New ICE Report Reveals Massive Illegal Alien Crime Wave

ICE issued detainers on criminal aliens just this past year who were collectively charged with 2,500 murders! To put that in perspective, according to the FBI, law enforcement agencies only arrested 9,049 individuals in total for homicide in 2018. So 2,500 is roughly 28 percent of the known homicide offenders! It is the equivalent to the body count from 43 Las Vegas shootings, all committed by foreign nationals. Isn’t it time we provide more funding for ICE so we don’t continue to harbor other countries’ murderers?

The biggest headline from ICE’s comprehensive enforcement and removal operations report released yesterday was that the border surge diverted ICE operations to the point that interior arrests were down 10 percent. But there is a bigger headline embedded in the report that should disturb us all. It reveals a catastrophically huge problem of foreign criminals remaining indefinitely in the country to commit more crimes, many of whom are unknown or unsupervised. Where are Republicans fighting the issue of harboring other countries’ criminals? Where is the budget fight?

ICE’s annual enforcement report reveals that at the end of fiscal year 2019, there were 3,274,244 foreign nationals in the national docket of immigration proceedings who are officially under the supervision of ICE, but are not detained. That is an increase of 800,000 illegal aliens in just two years, and most of them committed other crimes while here.

For all the talk about ICE locking up people and record numbers in detention, only 50,000 are being detained. That means that 98.4 percent of illegal aliens who have been caught by ICE in recent years and have not yet been removed – again, mainly criminal aliens – and remain at large in the country. The same 5,000 ICE deportation officers – one-fourth the size of the NYPD – who are responsible for roughly 150,000 new arrests and 85,000 new removals a year must monitor these people as well, which include roughly 2.5 million with final or pending final removal orders.

To put that in plain English, it means that because our system has moved away from expedited removal to lawfare in the immigration courts, 3.2 million illegal aliens, over 80 percent of whom have likely committed additional crimes, remain at large in this country indefinitely with almost no supervision. That is a public security crisis of epic proportions that cuts to the core of why we have a federal government, yet Congress refuses to allocate the resources even for ICE to properly monitor, apprehend, and remove just the illegal aliens with criminal records. Over 80 percent of those arrested by ICE in recent years have criminal convictions or pending criminal charges, which means that the overwhelming majority of the 3.2 million (not to mention all the criminal aliens ICE never caught) remain a danger to the public.

In 2017, the DHS inspector general found that in some field offices there is only one agent per 10,000 released aliens. Worse, the report found that that “a heavy workload limited oversight of non-detained aliens in that geographic area that ICE had flagged as risks to national security.” Now, there are one million more on the docket. . .

A few observations are in order:

This is just a tiny snapshot of the universe of criminality among illegal aliens and only includes the criminal offenses with more than 1,000 offenders. The fact that most of the crime numbers on the list are actually down roughly 10 percent from last year’s report, commensurate with the drop in total ICE apprehensions, demonstrates that ICE, even in a better year, is likely leaving a lot on the table. They caught fewer criminals this year because fewer agents were engaged in interior enforcement relative to FY 2018. Imagine how many they’d catch if they had 10,000 deportation officers rather than 5,000.

Then there are sanctuary cities and states. Most illegal aliens live in sanctuary jurisdiction where law enforcement doesn’t cooperate with ICE. Thus, there are many more crimes committed by illegal aliens that go unresolved by ICE. Just take a look at the California numbers. While California has, by far, the most illegal aliens in the country, ICE only apprehended a fraction of the number they caught in a state like Texas. For example, the Los Angeles field office only averaged about 30-40 arrests per month of those aliens with criminal charges, as compared to 300 per month for Dallas. According to Pew, L.A. metro has 2.5 times as many illegal aliens as the Dallas metro, which tells you there are likely thousands of illegal alien criminals being missed in L.A. Even the New Orleans field office averaged more total arrests than L.A., and the Salt Lake City office had more total arrests than the San Francisco office. Thus, the true number of crimes committed by illegal aliens in a given year is exponentially greater than what’s on this table.

With regard to the more serious criminals, especially murderers and repeat violent offenders, they are often serving life sentences or very long sentences and die before ICE ever apprehends them. None of those illegal aliens who fit into that category, which by definition are the worst offenders, are even accounted for in this table of cumulative crimes committed by those arrested by ICE in FY 2019.

