FBI official under investigation after allegedly altering document in 2016 Russia probe (DOJ IG Report thread) (1 Viewer)

[bdb13]

Washington (CNN) —

An FBI official is under criminal investigation after allegedly altering a document related to 2016 surveillance of a Trump campaign adviser, several people briefed on the matter told CNN.

The possibility of a substantive change to an investigative document is likely to fuel accusations from President Donald Trump and his allies that the FBI committed wrongdoing in its investigation of connections between Russian election meddling and the Trump campaign.

The finding is expected to be part of Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz's review of the FBI's effort to obtain warrants under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act on Carter Page, a former Trump campaign aide. Horowitz will release the report next month.

Horowitz turned over evidence on the allegedly altered document to John Durham, the federal prosecutor appointed early this year by Attorney General William Barr to conduct a broad investigation of intelligence gathered for the Russia probe by the CIA and other agencies, including the FBI. The altered document is also at least one focus of Durham's criminal probe.

Exclusive: Former FBI lawyer under investigation after allegedly altering document in 2016 Russia probe - CNN Politics

A former FBI lawyer is under criminal investigation after allegedly altering a document related to 2016 surveillance of a Trump campaign adviser, several people briefed on the matter told CNN.

www-m.cnn.com

Terrible if true. Trump will obviously seize upon this.

 

[Lame Duck]

In terms of sources, Time has the story with what seems like some additional info.

FBI Lawyer Investigated for Allegedly Altering Document Related to 2016 Surveillance of Trump Adviser: Reports

A former FBI lawyer is being investigated for allegedly altering a document related to surveillance of a Trump campaign adviser in 2016.

time.com

The conduct of the FBI employee didn’t alter Horowitz’s finding that the surveillance application of former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page had a proper legal and factual basis, an official told the Post, which said the lawyer was forced out.

 

[Beach Friends]

The walls are closing in.

 

[FWtex]

That is weird. No other sources are picking it up yet? And it seems illogical in light of CNN's typical biases. I'm kind of intrigued by this now.

My presumption is that the person being investigated has a contract with CNN and his contract requires reporting if you are the subject of a criminal investigation. Just a guess.

It was reported that the person not only changed the FISA but he fabricated an email to support the change made.

 

[crosswatt]

My presumption is that the person being investigated has a contract with CNN and his contract requires reporting if you are the subject of a criminal investigation. Just a guess.

It was reported that the person not only changed the FISA but he fabricated an email to support the change made.

I'm interested to see more of this story fleshed out. But from the Time article linked above, it doesn't appear to be impactful to whether or not the FISA warrant was legally awarded. So I'm even more intrigued as to what was edited that would result in an FBI lawyer being removed from the agency.

 

[Dadsdream]

FWIW, Hannity was going to absolutely bonkers about this story early this morning. I watched for five minutes and went back to bed. Can't stand Hannity.

 

[RegularChuck]

FWIW, Hannity was going to absolutely bonkers about this story early this morning. I watched for five minutes and went back to bed. Can't stand Hannity.

It's worth absolutely nothing.

 

[superchuck500]

In terms of sources, Time has the story with what seems like some additional info.

The conduct of the FBI employee didn’t alter Horowitz’s finding that the surveillance application of former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page had a proper legal and factual basis, an official told the Post, which said the lawyer was forced out.

I have seen this elsewhere as well.

We'll have to see what the report actually says but it seems like it will be hard to argue that the IG report shows the process was hopelessly flawed while at the same time discounting that the IG found that the application(s) had proper and legal foundation.

 

[crosswatt]

I have seen this elsewhere as well.

We'll have to see what the report actually says but it seems like it will be hard to argue that the IG report shows the process was hopelessly flawed while at the same time discounting that the IG found that the application(s) had proper and legal foundation.

I'm assuming it's somehow tied to this story from the IG's audit from earlier in the week:

DOJ watchdog finds security risks in FBI handling of confidential sources | CNN Politics

A Justice Department audit on how the FBI manages its confidential sources found security risks in the agency's handling of communications with, and information from, its sources.

www.cnn.com

 

[The moose]

Ok so the doj is investigating the FBI for something that would help trump with his story about the deep state had it in for him.

So if we could establish just went this started cuz it sure sounds a ton like Trump's lackie old Billy bar is up to his crap again.

