Quantcast
Connect with us

DOJ’s case against Andrew McCabe is ‘weak and likely to fail’: Ex-federal prosecutor

Published

on

In an opinion piece for POLITICO this Friday, former federal prosecutor and legal affairs commentator Renato Mariotti characterized the case federal prosecutors want to bring against former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe as “weak and likely to fail at trial.”

President Trump fired McCabe in March of last year just before he was set to retire. McCabe’s planned retirement came in the wake of a DOJ internal watchdog’s determination that he had authorized a leak about a federal investigation into the Clinton Foundation as the 2016 presidential campaign was ending. According to investigators, McCabe displayed a “lack of candor” when asked about the leak. On Thursday of last week, federal prosecutors recommended that charges be brought against him.

ADVERTISEMENT

But according to Mariotti, McCabe did nothing illegal.

One overarching challenge in prosecuting McCabe is his own history. McCabe is not a career criminal or the head of a violent street gang. He is a career FBI agent with no criminal history and a long career in public service who would argue that he would never intentionally lie because he knew the consequences of doing so could be severe. He already lost his job and his pension as a result of this investigation, and he has two children at home. Jurors would be hesitant to send him to prison for lying to a colleague, particularly given that no one was concretely harmed by his actions.

The evidence against McCabe is weak, according to Mariotti, because one case of him allegedly lying relies on a one-on-one conversation he had with former FBI Director James Comey of which there is no record. “It’s always a dicey proposition to expect a jury to convict someone when there is a ‘he said / he said’ situation,” Mariotti writes.

Another instance of McCabe’s alleged lying involves his claim to prosecutors that he had “no idea” who the source of the leak was. Marriotti points out that McCabe’s explanation was that “the question was an afterthought by the investigators and that he was confused about the article they were referring to.”

There were two investigators, not just one, and neither is a household name. The inspector general did not find McCabe’s excuses credible. But would at least one juror have a reasonable doubt that McCabe knowingly and willfully lied? Proof beyond a reasonable doubt that McCabe deliberately deceived the investigators is the heavy burden prosecutors would need to meet to convict him.

ADVERTISEMENT

Prosecutors’ strongest case against McCabe, according to Mariotti, is a recorded interview by investigators where McCabe denied authorizing an aide to leak the story, as well as his denial that he was in contact with the aide at the time the story was leaked — denials that Mariotti concedes are “provably false.” Even then, according to him, the prosecutors’ case falls short.

In this case, McCabe called the inspector general four days after the interview, said he had been thinking about the questions, and corrected the record. That strongly undercuts a conclusion that he knowingly and willfully lied, and it will be hard for a jury to send him to prison for a false statement that he promptly corrected without being asked.

Ultimately, there isn’t enough to convict McCabe and send him to prison, Mariotti writes, and much of the case against the former deputy FBI director is undermined by Trump’s incessant public attacks on McCabe and his wife, giving his legal team an opening to claim that he’s the target of a personal vendetta and as a result won’t get a fair trial.

ADVERTISEMENT


Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

George Conway: Even if the White House is telling the truth — we’d have no reason to believe them

Published

on

Republican lawyer George Conway tweeted Sunday night that even if the story the White House is spinning about President Donald Trump's trip to Walter Reed makes perfect sense, there's no reason to believe them.

https://twitter.com/gtconway3d/status/1196202741552599040

The tweet shared a Washington Post report from Karen Tumulty who further explained the sentiment.

"It's a good bet he White House is not telling the truth when it claims Trump was at Walter Reed 'to begin portions of his routine annual physical exam,'" Tumulty tweeted. "We know this because — well because those people lie about pretty much everything."

Continue Reading

Facebook

‘I’m very upset’: Furious Texas rancher says Trump is ‘secretly’ trying to steal land to build ‘the wall’

Published

on

Ranchers in Laredo, Texas, are furious as they're learning President Donald Trump is stealing their land away to build the "wall," he says, has already been built.

During a campaign stop in Louisiana Thursday, Trump said that his wall is "going up faster than anyone thought possible." But when probed about it, Trump's own top border official confirmed none of the wall has been built, in fact, all that has been built replaced existing structures.

Only four miles of the area where the Trump "wall" is going is owned by the federal government already. So, the White House is now calling land-owners on the Texas border to beg them to cooperate with their landgrab.

Continue Reading
 

CNN

Mike Pence distances himself from his own top adviser after she refuses to lie for Trump

Published

on

Vice President Mike Pence's top adviser, Jennifer Williams, seems to be enduring retaliation from her employers after cooperating with subpoenas from the House impeachment inquiry this week. Williams spoke to the committee behind closed doors, and her testimony has was released Saturday.

President Donald Trump attacked her as a "Never Trumper" on Twitter Sunday, despite her work for the Trump adminsitration.

Continue Reading
 
 
Help Raw Story Uncover Injustice. Join Raw Story Investigates for $1 and go ad-free.
close-image