remember Mueller's famous "not in my purview" answers re Steele dossier (among others)?

Extraordinary to re-read transcripts of stonewalling in 2017 and 2018 where DOJ/RBI lawyers prevented witness questioning on Steele dossier because it was under investigation by Mueller
2/ here's one example (Many others.) Trisha Anderson (FBI deputy general counsel) attended "meetings with McCabe" about Steele reports and what FBI had "learned about facts
that might bear on his credibility as a source".
3/ one of the three FBI lawyers from Office of General Counsel stopped Anderson from answering, first to consult, then to refuse because "questions pertain to matters that are being looked at by the special counsel". (Side question: Why cloak senior FBI lawyers in redactions?)
4/ but when Matt Gaetz asked Mueller about credibility of Steele dossier, Mueller famously declined to answer on grounds that "without regard to Steele, that's beyond ny purview".
5/ Mueller continued in his answer to Gaetz saying that "this is under investigation" and "consequently it's not within my purview" and the "DOJ and FBI should be responsive to questions on this particular issue"
6/ Mueller refused to answer whether Mueller investigation had even interviewed Steele.
7/ on this issue, it turned out FBI had interviewed Steele in Sept 2017, but, unlike every other important Mueller investigation interview, NO Special Counsel lawyers attended Steele interview. A 302 for Steele 2017 interview was in Mueller FOIA archive, but was TOTALLY redacted
8/ in early 2021, in closing hours of transition, a partly redacted 302 was finally released. (A very inept and uninformative interview, but that's a different story.)
9/ but the moral of this thread is to illustrate a classic form of bureaucratic obfuscation: FBI witnesses ordered not to answer questions on McCabe's meetings dealing with Steele credibility on grounds that it was under Mueller jurisdiction;
10/ but when Mueller was questioned a year later, Mueller refused to answer because it was being investigated by DOJ and under DOJ investigation.
11/ by then House was under Democrat control and they immediately moved on to impeachment on a different issue; then COVID and the election. Nobody ever answered the questions. Absolute classic bureaucratic obfuscation.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Stephen McIntyre

Stephen McIntyre Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ClimateAudit

27 Jun
recent US Supreme Ct decision established narrow interpretation of computer hacking act USC 1030. jdsupra.com/legalnews/supr…

It is relevant to Assange extradition, which relied on 8 year statute of limitations for 1030. I discussed issue in 2019
The recent decision pointed to a split in circuit courts on broadness of Computer Fraud Act.
3/ in my 2019 commentary on Manning and Assange cases, I had noted that the same inconsistency between circuit courts was critical to Assange extradition:
Read 8 tweets
25 Jun
@shipwreckedcrew the "Russian guy" was the person to whom Danchenko attributed pee tape story. And the FBI interviewed him about Danchenko within (literally) one week, maximum two, of the supposed exchange of "information" about pee tape. So yes, files need to be searched.
@shipwreckedcrew 2/ furthermore, when Crossfire Hurricane analysts learned that Danchenko was Steele's Primary Sub-Source in late Dec/early Jan, it is inconceivable that they didn't search "Danchenko" name in FBI files. If they didn't, FBI is even more incompetent than we thought.
@shipwreckedcrew 3/ regardless of what Vorontsov may or may not have said in the June 2016 interview, Danchenko was already on FBI radar and the search of records by analysts in Dec 2016 ought to have turned up these records. If they didn't, then more incompetence.
Read 5 tweets
24 Jun
Lee Smith has interesting article on Vorontsov Affidavit. Reasonable people can disagree on interpretation of these murky events and I disagree totally on most of Lee's interpretation, while also being glad that he commented on document.
Lee asks the same question that I began asking a couple of days ago: it is astounding that FBI was asking a Danchenko sub-source about Danchenko seven months before Danchenko named Vorontsov as a sub-source.
Lee notes (as both of us have long said) that Steele's instantaneous, too instantaneous, "intelligence" was only possible because it was fabricated. Bespoke intel porn, so to speak.
Read 13 tweets
21 Jun
fascinating new documents on Danchenko. courtlistener.com/docket/6163126… Scroll to 153.
wow. In June 2016 (!?!), Vorontsov, while attending a reception at US ambassador, was "whisked away" by FBI agents and interviewed about Danchenko. June 2016!!
3/ if Danchenko was already on FBI radar in June 2016, his identification as Steele's Primary Sub-Source by FBI intel analysts in late 2016 ought to have set off five-bell alarm in FBI. 🔥😡🔥
Read 12 tweets
9 Jun
at present, Canadian media is non-stop sanctimonious moralizing about anti-hate but condones and even praises hate crimes against symbols of Canadian heritage e.g beheading of statue of Egerton Ryerson, an important and liberal figure in formation of 19th C Ontario Image
the supposed rationale for the symbolic beheading of Egerton Ryerson is the discovery of graves at a residential school in western Canada founded after Ryerson's death and thousands of miles away from Toronto.
the message of the beheading is hate and revenge. But the president of Ryerson University, instead of standing up against the hate expressed in the beheading of the Egerton Ryerson statue, eagerly accepted the hate statement. Re-naming university will be next.
Read 4 tweets
7 Jun
while local private businesses in Canada are being eviscerated, the fattest and most indolent public sector in Canada - Canadian federal government - rewards itself.
I worked in Ottawa federal govt for a couple of years in late 1970s. Every building had book store so that employees would have something to read in the afternoons.
Largest section of federal phone book was Indian Affairs, which had thousands of employees who didn't seem to do anything useful. Since then, department has more than doubled in size and become less useful.
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(