With all the attention focused on tomorrow's release of the redacted version of the Mueller final report, more attention should be directed at the upcoming report of Michael Horowitz, the Inspector General of the Department of Justice, who is looking into misconduct by those who foisted the Russiagate/Trump collusion tale.  In recent meeting with two House Republican allies of Trump–Jim Jordan and Mark Meadows–Horowitz indicated that he would be making criminal referrals, presumably against FBI and DOJ officials.

While criminal referrals from Congress are often ignored at the DOJ, referrals from the Department's own Inspector General can hardly be ignored altogether.  I anticipate that the release of the Horowitz report, expected in four-to-six weeks will be a bombshell.

Cleanout of the corrupt, inept and ultra-partisan elements of the FBI and DOJ is long, long overdue.  Horowitz is respected for his professionalism.  He nailed the bias by some of the FBI and DOJ people who totally blew it in the Hillary Clinton email probe.

It may take years–perhaps a generation–to do a genuine house cleaning at the FBI and DOJ.  But look for Horowitz to move that process ahead.  Much more worthwhile reading than the Mueller report when it is released.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.


  1. Tom Wonacott says:

    Mr. Harper
    William Barr’s summary of the Mueller report included this section from the report:

    “……The second element involved the Russian government’s efforts to conduct computer hacking operations designed to gather and disseminate information to influence the election. The Special Counsel found that Russian government actors successfully hacked into computers and obtained emails from persons affiliated with the Clinton campaign and Democratic Party organizations, and publicly disseminated those materials through various intermediaries, including WikiLeaks. Based on these activities, the Special Counsel brought criminal charges against a number of Russian military officers for conspiring to hack into computers in the United States for purposes of influencing the election. But as noted above, the Special Counsel did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign…….”

    It should be noted that WikiLeaks is under indictment by the DOJ for allegedly helping Chelsea Manning hack into intelligence files – and potentially more charges may be pending against Assange for his 2016 election interference and/or the release of Vault 7. The indictment of the GRU which worked to undermine the Hillary campaign and elect Trump is an important part of the Mueller report.
    I’m not disputing that the FBI may have broken the law while investigating the Trump campaign (as you indicate) – and may need to be overhauled.

  2. blue peacock says:

    Maybe Assange was arrested to prevent him from testifying that he did not get the DNC emails from the Russians. He has always claimed that he did not get it from the Russians.
    In any case it will be interesting to see the actual evidence on the basis of which Mueller has come to these conclusions or assertions – that Russia successfully hacked and disseminated through Wikileaks.

  3. Fred says:

    Nice job Tom, I don’t recall any of that highlighting. Did you purposely leave off highlighinging
    “did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government”?

  4. Keith Harbaugh says:

    Anyone have any comment on this?:
    “The DOJ and FBI Influence of Dana Boente…”, by sundance, 2019-04-17

    In 2015 the DOJ-OIG (office of inspector general) requested oversight of the DOJ National Security Division. It was Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates who responded with a lengthy 58 page legal explanation saying, essentially, ‘nope – not allowed.’ All of the DOJ is subject to oversight, except the DOJ-NSD.

    BTW, on the Disquis vs. Typepad comment issue, I like very much the ability Typepad gives to preview comments.

  5. chris trakas says:

    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51442.htm :VIPS Fault Mueller Probe, Criticize Refusal To Interview Assange
    There is much evidence suggesting an insider leak as opposed to a hack and the VIPS examination has the forensics to assert it, unlike Mueller who declared, without forensic examination, the e mails to be hacked. It’s the lynchpin of the entire investigation. One need not be a Trump supporter in order to want the truth to be told because what can be done to Trump can AND WILL be done to the next Democratic president (assuming there will ever be another in my lifetime, not an assumption one should make without caution). There are 1000’s of real reasons to take down Trump for his financial crimes. Defending the pathetic loss by Hillary Clinton on “Russia” and “Russians” is xenophobic, indeed racist, cold war propaganda. I suggest you stop drinking the kool-aid.

  6. Phillip Allen says:

    Why on earth do you credit any Russian involvement in the Clinton/DNC email affair, when VIPS have conclusively demonstrated that those emails had to have been leaked by someone with physical access, and that they were downloaded to a flash drive and therefore physically taken away and then passed on to Wikileaks. There is no credible evidence yet presented that would support a story of Russian involvement in that leak or its dissemination. FBI/CIA/NSA are all partisan actors in this farce, and any credit given to their statements about anything regarding this affair is profoundly misplaced.
    As to Assange, the DOJ can indict a random dairy cow on any allegation they care to invent, and it would have exactly as much meaning as the Assange indictment. Not saying that powerful factions among our owners and masters don’t yearn to kill him or at least lock him away forever, but this stupid kabuki they are using to accomplish their end is vastly insulting to even a minimal intelligence.

  7. Harper says:

    Larry Johnson’s separate comment is quite true. Just as gentlemen DO read other people’s mail, governments have historically used their covert resources to interfere in other nations’ elections to their benefit. Nothing new under the Sun in this. Fully agree that VIPS has made a strong case, along with others, that the DNC emails were just as likely obtained from someone on the premises.
    Everything I’ve seen about the level of Russian interference in the 2016 elections was low-budget, low-level and given the controversial nature of the Trump-Clinton election, I do not believe evidence can ever be established that the Russian actions tilted the outcome.
    A contact in the USIC told me at the outset of the so-called Russiagate probe that there would be hyperbolic outrage and exaggeration of what the Russians did to make it more difficult for foreign powers to do it in the future. Issue was not 2016, but 2018 and onward.
    I recall Boris Yeltsin’s reelection campaign, when a small army of American political campaign experts flooded Moscow and virtually ran Boris’ campaign from a Moscow hotel.
    I hope the Democrats are collectively wise enough to let the Mueller report land and move on. As one reader commented, the backlash down the line will further damage our already hyper-partisan political climate and make bipartisan governance an impossibility for at least the duration of this generation.

  8. The Beaver says:

    The SCO’s report:
    448 pages

Comments are closed.