Mediaboss Marketing

Steve Marcus

Former Secretary of State and former first lady Hillary Clinton tours the Foundation for Recovery in Las Vegas Wednesday, May 24, 2023. A tour and news conference by Clinton at the Foundation for Recovery office were part of the efforts by the Clinton Global Initiative to prevent overdosedeaths.

By Casey Harrison (contact)

Thursday, May 25, 2023 | 2 a.m.

Rob Banghart estimates overdosing on heroin or opioids more than a dozen times while living on the streets of Las Vegas. He bluntly says he shouldnt be alive.

Id be lying if I gave an exact number (of overdoses), Banghart told the crowd Wednesday at the Foundation for Recovery in the central valley, before continuing into a story of how he was revived by another homeless person who was carrying the overdose-reversing drug naloxone one night.

Banghart, who says he is sober and now serves as the outreach director Foundation for Recovery, was one of two individuals who shared his fight with addiction with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who was at the Foundation for Recovery to meet with 30 volunteers assembling overdose distribution kits.

The group is a community nonprofit led by volunteers and staff in recovery from mental health and substance abuse disorders.

Each kit comes with three vials of naloxone, also known by the brand name Narcan, as well as individually-packaged syringes, alcohol wipes and latex gloves. Since 2019, the Clinton Foundation has supplied more than 20,000 doses of naloxone to the Foundation for Recovery and more than 720,000 doses to additional community organizations across 21 states.

Clinton, the 2016 Democratic presidential nominee, told the Sun after the event that the Clinton Foundation had worked closely with the Foundation for Recovery since launching an overdose awareness campaign in 2011. She said the Foundation for Recovery had become a model for other states because it offered services like one-on-one counseling and job training under a single statewide initiative.

Theyre a great example of a statewide effort and was one of the first brick-and-mortar support centers, Clinton said. To tackle this crisis, I think were going to need the public and private sectors to come together. I really do.

The Clintons also have been affected by the nations opioid epidemic, she said.

Clinton has known personally of five young people who have died in recent years, ranging from a former State Department staffer, to a neighbor across the street from their New York home, or the daughter of a dear friend, she said.

Estimates released last week by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention suggest approximately 109,680 people in the U.S. died from drug overdose in 2022, with the majority of those stemming from opioid or fentanyl use. That number has risen every year since 2018, when under 70,000 overdose deaths were recorded.

In Nevada, 949 people died of drug overdoses in 2021, according to the CDC.

For those like Banghart, or Donica Martinez, who also met with Clinton to share her experience of being revived with naloxone, having access to such an antidote can not only be the difference between life and death but can also serve as a vital wakeup call to finally seek help.

Martinez had been homeless for about seven years, and was with friends when she began overdosing. Fortunately for her, those she was with already had Narcan on them.

This Narcan was there because of the fact we have organizations like this, street outreach organizations, that pass these out to us, said Martinez, who has been sober for more than a year. If it was not given that day, then I would not be here today.

Sean ODonnell, executive director of the Foundation for Recovery, presented a plaque to Clinton on behalf of the Las Vegas mayors office and city council proclaiming May 24, 2023, Secretary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation Day throughout the city. Councilwoman Victoria Seaman, a Republican running for mayor, was also in attendance.

Whether its partnering with state or local officials, nonprofit organizations, faith leaders or a combination of those, Clinton says she believes it will take the totality of a community to put judgment aside and help those who are in clear need of it.

They cant recover if we ignore them, dismiss them, marginalize them, mistreat them or deny resources for them and think prison is the next answer instead, Clinton said. It is all about separating us from the differences that divide us and finding common ground because when we work together, guess what, we get really great things done.

New technologies

Clinton was joined in her tour by Joe Kiani, founder and CEO of Masimo, a medical technology company that specializes in wearable health devices. Company representatives were there to showcase two devices that have the potential to provide life-saving intervention during a potential overdose.

The so-called Opioid Halo contains a pulse oximeter sensor attached to the users fingertip while connected to a wristband that is also worn by the user, each of which are connected to the users smartphone via Bluetooth connection. The device provides real-time monitoring to watch for slowed breathing and will send audible alerts to the wearer and designated safety contacts.