ICE has removed roughly three million illegal aliens over the past decade. By and large, the worse of a criminal one is, the more likely he is to get deported. Inevitably, an unknown number of those removed come back into to the country. But many have also been kept out. Thus, a large percentage of the worst repeat offender aliens have been deported, yet we still see this much crime from illegal aliens. Imagine if ICE hadn’t existed at all the past decade. On the flip side, imagine how much less crime we’d have if ICE immediately removed every criminal alien after the first crime committed.

Overall, the 1,923 murder figure is what stands out. But it’s worse than that. That was the total homicide tally among those arrested by ICE this past year, which usually means people who committed murder years ago and have just finished serving their sentence in prison. ICE reported that just this year it issued detainers on individuals charged with a total of 2,500 murders. While some of them might have been legal immigrants who have been convicted of a murder a while ago and served time, the bulk of them will be front-end detainers on illegal aliens who have just recently been charged with murder. That such a large percentage of murder in this country is 100 percent avoidable is truly a national emergency.

Aside from homicides, among those who were subject to detainers in FY 2019, the illegal aliens together had a cumulative history of 56,000 assaults, 14,500 sex crimes, 5,000 robberies, and 2,500 kidnappings. Again, that’s just one year’s worth of detainers.

Unless ICE’s funding is increased and expedited removals become the norm, even if we completely shut off new illegal immigration, it would take years to dig out from the mess of bringing in millions of criminals who belong to other countries. We have truly become the global dumping ground. (For more from the author of “New ICE Report Reveals Massive Illegal Alien Crime Wave” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Prince Andrew Accuser Makes Public Plea for Help If ‘Something Happens’; Epstein-Funded Scientist George Church Is Creating a Genetics-Based Dating App

By Fox News. Virginia Roberts Giuffre pleaded for the public’s help in the event that “something happens” to her, noting “in no way, shape or form am I suicidal.”

The 35-year-old woman posted her cryptic message to Twitter late Tuesday in response to someone else’s tweet, writing in part: “Too many evil people want to see me quieted.”

Giuffre, who has repeatedly accused Prince Andrew, Duke of York, of having sex with her when she was 17, is one of the alleged sex trafficking victims of financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. . .

A spokesperson for Royal Communications later said in a statement to FOX Business the duke “unequivocally regrets” his association with Epstein and “emphatically denied” reports that Andrew ever had any sort of relationship with Giuffre.

(Read more from “Prince Andrew Accuser Makes Public Plea for Help If ‘Something Happens'” HERE)

____________________________________________________________

Epstein-Funded Scientist George Church Is Creating a Genetics-Based Dating App

By Daily Beast. Harvard biologist George Church already had to apologize for palling around with Jeffrey Epstein even after the financier pleaded to guilty to preying on minors a decade ago. Now he’s raising eyebrows again—with plans for a genetics-based dating app.

In an interview with 60 Minutes, Church said his technology would pair people based on the propensity of their genes, when combined in children, to eliminate hereditary diseases.

“That sounds like eugenics,” Fordham adjunct ethics professor and science journalist Elizabeth Yuko, who studies bioethics, told The Daily Beast on Monday. (The tech and science news site Gizmodo called Church’s idea “an app only a eugenicist could love.”)

Yuko compared the app, as described, to the Nazi goal of cultivating a master race: “I thought we realized after World War II that we weren’t going to be doing that,” she said. . .

Epstein had a twisted take on genetics, hosting scientific conferences at which he expressed his desire to propagate his own genome by impregnating up to 20 women at a time at his New Mexico ranch, like cattle stock. (Read more from “Epstein-Funded Scientist George Church Is Creating a Genetics-Based Dating App” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

SCHIFF SLIP: Adam Schiff Reveals Real Reason for Trump Impeachment; ‘It’s All a Lie!’: Constituents Scream at Democrat Over Impeachment (VIDEO)

By Daily Wire. On Tuesday, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA) made a slip-up seemingly revealing the real reason Democrats are ramming clearly partisan impeachment proceedings down the nation’s throat: Trump, according to Democrats like Schiff, is an illegitimate president that was not supposed to win in 2016 and must be stopped before 2020.

