FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe fired 30 hours before retirement.

[Vekseid]

ABC Article

His statement:

    I have been an FBI Special Agent for over 21 years. I spent half of that time investigating Russian Organized Crime as a street agent and Supervisor in New York City. I have spent the second half of my career focusing on national security issues and protecting this country from terrorism. I served in some of the most challenging, demanding investigative and leadership roles in the FBI. And I was privileged to serve as Deputy Director during a particularly tough time.

    For the last year and a half, my family and I have been the targets of an unrelenting assault on our reputation and my service to this country. Articles too numerous to count have leveled every sort of false, defamatory and degrading allegation against us. The president’s tweets have amplified and exacerbated it all. He called for my firing. He called for me to be stripped of my pension after more than 20 years of service. And all along we have said nothing, never wanting to distract from the mission of the FBI by addressing the lies told and repeated about it.

    No more.

    The investigation by the Justice Department’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) has to be understood in the context of the attacks on my credibility. The investigation flows from my attempt to explain the FBI’s involvement and my supervision of investigations involving Hillary Clinton. I was being portrayed in the media over and over as a political partisan, accused of closing down investigations under political pressure. The FBI was portrayed as caving under that pressure, and making decisions for political rather than law enforcement purposes. Nothing was further from the truth. In fact, this entire investigation stems from my efforts, fully authorized under FBI rules, to set the record straight on behalf of the Bureau and to make it clear that we were continuing an investigation that people in DOJ opposed.

    The OIG investigation has focused on information I chose to share with a reporter through my public affairs officer and a legal counselor. As Deputy Director, I was one of only a few people who had the authority to do that. It was not a secret, it took place over several days, and others, including the Director, were aware of the interaction with the reporter. It was the same type of exchange with the media that the Deputy Director oversees several times per week. In fact it was the same type of work that I continued to do under Director Wray, at his request. The investigation subsequently focused on who I talked to, when I talked to them, and so forth. During these inquiries, I answered questions truthfully and as accurately as I could amidst the chaos that surrounded me. And when I thought my answers were misunderstood, I contacted investigators to correct them.

    But looking at that in isolation completely misses the big picture. The big picture is a tale of what can happen when law enforcement is politicized, public servants are attacked, and people who are supposed to cherish and protect our institutions become instruments for damaging those institutions and people.

    Here is the reality: I am being singled out and treated this way because of the role I played, the actions I took, and the events I witnessed in the aftermath of the firing of James Comey. The release of this report was accelerated only after my testimony to the House Intelligence Committee revealed that I would corroborate former Director Comey’s accounts of his discussions with the President. The OIG’s focus on me and this report became a part of an unprecedented effort by the Administration, driven by the President himself, to remove me from my position, destroy my reputation, and possibly strip me of a pension that I worked 21 years to earn. The accelerated release of the report, and the punitive actions taken in response, make sense only when viewed through this lens. Thursday’s comments from the White House are just the latest example of this.

    This attack on my credibility is one part of a larger effort not just to slander me personally, but to taint the FBI, law enforcement, and intelligence professionals more generally. It is part of this Administration’s ongoing war on the FBI and the efforts of the Special Counsel investigation, which continue to this day. Their persistence in this campaign only highlights the importance of the Special Counsel’s work.

    I have always prided myself on serving my country with distinction and integrity, and I have always encouraged those around me to do the same. Just ask them. To have my career end in this way, and to be accused of lacking candor when at worst I was distracted in the midst of chaotic events, is incredibly disappointing and unfair. But it will not erase the important work I was prevailed to be a part of, the results of which will in the end be revealed for the country to see.

    I have unfailing faith in the men and women of the FBI and I am confident that their efforts to seek justice will not be deterred.

Well there's another lawsuit every American taxpayer gets to pay for, at the very least.

[Caitlin]

Maybe so, but it hardly seems fair what's happening to him. Everybody wants to be treated just. I think that this man more than any deserves to get all of what happened to him rectified. Besides, there are tens - if not- hundred-thousands of court cases every day, they cost the taxpayer too since the courthouses, judges, and supporting staff are paid for with public money, adding this one to the masses will hardly have an impact on the overall costs the taxpayers are already paying.

[Vekseid]

I am not claiming it was just.

At this point, I am simply past anger. It is just a set of problems that need solving, and I will do what I can.