The Halo also has a setting that will dispatch a wellness call that could lead to an EMS dispatch, Kiani said. We can hopefully save tens of thousands of lives a year, Kiani said, adding that it gained approval from the Food and Drug Administration just last month. This is basically taking what we have in hospitals, and shortening it down to a wearable sensor that can last for about a week, if you wanted to wear it all day and all night.

Kiani also demonstrated a device called the Bridge, a small electrical nerve stimulation device worn behind the ear that he says helps significantly reduce opioid withdrawal symptoms, and is designed for use in medication-assisted therapy with substances like naltrexone to wean patients from opioid dependency.

A prescription is required to obtain the Bridge, but studies show opioid withdrawal symptoms decreased by as much as 85% within one hour of use, according to Masimos website.

Ive heard people tell me this: Theyre addicts and they first take opioids to get high, but then they take opioids because they cant deal with the withdrawal, Kiani said. The withdrawals are so painful that it makes them vomit, its painful, (and) its really unfortunate.

Clinton said Kiani had been the most extraordinary partner when it comes to outside-the-box solutions to the ongoing crisis.

(Kiani) is someone who is truly on the frontlines trying to find ways to help people not just overdose, but prevent overdoses and then assist with recovery, Clinton said.

What to do in an overdose situation

Those interested in learning more about the overdose readiness kit, which are available to companies, EMTs, police and members of the public at no cost, can visit forrecovery.org.

Naloxone typically comes in a vial or nasal spray form. Nasal spray applicators work by simply putting the nozzle up a nostril and spraying it, while it is encouraged to administer a syringe of naloxone to any general area of large muscle, like the thigh, upper arm or buttocks.

Visible indicators like blue lips or fingertips may indicate the body isnt receiving much new oxygen, especially if the person suspected of overdosing is lethargic or unresponsive, said Chris Marx, a training specialist at the foundation.

Most often, their breathing will be short and shallow, and their pupils will appear extremely small. Almost like the tip of a pen, Marx said.

Marx said that naloxone had no negative side effects for someone who hasnt ingested an opioid. But when intervening in a potential overdose, every second matters, meaning its better to administer naloxone than nothing at all.

Once an initial dose of naloxone has been administered, call 911 and begin doing CPR, if possible, Marx said. If the person is still unresponsive after two or three minutes, administer another dose before attempting additional CPR.

When speaking to 911 dispatchers, Marx said, its important to relay to them if a person is not breathing or unresponsive, and that may increase response time from first responders. Nevada law also allows for people to call police to report an overdose without fear of facing legal action if acting in good faith.

When it comes to storing naloxone, the drug has a two-year shelf life, according to the FDA. Naloxone should not be stored in areas exposed to direct sunlight or extreme heat, Marx said.

Read more:
Hillary Clinton praises overdose awareness campaign in visit to Las ... - Las Vegas Sun

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

John Durhams final report blasts the FBI for using the so-called Steele dossier, a compilation of unconfirmed claims about Donald Trump and Russia, without sufficiently considering the chance that Steeles findings contained deliberate Russian falsehoods. But Durham himself relies substantially on a sketchy intelligence product that may be Russian disinformation to push a partisan political narrative. And he does not even note the irony.

Durham, the special counsel who former Attorney General Bill Barr selected in 2019 to look into the origins of the FBIs Trump-Russia investigation, may have succeeded in his apparent goal of serving up reheated scraps for a familiar retinue of hardcore Donald Trump defenders to feast on. House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) announced last week he wants Durham to appear before the committee on Thursday. But that testimony remains unscheduled. The Judiciary Committee did not respond to questions about the delay, which occurred with Durham facing substantial criticism.

Obituaries for his four-year, $7 million investigation have noted Durhams repeated failures to secure courtroom convictions and pointed out how meek his conclusions were compared to the wild expectations of Trump fans. But a different shortcoming in Durhams workits astounding hypocrisymay not be getting the attention it deserves.

The special counsels 306-page report refers 65 times to the Clinton Plan intelligence. That is a claim that Hillary Clinton, on July 26, 2016, approved a plan to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by the Russian security services. Where does this supposed intelligence come from? Those very same Russian security services. The report notes that the Clinton Plan intelligence came from a Russian intelligence analysis that US intelligence agencies got their hands on.