“Schiff, a California Democrat, strongly suggested in a press conference Tuesday that Trump colluded with the Russians to undermine the 2016 election and win the White House,” The Washington Examiner posted, though a two-year investigation from special counsel Robert Mueller showed there was no highly-hyped “Russian collusion” with President Trump.

“The argument, ‘Why don’t you just wait?’, amounts to this: Why don’t you just let him cheat in one more election?” Schiff said Tuesday, fending off criticism that the Democrats are not actually concerned about the truth due to their rush with impeachment. “Why not let him have foreign help one more time?”

Schiff’s latest admission comes in the concert with fellow Democrats, at various times since Trump’s election, stating that their mission is to remove Trump from office because of his politics. . .

This comes in stark contrast with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) claiming impeachment is a “somber” and “prayerful” process Democrats would rather not engage in. (Read more from “SCHIFF SLIP: Adam Schiff Reveals Real Reason for Trump Impeachment” HERE)

______________________________________________

‘It’s All a Lie!’: Constituents Scream at Democrat Over Impeachment During Town Hall

By Washington Examiner. Democratic Virginia Rep. Abigail Spanberger faced backlash from some of her constituents about the impeachment investigation during a town hall in her home district.

In the town hall over the weekend, Spanberger tried addressing the impeachment process, but she was interrupted by multiple people expressing their support for President Trump.

“My opinion of our inquiry is mine and mine alone. No one has pressured me to vote in any particular way from within the party. And I will not be pressured to vote in any particular way,” she said. “The allegations against the president are incredibly, incredibly serious,” she said, according to CNN.

“It’s a lie. It’s all a lie!” one man shouted. Someone else yelled, “You all have been trying to impeach this man since he got elected!” Another man asserted Trump “hasn’t done anything wrong,” while yet another man implored the congresswoman, “Let our votes count! Don’t take them away!”

(Read more from “‘It’s All a Lie!’: Constituents Scream at Democrat Over Impeachment During Town Hall” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Democrats Float Prosecution and National Guard for Police Who Fail to Enforce Gun Control Legislation

Democratic lawmakers on Capitol Hill say local police who do not enforce gun control measures likely to pass in Virginia should face prosecution and even threats of the National Guard.

After November’s Virginia Legislature elections that led to Democrats taking control of both chambers, the gun control legislation proposed by some Democrats moved forward, including universal background checks, an “assault weapons” ban, and a red flag law.

Legal firearm owners in the state, however, joined with their sheriffs to form Second Amendment sanctuary counties, which declare the authorities in these municipalities uphold the Second Amendment in the face of any gun control measure passed by Richmond. . .

Virginia Democratic officials, however, already say local law enforcement supporting these resolutions will face consequences if they do not carry out any law the state Legislature passes.

“I would hope they either resign in good conscience, because they cannot uphold the law which they are sworn to uphold, or they’re prosecuted for failure to fulfill their oath,” Democratic Virginia Rep. Gerry Connolly told the Washington Examiner of local county police who may refuse to enforce future gun control measures. “The law is the law. If that becomes the law, you don’t have a choice, not if you’re a sworn officer of the law.” (Read more from “Democrats Float Prosecution and National Guard for Police Who Fail to Enforce Gun Control Legislation” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Former FBI Official Calls Revelations in IG Report on FISA Abuses ‘Terrifying’

A former FBI official responded to the release of the Department of Justice Inspector General’s report about FISA abuses, calling the revelations “terrifying.”

Former FBI Assistant Director Chris Swecker made the comments to Neil Cavuto on his Fox News show on Wednesday. . .

“These are serious abuses. FISA is the most intrusive technique you can use. You can put a microphone in someone’s house, you can put a camera in their house. You can intercept their phone calls, you can intercept their emails, their texts, you can mirror their hard drives,” he explained.

“You can look at every aspect of someone’s life with a FISA order. It’s extremely intrusive and to find out there were 17 different errors, omissions and unsupported assertions in there, is absolutely is terrifying to me,” he concluded.

“We gotta make sure that the people who did this are held accountable,” Swecker continued. “It’s not the FBI, it’s the Comey leadership team, it comes from the top.” (Read more from “Former FBI Official Calls Revelations in IG Report on FISA Abuses ‘Terrifying'” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Top Ukraine Adviser Casts Doubt on Key Impeachment Testimony

A top Ukrainian official has disputed key claims made by Democrat witnesses testifying in the impeachment case against President Donald Trump, according to a recent report in TIME Magazine.