[Caitlin]

That is very true yes. I don't even live in the US, but Trump's 'antics' for lack of a better word are causing more harm than that they help. It also makes me wonder if he's going to get re-elected in a few years, I know that sitting presidents usually are, but I also hope that he'll be an exception to that rule.

[Regina Minx]

Dem offers to hire McCabe to help him qualify for his pension.

[gaggedLouise]

McCabe says he will offer Mueller access to his notes about meetings with Trump. :)

Will Rex Tillerson do the same?

[Wayfarer]

So Happy they didn't let that Douche McCabe retire. The guy needs to be in prison.

[Callie Del Noire]

So Happy they didn't let that Douche McCabe retire. The guy needs to be in prison.

So you’re okay with purposely denying retirement for 20+ years work and service? That a very partisan action that is going to possibly cost tax payers much more in the end.

I disagreed when Donald Rumsfeld did it to generals and military service members for doing their job of telling him what he needed rather than what he wanted to say.

[Sara Nilsson]

So Happy they didn't let that Douche McCabe retire. The guy needs to be in prison.

I am curious. I don't really know anything about the guy, but why does he need to be in prison?

[Vekseid]

The reports are that he leaked information about the Clinton investigation to the WSJ and then lied about it.

It's hard to be certain until we see the actual recommendation, however. If it ends up being like the 'recommendation' to fire Comey, well.

Here's a good oveerview: https://www.lawfareblog.com/what-we-know-and-dont-know-about-firing-andrew-mccabe

[Callie Del Noire]

The reports are that he leaked information about the Clinton investigation to the WSJ and then lied about it.

It's hard to be certain until we see the actual recommendation, however. If it ends up being like the 'recommendation' to fire Comey, well.

I find these reports of demands for Oaths of loyalty disturbing. Setting the President ahead of the Nation isn’t a good practice.

[Wayfarer]

The reports are that he leaked information about the Clinton investigation to the WSJ and then lied about it.

It's hard to be certain until we see the actual recommendation, however. If it ends up being like the 'recommendation' to fire Comey, well.

Here's a good oveerview: https://www.lawfareblog.com/what-we-know-and-dont-know-about-firing-andrew-mccabe

Leaking classified information is a crime. James Comey and McCabe could share a cell.

[Regina Minx]

Leaking classified information is a crime. James Comey and McCabe could share a cell.

The only thing James Comey leaked was his own memorandum of conversation following conversations with the president. This material was not classified.

I also will note that McCabe was fired and not, you know, referred to prosecutors for perjury and unauthorized disclosure of classified material. According to the statement, McCabe “had made an unauthorized disclosure to the news media and lacked candor—including under oath—on multiple occasions.” Note that doesn’t say u nauthorized disclosure of classified material, which would be a crime.

In one case of a fired FBI agent dismissed for the same lack of candor complaint, lack of candor was defined not as lying under oath (perjury), but for giving incomplete answers while under oath.

The full inspector general report on the Clinton email investigation, which will presumably include information on McCabe’s conduct, is to be released later this spring. Without seeing the report, it’s impossible to know whose story reflects the truth here—Sessions’s or McCabe’s.

[Avis habilis]

The notion that Dobby the hate elf gave McCabe the boot without direction from Littlefinger is dubious at the very best, but it's true he did have his own reasons for being vindictive.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/03/last-year-mccabe-launched-perjury-investigation-into-sessions-this-year-sessions-fired-him.html

[Callie Del Noire]

The notion that Dobby the hate elf gave McCabe the boot without direction from Littlefinger is dubious at the very best, but it's true he did have his own reasons for being vindictive.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/03/last-year-mccabe-launched-perjury-investigation-into-sessions-this-year-sessions-fired-him.html

Yeah, the Keebler elf of Doom is a long believer of payback

[Wayfarer]

The only thing James Comey leaked was his own memorandum of conversation following conversations with the president. This material was not classified.

I also will note that McCabe was fired and not, you know, referred to prosecutors for perjury and unauthorized disclosure of classified material. According to the statement, McCabe “had made an unauthorized disclosure to the news media and lacked candor—including under oath—on multiple occasions.” Note that doesn’t say u nauthorized disclosure of classified material, which would be a crime.

In one case of a fired FBI agent dismissed for the same lack of candor complaint, lack of candor was defined not as lying under oath (perjury), but for giving incomplete answers while under oath.