Think about that. To figure out how an American presidential campaign supposedly went about attacking a rival campaign, Durham relied on information US intelligence gathered on claims made by Russian intelligence agents about what they supposedly found by spying on Americans. Thats a pretty roundabout way to learn the kind of information youd expect to see inPlaybook. And this game of spy telephone wasactually even longer than Durham details. According to the New York Times, US spies obtained their insight into Russian intelligence thinking from Dutch intelligence, which was spying on the Russians as the Russians spied on Americans. Durham seems to have found no other confirmation for his Clinton Plan intelligence. Thats reason enough for skepticism.

But there is a bigger problem. Russian security servicesdidhack Clintons campaign to help Trump, according to the entire US intelligence community and the Senate Intelligence Committee. Yet Durham relies on those Russian spies for insight into how Clinton reacted to the hack. That is like the cops citing a bank robber who says the bank framed him.

Durham admits that the Clinton Plan intelligence may be a fabrication. Then he cites it anyway, extensively. He laments the FBIs startling and inexplicable failure to use the supposed plan to put the breaks on the bureaus Trump-Russia probe. He also suggests Clintons machinations may have in part triggered the FBIs investigation.

Durham doesnt explain that claim,but that didnt concern Trump defenders. The Russian collusion conspiracy was invented by Clinton operatives, frequent Trump apologist Jonathan Turley wrotein the New York Post. The Russian hoax was a figment of Hillary Clintons imagination, Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) declared.

Thisisnt just false.Itwould require time travel. Durham himself confirms that the FBI launched its investigation into Trump and Russia based on events that occurred months prior to Clintons alleged July 26 approval of the plan.In April 2016, George Papadopoulos, a foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign,met with a professor with Kremlin ties, who informed him that Russia had obtained dirt onClinton in the form of thousands of emails, as Robert Muellers final report noted. A week later, according to Mueller, Papadopoulos suggested to a representative of a foreign government that the Trump Campaign had received indications from the Russian government that it could assist the Campaign through the anonymous release of damaging material. When hacked Democratic emails were indeed publishedby WikiLeaks on July 22this foreign diplomat alerted US officials about what Papadopoulos had said. The FBI quickly launched an official investigation into the Trump campaigns Russia ties in response to that tip, Durham notes, while arguing they should have begun only a preliminary investigation.

It was the same Russian hack, not Hillary Clinton, that drove media attention, even before the documents were leaked to the public. A June 14, 2016, Washington Post reportRussian Government Hackers Penetrated DNC, Stole Opposition Research on Trumpkicked off a boatload of stories about Trumps financial ties to Russia andhis fawning posture toward Vladimir Putin.

And for all weve heardabout Muellers failure touncover collusion or a criminal conspiracy between Trump and Russia, Durham in fact failed to dent the conclusion, reached by multiple investigations, that Trumps campaign knew of and expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, as Mueller wrote. The Trump campaigns litany of sketchy Russian contacts included campaign chief Paul Manaforts secret 2016 contacts with a man the Senate Intelligence Committee labeled a Russian intelligence officer, who was seeking Trumps backing for a Kremlin-approved plan that would have given Russia effective control of eastern Ukraine. Manafort meanwhile provided his Russian contact with campaign polling data. All by itself, the machinations of Manafort, whom the committee called a grave counterintelligence threat, refute Trumps hoax claims.

Russias hacking, and Trumps effort to exploit it, along with his extensive lies about the topic, drove media and law enforcement attention to it. Clintons campaign, as Durham labored to show, did try to exploit the scandal. But Clinton didnt invent it. Or if she did, as weve noted before, she had the extraordinary luck of making up an accusation that turned out to be correct.

Durham evades this problem by focusing on Clinton supporters efforts to highlight allegations about Trump and Russia that did not pan outin particular the campaigns funding of the Steele dossier, the series of memos of unverified human intelligence that British ex-spook Christoper Steele compiled as opposition research on Trump. Steeles stuff didnt cause the FBI investigation. The agents only saw Steeles memos in mid-September, long after launching the probe, as Durham notes. Nor did the material factor in the conclusions of the probes conducted by Mueller or Senate Intelligence Committee.

But the FBI did use the Steeles memos in FISA applications allowing them to spy on Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. And Durham rips the bureau for relying on unvetted and unverified rumors. Durham also argues that the FBI failed to fully consider the possibility that Steeles primary sub-source, Igor Danchenkoa Russian-born US residentwho was once the subject of a US counterintelligence probemisled Steele to help the Kremlin.