Andriy Yermak, the top adviser to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, said that U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland did not inform him of a quid pro quo offer when the two spoke in Warsaw last fall — a claim Sondland made during his testimony that has become central to the Democrats’ impeachment argument against the president. Instead, Yermak said the two men briefly met by the escalator after a meeting between President Zelensky and Vice President Mike Pence, and they both agreed the meeting between the two world leaders went very well.

“Gordon [Sondland] and I were never alone together,” Yermak told TIME in an interview last week. “We bumped into each other in the hallway next to the escalator as I was walking out … and I remember – everything is fine with my memory – we talked about how well the meeting went. That’s all we talked about.” (Read more from “Top Ukraine Adviser Casts Doubt on Key Impeachment Testimony” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

A New 2020 Poll Doesn’t Look Good for President Trump

A national poll released Tuesday on the 2020 election shows Independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders beating President Donald Trump by eight points.

According to Quinnipiac, Sanders beats Trump 51-43 in a head-to-head competition, while other Democratic candidates like Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren are also beating Trump, 51-42 and 50-43, respectively.

Moreover, even Democratic candidates with less support in the primary are beating Trump, such as South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Democratic Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar. . .

A November poll indicated that Democratic billionaire Michael Bloomberg was beating Trump, while another poll showed Biden and Sanders beating Trump too. (Read more from “A New 2020 Poll Doesn’t Look Good for President Trump” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

GOP Governors Betraying Constituents by Pushing Refugee Resettlement

After a year of record illegal immigration and a high baseline of third-world legal immigration, Republican governors are now pushing for even more refugee resettlement.

In September, President Trump gave veto power to governors and county officials to halt refugee resettlement in their respective jurisdictions with the full understanding that at least the Republican officials would follow his campaign promises of putting American taxpayers first. Instead, not a single Republican governor has publicly exercised this prerogative, while several of them have given their affirmative support to this travesty.

Governor Doug Ducey, R-Ariz., leads a state that has been beleaguered by illegal immigration with an enormous cost to taxpayers, financially as well as in education, culture, drugs, and crime. Yet earlier this year, he agreed to implement in-state tuition discounts for illegal aliens. Evidently, dealing with the entirety of Central America at Arizona’s international border and in the local communities is not enough for him. He has now agreed to allow refugee resettlement contract groups to engage in more resettlement in the Grand Canyon State.

“Throughout our nation’s history, the United States has been a refuge for individuals fleeing religious and political persecution in their homeland,” Ducey wrote Friday in a formal letter to U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo consenting to resettlement. “And Arizona has historically been one of the most welcoming states in terms of the number of refugees resettled here.”

Local Democrat congressmen and state officials expressed satisfaction with Ducey’s agreement with their position. He also has the support of state House Speaker Rusty Bowers, R-Mesa. When it comes to the real issues that matter to our future, both parties are on the same page, representing the special interests and not the voiceless taxpayers.

Do the people of Arizona not factor into Ducey’s virtue-signaling? Moreover, is Ducey unaware that much religious strife has actually ceased to be an issue in the modern era, with most of the conflict now involving warring Islamic factions, not persecuted minorities? We are bringing in an equal number of Sunnis and Shiites from places like Iraq, with no understanding of how they will live harmoniously with each other, much less with Americans. Why should his state’s population be on the hook for the language and cultural problems in the schools? Who else will pay for it?

Also, the fact that Arizona has taken in so many refugees in the past, in addition to shouldering one of the heaviest burdens of illegal immigration in the nation, is a reason to slow down the process and allow for more assimilation and give taxpayers a reprieve. It’s not a reason to step on the gas pedal with more open-borders policies.

It’s not just large cities like Phoenix that are being transformed. A quick search of the WRAPS State Department database indicates that Glendale, Arizona, has become the new hot spot for resettlement in recent years. A midsized suburb of Phoenix, Glendale has received 2,700 refugees over the past four fiscal years. Most of them originate from Islamic countries or places with dramatically different countries and volatile tribal divisions, such as Iraq, Somalia, Burma, Syria, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Who is looking out for the security concerns, especially when so many Somali refugees have been known to bring their intra-clan violence to our shores, dividing along the same gang structures they had in their home countries?

