Trump and his associates were conspiring with Russia) the credibility of the Dossier is now definitely in the toilet.
The fact that Steele's work was ultimately paid for by the Clinton campaign and the Party of the Left's National Committee -- and tried to hide that fact -- supports a conclusion that Steele was hired to be an agent provocateur.
He efforts succeeded beyond anyone's dreams...except for the unfortunate fact that voters in swing states disliked Hilary Clinton more than they disliked Donald Trump. (Polls indicate they disliked both.)
The Inspector General's investigation of the FISA warrants has gone on now for over a year.
Waiting for its release is like waiting for Godot.
2
@MM
How did Mueller contradict Steele?
5
Correct, mostly. I believe the story is that Steele passed the intel on to John McCain. The senator forwarded it to the FBI.
1
The old Trump ruse. Distract and attack in the wrong direction and blame the others.
64
Given Bill Barr's previous mendacity and his views on executive authority, I would anticipate two possible outcomes from this:
1. By far the most likely, Barr will find a way to use the report to proclaim that Spanky was "spied on" and that it was "unfair". A closer reading of Horowitz's report will reveal neither of these conclusions is true.
2. The report will find nothing improper, in which case Barr will refuse to release it.
34
Any bets on when this comes out? Like say July 17th, when Mueller is set to testify..........
15
There are three different investigations underway.
When today’s articles postulate that investigators found Steele “credible”, my instincts are that is a very bad sign for Obama FBI, DOJ and State.
Steele is obviously NOW cooperating because he knows next Brit PM is close ally of DJT; Boris would put him out of biz if he does not fess up.
Despite all the NYT, WP, TV media etc diversions the truth will come out. This could set Dems back for decades.
12
@PTM
Why wouldn't they find Steele credible?
He has been throughout this whole affair.
17
@PTM Today's articles go beyond just postulating that the Horowitz team found Steele to be credible. And this is a clearly not good thing for the Trump team.
13
@judith
Robert Mueller certainly didn't.
Clearly trump will have to get his personal AG Barr to investigate the investigators of the investigators!
Maybe Inspector Clouseau is available.
201
@trblmkr ... yeah, don't forget Mueller; and it's all on your dime.
@BD Mueller was worth every penny, in my humble opinion, and we'll find out for sure on July 17 when he testifies to Congress in a public forum.
15
Ha. None of this is at all funny. We are well past gallows humor.
2
Good of the NYT to get out ahead on this story for their DoJ / FBI sources. I'll check the WaPo, see if they're running cover for their clients, the CIA.
A correction about the FBI agents not receiving Steele info until two months later; Bruce Ohr met with Christopher Steele the day before Crossfire Hurricane was opened. He was passing Steele info on to Joe Pientka of the FBI on a regular and continuous basis from that point on - Pientka, along with Peter Strzok who opened Crossfire Hurricane on July 31, were the agents who interviewed Mike Flynn back in January, 2016, so the relevant agents were getting Steeles' info well before what the Times has reported here.
The State Dept had already received Steele's first instalments in early July through Jonathan Winer (as well as similar dossiers from Clinton fixers, legendary Sid Blumenthal and Cody Shearer). Victoria Nuland advised this info was to be passed on to the FBI.
If you folks at the Times need anything else, let me know.
23
@Lazlo K. Hud You win the commentariat today! Bravo!
8
@Lazlo K. Hud
Nice try. Read the article. "The Steele dossier did not reach the relevant agents until Sept. 19, 2016,"
Orr did not start meeting with Pientka until November 2016. That was after the investigation started.
You trump chumps always fade away when asked what you would do if you received this type of information from a source you trusted so I guess that's goodbye for now .
29
Re setting straight the record: Nicely done.
7
Oh my, the Democrats hired Steele to conspire with Russians within Russia sounds treasonous! Good grief!
6
@Charlie professionals who gather intelligence are not committing treason, they are keeping you safe.
78
@judith the fact they hated Trump and wrote text messages saying "we'll stop him" has no bearing on why they are keeping us safe, I suppose . . .
6
@Lazlo K. Hud
Did you miss this?
