I have no idea whether this is true or not; these days, if it weren’t for leaked news, we wouldn’t have any news at all. But the Washington Post reports that the Justice Department’s Inspector General is focused on the FBI’s delay in reviewing emails that were found on Anthony Weiner’s laptop in the late stages of the 2016 presidential race:
The Justice Department’s inspector general has been focused for months on why Andrew McCabe, as the No. 2 official at the FBI, appeared not to act for about three weeks on a request to examine a batch of Hillary Clinton-related emails found in the latter stages of the 2016 election campaign, according to people familiar with the matter.
The inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz, has been asking witnesses why FBI leadership seemed unwilling to move forward on the examination of emails found on the laptop of former congressman Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) until late October — about three weeks after first being alerted to the issue….
A key question of the internal investigation is whether McCabe or anyone else at the FBI wanted to avoid taking action on the laptop findings until after the Nov. 8 election, these people said.
Reportedly, McCabe’s resignation from the FBI followed closely upon his meeting with Director Christopher Wray, in which the two men discussed the IG’s investigation. The WaPo story indicates that McCabe has lawyered up, which is nice to see.
I hadn’t recalled that McCabe also had his fingerprints on the FBI’s investigation of the corrupt Clinton Foundation. But he did:
At the same time, the FBI was facing a new set of questions, this time about McCabe’s role in a stalled probe into the Clinton Foundation. Some within the FBI felt McCabe had repeatedly moved to hamstring that probe and were suspicious of his motives for doing so, according to people familiar with the matter.
The Post’s story doesn’t mention DOJ’s dismal performance regarding the Uranium One scandal. Whether McCabe was involved in the DOJ/FBI coverup is, at this point, unknown.
Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.