on 1/13/19. This is a
.
Mr. McCarthy spells out in great detail the activities of the FBI and
Department of Justice (DOJ) in their efforts to thwart the presidency of
Donald J.Trump.
We have to remember: The FBI believed the Steele
dossier
– the collection of faux intelligence reports compiled by former
British spy Christopher Steele, who was ultimately working for the
Hillary Clinton campaign. The Justice Department on four occasions
brought surveillance applications to the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Court (FISC), in which the FBI swore that it believed the
dossier allegations.
Ostensibly,
the surveillance application targeted Carter Page. But Page was just a
side issue. The dossier was principally about Trump – not Page, not Paul
Manafort, Michael Cohen, or other Trump associates referred to by
Steele. The dossier’s main allegation was that Trump was in an espionage
conspiracy with Russia to swing the election to Trump, after which
Trump would do Putin’s bidding from the White House. The FBI and the
Obama Justice Department could not verify the dossier, but they
undeniably believed it.
If you believe the dossier, then of course Trump is the main focus of the probe.
The
FBI and DOJ knew this would be controversial – the incumbent
administration spying on the opposition campaign in the absence of
corroborated evidence of a crime. So, they designed the investigation in
a way that allowed them to focus on Trump without saying they were
doing so. Before Trump was elected, they papered the files to indicate
that they were focusing on the Trump campaign or people connected to it,
like Page and Papadopoulos. This way, they could try to collect
evidence about Trump without formally documenting that Trump was the
target.
After Trump was elected, the FBI realized that Trump was
soon going to have access to government intelligence files. If they
honestly told the president-elect that they had been investigating his
campaign in hope of making a case on him, they had to be concerned that
he would shut the investigation down and clean house at the FBI and DOJ.
So, they misleadingly told him the investigation was about Russia and a
few stray people in his campaign, but they assured him he personally
was not under investigation.
Because
the FBI did not have solid evidence of a crime, they did it under
counterintelligence authority rather than criminal authority –
calculating that the cover of probing Russia’s interference in the 2016
election would enable them to keep investigating while they tried to
tighten up the obstruction case or find some other criminal offense.
This
was not true. The investigation was always hoping to find something on
Trump. That is why, for example, when director Comey briefed
then-President-elect Trump about the Steele dossier, he told Trump only
about the salacious allegation involving prostitutes in a Moscow hotel;
he did not tell the president-elect either that the main thrust of the
dossier was Trump’s purported espionage conspiracy with the Kremlin, nor
that the FBI had gone to the FISC to get surveillance warrants based on
the dossier. The FBI was telling the president-elect that the
allegations were salacious and unverified, yet at that very moment they
were presenting them to a federal court as information the judges could
rely on to authorize spying.
Later, though Comey repeatedly told
President Trump he was not a suspect, he gave House testimony patently
geared to lead the public and the media to believe Trump was a suspect –
which is exactly how the media reported it. In so doing, the FBI (and
the Obama holdovers in the Justice Department who authorized Comey’s
testimony) violated DOJ rules about publicly confirming the existence of
an investigation, and publicly identifying a subject of an
investigation: the Trump campaign, which Comey publicly announced was
suspected of “coordinating” in the Kremlin’s widely reported
cyberespionage interference in the 2016 campaign.
Comey’s firing
on May 9, 2017, was not the start of an investigation of Trump. It was
the point when the FBI and Justice Department rashly determined that
they finally had a crime to pin on Trump — obstruction. In their haste
and overconfidence, they rationalized that (a) Comey’s firing must have
been intended to impede the Russia investigation, and that they could
couple this with; (b) the claim that Trump may have impeded the Flynn
investigation – based on a memo Comey leaked to the New York Times a few
days after his firing.
Legally, none of this was obstruction.
Yet, the FBI and Justice Department settled on this novel and flawed
legal theory: Even though the president has constitutional authority to
fire subordinates and weigh in on investigations, he may somehow still
be prosecuted for obstruction if a prosecutor concludes that his motive
was improper. Of course, even though he could have, Trump never actually
took any steps to interfere in the investigations of Russia (which is
still continuing) or Flynn (who later was indicted and pled guilty). Yet
the FBI, hot-headed over the director’s dismissal, concluded that this
obstruction theory was a sound enough basis to go overt with the case on
Trump they had actually been trying to make for many months.
Remember,
it is not just that the FBI formally opened an investigative file on
Trump. There was talk between Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and
acting FBI director Andrew McCabe of wiring up against the president —
i.e., conducting covert surveillance to try to record Trump making
damaging statements. There was also talk of invoking the 25th Amendment –
of claiming Trump was too incapacitated to perform his duties. And
finally, on May 17, Rosenstein appointed Robert Mueller as special
counsel to pursue the Trump-Russia investigation.
But
all of these steps were just a matter of finally being overt about
something that had been true for over a year: The FBI was conducting a
probe to try to make a criminal case on Trump. Because they did not have
solid evidence of a crime, they did it under counterintelligence
authority rather than criminal authority – calculating that the cover of
probing Russia’s interference in the 2016 election would enable them to
keep investigating while they tried to tighten up the obstruction case
or find some other criminal offense.
Make no mistake, though: The investigation was always about Donald Trump, from Day One.