EITHER OR

There is a very interesting story today in the Daily Caller:

https://www.dailycaller.com/2018/11/29/fbi-whistleblower-clinton-uranium/

This begs the question of who is investigating whom. At first glance, the impression is that the FBI is violating the rights of a Whistle Blower. If James Comey was still Director of the FBI, that would be understandable. But the Director of the FBI is Christopher Wray and the Acting Attorney General is Matthew G. Whitaker. That begs the question: why this, why now?

There seems to be two possibilities. One is that they are punishing a Whistle Blower. That is what the author of this article is assuming. The other is that they are verifying the chain of custody of records provided by the Whistleblower. I note that there were sixteen FBI agents involved. This is a big deal. What if they are primarily interested in verifying that the documents delivered by the whistleblower are identical to the documents delivered to congress?

The lawyer for the Cain (the Whistleblower) said the following:

“For the bureau to show up at Mr. Cain’s home suggesting that those same documents are stolen federal property, and then proceed to seize copies of the same documents after being told at the house door that he is a legally protected whistleblower who gave them to Congress, is an outrageous disregard of the law,”

I ignored his opinion with regard to motive and instead focused on what really happened. The FBI seized copies of the original documents reportedly delivered to congress. They also searched the house to be sure there were no other pertinent documents.

This is how the meeting where the documents were originally delivered was described:

Cain met with a senior member of Horowitz’s office at a church close to the White House to deliver the documents to the IG”

Cain sat in a pew with a hoodie and sun glasses, Socarras said. Cain held a double-sealed envelope containing a flash drive with the documents. The IG official met him and, without saying a word, took the pouch over Cain’s shoulder and left.

The obvious question is who took possession of those documents and were they identical to the documents delivered to the House and Senate Intelligence Committee. One has to note that the documents allegedly showed that then FBI Director Robert Mueller failed to investigate allegations of criminal misconduct regarding Hillary Clinton, the Clinton Foundation and Uranium One. It seems possible that the real investigation is whether or not those documents were “redacted” or otherwise altered before they got to congress. Was the FBI raid targeting the whistleblower or the people who received delivery of these documents? He certainly hasn’t ‘been charged with a crime, the FBI didn’t arrest him, they just seized documents.

We don’t know the facts, but what if those documents were redacted or there were material changes before they got delivered to congress? That could be beyond explosive. But even if they weren’t altered at all, they still could be very material.

Imagine you are Director of the FBI and you now report to a new Acting Attorney General. Unlike Jeff Session, the Acting Attorney General has not been recused from the Russia investigation or the supervision of Robert Mueller.

The DOJ has been directed, by both congress and the President of the United States, to investigate the potential criminal misconduct regarding Hillary Clinton, the Clinton Foundation and Uranium One. That has been going on for months. But now you are asked to focus on the actions of Robert Mueller and for the first time the Acting Attorney General is directly involved.

You are nearing the end of your investigation. You are close to making a report. You may even be close to calling for indictments. This is the point where you want to make sure that all the documentation you are using has been verified 100%. You don’t want to risk using documents that have been altered and you also don’t want to risk ignoring other documents that are potentially exculpatory.

I do not know. Neither does anyone else, other than those directly involved. Perhaps this is another, attempt at perpetuating a cover-up conducted by the deep state. Certainly a lot of smart people believe that. But, it is highly unlikely that this raid took place without Whitakers approval and he shows no signs of being part of the Deep State. In addition, this time the documents were picked up by sixteen FBI agents and the chain of custody is absolutely solid. This is very different from how they were obtained originally; with a whistleblower handling over a flash drive while wearing a hoodie and sun glasses in a church pew to someone he doesn’t even know.

TDM

Leave a Reply