A Biased FBI Agent Was Running an Informant on an Oppo-Research Predicated Investigation–into Hillary–in 2016

I’m still working on my slow read of the DOJ IG Report on Carter Page. But I wanted to call attention to this footnote, which a few people have already noted.

We reviewed the text and instant messages sent and received by the Handling Agent, the co-case Handling Agent, and the SSA for this CHS, which reflect their support for Trump in the 2016 elections. On November 9, the day after the election, the SSA contacted another FBI employee via an instant messaging program to discuss some recent CHS reporting regarding the Clinton Foundation and offered that “if you hear talk of a special prosecutor .. .I will volunteer to work [on] the Clinton Foundation.” The SSA’s November 9, 2016 instant messages also stated that he “was so elated with the election” and compared the election coverage to “watching a Superbowl comeback.” The SSA explained this comment to the OIG by saying that he “fully expected Hillary Clinton to walk away with the election. But as the returns [came] in … it was just energizing to me to see …. [because] I didn’t want a criminal to be in the White House.”

On November 9, 2016, the Handling Agent and co-case Handling Agent for this CHS also discussed the results of the election in an instant message exchange that reads:

Handling Agent: “Trump!”

Co-Case Handling Agent: “Hahaha. Shit just got real.”

Handling Agent: “Yes it did.”

Co-Case Handling Agent: “I saw a lot of scared MFers on … [my way to work] this morning. Start looking for new jobs fellas. Haha.”

Handling Agent: “LOL”

Co-Case Handling Agent: “Come January I’m going to just get a big bowl of popcorn and sit back and watch.”

Handling Agent: “That’s hilarious!” [my emphasis]

The footnote appears in the discussion of an informant who had some sort of tie to Trump who offered up a bunch of documents without tasking. The documents got entered into FBI’s files and remained there when the IG did their review.

The passage has generally been noted to demonstrate that anti-Hillary case agents involved in related investigations used their FBI phones to engage in political speech, just like Peter Strzok and Lisa Page did.

But it says something more.

It pertains to FBI’s investigation into the Clinton Foundation — an investigation predicated (unlike the Trump one) on opposition research, the Steve Bannon-funded Clinton Cash. This is the investigation, of course, that Andrew McCabe confirmed for the Wall Street Journal, just weeks before the election.

The passage reveals that the FBI had actively tasked CHSes — that is, informants — as part of their investigation into one of the candidate’s Foundations. Mind you, this was reported in real time (including in that WSJ article). But you might think that, upon discovering that politically biased agents were tasking informants to collect on one of the candidates, the IG might take the time to investigate that.

There’s no indication that happened.

According to John Solomon (!!!), FBI reopened their investigation into the Clinton Foundation in early 2018.


Overview and ancillary posts

DOJ IG Report on Carter Page and Related Issues: Mega Summary Post

The DOJ IG Report on Carter Page: Policy Considerations

Timeline of Key Events in DOJ IG Carter Page Report

Crossfire Hurricane Glossary (by bmaz)

Facts appearing in the Carter Page FISA applications

Nunes Memo v Schiff Memo: Neither Were Entirely Right

Rosemary Collyer Responds to the DOJ IG Report in Fairly Blasé Fashion

Report shortcomings

The Inspector General Report on Carter Page Fails to Meet the Standard It Applies to the FBI

“Fact Witness:” How Rod Rosenstein Got DOJ IG To Land a Plane on Bruce Ohr

Eleven Days after Releasing Their Report, DOJ IG Clarified What Crimes FBI Investigated

Factual revelations in the report

Deza: Oleg Deripaska’s Double Game

The Damning Revelations about George Papadopoulos in a DOJ IG Report Claiming Exculpatory Evidence

A Biased FBI Agent Was Running an Informant on an Oppo-Research Predicated Investigation–into Hillary–in 2016

The Carter Page IG Report Debunks a Key [Impeachment-Related] Conspiracy about Paul Manafort

The Flynn Predication

Sam Clovis Responded to a Question about Russia Interfering in the Election by Raising Voter ID

32 replies
  1. Rugger9 says:

    This is why the NYC Feebs have to be cleaned out, and Rudy’s connections to that office during the 2016 campaign dug into thoroughly. I smell several rodents here, but this may have to wait until Barr is out of the DOJ.