The full inspector general report on the Clinton email investigation, which will presumably include information on McCabe’s conduct, is to be released later this spring. Without seeing the report, it’s impossible to know whose story reflects the truth here—Sessions’s or McCabe’s.

Well said and agreed.

The IG report will indeed tell the tale and ( at least the classified version ) will more likely than not show that information was indeed leaked that was classified. I look forward to reading it. Time will tell. What is clear beyond any doubt is that both men were prone to leaking information for political reasons. A bad idea for someone who is supposed to lead the FBI by example and demonstrate no partisan bias.

[Regina Minx]

The IG report will indeed tell the tale and ( at least the classified version ) will more likely than not show that information was indeed leaked that was classified. I look forward to reading it. Time will tell. What is clear beyond any doubt is that both men were prone to leaking information for political reasons. A bad idea for someone who is supposed to lead the FBI by example and demonstrate no partisan bias.

[Emphasis added, RM]

I take you as meaning that "The epistemic probability that McCabe released classified material (which is a crime) is greater than 50%."

And I'm curious as to how you arrived at that conclusion. What information do you have that has not been presented here that leads you to believe he has committed a crime? Remember, I drew a distinction between leaking information and leaking classified information. The latter is a crime. The former is not. You are specifically accusing him of committing a crime, and you think the probability that he did so is at least 50%...and given how you spoke earlier in this chat, I think it's safe to assume that you mean that the probability is quite a bit higher than 50% (how high, exactly?). Based on what evidence?

[Wayfarer]

I wish that I could say what evidence but that would make me a hypocrite and no better than McCabe.

[Avis habilis]

Because of course leveling accusations based on no evidence at all is fine as long as we're all up front about it.

[Callie Del Noire]

I find it amazing that one side can try people they dislike in the court of public opinion as long as it’s is acceptable that the same is not done to their allies and selves.

McCabe has not yet been charged with any crimes and yet his service is impugned and his retirement snatched away without justification at present.

I’m sorry, I’m not buying what Darth Keebler in the DoJ is selling till proof is put forth. If these sort of implied accusations were pointed at the residents of the West Wing, Cruz-Sanders would be living in the press room demanding judgment be held till proof (125%) was given.

This was most likely punishment for refusing to swear loyalty to the president over the country. Till the report, and it’s evidence, comes to light...I’m going to judge it by the past actions of this administration as being a vindictive act to punish McCade and implied threat to whoever comes next

[Regina Minx]

I wish that I could say what evidence but that would make me a hypocrite and no better than McCabe.

Then I am going to take a page from Hitchens. That which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

[Wayfarer]

Because of course leveling accusations based on no evidence at all is fine as long as we're all up front about it.

kinda like the whole collusion thing? LMAO!

[Wayfarer]

Then I am going to take a page from Hitchens. That which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

Get a security clearance, get read on to the case, and we can talk offline in a secured room. Till then, I guess the adage about ignorance and bliss applies.

[Nachtmahr]

I wish that I could say what evidence but that would make me a hypocrite and no better than McCabe.

I am a little confused confused. Are you suggesting that you would be a hypocrite because the evidence you have is classified, or are you saying that you'd be a hypocrite because you'd potentially have to lie in order to back up your assertion?

I'd just like to point out that slander is also, to the best of my knowledge, illegal in the US (I'm not a citizen, nor an expert) and that accusing someone of a crime without presenting any sort of credible evidence very much qualifies as such.

I will have to side with Regina Minx (And by extension, Hitchens) on this.

That which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

- - -

Since this was posted before I could post my reply, I'll address it now.

kinda like the whole collusion thing? LMAO!

An investigation is not an accusation of guilt. You investigate something to find out whether or not there is credible evidence to base a case on. If there is no evidence, there will be no case.

[Nachtmahr]

Get a security clearance, get read on to the case, and we can talk offline in a secured room. Till then, I guess the adage about ignorance and bliss applies.

So you're saying that you know, for a fact, that McCabe is guilty, because you are privy to classified evidence that proves this.

I'm genuinely curious here - Doesn't it essentially count as a leak to say; "I know there is classified material that confirms this to be true" even if you aren't showing the classified material itself?

As stated, I'm no legal expert, but that seems sketchy at best.