In not resolving Danchenkos status vis-a-vis the Russian intelligence services, it appears the FBI never gave appropriate consideration to the possibility that the intelligence Danchenko was providing to Steelewas, in whole or in part, Russian disinformation, Durham says.

But Durham levels this criticism while leaning heavily on information that indisputably came from Russian intelligence, which has an obvious motive to mislead Americans. The Clinton Plan intelligence, like the Steele dossier, also came from a series of memos, the New York Times reported in January. But these memos were notjustpotentially influenced by Russian spies. They were written by Russian intelligence analysts, who claimed to base them on conversations involving American victims of Russian hacking. According to the Times, the memos made demonstrably inconsistent, inaccurate or exaggerated claims, and some U.S. analysts believed Russia may have deliberately seeded them with disinformation.

Durham admits, the first time he cites the Clinton Plan intelligence, that it may be total bullshit. The report quotes former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe. who, when he declassified some of the same information in October 2020, said the Russian claims were unconfirmed and might reflect exaggeration or fabrication. Durham also quotes three Clinton aides separately calling the allegation ridiculous and notes that Clinton said that the claim struck her as Russian disinformation. But Durham does not otherwise address the possibility that the Russian analysis was a deliberate lie.

Instead he leans heavily on the supposed intelligence. And like the FBI officials who used Steeles memos to justify surveilling Page, Durham cited the Russian memos in court to advance his cause. The same Russian memos that included the Clinton Plan allegation also claimed that the Russians had snooped on communications between an official at the Open Society Foundationsthe pro-democracy organization founded by George Sorosand Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida, then head of the Democratic National Committee. The Russians claimed the duo had discussed a promise by then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch to limit the Justice Departments probe into Clintons handling of State Department emails. But, as the Washington Post first reported in 2017, no other evidence supported this claim, and US officials suspected it was deliberate disinformation.

Still Durham cited the memos as evidence in a bid to obtain a secret federal court order to seize the Open Society officials emails, according to the Times. After a judge found his evidence was too weak for a warrant, Durham used grand-jury power to demand documents and testimony directly from Open Society and forced the groupto cooperate. He seems to have found nothing.

Durham used possible Russian disinformation while attacking the FBI for using possible Russian disinformation. That may seem confusing, but it helps clarify what the special counsel has been up to for the last four years.Working to arm Donald Trump and his allies with talking points to fault what they call the weaponization of government, Durham made himself their weapon.

Read the original here:
John Durham's Report Used Sketchy Intelligence That Might Be ... - Mother Jones

Its more fun via email (promise).This article first appeared in ourSlatestevening newsletter, which seeks to surface the best pieces published across Slates digital and audio journalism. We publish it there to help you cut to the chase at the end of each day. To get it in your inbox, along with more of the best work we published that day, sign up below.

The best of Slate, delivered late

Justice Samuel Alitos majority opinion in Sackett v. EPAwhich deals a devastating blow to the countrys wetlandswas so brazen, it was all a bit much for Brett Kavanaugh!

Justice Kavanaugh wrote a dissenting opinion that did an admirable job explaining the totally ahistorical and atextual nature of Alitos argument, Mark Joseph Stern writes. Stern digs into Alitos tortured logic (Honestly, its like hes barely even trying) and the consequences the courts decision will have for the environment.

Theres a faction of Oregonians who are trying to split from the Beaver State to join Idahoaspiring Beaver Leavers, if you will! (They call themselves something else.) Nitish Pahwa examines the underlying factors driving the movement, and why its gained more traction than past attempts, by the left and the right, to reshape the Northwest.

Its been three years since a police officer murdered George Floyd, sparking protests across the country.

From our archives: Aymann Ismail took a close look at the store that called the cops on Floyd, and the painful reckoning after his killing.

Plus: Hear Me Out imagines what a world without police could look like.

HBO Max just launched its rebrand in just about the grossest way possible, Sam Adams writes. He reviews the lurid debacle that is The Idol.

Im a bitch / Im an orca / Sinking boats / Just off Majorca

The recent rise of whale attacks on boats has let a hundred memes bloom. But whats actually going on here? Anna Guasco explains.

