Sessions fires McCabe before he can retire
"Attorney General Jeff Sessions late Friday night accepted the recommendation that former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, who took the reins of the agency during the turbulent days after the abrupt firing of James Comey, be terminated — two days before he was to retire and become eligible for full pension benefits."
Although it may seem suspicious because of Trump's obsession with this guy and his wife, this looks like it might be a proper firing. McCabe's termination was recommended by an FBI internal affairs investigation as well as by an investigation by the Department of Justice. McCabe is a career civil servant, not a political appointee, so Justice would be loath to fire him without proper cause, because the ensuing lawsuits would be far more costly than actually paying his full pension. Not to mention highly embarrassing.
"Both the OIG and OPR reports concluded that Mr. McCabe had made an unauthorized disclosure to the news media and lacked candor — including under oath — on multiple occasions."
OIG = the Inspector General of the Justice Department
OPR = the Office of Professional Responsibility of the FBI
Here is his rebuttal. It's difficult to say who is wrong based on what we know now. Check out more thoughts in the "comments" section.
McCabe's statement gives you different food for thought. One thing he emphasizes is that it's his job to give information to reporters:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-mccabe-statement/fired-fbi-deputy-director-mccabes-statement-idUSKCN1GT04Q
His statement doesn't address the FBI's own internal investigation, just the one by the OIG.
DeleteI think I agree that the "unauthorized disclosure" charge may be bullshit. I'd have to see the details. For example, if he was the acting director of the FBI at the time, whose authorization did he need? Even if he was deputy director, was he free to speak on his own authority or not?
It sounds like he intends to lawyer up and fight for his pension and honor. That legal battle may tell us much more than we know now.
DeleteYeah, but the leaking doesn't seem important enough for his dismissal. The lying under oath does.
ReplyDeleteYes, I agree the lying under oath is more problematic. And his rebuttal has statements like "I answered questions truthfully and as accurately as I could amidst the chaos that surrounded me" and "to be accused of lacking candor when at worst I was distracted in the midst of chaotic events" seems to indicate that he said something that was proven to be wrong.
DeleteGiven everything else about this administration's proven mendacity, however, it wouldn't be surprising if they're taking some relatively minor issues and using them to misdirect and scapegoat.
Yes, I agree. That would be characteristic of the administration and its enablers, and consistent with many other actions that were equally dishonest intellectually, like the Uranium One "scandal" and the Nunes memo, which were both based on forming a pastiche of statements that were technically true but meaningless.
Delete("A major stockholder in Uranium One made massive donations to the Clinton Foundation.")
Sure, long after he had abandoned U-1 and long before Hillary was SoS.
("The FBI was listening in on Trump campaign workers.")
Sure - before and after he was associated with the campaign, because Trump and his cohorts did not screen someone they called a key foreign policy advisor.
Yes, I agree with you. Their negative assessments of McCabe could be more of those statements that mean nothing when placed in the proper context.
And maybe the FBI internal affairs investigation was pure politics, but we haven't gained enough info to decide that.
If McCabe actually did something wrong, they would charge him with a crime. But that would involve evidence, public testimony, blahblahblah.
ReplyDeleteBut boning an employee is easy so they'll do that. He'll write a book, but by the time that comes out it'll just be so much paper.
Well, this gets even better because it appears that McCabe, like Comey, took memos of his interactions with Trump, and now Mueller has them all. So if there's anything hinky there, Mueller may have the chance to look into it.
ReplyDelete