WaPo uses anonymous sources to claim dispute between Horowitz and Barr over justification of FBI’s Russia investigation

American Thinker: The Deep State’s game plan is now becoming clear: any indictments coming from the Durham investigation will be tarred as politically motivated and tainted by the biased Attorney General William Barr, who is out to protect a rogue president.  That is what lies behind this anonymously sourced story in the Washington Post today, alleging, “Barr doesn’t accept key inspector general finding about FBI’s Russia investigation.”

Attorney General William P. Barr has told associates he disagrees with the Justice Department’s inspector general on one of the key findings in an upcoming report — that the FBI had enough information in July 2016 to justify launching an investigation into members of the Trump campaign, according to people familiar with the matter.

The Justice Department’s inspector general, Michael Horowitz, is due to release his long-awaited findings in a week, but behind the scenes at the Justice Department, disagreement has surfaced about one of Horowitz’s central conclusions on the origins of the Russia investigation. The discord could be the prelude to a major fissure within federal law enforcement on the controversial question of investigating a presidential campaign.

Barr has not been swayed by Horowitz’s rationale for concluding the FBI had sufficient basis to open an investigation on July 31, 2016, these people said.

Barr’s public defenses of President Trump, including his assertion that intelligence agents spied on the Trump campaign, have led Democrats to accuse him of acting like the president’s personal attorney and eroding the independence of the Justice Department. But Trump and his Republican allies have cheered Barr’s skepticism of the Russia investigation.

It’s not yet clear how Barr plans to make his objection to Horowitz’s conclusion known.

It is important to keep in mind two factors in evaluating whatever Horowitz’s conclusions might have been — keeping in mind that we don’t even have a good idea of what, exactly, the Horowitz report will say.  The leaks so far almost certainly have been based on persons named in the report who have been offered the chance to review those sections of the report mentioning them, and allowed to submit rebuttals.  Such persons have not seen the entire report.

The three factors are these: read more