Hillary Clinton says Dianne Feinstein cant afford to retire from the Senate because Republicans wont allow a Democrat to replace her on the Judiciary Committee. I understand why Hillary Clinton, who has lived the life that Hillary Clinton has lived, would assume the worst of Republicans, Jim Newell writes. But her analysis of this situation doesnt make sense. Thats in part, he argues, because this would be quite a bad move for Republicans.

Biden recently predicted that U.S.China relations will be thawing very soon. Thats likely trueand unequivocally a good thing, despite the widespread bipartisan belief that were headed for war with China, Fred Kaplan writes. He explains what the U.S. can do to cool tensions now.

As Successions finale draws near, we put our heads together and came up with five theories about how the show will end.

much like the politics of queer utopianism in Edward Carpenters fiction. In the midst of the horrifying anti-LGBTQ+ backlash were living through, Theodore McCombs turns to these works for a glimmer of hope.

Thanks so much for reading! Well see you tomorrow.

Excerpt from:
News and politics newsletter: Read The Slatest for May 25. - Slate

Casey, a three-term senator who has built such a moderate, mild-mannered reputation he has been compared to oatmeal, is in the crosshairs of national Republican leaders. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has identified Casey as one of his top targets in 2024, going so far as to rank his seat alongside those held by Senate Democrats in solidly red states such as West Virginia and Montana.

Republicans are desperately trying to lure former business executive David McCormick, who they see as the best possible challenger, into the race. The party establishment caught a break this week when MAGA firebrand state Sen. Doug Mastriano announced that he wouldnt run for the Senate at this time, potentially clearing the path to the nomination for McCormick.

But behind the scenes, GOP elected officials, strategists and donors are still not bullish about their chances against Casey. They are well aware that he has won all of his Senate elections by double digits or close to it. They know hes an institution in the state and the son of the late anti-abortion Gov. Robert Casey, Sr. And as working-class white voters have bolted from most Democrats, GOP insiders fear Casey still has a hold on many of them, partly due to his family name.

Bob Casey is political royalty in Pennsylvania. Hes an incumbent senator who is beloved, said Republican Carla Sands, an ambassador to Denmark under former President Donald Trump who ran unsuccessfully for the Senate in the state last year. I think hes tough to beat.

If Trump wins the presidential nomination, some Republicans worry it would make an already difficult situation all but impossible. They are concerned that Trump, who lost Pennsylvania to President Joe Biden in 2020, could be a drag on down-ballot candidates and force them to answer for his unpredictable comments. As he decides whether to run, McCormick himself is weighing the prospect of running alongside Trump, according to two Republicans close to him.

It definitely makes it tougher for a Republican to win the Senate race if Trump is on the ticket for sure. For a Republican to beat Casey, I think the GOP presidential nominee has to win Pennsylvania, said Josh Novotney, a Pennsylvania-based Republican strategist. Casey is more popular than Biden in Pennsylvania and will likely outperform him.

Though Republicans see Casey as a strong contender, the Senate map overall in 2024 heavily favors their party. Democrats are on defense in 23 states, several of them in battlegrounds and full-blown MAGA country. Republicans are facing reelection in just 11 states, with the best opportunities for Democrats lying in hostile territory like Florida and Texas. Republicans only need to flip two Senate seats or one if they win the White House to take back control of the upper chamber.

But the GOPs assessment of Casey underscores another dynamic in Senate races that complicates the picture next year. Democrats have several battle-tested senators on their roster in 2024 like Sherrod Brown, Jon Tester and potentially Joe Manchin who are widely seen as skilled opponents and have outperformed other candidates in their party.

During the blue wave of 2018, Casey carried the state by 13 percentage points, two years after Hillary Clinton lost Pennsylvania to Trump. In 2012, Casey won by 9 percentage points, compared to then-President Barack Obamas 5-point margin of victory.

Republicans said one challenge confronting them is that Casey is so bland that hes not hated by anyone, a similar dilemma they faced in 2020 with Biden. Another is Caseys constituent services.

His staffers who represent him are very effective, said Jackie Kulback, chair of the Cambria County Republican Party. Theyre helping with constituent issues, things like that. That helps you win elections.

Plus, she said, Honestly, I think theres a lot of people who still think that theyre voting for his dad.

