THREAD about McCabe testimony to House Intel. Dec 19, 2017 intelligence.house.gov/UploadedFiles/… in light of new disclosures. @RepRatcliffe @RichardGrenell if you're listening, UNREDACT needed. Too much is hidden. Why are you protecting McCabe? Comey?
2/ this is not comprehensive exegesis of testimony but of points that caught my eye. Gowdy (p 76) presciently posed question that DOJ only recently asked: "what would there have been to obstruct? What was the investigation?"
Watch McCabe's evasions.
Watch McCabe's evasions.
3/ Gowdy does not appear to have known that Flynn had been named as Crossfire Hurricane target.
Now watch pea as McCabe answers: he said that Flynn's statements were inconsistent with their understanding of actual conversation. But didn't answer Gowdy's question.
Now watch pea as McCabe answers: he said that Flynn's statements were inconsistent with their understanding of actual conversation. But didn't answer Gowdy's question.
4/ Gowdy then lost track of his important question of "what was there to obstruct" and asked related question about "intentionally" false - a topic that had been central to Hillary investigation, which was then still an open sore. Gowday asked McCabe about "intentionality" but
5/ Gowdy then segued into intentionality as it pertained to Trump's comment about letting Flynn go, reasonably comparing Trump's comment about Flynn to Trump's similar (and gracious) comment on election night about letting Hillary go.
6/ McCabe attempted to distinguish Flynn and Hillary situations on grounds that they had an open investigation on whether Flynn had made false statements - a statement that he appears to have quickly withdrawn. His explanation is REDACTED for no good reason
@RichardGrenell
@RichardGrenell
8/ Gowdy then asked McCabe whether there was a potential crime in incoming NSA talking to another ambassador about sanctions. McCabe: "There certainly could be".
9/ McCabe's answer to Gowdy's seemingly innocuous question was entirely #redacted/ Why? @RichardGrenell
10/ Gowdy then returned to his near-original inquiry about "what it was that could have been obstructed". McCabe, all the way through, hasn't revealed the FBI's preposterous "predicate" that Flynn, a decorated hero, was supposedly a Russian agent.
11/ McCabe appears to have given a sort-of explanation. Which, needless to say, was #redacted. @RichardGrenell Why?
12/ Schiff followed immediately to obtain clarification that their interview was pursuant to a #redacted. Again, why? @RichardGrenell
13/ Schiff then asked whether Flynn "in early part of interview", Flynn had "denied much" of what he had said to Kislyak. McCabe's answer is #redacted. McCabe then agreed with Schiff that Flynn's answers "contradicted what you knew to be the truth".
14/ in fact, nothing in "early part" of interview was later contested. Expulsions and the Israel vote were discussed later. And, as we've seen from transcripts, Flynn himself never used the word sanctions and is recorded as telling the agents that
15/ he didnt ask or suggest to Kislyak that Russians "do nothing" - the supposed point at issue for Obama WH.
16/ jumping to a different issue: in response to Gowdy's question about whether FBI was "contemplating closing the investigation", McCabe said that he didn't "think a closure would have been soon".
17/ this is now known to be untrue. We know that a Closing Memorandum had been written and approved and, only through FBI inefficiency, had it not been registered in system. Only thru last-minute intervention by Strzok, apparently on direction from 7th floor, was closure averted.
18/ McCabe's false statement on this point was far more important and material than any of the false statement charges against Roger Stone, Papadopoulos or Flynn himself. McCabe's false statement mattered. None of the others did.
19/ later in interview, McCabe said that there was "no backing off of the investigation" into Flynn even tho agents didn't think that Flynn was lying. But earlier McCabe didn't explain what they were investigating. Note another #redacted at critical sentence.
20/ McCabe told Swalwell that FBI "had a lot of work left to do in that investigation" as of Jan 24. Swalwell also asked about when a grand jury had been convened. FBI lawyer Baker stopped McCabe from answering, But interesting question: was there grand jury? About what?
21/McCabe told Cmte that FBI opened up case on Flynn before FBI had dossier. This obviously isn't true except in narrow sense that Crossfire Hurricane team may not have had Steele memos. Gaeta had Steele memos; he'd sent memos to NYFO, which had opened file and who had notified
22/ HQ at Executuve AD level (Steinbach), who regularly briefed McCabe. Bruce Ohr had also briefed McCabe and Lisa Page directly. So idea that Steele memos were unknown to FBI leadership is suspect.
23/ Speier asked McCabe about predicate for opening investigations. McCabe's answer once again #redacted. Why? @RichardGrenell
24/ Speier then asked McCabe about Flynn's trip to RT dinner (in 2015). More #redacted. Rather than agreeing that this had been in past and "off [FBI] radar", McCabe said that RT dinner was still part of an "ongoing preliminary inquiry". Was that prior to Crossfire? What was it
25/ Speier asked a follow up on FBI investigation of Flynn's Russia trip. Once again, key part of answer #redacted
26/ iSpeier asked McCabe about whether Obama had ever discussed Russia investigation with either Comey or Flynn. We know that McCabe and Comey supplied Flynn-Kislyak tech cut to Obama and that Obama discussed with Comey, Yates. Implausible that Comey didn't tell McCabe on meeting
27/ Swalwell referred to Comey's March 2, 2017 briefing, All details #redacted. @RichardGrenell , if you're listening, time to unredact.
28/ this is cute: Gowdy asked McCabe if Strzok was involved in opening all four cases. McCabe said Strzok was "approver" on (presumably) Crossfire Hurricane- concealing from Gowdy that Strzok not only approved but originated CH, as well as sending it as communication to himself.
