Posted by Curt on 14 March, 2018 at 6:52 pm. 1 comment.


A very interesting dynamic today, with a motive that may not be as transparent as initially appears. The New York Times and Washington Post are both reporting the FBI’s internal Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) has recommended to AG Jeff Sessions that FBI Asst. Director Andrew McCabe should be fired.

The reason for the recommendation surrounds the DOJ Inspector General discovering that FBI Asst. Director Andrew “Andy” McCabe intentionally leaked information about the Clinton investigation to the media, and coordinated the leaks therein.  The IG referred the issue to the FBI’s internal OPR for review and recommendation to the Attorney General. The Times and Post are leaking information of the determination by the OPR that Andrew McCabe should be fired.

(NYT) […] Now, Mr. Sessions is the final arbiter of Mr. McCabe’s dismissal, shortly before his retirement takes effect Sunday. Though no decision has been made, people inside the Justice Department expect him to be fired before Friday, a decision that would jeopardize his pension as a 21-year F.B.I. veteran. (link)

If AG Jeff Sessions fires McCabe for cause, the former FBI Deputy could, likely would, lose his pension and benefits.  McCabe is scheduled to retire with those benefits on March 20th, six days from now.

The dynamic is interesting.  An OPR recommendation for disciplinary firing puts AG Jeff Sessions into a box; he has two options:  Option #1 is fire McCabe.  Option #2 is set aside the OPR ruling and allow McCabe to retire.  Sessions has to take one of those two actions.

[Don’t get confused, this has nothing to do with Inspector General Horowitz, or his ongoing release of the year-long internal investigation.  The IG simply referred, based on his own review and interview, the likelihood that McCabe leaked to the media.  The OPR takes over from there; the IG goes back to work.]

On one hand you could make an argument the Office of Professional Responsibility’s disciplinary recommendation is (Good Guys) trying to hit and punish McCabe at the last moment possible.  However, on the other hand you can look at this leaked disciplinary recommendation as Machiavellian characters (Bad Guys) within the FBI setting up AG Sessions, painting him into a corner, to create yet another controversial storyline.

My guess as to the FBI OPR motive is the latter, not the former, and here’s why.

First, the OPR recommendation is leaked.  We are all too familiar with the IC leaks to the New York Times and Washington Post being 100% constructed by illicit schemers within the intelligence community who are against the Trump administration.  This truism is transparent from the history of the leaking.  All leaks frame a narrative that only goes in one direction. All leaks are against the people’s president, Donald Trump.

Second, and perhaps more convincingly, the recommendation is coming from the Office of Professional Responsibility inside the FBI.  Think about that carefully.

If there was an actual OPR office – containing any semblance of professional watchdog intent – then where the hell were they over the past few years while the entire organization was engaged in brutally corrupt activity.

Now, only RIGHT NOW, the FBI-OPR has issues with McCabe et al?

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot!

Where was the OPR while the entire administrative apparatus of the FBI was leaking to the media, constructing false witness, assembling fraudulent investigative materials, conducting sham investigations with predetermined outcomes; blocking congressional oversight, and generally behaving like a rogue political intelligence apparatus?

Seriously, where was the FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility then?

No.  Sorry.  Not even beginning to buy the angle of a decent department watchdog doing their level-best to bring justice upon the head of a corrupt FBI political operative, Andrew McCabe.  I’m not buying it.

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x