This article is from the source 'washpo' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/attorney-general-sharpens-attacks-on-fbis-russia-probe/2019/12/10/26170a16-1b6e-11ea-b4c1-fd0d91b60d9e_story.html

The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Attorney general sharpens attacks on FBI’s Russia probe Attorney general sharpens attacks on FBI’s Russia probe
(about 2 hours later)
Attorney General William P. Barr on Tuesday sharpened his attacks on the FBI’s investigation into possible coordination between Russia and the Trump campaign to influence the 2016 election, alleging in media interviews the bureau had flimsy reason to initiate the probe in the first place, pursued the matter even after the case had “collapsed,” and might have acted in bad faith. Attorney General William P. Barr on Tuesday sharpened his attacks on the FBI’s investigation into possible coordination between Russia and the Trump campaign to influence the 2016 election, alleging in media interviews that the bureau had flimsy reason to initiate the probe, pursued the matter even after the case had “collapsed,” and might have acted in bad faith.
In an interview with NBC, and, later, at the Wall Street Journal’s CEO Council, Barr disputed aspects of the Justice Department inspector general’s assessment of the Russia case — especially those that were exonerating for the FBI — while emphasizing the malfeasance the watchdog had uncovered. In an interview with NBC News, and, later, at the Wall Street Journal’s CEO Council, Barr disputed aspects of the Justice Department inspector general’s assessment of the Russia case — especially those that were exonerating for the FBI — while emphasizing the malfeasance the watchdog had uncovered.
“It was a travesty, and there were many abuses,” he said of the Russia case. “From day one, it generated exculpatory information and nothing that substantiated any kind of collusion.”“It was a travesty, and there were many abuses,” he said of the Russia case. “From day one, it generated exculpatory information and nothing that substantiated any kind of collusion.”
FBI was justified in opening Trump campaign probe, but case plagued by ‘serious failures,’ inspector general findsFBI was justified in opening Trump campaign probe, but case plagued by ‘serious failures,’ inspector general finds
Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz had a day earlier found in a report that the FBI had adequate reason to initiate the Russia investigation, and that there was not evidence to support the allegation that leaders acted out of political bias in doing so. But Horowitz also found serious faults in how the FBI applied for court permission to monitor a former Trump campaign adviser as the investigation progressed.Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz had a day earlier found in a report that the FBI had adequate reason to initiate the Russia investigation, and that there was not evidence to support the allegation that leaders acted out of political bias in doing so. But Horowitz also found serious faults in how the FBI applied for court permission to monitor a former Trump campaign adviser as the investigation progressed.
“I think our nation was turned on its head for three years based on a completely bogus narrative that was largely fanned and hyped by a completely irresponsible press,” Barr told NBC. “I think there were gross abuses…and inexplicable behavior that is intolerable in the FBI.” “I think our nation was turned on its head for three years based on a completely bogus narrative that was largely fanned and hyped by a completely irresponsible press,” Barr told NBC News. “I think there were gross abuses … and inexplicable behavior that is intolerable in the FBI.”
Barr’s comments are his most strident attacks yet on those at the FBI involved in the Russia case, and hew closely to criticism that President Trump and his conservative allies have leveled. Barr’s comments are his most strident attacks yet on those at the FBI involved in the Russia case, and hew closely to criticism that President Trump and his conservative allies have leveled. They quickly sparked outcry from former Justice Department officials and those on the political left.
Barr said a prosecutor he had hand picked to conduct a review similar to that of Horowitz — U.S. Attorney John Durham — had a broader mandate, and his investigation would likely hit an “important watershed” in the late spring or early summer. “Mr. Barr is acting in incredibly bad faith,” Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-Va.) wrote on Twitter. “With this revisionist campaign to undermine a thorough, two-year IG investigation, the Attorney General is once again substituting partisan rhetoric for politically inconvenient facts.”
Matt Axelrod, a former senior Justice Department official during the Obama administration, called Barr’s remarks “a shockingly inappropriate departure from normal.”
“By undercutting the comprehensive work of the independent inspector general and spouting White House talking points, AG Barr is eroding public confidence that he is acting in the best interests of the institution he leads rather than as a shill for the president who appointed him,” Axelrod said.
Barr said a prosecutor he had handpicked to conduct a review similar to that of Horowitz — U.S. Attorney John Durham — had a broader mandate, and his investigation would likely hit an “important watershed” in the late spring or early summer.
