One of the most mysterious questions of the 2016 election centered around the administration of Barack Obama and their weaponization of the FBI during that crucial contest.
During the race, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton became suddenly fond of accusing Donald Trump of having nefarious Kremlin connections, essentially insinuating that the NYC business mogul was some sort of Russian double agent, or a puppet of Vladimir Putin’s. Where this allegation came from was, for a while, a mystery.
We now know the origin of this tall tale; a DNC-funded opposition research dossier full of unverified and unverifiable rumors that was used to approve a FISA warrant to spy on the Trump 2016 campaign. An investigation into this nefarious and clandestine coup attempt has turned up little more, however, and Attorney General Bill Barr isn’t so sure about the spin being applied to the story.
Attorney General William Barr reportedly disagrees with a finding by the forthcoming Department of Justice (DOJ) Inspector General (IG) report that the FBI had sufficient reason to monitor the Trump campaign in 2016.
The Washington Post reported Monday evening that IG Michael Horowitz, an Obama administration appointee, had concluded that there was, in fact, sufficient evidence to justify what Barr earlier called “spying” on the campaign.
Barr reportedly disagreed, though a spokesperson for the DOJ dismissed reports of a dispute between Barr and Horowitz: “Rather than speculating, people should read the report for themselves next week,” she said.
The Mueller investigation and subsequent Mueller report, which thoroughly and exhaustively looked into the claim that Trump was a Russia asset, did not suggest that there was sufficient evidence to charge Donald Trump with any crime.
Become an insider!
Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.