Last year, Ahmad Suhad Ahmad, an Iraqi refugee living in Tucson, was arrested for an elaborate bomb plot after he was caught making two explosive devices in Las Vegas. Also last year, Mohamed Abdirahman Osman and Zeinab Abdirahman Mohamed, a refugee couple living in Tucson, were indicted after they were found to have been members of Al-Shabab. The FBI believes that Osman sustained permanent injuries from his time handling explosives for the terror group. I’m sure Doug Ducey will personally vet these people to ensure all of them will love America.

But these are the Republicans we are electing. They are indistinguishable from Democrats on this and many other issues.

Thus far, the Republican governors of New Hampshire, North Dakota, and Utah have also agreed to refugee resettlement, at least as long as the county governments agree to it. But the RINO problem likely runs deeper than that. As refugee expert Ann Corcoran warns, the New York Times is reporting that 16 governors have officially consented to resettlement. Which ones? Are other Republicans silently supporting this? Well, that is exactly what will happen if conservatives don’t get engaged on the ground and demand that governors such as Texas’ Greg Abbott decline to resettle refugees.

In October, the Washington Post reported that “none of the 27 Republican governors and other state officeholders contacted by The Post said definitively that they would move to block refugees.” The only statewide elected Republican willing to go on record was Alabama’s Attorney General Steve Marshall. “There is an array of challenges — financial, legal and public safety, to name a few — that states or localities face when compelled to accommodate refugee populations,” said Marshall’s office in a comment to the Post. “States deserve to be heard before those decisions are made.”

Why can’t any other Republican go on the record as standing with taxpayers?

The answer is that most Republicans are bought out by the big business and agricultural interests, in addition to being intimidated by the progressive outrage-mongers. Earlier this week, despite massive protests, the Burleigh County, North Dakota, Commission voted 3-2 to accept refugees. This is a county Trump carried by a 46-point margin in 2016, yet we can’t even elect Republicans who will side with the people. The governor, Doug Burgum, already gave his approval for resettlement in counties that vote for it.

Do yourself a favor: Look at the roster of GOP governors and ask yourself how many of them share our values on immigration, sovereignty, national security, crime, health care, traditional values, and spending, just to name a few issues. If you find more than two or three, you are likely living in a dream world.

Many Republicans voted for Donald Trump in the primary because they were sick of business as usual with Republican politicians acting like Democrats. The problem is that no effort has been made to change the type of Republicans we are electing down-ballot. This issue of fundamental transformation through Middle Eastern refugees is the perfect issue with which to catalyze a movement to finally drain the GOP swamp. Let these Republicans become political refugees during next election. When will conservative talk radio and media figures stand up and be counted on the issues that actually matter in their own party? (For more from the author of “GOP Governors Betraying Constituents by Pushing Refugee Resettlement” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Judge Puts Injunction on Border Wall – When SCOTUS Already Ruled There’s No Standing

Can I get standing to sue our policy of disarming soldiers on military bases because it embarrasses our image as Americans and makes us look weak in the eyes of the world? Well, if Trump legitimizes a district judge’s opinion granting a city government standing to sue the construction of border wall because of “reputation” issues, then there is quite literally no political question a court can’t decide, on any standing or none.

Yesterday, U.S. District Judge David Briones of El Paso, a Clinton appointee, ruled that Trump has no authority to reprogram $3.6 billion in military construction projects for border wall construction as part of his emergency declaration powers. The Department of Homeland Security was slated to use those funds to construct 175 miles of border wall in several border states.

Let’s put aside the fact that 10 U.S.C. § 2808 allows the president to reprogram defense funding for construction of barriers if he declares a national emergency, which he did last February. Even if the president indeed infringed upon Congress’ power of the purse, since when did the judicial branch hold the power of the purse? How in the world can a federal judge grant standing to random plaintiffs to rule upon a national question dealing with defense funding?

The “plaintiffs” in this case weren’t defense contractors or people standing to lose from the reprogramming. They were the city government of El Paso, Texas, and an agitation group named Border Network for Human Rights. How can a city government and a left-wing political group get standing to sue against transferring funds to our own national security?