The view of Casey within the GOP underscores why Republicans in both Pennsylvania and Washington, D.C. have aggressively wooed McCormick and dissuaded Mastriano from jumping into the race. Public and private polls have shown Casey leading McCormick, but that the race would be closer if McCormick is on the ticket.

Republicans said one challenge confronting them is that Casey is so bland that hes not hated by anyone, a similar dilemma they faced in 2020 with President Joe Biden. | Matt Slocum/AP Photo

After the Senate GOPs campaign arm took a hands-off approach to primaries last year to disappointing results, the National Republican Senatorial Committee is getting involved this time around in several states in hopes of nominating high-quality candidates. Republican officials believe McCormick, a combat veteran and former hedge fund CEO, can appeal to suburban voters and help finance what is expected to be a highly expensive campaign against Casey.

A tough GOP opponent who is well funded could give him a race, said Novotney.

Keith Rothfus, a former GOP congressman, is also eyeing the Senate contest. Sands, the former ambassador, recently declined to rule out a 2024 run.

Despite many Republicans less-than-optimistic attitude toward Casey, the Democrat is not without vulnerabilities. He has moved leftward in recent years one liberal Philadelphia columnist dubbed him Woke Bob Casey which could give an opening to Republicans to challenge his moderate image. Bidens approval ratings are dismal and could pull down Casey and other Democrats on the ballot. Casey has voted with Biden almost 99 percent of the time, according to politics data site FiveThirtyEight, a fact that the GOP is eager to highlight. And Casey has gotten lucky, running in good years for Democrats.

In a statement Thursday after Mastrianos announcement, McCormick signaled the lines of attack he would use on Casey were he to run.

I am seriously considering a run for the U.S. Senate because Bob Casey has consistently made life worse for Pennsylvania families over the past 18 years, and our state deserves better, he said. He is openly hostile to our states energy industry, endorses dangerous criminals walking freely on our streets, and is enabling open borders, leading to a terrifying rise in fentanyl deaths in Pennsylvania.

Caseys campaign manager, Tiernan Donohue, shot back: Bob Casey is a champion for Pennsylvania who has spent his life fighting against the ultra-wealthy and special interests that threaten Pennsylvanias hardworking people from countries like China that threaten our jobs, to big insurance companies that are raising our health care costs. Meanwhile, David McCormick is a Connecticut hedge fund executive who got rich outsourcing jobs, laying off workers, and cozying up to China.

Republicans also believe that recent headlines about Casey are another liability, and that they havent been litigated in TV ads before. Caseys brother registered to lobby last year and a March article by the New York Post found that Caseys campaign paid his sisters company for printing services. Caseys office has said his brother will not lobby him, in accordance with Senate ethics rules.

Some in the GOP even think that Trump sharing a ticket with McCormick would be a positive for the two men. They envision a repeat of 2016, when Trump and then-Sen. Pat Toomey both won Pennsylvania, but with different paths: Toomey performed better in suburban areas, while Trump was stronger in rural parts of the state.

To beat Bob Casey, you need to recreate the 2016 Toomey-Trump coalition, said a national GOP strategist granted anonymity to discuss party strategy. You blow it out in the rural areas and hold down Democrat numbers in the suburbs.

And, some Republicans said, the benefits of Caseys name might be finally beginning to fade.

I think what Bobby has always had going for him is his dads legacy, said Rep. Glenn GT Thompson (R-Pa.). But I will say that I think the majority of voters in Pennsylvania are at an age where they dont remember Bob Sr.

Ally Mutnick contributed to this article.

Continued here:
A well-liked incumbent stands in the way of Republicans retaking ... - POLITICO

Opinion

By Andrew C. McCarthy

May 19, 2023 | 5:57pm

When Andrew McCabe, former deputy director of the FBI, was fired in disgrace in 2018, it was commonly assumed it was because of the Russiagate investigation.

After all, he essentially ran that fiasco, which Special Counsel John Durham definitively noted this week was a baseless farce.

But no. McCabe was fired because he serially lied to investigators that he wasnt leaking investigative information to the media.

More telling was what he was lying about: an FBI investigation of foreign efforts to influence a presidential campaign.

Not Donald Trumps campaign. Hillary Clintons.