If you guys really buy into this without looking at the involved parties you are kinda nuts.

 

[JimEverett]

In terms of sources, Time has the story with what seems like some additional info.

FBI Lawyer Investigated for Allegedly Altering Document Related to 2016 Surveillance of Trump Adviser: Reports

A former FBI lawyer is being investigated for allegedly altering a document related to surveillance of a Trump campaign adviser in 2016.

time.com

The conduct of the FBI employee didn’t alter Horowitz’s finding that the surveillance application of former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page had a proper legal and factual basis, an official told the Post, which said the lawyer was forced out.

I am not sure what the role of the IG is in such investigations. But on its face that does not seem like a call the IG is tasked with making.

 

[The moose]

I am not sure what the role of the IG is in such investigations. But on its face that does not seem like a call the IG is tasked with making.

Well I am not sure but I would bet the inspector general answers directly to the attorney general.

The two things he is known for is investigating the FBI.

He is the dude that caught that guy cheating on his wife and texting about trump.

So I would take anything with well more than a grain of salt. Probably a cows salt lick would be about the right size

 

[MT15]

Saw this tweet about the subject as well:



I agree that it’s hard to imagine that the warrants would be found to be legitimate if this falsification was a big deal. I guess we will find out soon enough.

 

[EmBeeFiveOhFour]

The FNYT has a story out about the IG report. This thread sums up a few important notes (sadly not "WITCH HUNT!!!")

 

[Lame Duck]

I am not sure what the role of the IG is in such investigations. But on its face that does not seem like a call the IG is tasked with making.

I don't think I understand your question. The quoted part was just saying that the IG was going to be releasing his report, and the draft of the report states that he investigated one hundred people, and one FBI lawyer was found to have committed one instance of maleficence in altering a document and admitted to altering the document when asked, and has been removed from the job. It also says that the report will show that the IG found the there was an appropriate legal basis for the original surveillance application, and that the altered document didn't undermine that basis. I'm not sure that a call is being made other than his findings being released.

 

[JimEverett]

I don't think I understand your question. The quoted part was just saying that the IG was going to be releasing his report, and the draft of the report states that he investigated one hundred people, and one FBI lawyer was found to have committed one instance of maleficence in altering a document and admitted to altering the document when asked, and has been removed from the job. It also says that the report will show that the IG found the there was an appropriate legal basis for the original surveillance application, and that the altered document didn't undermine that basis. I'm not sure that a call is being made other than his findings being released.

I was refrencing the last point.

Why would the IG make such a determination?
Is the IG responsible for determining if affidavits are sufficient for warrants?????

That quote seems bizarre.

 

[The moose]

I was refrencing the last point.

Why would the IG make such a determination?
Is the IG responsible for determining if affidavit's are sufficient for warrants?????

That quote seems bizarre.

Why would he not?

He single handedly squashes the Mueller report and set on it for weeks and weeks.

If more than one thing was wrong they would be screaming this stuff as loud as possible.

Witch Hunt deep state all that nonsense.

So Michael E. Horowitz has caught one dude cheating on his wife and a date wrong.

Man I wonder how much that cost us?

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

This story has something for everyone. It's actually going pretty close to what I predicted would happen. Horowitz determines that there was a good legal basis for the FISA report and that not all rules were followed precisely.

JimE brings up a good point though. I'm not sure Horowitz it's in a position to determine whether there is a good legal basis for the FISA report. That's for a FISA judge to determine. I suspect the actual report will determine that some procedures were not properly followed, but there was no concerted effort to falsify evidence and that the evidence presented to the FISA court was accurate.

 

[JimEverett]

This story has something for everyone. It's actually going pretty close to what I predicted would happen. Horowitz determines that there was a good legal basis for the FISA report and that not all rules were followed precisely.

JimE brings up a good point though. I'm not sure Horowitz it's in a position to determine whether there is a good legal basis for the FISA report. That's for a FISA judge to determine. I suspect the actual report will determine that some procedures were not properly followed, but there was no concerted effort to falsify evidence and that the evidence presented to the FISA court was accurate.

yeah. If the source for that quote knows what he is talking about I suspect Horowitz wrote or said something along the lines of - the affidavit still met the burden the FBI requires or something along those lines.