Agent Who Mueller Removed for Anti-Trump Messages Softened Comey’s Clinton Description
“Gross negligence” to “extremely careless.”
This past summer, Special Counsel Robert Mueller removed an FBI agent from his investigation into possible collusion between Russia and President Donald Trump’s campaign due to anti-Trump messages he sent. The news was only made public over the weekend.
This agent, Peter Strzok, is also the man who changed former FBI Head James Comey’s description of Hillary Clinton’s handling of classified information on her private server when she served as secretary of state.
Strzok also served as the No. 2 official in the counterintelligence division and led the investigation into her server.
From CNN:
The shift from “grossly negligent” to “extremely careless,” which may appear pedestrian at first glance, reflected a decision by the FBI that could have had potentially significant legal implications, as the federal law governing the mishandling of classified material establishes criminal penalties for “gross negligence.”
—
CNN has also learned that Strzok was the FBI official who signed the document officially opening an investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election, according to sources familiar with the matter. As the No. 2 official in counterintelligence, Strzok was considered to be one of the bureau’s top experts on Russia.But the news of Strzok’s direct role in the statement that ultimately cleared the former Democratic presidential candidate of criminal wrongdoing, now combined with the fact that he was dismissed from special counsel Robert Mueller’s team after exchanging private messages with an FBI lawyer that could be seen as favoring Clinton politically, may give ammunition to those seeking ways to discredit Mueller’s Russia investigation.
YIKES! This is the definition of gross negligence:
A lack of care that demonstrates reckless disregard for the safety or lives of others, which is so great it appears to be a conscious violation of other people’s rights to safety. It is more than simple inadvertence, and can affect the amount of damages.
The changes to the statement came out in August when Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) wrote a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray to inform him that the committee found in unredacted parts in transcripts that Comey decided to write a statement to exonerate Hillary before the FBI finished its investigation. Grassley released this statement:
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley is seeking more details on the formulation of former FBI director James Comey’s July 2016 remarks announcing that the FBI would not seek criminal charges following its investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server and mishandling of classified information while serving as Secretary of State. Early drafts of the remarks include phrases indicating a violation of federal statute. Those terms were later eliminated in revised drafts of the same statement.
“Although Director Comey’s original version of his statement acknowledged that Secretary Clinton had violated the statute prohibiting gross negligence in the handling of classified information, he nonetheless exonerated her in that early, May 2nd draft statement anyway, arguing that this part of the statute should not be enforced,” Grassley said in a letter today to FBI Director Christopher Wray.
The statute governing the mishandling of classified material establishes criminal penalties for “gross negligence.” Comey’s May 2, 2016, draft stated that Clinton had been grossly negligent in handling classified information. However, a later version of those remarks, dated June 10, 2016, deleted that legal language, and instead refers to Clinton and her associates as “extremely careless.”
In November, a source close to the ultimate decision told CNN that Comey and his colleagues played “with language” during the process since they felt “they needed to condemn Clinton’s handling of classified information while asserting they would not bring charges.”
CNN reported:
A source familiar with the decision-making process at the FBI at the time tells CNN that “the Bureau and Jim were trying to see what a statement of declamation might look like — and they were playing with the language throughout. The one thing that’s a constant is that they thought what they had seen so far, subject to change, was that charges would not be appropriate but that the conduct was worthy of criticism. It was a matter of how to explain both.”
“They wanted to get a sense of what this statement might look like,” the source said. “They hadn’t stopped investigating and they were continuing to seek access to all sorts of things from Hillary that she was fighting to have to turn over. But they also wanted internally to discuss what an end game might look like.”
Comey used the word ‘negligent’ to describe Clinton during a House Oversight hearing.
Circa reporter Sara Carter wrote that Strzok interviewed former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, who recently pled guilty to lying to the FBI, at the White House:
According to another source, with direct knowledge of the Jan. 24 interview, McCabe had contacted Flynn by phone directly at the White House. White House officials had spent the “earlier part of the week with the FBI overseeing training and security measures associated with their new roles so it was no surprise to Flynn that McCabe had called,” the source said.