Its just part of the many ways the FBI went easy on Clinton, as Durham reveals the agency dropped at least four criminal investigations related to her.

The Clinton Foundation was understandably suspected by FBI agents in three different field offices Little Rock, Washington, and New York as a dodgy vehicle enabling donors, very much including foreign regimes and their operatives, to give goo-gobs of money to Hillary and Bill Clinton without appearing to violate the campaign finance laws.

But McCabe was infuriated, during the stretch run of the 2016 campaign, when the Wall Street Journal reported that he had tied the hands of investigators on the Clinton Foundation case.

Because McCabes wife, in her run for state office in Virginia, had received a hefty contribution from a fund tied to Clinton crony Terry McAuliffe, there was a strong suggestion of partisanship on McCabes part.

To push back against that, McCabe had his subordinates leak that the Obama Justice Department had pressured him to shutter the Clinton Foundation probe.

This was true. In fact, it is substantiated by Durham. He found that the bureau had meetings with top Obama DOJ officials who were hostile to the investigation.

One of them played down as de minimis evidence the FBIs New York office obtained from an informant about the amounts of money involved.

Without making any finding of criminality, Durham found that the transactions in question actually totaled hundreds of thousands of dollars.

The Obama DOJ, including its appointed U.S. attorneys in Manhattan and Brooklyn, made clear to the FBI that they had no interest in a Clinton Foundation case.

McCabe may not have been especially interested either, but it was a lot easier for him to direct his subordinates to stand down when he knew the prosecutors wouldnt touch it.

This was a pattern. As Durham found, even when there may have been evidence that foreign powers were trying to cultivate Clinton and possibly try to bring her under their influence, the same FBI that couldnt open a case on Trump fast enough became paralyzed.

Durham noted that in 2014 i.e., before Clinton even formally announced her candidacy the bureau got information about a foreign governments effort to have one of its operatives contribute to Clintons campaign.

But when agents in one of field office sought to conduct FISA counterintelligence surveillance, their request sat at FBI headquarters for months with no action taken.

One unidentified agent told Durham that the bureau was super more careful and scared with the big name [Clinton] involved.

FBI officials, a supervisor recalled, were pretty tippy-toeing around HRC because there was a chance she would be the next president.

They wanted to avoid any possibility that Clinton could be caught on tape after all, she was a presidential candidate!

The bureaus priority with Clinton was to protect her from malign foreign powers.

After 11 months of bureau handwringing, her aides were given a defensive briefing about the foreign approach, and the matter was quietly closed. Unlike in Russiagate, the FBI was unconcerned that by bringing the Clinton campaign into the loop, their investigation would be compromised.

In a second case of a foreign government seeking to donate to Clinton, the FBI warned one of its informants, who had made an illegal contribution, to cease and desist attending Clinton-related events.

The informants handling agent did even not document the illegal contribution in the bureaus files.

In late July 2016, the FBIs then-director, James Comey, was briefed that U.S. spy agencies had intercepted a Russian intelligence analysis that Clinton had approved a plan by her campaign to smear Trump as an asset of the Kremlin.

Durham provides no reason to believe the FBI investigated the Russian analysis; indeed, he finds that the bureau essentially ignored it.

Of course, regardless of whether the Russian analysis was authentic, we now know the Clinton campaign had exactly such a strategy, and that the campaign managed to get the FBI to do its bidding in framing Trump as Putins puppet.

Just days after being briefed on the Russian intelligence, the FBI opened Crossfire Hurricane on the basis of a sketchy hearsay kind of suggestion made in a London bar to Australian diplomats by young, unpaid Trump campaign aide George Papadopoulos, to the effect that Russia might have unflattering information on the Clintons that it could disclose to harm her campaign.

The Aussies thought little of the statement or of Papadopoulos, but the FBI rushed to open a full-field investigation of Trumps campaign without taking any of the usual preliminary steps and without interviewing a single witness.

Quite a contrast.

Andrew C. McCarthy is the author of Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig an Election and Destroy a Presidency.

Load more...

https://nypost.com/2023/05/19/how-obama-officials-fbi-squashed-any-investigation-into-hillary-clinton/?utm_source=url_sitebuttons&utm_medium=site%20buttons&utm_campaign=site%20buttons

View post:
How Obama officials and the FBI squashed any investigation into Hillary Clinton - New York Post