"Mr. Horowitz also uncovered text messages between the F.B.I. employees Peter Strzok and Lisa Page criticizing then-candidate Donald Trump. He sharply rebuked the pair but said he had found no evidence that the pair had acted with bias in the Clinton investigation." All FBI professionals have opinions. They are trained to ignore them when doing the job. Strzok and Page did that. You just got to peek at their compartmentalized lives.
17
Expect Horowitz redux here, criticizing the FBI for their behavior, yet finding nothing inherently wrong or worth following up on. And exactly how is this (as evidence by his previous inquiries) being above the fray of partisan politics? His report will simply serve as a life raft (albeit a weak one) for the media to twist in an attempt to salvage the Russian collusion narrative; or at the very least to paint the unprecedented behavior of the FBI and outgoing president into a well intentioned if not misguided light.
9
@J
Wow, you are so well informed!
Thanks!
2
@J It was an unprecedented situation. Just look at what has happened to Trump's closest advisors--in prison. THAT is also unprecedented, as is the 129 contacts documented by Mueller between the Trump team (or Trump) and the Russians during the election and transition. I feel sorry for the FBI agents trying to find their way through this mess dragged in by an inherently corrupt man who attracts those like him.
24
@trblmkr
Thank YOU for such a well informed response that fails to address the points made in my comment.
I’m so tired of this, every day it’s the same thing, yet nothing ever changes.
I’m no longer being polite to any Republicans I interact with, they are intent on destroying not just democracy or even civilization but life as we know it, all in the name of power simply for short term profit.
324
“Destroying life as we know it”? Yeesh!
Hyperbole: extravagant exaggeration (such as "mile-high ice-cream cones")
11
@Garret Clay,
Garret, Very well said. Republicans are responsible for the horrific damage to this country, including internment camps full of Hispanic infants and children. I no longer interact with them either. To do so would be to enable their views and behavior.
36
Oh, indeed, and NOT simply for profit. They intend to move the clock back. Way back. They want certain kinds of people put in their place(s). They are deadly serious.
34
Since FBI Director James Comey is a Republican, why would he have gone forward with what Bill Barr called as "spying" on a Republican running for President?
82
@Jacquie he may be a registered republican but I expect he's of the NeverTrump branch.
He's urging everyone to vote Democrat now. (likely the only way he stays out of the slammer).
9
Because Comey disdains Trump.
Not everything runs in lockstep with US political parties.
9
@Jacquie Yeah. I think that's a great ruse. I'm registering as a Democrat next week. Jolly game it all seems to be.
3
"...Russia has a compromising sexual video of Mr. Trump taken inside a Moscow hotel room. No evidence of such a recording has surfaced."
No, but maybe there's a video taken in one of the homes owned by Jeffrey Epstein?
178
@bijom probably but not on who you hope it will be - see Nancy Pelosi's daughter tweeting about their 'faves' earlier today.
5
@bijom
actually there is credible testimony from a victim regarding that.
9
As a former DOJ public corruption prosecutor (Public Integrity Section, Criminal Division): it is very difficult to retrospectively investigate and evaluate a federal investigation with regard to nuanced decisions as to which there were multiple options - only egregious errors and blatantly bad faith acts are obvious. This is because many factors - each of which is weighed subjectively to an extent - go into decision-making. Thus, one should not expect the IG report to necessarily "catch" all aspects of bad faith conduct in this matter (to the extent they exist).
When I was with DOJ, the Public Integrity Section leaders (Lee Radek and Joseph Gangloff) by the totality of information I observed were intent on "slow walking"and otherwise conducting a tepid criminal investigation so as to protect certainly highly connected individuals (ones typically part of the elite political establishment). Indeed, I spoke with a manager in the Section after I had left it regarding our investigation of then VP of the US Gore regarding potential criminal violations of the campaign finance laws in LA, and he said to me "the investigation was brought to Washington (from the LA USAO) "to kill it."
From a distance, it seems to me that the DOJ was intent on protecting Hilary Clinton from federal criminal charges (by conducting the investigation in a manner that never would have occurred had she been simply a mid-level USG employee).