McCabe told Flynn “some agents were heading over (to the White House) but Flynn thought it was part of the routine work the FBI had been doing and said they would be cleared at the gate,” the source said.
“It wasn’t until after they were already in (Flynn’s) office that he realized he was being formally interviewed. He didn’t have an attorney with him,” they added.
A former U.S. intelligence official told Carter that the “interview as a whole should be reviewed and called into question.” He suggested that those in charge “call the other FBI Special Agent present during Flynn’s interview before the Grand Jury to recount his version.”
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
So the FBI has their own “focus group”?
According to Hannity , he interviewed Flynn , although Flynn has no recourse since he pleaded .
The scum thickens
If this goes sideways enough, I have to believe they’ll find a judge to throw it all out. as in.. expunge the record. No plea, etc.
The mission of the FBI is to overthrow the duly elected government of the United States. Everything they have done has been in pursuit of that goal. Everything that they will do, pending Federal law enforcement being subjected to the law and Constitution.
i have also read somewhere that the FBI team that M has assembled had overwhelmingly contributed to the Clinton Ctime Conspiracy in 2016.
talk about rigging the investigation!
This would not have happened if we had an AG that was willing to do the heavy lifting, get dirty and standup to the media. He is still acting like all the other Conservative (Conserve My Seat) politicians in DC.
If he changed Comey’s wording concerning Hillary, does that mean that Comey was stuck and had to either A)come out with the original wording of “gross negligence”, and therefore would have to explain HOW this happened. This would expose the inner disfunctionality of the FBI.
Or, he B) does *not* change the wording (which he didn’t), but in a back handed sort of way describes that Hillary did something very bad.
IOW CYA for FBI
Does Jeff Sessions do ANYTHING? There is legal war being waged against the citizens by the deep State swamp and Sessions is no where to be found.
Sessions is doing a ‘boehner.’
We got rid of boehner.
Sessions is either a coward, is incompetent, or is a Deep State plant. Just as Obama knew, if you want to stop anyone from being prosecuted the first thing you do is corrupt the office of AG.
Make no mistake: it is McConnell and the GOPe who are keeping Sessions in place. That tells you a lot about their motivations.
I really like Old Dirty Barrister’s (I think) idea yesterday about countering with information of quo warranto.
Mueller, and FBI, has less and less legitimacy as the hours tick away.
I always found the “Gross negligence” to “extremely careless” to be a distinction without a difference. The semantics remain the same, imho.
It is.
Zero difference, but it was Comey’s supervisory responsibility to vet that change.
Comey fucked that one up good.
the difference is breaking the law or just splintering the law without penalty.
The distinction between gross negligence and extreme carelessness matters under the law when you are trying to protect someone from the consequences of their acts and omissions. If an agency uttered the words “gross negligence,” there is not straight face and colorable way to deliver the result desired, which is to avoid an indictment or information under the gross negligence standard.
A demonstration of what occurred by reference to a pertinent passage from Through The Looking Glass by Louis Carroll:
“I don’t know what you mean by ‘glory’,” Alice said.
Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. “Of course you don’t- till I tell you. I meant ‘there’s a nice knock-down argument for you!'”
“But ‘glory’ doesn’t mean ‘a nice knock-down argument’,” Alice objected.
“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean- neither more nor less.”
“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”
“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master-that’s all.”
“I always found the “Gross negligence” to “extremely careless” to be a distinction without a difference. The semantics remain the same, imho.”
Gross negligence is part of the law. Extremely careless is not.
So we have the *same* person, the #2 in Counterintel in the FBI, who had his thumbs in the doggy Russian dossier, the wiretapping of Trump, the exoneration of Hillary complete with preemptive amnesty for her minions, the interview of Flyn with the perjury trap, and cheats on his wife as well.
Wow, Obama sure knew how to pick honest people for his agency.
This is very frightening: the fix is in, in our government. Aside from the rank and file of the military and the current president and most of the Supreme Court (Roberts, not included) our government has been COMPLETELY corrupted.
COMPLETELY.
Boycott the democrat media and its ‘entertainment’ programming until it is destroyed. Boycott the GOPe until they are no more.
Raise your voices and be heard. Don’t take any crap from any liberal or leftist.
If you don’t know, prepare for torches and pitchforks time.
Nothing sounds right here. I was in law enforcement for 10 years and this sounds like open corruption and Comey a part of it. This was a criminal conspiracy.
The more I read of Flynn the more I realize he’s a dummy even with those three stars on his shoulder.
Okay so two FBI agents show up in your office and you realize that they are not there to do other work but are there to interview you over your phone calls. You have no lawyer present and you sit there and go through the interview?
If I was there I would have told them to stop talking and to get the hell out of my office. Call my lawyer.
“The more I read of Flynn the more I realize he’s a dummy even with those three stars on his shoulder.”
I was thinking, while reading the post, that people who are of average or better intelligence, and are seen as successful in their area, are probably the easiest for the FBI/police/whomever to manipulate into making an error.
I expect Sessions to be replaced later next year once there are more Republicans in the Senate to counter act the Den RINO’s that will still be in place after the house elections.
At the moment there are to many RINO’s who are only too happy to support what ever the Democrats want. So we are stuck with Jeff for the time being.
If you look at immigration, arresting criminal aliens and the pursuit of felons who bought guns under obama’s watch you will find Sessions doing his job. Immigration is at its lowest level in many years and many aliens are self-deporting. Anything to do with the Russian/Muller probe cannot be handled by Sessions since he honorably recused himself from that investigation. The rest of the DOJ are obama’s people including Rosenstein who is Sessions deputy. Where exactly is Sessions supposed to pop up? He is now going after sanctuary cities and has started pressure on the US military branches to report A member who is discharged for any reason that they should not be allowed to purchase a gun. It is frustrating but Sessions cannot don a cape and fly into this mess. Congress is about to issue a contempt citation against the FBI and the DOJ. Give it time and things will break loose.
So what? If the president is brought down, it won’t be because of illegal immigration. A reasonable person understands prioritization, and Sessions is not reasonable.
Is comey wearing eye makeup in that picture? Whats next, pictures of him wearing one of hoover’s dresses?
Lock Hag up.
In Hillary’s case, I think they just wanted to avoid accidentally conjuring up images of her in a “gross negligee”.
Makes me wonder if Comey is not just another yes man who didn’t even know the difference between the two terms.
Those of you that read the released emails relating to the Clinton-Lynch meeting on the apron at the airport in AZ know that agents in the FBI wanted to report local LEO’s that might have leaked the meeting to an “OPR.” OPR is shorthand an Office Of Professional Responsibility, which is a disciplinary body in the federal machine. The field agent Sztrock and his former adulterous trollop, Lisa Page, clearly deserve review and discipline.
For those that care and have time on their hands:
https://www.justice.gov/opr/how-file-complaint
Oops. Strzok.
Nothing will be done about this. Republicans are cowards.
“:You should move to a small town, somewhere the rule of law still exists. You will not survive here. You are not a wolf, and this is a land of wolves now.“
*Some* Republicans are cowards. Others are collaborators.
The GOPe is working hand-in-glove with Dems to stymie Trump’s reform agenda. They like things just the way they are, and they aren’t going to let any G*ddamned election interfere with it.
A pervasive theme of all of these men’s coverage of Mrs. Clinton was that she was dishonest and unlikable. These recent harassment allegations suggest that perhaps the problem wasn’t that Mrs. Clinton was untruthful or inherently hard to connect with, but that these particular men hold deep biases against women who seek power instead of sticking to acquiescent sex-object status.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/01/opinion/matt-lauer-hillary-clinton.html?_r=0