As the Washington Post reports, the city “argued that the new barrier was unwanted by the community and would inflict permanent harm on its reputation as a welcoming, cross-border place.”

So now a single district judge can grant standing to a city government to rule on a national policy affecting national security at an international border and then place an “injunction” on all construction, even outside El Paso?

Of course not. No judges have such power. The problem is the administration continues to act as though they do, perpetuating this dangerous myth that there is nothing out of bounds for the courts to rule on.

Simply saying that the administration will appeal the decision is not good enough. This was already appealed in a similar case. After a California judge placed an injunction on the first $2.5 billion of reprogrammed funding, the Supreme Court stayed the injunction. Yet, as we’ve seen in the growing trend of lower courts ignoring the Supreme Court, that didn’t stop the El Paso judge from issuing a similar injunction.

It’s true that the California case involved the $2.5 billion in non-emergency funding to combat drug smuggling, which might be a stronger authority for the president than the $3.6 billion in emergency military construction funding, but that doesn’t matter. The reason the Supreme Court stayed the injunction is because, regardless of whether the president was correct in using the funding, courts have no power to grant standing to outside organizations to sue against a border wall. The case in California involved the Sierra Club and a group named Southern Border Communities Coalition. The reasons why these groups do not have standing applied to the El Paso case as well. “The government has made a sufficient showing at this stage that the plaintiffs have no cause of action to obtain review of the Acting Secretary’s compliance with Section 8005,” stated the 5-4 majority SCOTUS order in July.

Yet liberal judges will just come back in identical cases and start the injunction process all over again. At some point, the Trump administration needs to make the point that if the Supreme Court won’t effectively defend its own decisions from the lower courts, the other branches of government will.

Going forward, if the administration is going to salvage some semblance of border security, it has two choices: Either refuse to give force to this lawless ruling, or engage in a budget fight with Democrats and refuse to sign a funding bill without border wall appropriations. One of the two needs to take place. Otherwise, the foremost promise of Trump’s presidency goes down the tubes. (For more from the author of “Judge Puts Injunction on Border Wall – When SCOTUS Already Ruled There’s No Standing” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Bombshell: Trump Campaign ‘Clearly Spied upon’

By Daily Wire. Attorney General William Barr slammed the FBI during an interview with NBC News on Tuesday, saying that the campaign was “clearly spied upon” and that it was the “first time in history” that something like that had ever happened to a presidential candidate.

NBC News Pete Williams asked Barr, “Based on what you know so far, do you still stand by your statement that the campaign was spied upon?”

“Oh, it was clearly spied upon. I mean, that’s what electronic surveillance is. I think wiring people up to go in and talk to people and make recordings of their conversations is spying,” Barr responded. “I think going through people’s emails which they did as a result of the FISA warrant. They went through everything, you know, from Page’s life.”

Earlier in the interview, Barr said that this was “the first time in history that this has been done to a presidential campaign, the use of these counterintelligence techniques against a presidential campaign.” . . .

Barr continued by highlighting what U.S. Attorney John Durham is looking at in his criminal investigation of the origins of the Russia investigation, noting that FBI officials falsified evidence to surveil the Trump campaign and that they continued to investigate Trump after their case collapsed and the investigation was over. (Read more from “Barr Bombshell: Trump Campaign ‘Clearly Spied upon’” HERE)

______________________________________________

Barr: Comey Refusal to Reinstate Security Clearance a ‘Problem’ in FISA Investigation

By Washington Examiner. Attorney General William Barr said a “problem” in the Justice Department watchdog report on the Russia investigation stems from fired FBI Director James Comey’s refusal to have his security clearance temporarily reinstated.

The former FBI chief, who claimed Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s assessment provided him vindication, was brought up by Barr during an interview Tuesday with NBC News’ Pete Williams.

Brushing off Horowitz’s determination that the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation into the Trump campaign was properly predicated, Barr said U.S. Attorney John Durham would need to finish his investigation before any final conclusions are made about the motivations behind the inquiry.

Noting the limits inherent in an inspector general review, including jurisdiction and inability to compel testimony, Barr pointed to Comey as an example where Horowitz’s report fell short. (Read more from “Barr: Comey Refusal to Reinstate Security Clearance a ‘Problem’ in FISA Investigation” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE