Varying Expectations For IG Horowitz Report – The Convenient Application of “intent”……

If Senator Lindsey Graham is correct – tomorrow the DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz will release a much anticipated review, looking into how the FBI and DOJ used an application to the FISA court to investigate the Trump campaign. There are wide-ranging opinions about what exactly this report may, or may not, outline.

The IG review has been ongoing for 21 months.  This report is anticipated to be a culmination of that investigative effort.  The ‘tick-tock club’ of Sean Hannity, Sara Carter, John Solomon and various Fox pundits have promised the report will be the most devastating outline of gross FBI and DOJ misconduct in the history of IG review.

Additionally, a network of financially dependent social media voices, book writers, podcast pundits and Q-theorists collectively known as the ‘trusty plan group’, have predicted criminal indictments, wide-scale arrests and a shock to the DC system that will fracture the foundation of the administrative state and simultaneously drain the swamp.

Meanwhile the Lawfare group has been the most visible advocacy network for the current and former DOJ and FBI officials who participated in setting up and using the FISA surveillance system now under IG review.   The Lawfare group has stated the IG report will exonerate all of their pre and post election activity; validate the justification for their predicate efforts; and leave the ‘tick-tockers’ and ‘trusty planners’ having to reconcile to their stunned audiences how they interpreted all the data so incredibly wrong.

A review of the last three IG reports which brush up against the same DOJ and FBI network: (1) IG review Clinton email/FBI conduct; (2) IG review of McCabe/media leaks; and (3) IG review of James Comey conduct; shows the IG report on FISA is likely to come down somewhere in the middle.  ie. mistakes were made; poor judgements were evident; some unprofessional conduct was found; some lack of candor was identified; department policies were not followed; but no direct evidence of intentional wrongdoing was attributable to a coordinated political effort.

If prior IG reports are predictive we should see something akin to:

…Everyone collectively just happened to make identical mistakes, at the same time, in the same direction, together with all the administrative staff within all intelligence organizations… many of them were professionally trained lawyers… but no-one did anything wrong on purpose….

Remember the modern mantra for DOJ definitions of legality are all about “intent“.

Defining statutory violations by the intent of the violator is specifically attributable to how President Obama, AG Eric Holder and AG Loretta Lynch changed the entire enterprise of lawful application to make outcomes arbitrary, variable, changeable to the situation.

The IRS targeting wasn’t unlawful because it wasn’t intentional.  The death of four Americans due to sketchy CIA and State Dept. operations in Benghazi was not unlawful because the risky situation wasn’t created intentionally.  Hillary Clinton’s private email server with classified information wasn’t “intentional”, etcetera – etcetera, the list is long.

The nice thing about switching to definitions of lawbreaking by “intent” is the ease in arbitrary application.  Republican targets ‘intended’ to violate laws… Democrat targets, well, not-so-much.  Fluidity is a necessary oil amid a two-tiered administrative state.

If you elevate, I mean really elevate, and look at the bigger issue inside each of the examples there’s a connective thread surrounding a purposeful shift in accountability for broken laws by focusing on “criminal intent.”

“Intent”, not consequence, is now the larger shield being applied toward excusing the action of people within institutions of government and society.  Consider:

Ah yes, Hillary Clinton was not guilty or accountable because FBI Director James Comey said they couldn’t prove intent….. But the statute doesn’t require intent… But the DOJ said ignore the statute, they require it… and so it goes.

Also see years of Inspector General internal investigations culminating in the very familiar phrase: “declined to prosecute”; yup, they all surrounded intent.

Apparently anyone who breaks the law (lies) while inside the DOJ or FBI didn’t intend to… While lawbreakers (fibbers) outside the FBI/DOJ offices are intentful sons-of-bitches.

The “intent” issue extends everywhere….

Illegal alien entry, and accountability for fraud, all downplayed because there’s no proof of intent.   Walk down a pier in San Francisco and shoot a girl in the head… your honor, my client didn’t intend to do it.  The focus on intent -a specific decision made within the administration of a modern justice system- has become a shield against consequence.