It will be fascinating to read the DOJ OIG's report.
10
I can’t wait to read this report. It will be interesting to know how far the DNC corruption went. It will be opera music to my elderly ears.
10
@Andrew F . Did you not just read that the IG has already found that Peter Strzok and Lisa Page's personal texts that Sean Hannity bangs on about, in no way influenced their work or decisions at the FBI?
What is it you believe the IG will find?
Trump is a rotten apple. Who else has had so many close advisors and appointees go to prison, to jail, or resign in disgrace. At this point we cannot even count them all.
27
@Andrew
You seem confused. The DNC?
11
@trblmkr,
Yes, the DNC, i.e., Hillary Clinton's mob.
4
Innocent people do not need to accuse their prosecutors or question their motives, because they know the evidence is on their side and will vindicate them when it all comes out.
Too bad Mr. Trump is not in that category.
159
The DOJ IG's reputation is at stake with this report far more so than Steele's.
11
The Justice Department “misstepped” in the way Epstein “misstepped.”
1
@Hoobert Herver: misstepped in the steppes. In Russia. Where the video was buried by that Russian fellow who promised that there would be no compromising video of Mr. Trump.
1
Is it too much to ask that we investigate the people who are investigating the investigators, because I suspect their motives.
46
A mob full of high-level officials at the FBI, CIA, and NSA, under the direction of the Obama Administration, will be shown to have broken numerous laws while conducting covert surveillance of the Trump Campaign before the election and afterward. None of these creeps are heroes. Their acts to coop our democracy are reprehensible and they will eventually suffer the legal consequences. They will not escape being held responsible for these high crimes.
12
@William really! I have worked for two of those agency and these people operate at an ethical level that is far greater than any person on this thread.
These are the Facts people, not "Alt-Facts" they operate in the world of truth, and the people who do bad things hate them! (your input suggest you might be one of those)
35
@William
Seems you too missed the part stating the IG has already found that Peter Strzok and Lisa Page's texts in no way influenced their work at the FBI. I suspect that will be true for the rest of the public servants vilified by political entertainer Sean Hannity and his ilk. Many of these people are Republicans and doing the best job they could given the corruption they were dealing with. Trump was a magnet for greed and corruption.
20
The investigation began because Trump and his campaign welcomed Russian aggression/interference in US election. THAT attitude of welcoming your enemy to destroy your own country should alarm us all.
48
I find this pretty concerning. The merits of Steele's investigative process are irrelevant. He is not a U.S. government agent, and his methods have no bearing on whether U.S. investigators did their job within the bounds of the law. The relevant questions are what steps U.S. investigators took to verify the reliability of any information they relied on, and what they told the relevant court officers about those efforts to verify in seeking authority for taking investigative steps, including the disclosure of reasons for doubting the reliability of the information.
13
It will hit the fan, it will hit the fan hard, people will be surprised.
15
An American hero: Christopher Steele
145
@jr British, actually.
10
@kr
That's the joke.
20
Here’s he thing: chances are, prior to the swamp that has engulfed our nation, the FBI probably never had to delve into this depth of associations w our mortal enemies, the Russians.
However, be forewarned, unless Mr. Horowitz trashed the FBI, he can expect to face the twitter wrath of Trump and possibly of his thugs led by that sorry excuse of an Atty General, Barr. May this administration go down in infamy.
301
I guess you either did not read the following passage or in your view this is okay:
“Mr. Horowitz have asked witnesses about whether the F.B.I. properly opened the Russia investigation and how the bureau handled a pair of informants, including Mr. Steele, whose work was financed by Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee.”
7
@MDCooks8
Originally, it was Republican research. When it became clear that Trump was the candidate, they no longer needed to do the research so the dems took over.
Facts will set you free.
35
Did Carter Page discuss energy cooperation between the United States and Russia or not, when he was on the Trump campaign staff? That's all I want to know. Because if that is true, that is a smoking gun for a conspiracy for collusion.
Trump can dump as much cold water on this FBI investigation as he can get his tiny hands on. However, I just want to know the facts about a guy sent into the American presidency by a minority of people in the 2016 electorate.
210