Just as the impeachment inquisition seems to be temporarily coming to a conclusion, a bombshell report by Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz reveals he’s found evidence that an FBI lawyer falsified a key portion of a FISA application submitted to the FISA Court, targeting Trump Campaign adviser Carter Page.
The deliberate manipulation of the document was enough to change the substantive meaning of the document, thus duping the FISA Judges who “green-lighted” the secretive surveillance of the former Trump campaign advisor.
The show-stopping announcement coming on the heels of the dubious impeachment show-trial was perhaps meant to send a clear signal to Schiff and company that what awaits them, on December 9th when Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., along with Horowitz’s comprehensive report of criminal behavior by the FBI goes public.
The South Carolina Senator appearing on Fox News emphasized “That’s locked,” concerning the December 9th date.
Horowitz also revealed that the accused FBI attorney worked under the former Chief of the Counterespionage Peter Strzok, the “never Trumper” FBI agent who was fired after it was revealed he exchanged neatly 7,000 emails with FBI lawyer Lisa Page, both conspiring to bring down the President.
The IG report found that the FBI attorney purposely modified the FISA document falsely stating that he had “documentation to back up a claim he had made in discussions with the Justice Department about the factual basis” for the FISA warrant application.
However, according to internal text messages previously obtained by Fox News, just 9-days before the FBI applied for its FISA warrant to spy on Page. Bureau officials were worried and battling with a senior Justice Department official, who had “continued concerns” about the “possible bias” of a source pivotal to the application.
While the IG report is slated for a congressional hearing on December 11th, another separate however parallel report by U.S. Attorney John Durham is also nearing completion. However, the Horowitz report will highlight the reason why Durham’s probe has become a criminal inquiry.
Both investigations to some degree worked in tandem regarding Horowitz’s findings concerning the falsified FISA document, in that only Durham has the ability to charge someone with criminality, meaning the ex-FBI lawyer who made the changes is now under criminal investigation.
Also under scrutiny is former FBI Director James Comey’s handling of his personal memos about meetings with the President and former official Peter Strzok’s anti-Trump text messages.
No doubt the biggest concern for the Justice Department is the Durham probe and more importantly what he’s uncovered. Attorney General Barr himself soon after appointing Durham acknowledged he was concerned that former Obama officials acted inappropriately as they oversaw the counterintelligence probe of the 2016 Trump campaign.
While it’s yet not clear if the IG Report has probed the apparent falsifying of documents by the FBI concerning another Trump supporter, Michael Flynn. His attorneys last month alleged that FBI agents manipulated official records of the former national security adviser’s 2017 interview that led to him being charged with lying to investigators.
Flynn’s attorney Sidney Powell recently filed a 37-page motion outlining several glaring discrepancies urging the court to “dismiss the entire prosecution against her client, for outrageous government misconduct” and hold the prosecutors in contempt.
Powell contends that FBI agents willfully changed Flynn’s “302” a formal forum used by agents in summarizing their interview with a subject. However, it appears that someone within the agency may have edited the wording. It’s noteworthy to point out that ex-FBI agent Peter Strzok was involved in the original interview.
“Those changes added an unequivocal statement that ‘Flynn stated he did not’ — in response to whether Mr. Flynn had asked Kislyak to vote in a certain manner or slow down the UN vote [on sanctions],” Powell wrote. “This is a deceptive manipulation because, as the notes of the agents’ show, Mr. Flynn was not even sure he had spoken to Russia/Kislyak on the issue. He had talked to dozens of countries.”
Powell also alleged that agents added: “or if Kislyak described any Russian response to a request by Flynn.”
“That question and answer does not appear in the notes, yet it was made into a criminal offense,” Powell wrote. “The draft also shows that the agents moved a sentence to make it seem to be an answer to a question it was not.”