Trump lashes out at FBI director in wake of Justice Department inspector general’s reportTrump lashes out at FBI director in wake of Justice Department inspector general’s report
The interview came shortly after President Trump similarly attacked FBI Director Christopher A. Wray, who had noted in a TV interview that Horowitz found the bureau had adequate cause to initiate the investigation and that there was not evidence the decision was spurred by bias. Barr’s interviews came shortly after President Trump similarly attacked FBI Director Christopher A. Wray, who had noted in a TV interview that Horowitz found the bureau had adequate cause to initiate the investigation and that there was not evidence the decision was spurred by bias.
“I don’t know what report current Director of the FBI Christopher Wray was reading, but it sure wasn’t the one given to me,” Trump tweeted. “With that kind of attitude, he will never be able to fix the FBI, which is badly broken despite having some of the greatest men & women working there!” “I don’t know what report current Director of the FBI Christopher A. Wray was reading, but it sure wasn’t the one given to me,” Trump tweeted. “With that kind of attitude, he will never be able to fix the FBI, which is badly broken despite having some of the greatest men & women working there!”
Barr said he understood and agreed with what Trump was “getting at” in his tweet, namely, “We can’t ignore the abuses of the past and appear to be justifying or minimizing them.”Barr said he understood and agreed with what Trump was “getting at” in his tweet, namely, “We can’t ignore the abuses of the past and appear to be justifying or minimizing them.”
But he noted Wray “has been working hard to address the problems of the past,” and, asked by NBC’s Pete Williams if he had confidence in the FBI Director, responded simply, “Yes.”But he noted Wray “has been working hard to address the problems of the past,” and, asked by NBC’s Pete Williams if he had confidence in the FBI Director, responded simply, “Yes.”
Barr issued a statement soon after the inspector general report was released Monday, disputing aspects of it and criticizing the Russia probe. He said the case was initiated “on the thinnest of suspicions that, in my view, were insufficient to justify the steps taken.” Durham also issued a statement in response to the inspector general report noting his office disagreed “with some of the report’s conclusions as to predication and how the FBI case was opened.”
The FBI had opened the investigation in July 2016, after receiving information from an Australian diplomat who alleged George Papadopoulos, a Trump campaign aide, had “suggested the Trump team had received some kind of suggestion from Russia” that Moscow could anonymously release damaging information about Clinton.
By the Australians’ telling, Papadopoulos had made that claim before it was publicly known Russia had hacked Democratic emails, which it would release during the campaign. The tip, though vague, was viewed as a “tipping point,” former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe told inspector general investigators, and bureau leaders felt they had no choice but to open a case.
Horowitz agreed in his report that the FBI had an “authorized purpose” to initiate an investigation, and did not find evidence to support the allegation, made by Trump and his Republican allies, that the decision was driven by bias.
Barr asserted in the interviews that he felt the FBI was using a “suggestion of a suggestion” to initiate a full investigation, and officials there seemed to have the idea that Papadopoulos’s comment “must reflect preknowledge of the hack.” He said that was “a bridge too far,” because the campaign adviser could have been passing along speculation that Russia had hacked the private server Clinton used while she was secretary of state.
“The proper response,” Barr said, “was to talk to the campaign.”
In the intervening months, the FBI would use informants to try to talk to Trump campaign advisers and — starting in October 2016 — apply for a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court warrant to monitor Carter Page, then a former Trump campaign adviser. The inspector general found serious omissions and other faults in those applications.
Barr cast the errors as especially sinister — using terminology likely to make those in law enforcement bristle. As he has in the past, he again asserted the Trump campaign was “clearly spied upon.” Wray and other law enforcement leaders have said they would not use that term to describe court-approved surveillance activities.
He also alleged that, even as the bureau turned up exculpatory, rather than incriminatory, information, officials kept it from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and pressed ahead with their investigation. He took particular aim at a dossier that the FBI used to help acquire warrants, which was prepared by a former British intelligence officer hired by an opposition research firm working for a lawyer for the Clinton campaign.
The dossier, Barr asserted, was a “complete sham,” and the FBI did not relay as much to the court.
“When their entire case collapsed, what did they do?” Barr said. “They kept on investigating the president, well into his administration.”
The FBI’s investigation would ultimately be taken over by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III. Mueller found “numerous links” between those tied to the Russian government and those tied to the Trump campaign, but that the evidence was “not sufficient to charge that any member of the Trump Campaign conspired with representatives of the Russian government to interfere in the 2016 election.”