    Even accounting for the note that it is Solomon’s work, the point that the FBI would look at anything to do with the Clinton Foundation in 2018 tells me that someone thinks HRC is running again, and she’s not. Or, they think Biden will get ensnared or maybe Warren. Totally unlike the Trump Foundation which looks more like an interstate cabal-ico and who had to cough up millions plus refresher training on how to play nice.

    • dwfreeman says:

      Lest we forget, the Trump campaign’s final act of election interference in the 2016 presidential race was a late October enterprise aimed at forcing investigation of Hillary’s missing emails by prompting the seizure of her top aide’s husband’s laptop through an alleged case of illicit contact with a minor.

      This was an orchestrated political dirty trick, coordinated with the knowledge of Trump associates, including Rudy Giuliani, Erik Prince, Steve Bannon and Trump family members, who all presaged likelihood of a federal probe that wound up leading to former FBI director Jim Comey to first avow the need for re-investigation of Hillary emails and then, days before the election, announcing no incriminating emails were found by authorities. Talk about sham cases.

      So, when it closed, Weiner pled guilty to communicating with a minor — even though the victim wasn’t one at the time the case was brought –ending his marriage and sending him to prison for 18 months. He, in fact, is the only Democrat related to the Hillary campaign, tangentially, at least, to go to jail for a 2016 campaign-related offense.

      Compare this outcome to what Trump and his flunkies were seeking to do in Ukraine for a variety of political reasons to distract from the Mueller Report findings and then launch a phony predicate for foreign interference in the 2020 election to get dirt on the Bidens and snub Hillary yet again to disavow Russian election meddling.

      So, from the Trump perspective, the Weiner laptop case worked at home, why not try it abroad?

      There is a pattern here.

      In the Carolina conspiracy, Weiner was contacted by a rural North Carolina teen in January 2016 for an alleged school project. This girl, almost like a whistleblower, was age restricted from facing people with public questions about her motive for this relationship or its length, which perfectly ran from the start of the Trump campaign till his nomination.

      After her initial interview with a UK tabloid, in which her age was fudged and her father was deliberately misidentified as a lawyer, to help limit and challenge press scrutiny, she and her family were never interviewed. So, after the story ran in September 2016, there were no other interviews conducted with the teen, only family surrogates.

      You have to ask yourself regardless of how that murky private story became public overseas, the only reason to report it was to politically sideswipe Hillary in the final days of the campaign, whether the story had merit or not, because a candidate under federal investigation is under a cloud. And curiously, members of the Trump campaign seemed to have advance notice that Hillary was about to go through some things.

      Virtually overnight from North Carolina, and the Charlotte US attorney’s office, where the case ostensibly began, it was moved to USAO in New York, and it was investigated by New York FBI field office.

      So much has happened since then. But to imagine that the Trump camp and Republicans want to scream about no quid pro quo in the Ukraine deal, no laws broken and that Trump was seeking to check corruption in Ukraine before not releasing aid that was in process for appropriation over nine months, is a joke.

      Laws were broken, both budgetary and defense appropriation deadlines that forced Congress to renew funding authorizations to assure the military was released. There is a pattern of misconduct here that unless checked will continue under this presidency, making impeachment power irrelevant and normalizing election cheating.

      • greengiant says:

        David Markosto was the political editor of the Daily Mail which broke the Weiner story. He was executive editor of the daily caller from 2011 to 2013 and attended the candidate on the Trump plane in 2016. After the election it was said he was in the running for White House communications director.

  2. Jenny says:

    Thank you Marcy for your excellent sleuthing. The line speaks volumes: “But you might think that, upon discovering that politically biased agents were tasking informants to collect on one of the candidates, the IG might take the time to investigation that.”
    Sloppy IG work?

    • Greg Hunter says:

      Since 911 the government has hire a certain type of person to be involved in the “intelligence”, enforcement, military and incarceration sector. This sector of society has had their kids and livelihood dependent on surveilling, incarcerating or killing others and these individuals have tended toward the party that cares not about people and now does not care about the rule of law, unless a Democrat is involved.

      Right Wing socialism wins the electoral college and Democrats have waited far too long to push back against the grift and the outright taxpayer support of these ideologues.

  3. jaango says:

    The ‘role’ of the FBI is, at its worst, and even at its best, is inconsequential in how it performs its “mission” and predicated on Public Polices, and as configured by federal legislation. And if you’re aware of a tad of history, in the 1960s and 1970s, COINTELPRO contained a ‘second level’ apprication and targeted Chicano and Native American military vets. And from my perspective, today’s dominate culture is predicated on the Romney Schematic of Self-Deportation, nonetheless.

    Consequently, the Gangsters in Fancy Suits and Uniforms Affixed with Stars, exemplies today’s current political posture that supposedly enhances, and while reducing the reinforcing impact of “demographics.”

    However, history is embliematic of the Chicano Movement’s (from 1985) is the Agenda of Unmet Needs. Take, for example, the following when it comes to any “politial risk analysis” is being contrasted with today’s “containment of Russia, China and Iran.” To wit, the following when “listening” to Chicanos Talking to Chicanos:

    And as a gentle reminder, and starting with Jimmy Carter’s presidential era and familiar to us as the Peace Process and where America made a highly substantive effort to bring peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians, was not. Today, and in comparison, America abandoned this essential or critical effort, starting with the Ronald Reagan presidential era for nonsense, that being ‘trickle down economics.’

    Back in 1985, the Chicano Movement issued its Agenda of Unmet Needs, and of the 10 issues addressed, was the Palestinian-Israeli Relationship, then being discussed as our public’s foreign policy behavior as per the Jimmy Carter Peace Process.

    To wit, today’s over 7,000 Latino Elected and Appointed Officials have never wavered in their affirming behavior for the following:

    1. A congressional resolution approved by both the House and Senate chambers and where, once signed by Senators McConnell and Schumer and with the signatures of Representatives Pelosi and McCarthy, this Formal Request would be submtted to the Genaral Assembly at the United Nations, for their consideration and adoption.

    2. Once adopted by the General Assembly, the United Nations would establish a Border Commission that would define and design the geograhical boundaries, as per the intent of the Jimmy Carter Peace Process. And once completed via a street-by- street and neighborhood-by-neighbood basis, the results of this Commission, would be either accepted or rejected by a consequential vote of its members in the General Assembly.

    3. Once adopted by the General Assembly, the General Assembly would require that three elements be included. First, respective voters among Palestinians and Israelis, would take place at the ballot box during the course of each’s nation’s next general election cycle.. Second, if either respective society rejected such at the ballot box, the respective nation would no longer have access to the United Nations, as well as the United States. Third, if approved by the respective nations, each nation would have to establish a political vehicle that “guarantees” the national security and self-defense of each of these respective sovereign nations. Thusly, the subjective requirement that Israel would guarantee the political viability of Palestine and conversely, Palestine would guarantee the political viability of Israel. And in in doing so, each state would insure that the political interference from the surrounding nation-states would be widely diminished and possibly to the point of being deemed unacceptable.
    And how can this be accomplished?

    Of course the next Democratic-oriented President could conceivably issue her National Request to the General Assembly at the United Nations. And the alternative is to have this National Request via Congressional Resolution being embodied with the signatures of the House chamber’s Nancy Pelosi and the Senate chamber’s, Mitch McConnell.

    And to solidify this view, the ‘demographics’ here in our nation, hence, in 20 years or so, will evolve and where this National Request, becomes a mere formality and premised on Common Sense.

    In the meantime, we will continue to adddress the discourse that currently exists between the Palestinians and the Israelis.

  4. jaango says:

    Was the FISA surveillance improperly advanced? Or was Page an ‘agent’ for the Russians and in contrast to the federal government? Or was he a private citizen attempting to subsidize his business interests? And from my perspective, none has this has been resolved to my satisfaction. However, my ‘reading’ of Marcy’s postings over these past many months, will eventually garner my attention due to her hard work and quintessential accuracy.

    • Rugger9 says:

      Short answer, no. Whether the FISA process is fully robust (even allowing for some of the pre-application distillation of warrant applications) against abuse or unnecessary surveillance as was seen in the Shrub White House is something we could actually agree on across party lines. However, it appears that for Carter Page there was good reason to wonder about the Russian contacts, beyond being a loudmouth.

      As for Taibbi, maybe it’s time to follow the money, just like another former progressive Glenn Greenwald who is holed up in Brazil.

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        I disagree with several of his positions, certainly on the issue of Russian influence over Trump and in the US, but not on his living in Brazil.

        Greenwald has legitimate family reasons for living in Brazil. He is married to a Brazilian national, has children, and has learned Portuguese. He could not have had that family life in the US at the time he moved there.

      • bmaz says:

        Rugger, as Earl replied, there is plenty to disagree with Glenn about.

        The fact that he is an ex-pat in Brazil is not one of them. He chose that out of love for the area, and more so his partner, and the country of Brazil, and there is nothing wrong with that whatsoever.

        That said, there was indeed good and predicative reason to surveil Page.

        • Tyler says:

          My understanding is that they would likely have still gotten the original order approved with a proper application, but probably not any re-authorizations.

          Or so said one of the lawfare folks.

        • bmaz says:

          Well, I have seen that theory, but I am just not sure it is correct. To my eye, there is clearly sufficient information in all the apps to have them stand up. Were there a few problems? Yes, but not enough to invalidate them under existing law of how warrants are evaluated. I would be happy to have that law changed, because that would effect how warrants in general are evaluated. But as of the law as it exists now, and has for a very long time, there is sufficient probable cause even without the problematic “errors” that people at Lawfare and otherwise clack about.

        • timbo says:

          So you’re saying that the fact that Carter Page was somehow associated with the CIA some point somehow invalidates the case for a warrant to be issued? Where are you seeing a problem precisely with how and why the warrant was issued?

        • bmaz says:

          No, the fact he at some brief point talked to the CIA is irrelevant, as are his “denials” of being involved in anything. Seriously, people are biting off on bullshit from Horowitz and the worthies at Lawfare etc.

        • Rugger9 says:

          I wasn’t pinging on GG for being in Brazil but for his sea change from a pointedly progressive voice worth following (a bit libertarian then, much more so now) to at times being a Trump apologist. He just happens to live there and I wish him the best on the personal level.

          Why the attitude change? I think someone paid him to do it.

          For another example, let’s look at Jill Stein, who still hasn’t fully explained her excellent RT-Moscow adventure, etc. et al and I think there’s filthy lucre involved as well.

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          “Holed up in Brazil” suggests a little pinging, that he’s on the run. As it turns out, the present government has made life there much less safe for its critics, anyone who stands in the way of rapacious resource extraction, and those not tithing members of the neoliberal church.

  5. Molly Pitcher says:

    Also OT, apparently , Manafort has been in the hospital since last Thursday for a ‘cardiac event’.

  6. frank c. tripoli says:

    Nixon gave us Carter….
    Who will stumpy gift us with ?
    Klobuchar ? Warren ? A Dem Senate ?

    [Welcome back to emptywheel. As bmaz said, please use the same username each time you comment so that community members get to know you. This is your fifth user name since July 2018, including FRANK TRIPOLI, franceso, FRANK E, and f. Thanks. /~Rayne]

    • bmaz says:

      This is the third iteration of your screen name you have used over three comments. Pick one and stick to it so people know exactly who they are dealing with. Secondly, his name is Trump, not “stumpy”, do not make us look stupid with such silly bullshit. Lastly, what exactly was wrong with Carter in retrospect? And are you a little man scared of competent women like Warren and Klobuchar? What kind of pathetic misogynist are you?

  7. stefon manci says:

    My deepest respect in providing this observation. In this thread user “Rugger 9” used a witty synonym to describe the 43 President of the United States commonly know as George W. Bush. Said user wrote: “as was seen in the Shrub White House is something.”

    Surly I don’t need to spell out the joke, which I found quite funny and had planned on using. In my view, which understand means little, a distasteful misspelling of a persons name, as was done by user “frank c. tripoli” when mocking Mr. Trump with the spelling “stumpy,” and the use of a witty synonym for a persons name have one comment element in that each seek to sully the character of the individual whose name is being cast in doubt.

    It is therefore my observation, that some constancy should be applied in publicly reprimanding users for sullying the name of public office holders. I will now return to lurking.

Comments are closed.