dChan - Q Origins Project Archive

>>9374807

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/lynch-disputes-having-directed-comey-to-characterize-clinton-email-probe-as-a-matter/2019/05/21/3b515f56-7bc0-11e9-8bb7-0fc796cf2ec0_story.html

During the closed session, Lynch was asked about Comey’s June 2017 testimony to the Senate Intelligence Committee in which he suggested Lynch had been politically compromised when she asked him in 2015 not to call the FBI’s probe “an investigation.”

“The attorney general had directed me not to call it ‘an investigation,’ but instead to call it ‘a matter,’ which confused me and concerned me,” Comey told the Senate panel. “That was one of the bricks in the load that led me to conclude, ‘I have to step away from the department if we’re to close this case credibly.’”

During her House testimony, Lynch said she and Comey had a conversation about how to describe the status of the case but that she never issued a directive.

“I was quite surprised that he characterized it in that way,” Lynch said. “I didn’t direct anyone to use specific phraseology.”

Lynch said that at the time of their conversation, the probe of Clinton’s use of a private email server while secretary of state was still in its early stages and she was not publicly calling it an “investigation.”

“When the director asked me how to best to handle that, I said, ‘What I have been saying is we have received a referral, and we are working on the matter, working on the issue, or we have all the resources we need to handle the matter, handle the issue,’” Lynch said. “So that was the suggestion that I made to him.”

Lynch added that her suggestion was consistent with long-standing Justice Department policy.

2015

https://www.justsecurity.org/42088/loretta-lynch-matter-matter-matters/

The requirements the FBI must meet in order to open an investigation are far too low. In fact, they are practically nonexistent.

FBI investigations fall into three categories: assessments, preliminary investigations, and full investigations. As the Brennan Center’s Michael German and Emily Hockett have explained, assessments can be conducted “without any objective basis to suspect the target of the investigation has violated any law, or is likely to in the future.” As long as an agent claims they have an “authorized purpose,” like preventing crime or espionage, they can open an assessment — which allows for the use of informants, physical surveillance, interviews, and more.

The FBI’s own statistics provide some of the best evidence that an investigation is not suggestive of wrongdoing. In their piece on Just Security, German and Hockett pointed out that from 2009 to 2011, only 4 percent of over 82,325 FBI assessments led to information that ultimately warranted the opening of more extensive investigations. This is doubly unsettling given how low the standards are for preliminary investigations.

Only a full investigation requires an “articulable factual basis” of criminal activity, but even that tells us very little about whether the subject of an investigation is actually guilty.

Overall, this extreme discretion afforded to the FBI is bound to be disproportionately employed against politically unpopular groups. In particular, it exacerbates the potential for investigations to be brought as a result of explicit and/or implicit bias against racial and religious minorities.

The solution is two-fold. First, Attorney General Jeff Sessions (and if not him, Congress) must raise the requirements for initiating FBI investigations. But even more importantly, we all need to stop equating investigations with culpability, period. Public officials and the media need to explain to the public that, no matter what, the mere fact that someone is under investigation will never be strong evidence that they are guilty of wrongdoing. After all, the fundamental purpose of an investigation is to determine whether that is the case.

With that in mind, I think it’s fair to say that there was some merit in Lynch’s attempt to characterize the Clinton investigation as a “matter,” since that does not carry the same unjustified connotation of guilt. The problem is that everyone targeted by the FBI deserves that same deference, not just the political allies of those in power.

What matters?

Matters under dispute, only?

Low standards matter.

Note: Preliminary investigations require only “information or an allegation,” and … the allegation does not need to be “credible.” A 2010 Inspector General report found the FBI opened preliminary investigations on political advocacy organizations based on mere speculation that the subjects might commit a crime in the future, and the agents themselves often made the required “allegations.”

https://www.justsecurity.org/40451/standards-opening-fbi-investigation-statistic-meaningless/

What at this point does it matter?