It was a “mistake”…. he/she/it made “a poor decision” etc.  A pattern of obfuscation downplaying consequence and allowing those decision-makers charged with delivering accountability to withdraw or apply the rules of law based on their individual overlay of ‘intent’.

That shift is factually visible everywhere now.

The prior IG report by Horowitz [FBI bias & investigative outcome] was fraught with the application of ‘intent’ inside the inspectors explanation of absent evidence toward bias.

Each of these examples does not seem to be arbitrary, but rather connected to a more consequential decision by those in power to water-down accountability and open the doors for further abuse.

If the official didn’t ‘intend’ to do wrong, or more specifically if the people in position of delivering accountability for the wrong-doing cannot find specific intent, then the action is less-than regardless of outcome.

Consider what FBI officials were doing inside the FBI regarding media-leaks, then insert the James Wolfe example here & ask yourself how could they ever hold him accountable?

Pro Tip: They didn’t.

Following along the ideological lines we can all see how a shift to ‘intent’ can become a very serious issue within a corrupt system.

Within that system, and against that purposeful filter and determination, plausible deniability becomes the construct for intentional criminal engagement.

The illegal alien voter didn’t intend to violate the law… therefore no law was violated.  The Democrats who ballot-harvested illegal alien registration didn’t intend to violate the voting integrity statute… therefore no statute was violated.  Everyone just, well, made a mistake.

Whoopsie daisy.

A corrupt official doesn’t even need to put a finger on the scales of justice, once the scales are intentionally mis-calibrated like this.

If you wonder why there is such an overall sense of anxiety, poor conduct, lack of virtue and general unease within the recent landscape…. I would deposit the likelihood all of the unnerving instability around us is being caused by this shift away from consequence based entirely on ‘intent‘.

Brazen unlawfulness and abuses are now subject to arbitrary determinations of intent.

According to the current DOJ legal proceedings Michael Flynn the outsider intended to lie… FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, the insider, didn’t:

It’s this weird mish-mosh world where changing your party registration before you defraud your investors rob the bank might just help you out if you get caught.

From all current indications FBI Director Christopher Wray is directing his organization to spend more time filling the cracks in the dam (bias training) -trying to hold back the tide of electoral anger- than they are doing actual FBI work.  Which begs the question….

….did Bill Barr purchase scuba gear?

 

This entry was posted in 6th Amendment, AG Bill Barr, Big Government, CIA, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Donald Trump, Election 2016, Election 2020, FBI, IG Report Clinton Investigation, IG Report Comey, IG Report FISA Abuse, IG Report McCabe, Impeachment, media bias, Nancy Pelosi, Notorious Liars, President Trump, propaganda, Russia, Spygate, Spying, Susan Rice, THE BIG UGLY, TowerGate, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

756 Responses to Varying Expectations For IG Horowitz Report – The Convenient Application of “intent”……

  1. scrap1ron says:

    President Trump broke no laws, but he probably intended to, so he’s guilty. That’s the Democrat’s idea of just-us. Try and remove President Trump from office on such a fascist excuse and you’ll find that an armed citizenry says, “no you won’t” and back it up.

    Feeling lucky?

    Liked by 4 people

    • Beau Geste says:

      Scrap, President Trump could not have broken any laws under the DOJ/FBI definition of “intent”, so he is not guilty of anything except defeating hillary and being elected by deplorable US citizen voters. So, PDJT must be removed so voters do not try to ever again elect a non-deep-state candidate.

      Liked by 2 people

    • joebkonobi says:

      Funny how the dems don’t recall when Obama admitted that his DACA was unconstitutional but he went ahead and created it anyway. Someone should remind them.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Sundance’s excerpt from the DOJ IG’s report on Hillary’s email server states: “Even though Section 793(f)(1) does not require intent, prosecutors told us that the Department has interpreted the provision to require that the person accused of having removed or delivered classified information in violation of this provision possess knowledge that the information is classified. In addition, based on the legislative history of Section 793(f)(1), the prosecutors determined that conduct must he ‘so gross as to almost suggest deliberate intention,’ he ‘criminally reckless,’ or fall ‘just a little short of willful’ to ,meet the ‘gross negligence’ standard.”
    Even under this standard, Hillary was culpable. Hillary had “knowledge that the information is classified” because she knew that classified information would be in the emails on her server and that her server was outside of the protected U.S. Government network. Also, her conduct was at minimum, gross and reckless. She established a system that she knew, with 100% metaphysical certitude, would take classified information out of the Government protected network. Horowitz violated his own standard.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. NJ Transplant says:

    Carter Page was on with Maria Bartiromo today. One thing he said was there there is a lot still classified. It won’t have everything we want in this report. That has been saved for the Durham investigation. Of course, the Durham investigation will only deal with people who are charged with a crime. If there is a lot of documents still classified, according to the Horowitz report, that could either mean that Christopher Wray is refusing to hand over documents, or documents are classified pending the Durham report. Christopher Wray can’t withhold documents from John Durham.

    The IG report only deals with FISA warrants, not origination of the Russia investigation. My sense is that a lot will be explained away by the media and the left because not all the documents were released.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Beau Geste says:

      PDJT can release them in his “defense” if he can get the crazy dems to vote for impeachment !!! The best defense is a dem-criminal-disclosure offense.

      Like

    • Mr e-man says:

      Wray can’t withhold docs from Durham.

      Wray has already violated the law by withholding information he was legally required to turn over in a FOIA request. He even “lacked candor” when he said they didn’t have it but it was later found they did have it.

      Wray is not subject to following the law. We should turn him in to his boss. Oh yeah, thats Barr.

      Like

  4. william elbel says:

    Will anyone please tell me why this latest report from Horowitz will be something other than his previous result where the summary said there was no bias demonstrated but as a followup the FBI will arrange bias training?

    The FBI needs to shown that they are reliable so that all FBI convictions are not thrown out as they should be.

    Like

    • steph_gray says:

      Yes, in one sentence:

      Rod Rosenstein wrote the summary to the last report.

      It won’t be all unicorns and rainbows for true justice but it will not be a total whitewash either.

      Like

  5. Bogeyfree says:

    It makes it pretty hard for Durham to do anything IMO if the IG Report States the FBI and DOJ all acted properly but they just got bad intel.

    IMO this goes down as the biggest sweeper operation in the history of the country with the DS laughing all the way to the bank!

    Like

    • Mr e-man says:

      The Woods rules are set up because the target in the FISA court does not have an opportunity to protect their constitutional civil rights by presenting their side in the FISA court. The government is therefore required to present both sides. That means exculpatory evidence MUST be presented. To “knowingly ” withhold it is a crime. They knew Hillary paid for the dossier. They knew Steele had issues. They knew Papadoupolis had made exculpatory statements. None of that was presented to the court. This isn’t a regular court. It is a special court with special rules to protect citizens rights. They shouldn’t be allowed to just say whoopsie.

      Liked by 5 people

    • mimbler says:

      Not really, IMO. The report can’t exonerate the FBI and DOJ – at most it could say it didn’t find evidence of criminality. That doesn’t prevent Durham from finding the evidence that the IG “overlooks”.

      Like

    • L4grasshopper says:

      Part of “acting properly” is to validate the “bad intel” proposed for usage before you use it 🙂

      Like

  6. Orson Olson says:

    In other words, expect the IGs “report” to be a fraud. Where are the Patriot Minutemen to wage war against treaaon against the People and the Constitution?

    Like

    • Publius Syrus says:

      Remember that it was only 3% who really stood up, and risked all for (and some lost all in spite of..) Victory.

      IF the Senate votes to impeach (only takes four among those present) then its all talk .
      Given tye corruption exposed by Ukraine, and earlier Uranium One, and crooks like Senator Barr and I suspect Graham, I am become very pessimistic.

      Like

      • Adele Virtue says:

        actually, the senate needs 66 to impeach and I really do not see that many defecting to the dems side. Of course I may be wrong but it is way more than 4, more like 20+

        Like

  7. nyckers says:

    Hey Sundance, your take on “intent” has been used in an even more egregious manner by the judge in Devon Archer’s case, who vacated his FELONY CONVICTION BY A JURY on the nebulous basis of “intent” – just as you frame it. Read the Judge’s insane contortions to get there here: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5985572-Court-Ruling-Overturning-Devon-Archer-s.html

    Archer let his mobster buddy and partner, Galanis, who had been BARRED from the business by the SEC, use his name and address on the business to evade the ban on this criminal. Archer KNEW this. The most incredible part is when, just after millions of dollars were stolen by Galanis from the Native American’ bond issue, and $15 million was suddenly wired into Archer’s accounts at Morgan Stanley and Deutsche Bank, Archer LIED about the source of the funds – saying this huge payment came from “real estate transactions!” He KNEW Galanis had no money, and that the only POSSIBLE place he could have laid hands on $15 million was from the bond issue. But, because Galanis didn’t write a memo on the wire “stolen funds” the Judge says she is “troubled” that Archer may not have had INTENT to launder a massive theft by his mobster partner and his fraudster Dad.

    Maybe it’s just a COINCIDENCE that the Judge, Ronnie Abrams, happens to be married to a BIGLAW lawyer who WAS ONE OF MUELLER’S “DREAM TEAM” of prosecutors login after Trump. She had recused on two cases involving Trump, but not THIS one, because it involved a partner of Joe Biden’s family who possibly has a ton of deeply incriminating evidence on Hunter (and probably his father) AND who visited BOTH Joe Biden in the White House AND John Kerry at the Department of State back in 2014/2015 when he was busy doing conflicted deals with Ukraine and China on one day, and stealing $60 million from a Native American tribe the next day.

    COMEON, MAN!! Sundance, do a deep dive on this case and these people!! This guy is running for POTUS! There are no coincidences in this world!!

    Like

  8. lawton says:

    Hearing 2 or 3 criminal referrals from the report but the deep state will just refuse to prosecute as usual probably while locking anyone up connected to Trump that forgot something.

    Like

  9. tozerbgood8315 says:

    Still waiting. Is it 2020 yet?

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Show me says:

    This is the difference between manslaughter and first and second degree murder.
    If someone plans to kill, or murder, and has a plan, it’s first degree murder, but if someone is killed, but it hadn’t been planned, but seemed to occur spontaneously, perhaps through negligence, then it would likely be categorized as manslaughter.
    Laws are still broken, but there is a trial, determination of guilt or innocence and sentencing if guilty.
    Intent is really nonsensical.

    Like

  11. loteal2014 says:

    Yeah, they are trying to hold Trump accountable for something Hillary got away with. Intent… if it sticks it will show just how corrupt the left is. https://youtu.be/WIARMMtUdZQ

    Like

  12. Zy says:

    Fushion GPS favorite gal throwing out flak. Natasha Bertrand co- conspirator.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/status/1203814041036214273

    Like

  13. jello333 says:

    I’m really hoping something big is detailed in this report, and that it’s explicitly highlighted in the summary. That way it’ll be pretty hard for the MSM and the rest of our/Trump’s enemies to pretend it’s a “nothingburger”. But what’s just as important, in my opinion, and the main thing I’ll be looking for, is how Bill Barr responds to the report. If the report doesn’t sound as tough as we’re hoping, Barr might have one of two reactions:

    He can say he basically agrees with it, and he’s glad a “thorough report” was put together, and just leave it at that. If that’s all he does, we have a right to be very disappointed, and will be justified in questioning Barr’s motives.

    On the other hand he can say that the evidence presented in the report is valuable, but the conclusions not to recommend serious consequences are misleading. Because Horowitz could only do so much with what he had to work with, but there’s more out there. And until the details of that “more” — mainly the Durham investigation — are MERGED with the details of the Horowitz report, the whole thing is far from complete.

    So which of these two (or something else?) we hear from Barr might give us a good idea of what to expect down the road a bit.

    Like

  14. ATheoK says:

    I’ve written about this before. So, allow me to reiterate and restate.

    Inspector Generals and their teams are not prosecutors, police, law enforcement, etc.!!
    IGs and their teams are bureaucrats!
    IG investigators are often accountants or people with strong accounting experience.

    IG teams familiarize themselves with every law and regulation that governs an agency, department, branch, etc.
    Perhaps worse, IG investigators accrue experience investigating certain groups. These ‘experienced’ investigators assume that every process they documented before are standards equivalent to requirements and regulations.
    e.g. 1) during office computerization IG investigators wrote up every ‘new’ computer process as incorrect; often citing the previous laborious manual method as an office standard.

    A statement that highlights what IGs produce! IGs produce reports!
    At the end of every investigation they ‘present’ their findings to officers and senior staff of the groups they are investigating. These notified groups then get XX days to respond to the IGs report.
    N.B. Every process that they note is incorrectly performed/accomplished according to laws and regulations requires a response that highlights the actions necessary to correct and bring the work up to regulation/law standards.

    Every item where the IG’s team doesn’t approve or like how it’s being accomplished also requires a response, but not a ‘correction’. In the case of computerizing office work example, the Vice President or senior manager in charge acknowledges the IGs position then declines to change from the modernization back to archaic.

    IG teams must have direct absolute proof of a crime they understand, before they call the police or prosecutors. Accountants are able to recognize when accounting reports do not match funds in the banks; or when checks have incorrect signatures; or when employees are using work equipment and time to work at a managers private residence; or there is a body behind the filing cabinets; or employees snorting drugs or reeking of alcohol…
    Then and only then do IG investigators call the police.

    Note; that I did not specify employees smoking drugs! Smoked stuff is unknown stuff, employees inhaling white powder or melting stuff in spoons then injecting are obviously not normal.
    If an IG investigator references to smokers it will be whether they are observing the burdens placed on smokers and anti-smoking restrictions. Not about what the people are smoking.

    Many government departments operate under umbrellas of laws and regulations. Laws and regulations that tend to be vague about what exactly is a criminal act by employees across the breadth of their responsibilities.
    Which is why agencies can easily bafflegab IG teams with dark shadowy worlds of counterintelligence. Or NOAA can adjust historical temperature records into unrecognizable numbers while claiming they are homogenizing the data. If the IG teams do not understand what is occurring, they are unable to cite a process or performance error.

    e.g. 2) Remember the previous IG report? The IG was able to identify simple wrongs like employees leaking for quid pro quo return favors from news media.
    What wasn’t mentioned was FBI employees leaking to other agencies or even foreign governments!
    The governing regulations clearly identify leaking in return for goods or cash as illegal.
    Leaking to other government officials is a very murky business; and no proper paper bound anal retentive IG investigator is willing to write about things they clearly do not understand.

    e.g. 2a) In both leaking possibilities, the IG does not call law enforcement! Instead, the IG follows their duty and reports the findings to the officials in charge!
    Items that IG investigators do not understand get very low key and vague concern statements. Though at the exit interviews, the IG team usually can reference time and date of the reason they wrote the statement.
    Which is why so many of the FBI’s corrective actions are administrative training. Administrative training satisfies the IG’s response requirement from the investigated group.
    The IG is not in the business of requiring disciplinary or punitive actions; those are the business of the investigated group’s managers.

    Again, cue Wray publicly stating that he didn’t see anything damning in the report.

    It might, a very weak might, be that Horowitz learned from his first FBI report that many of the actions taken they cited in the report are indeed illegal and sent the relevant data to A.G. Barr and Prosecutor Durham.
    I suspect that many of the FBI’s most atrocious anti-Constitution actions are going to be nebulously cited in the IGs report:
    e.g. 3) The sheer abuse of police and FBI power used to arrest Roger Stone; or the FBI’s destruction of due process in prosecuting Flynn are key examples of what might get the nebulous vague statements. While it would be proper and nice of the IG team to identify high officials who abused their powers in ordering such inhuman practices; what I expect are simple bland statements that the FBI did not follow FBI regulations and procedures.

    Leaving all of the laborious hard work prosecuting the misbegotten illegitimate inter-species mongrels to a real prosecutor like Durham. That Durham is relying upon FBI investigators is not comforting.

    One of the things I have been very amused about, is the steady stream of revelation every week and sometimes every day proving malice, treason, coup plotting, quid pro quo, biased justice favoring the rich and powerful, conspiracy, RICO actions, etc. etc.
    Properly, The IG report should cover every one of those revelations. Every time there has been a new major revelation, I envisioned Horowitz and his team rewriting relevant portions of his report as CYA.
    With G-d’s grace, Durham added extra teams to investigate each revelation so that prosecutions are in process.

    Remember; IGs write voluminous reports and findings. Prosecutors investigate illegalities, present to Grand Juries, collect arrest warrants and coordinate arrest teams, and prosecute.
    Don’t expect prosecutions from the IG! Those get referred, if they are obvious! And trust me, IG teams find few bodies behind filing cabinets.

    A friend of mine was a Post Office inspector. Not under the IG or the Inspection Service!
    Unfortunately, he knew and understood Post Office Regulations and the overriding laws. He was also very adept at finances.
    Two years into his PO inspector career and his nickname was Dr. Death, for which he was ashamed. Virtually all of the people he referred to Postal Inspectors or the Police had committed theft; which was obvious when he performed inventory and then validated the accounting.

    Once a reputation starts, people panic when he shows up. Unlike typical IG teams, his visits were always unannounced to prevent employees shuffling stock to cover losses.
    With his reputation preceding him, employees often confessed everything they were doing wrong. Causing him to end up calling in Postal Inspectors for employees fudging travel records or taking home large Post Office equipment. Activities he would never normally uncover during an inspection.

    When Durham starts issuing arrest warrants and builds a history of successful prosecutions, more and more employees will start fessing up if they witnessed, supported or participated in nefarious actions.
    That should start occurring well before President Trump’s second term ends.

    Like

  15. TPW says:

    This whole thing is horrendous. Who would have ever dreamed that in a country of mostly moral patriotic people we end up with a totally corrupt government. Have we become so lazy and apathetic this gets a pass? Do we have to get to the point of the French having their pensions being taken…except it will be them stealing our social security all the while giving billions to other countries and having it kicked back. Sending our children to fight and die under false pretences …The only reason many of us will have any money…if they don’t steal it….at retirement is because our parents still were able to work and save or had pensions. They also had decent healthcare so were able to leave some money behind but that will change with this retiring generation who will use every penny just to survive.Mean while the jackasses in DC were destroying our jobs and saddling our children with huge debt for an education they will not get a job in. What a horrendous Sham. How much are we going to put up with? We have to come to PT aid …he can not do this without us…no way…..Sad thing is …those who are going along think they are protected….media….government employees…..even the Trumps …..all will be taken down for the few who are known by the few. Do or go down like sheep led to the slaughter.

    Like

    • Gary says:

      Almost there already, you don’t really believe the A.C.A had anything to do with health care? If they can mandate we must purchase insurance, they can mandate our pensions be funded with worthless Fed bonds…..we get screwed.

      Like

  16. moe ham head says:

    and once again it will be a lot of hot air with no substance
    until i see the main players swinging at the gallows it will corruption and cover up at its finest

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s