McCabe FBI Vault release...9 months to recuse self from Clinton case...uh-oh

Of particular interest to me is the redacted name of the person that modified these records for McCabe.

Now the originator of them was Patrick W. Kelley, as shown on the document.

His bio: www.fbi.gov...

Looking at the length of the redacted line compared to Kelleys it has to be a shorter name so I went looking on the FBI website...

www.fbi.gov...

And of particular note on this page, 2 names stand out....

Jim Rybicki

And

Carl Ghattas

Both names easily fit within that redacted space.

Now the reason they are of particular interest is this.

The Justice Department is blocking Senate investigators from interviewing two top FBI officials who could provide testimony on the firing of former Director James Comey and the handling of the investigation into Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server, according to a letter obtained by The Hill.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and ranking member Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) have repeatedly requested that the two senior bureau officials, Carl Ghattas and James Rybicki, appear for a transcribed interview.

The Justice Department in July declined the committee's request to speak with Rybicki and Ghattas, citing the appointment of Robert Mueller to serve as special counsel in the Russia investigation and "related matters."

Grassley and Feinstein offered to limit the scope of their questions to events that occurred before Comey's dismissal, in an effort to avoid a conflict with the pending Mueller investigation, but the Justice Department has stood by its initial refusal.

"As a threshold matter, the scope of the Committee's inquiry has not been de-conflicted with Special Counsel Mueller's investigation," Assistant Attorney General Stephen Boyd wrote in a Monday letter to the committee declining the request.

"Therefore, in order to protect the integrity of the Special Counsel's investigation, as we have previously indicated, we will not be able to provide Mr. Ghattas or Mr. Rybicki for interviews at this time."

Rybicki is Comey's former chief of staff. Ghattas is the head of the FBI's national security division and is in charge of leading the FBI's operations and intelligence efforts.

thehill.com...

Then it gets even more pointed when looking into the names and connections.

So the name Ghattas is pretty unusual and I have yet to be able to actually connect it, but if anyone can, please research Kim Ghattas....here's why...

Kim Ghattas (born 1977 in Beirut, Lebanon) is a journalist for the BBC and author who covered the US State Department.[1]

She attended the American University of Beirut, studying political science. At the same time, she worked as an intern at an English-language newspaper in Beirut. Ghattas then worked for the Financial Times and the BBC from Beirut. After reporting from the Middle East, in early 2008 she moved to Washington, D.C., to take up her post covering the US State Department.[2][3]

In 2013 Ghattas wrote a book, The Secretary: A Journey with Hillary Clinton from Beirut to the Heart of American Power, about her travels with Hillary Clintonduring Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State.[4] She later covered Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign for the BBC.[5]

Both are in DC too...

Oh snap...Carl Ghattas was McCabes legal advisor!

Ok, so digging more, Kim Ghattas attended The American University of Beirut. Carl Ghattas apparently worked there.

Wondering now if they are blood family related.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
Oh snap...Carl Ghattas was McCabes legal advisor!

Of course he was. You can't even throw a pebble inside D.C. without hitting a Clinton crony. Well the list for possible indictments surely grows steadily. Perhaps the nearly 10k sealed indictments are for the people we hope for.

Frostmourne Gitmo hungers.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

Storm has arrived, so it appears!

Some say he knows he is toast, yet someone is letting
The clock run out?

Why should McCabe be allowed to retire with benefits?

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: GuidedKill
Tick tock , tick tock......

Indeed!

I love FBI Vault....it seems to go under most people's radar.

I'm "most people". First time I've heard of it. Is this "FBI Vault" something that Wiki-leaks has posted? Like the Hillary vault?

Nope....It's the FBI Vault on the FBI website. I follow it on Twitter as it updates immediately when they release a new one. Typically from FOIA requests.

Oh..I see. Thank-you! There should be a "Mueller Vault" too, since he's burning through taxpayer money so precipitously.

Reusing oneself is a voluntary act, right? I understand the implications of not doing so against ones honor, but McCabe didn't HAVE to recuse himself because he was notified of a conflict of interest, did he?

Just playing the Devils Advocate...

FBI ruled McCabe had no conflict of interest in Clinton probe: docs

The deep state is really deep.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

Don't know if it's relevant but August 2015 in History shows the following:

Aug 4 Muppets Missy Piggy and Kermit the Frog announce the end to their relationship on Twitter (just for LOL effect)

Aug 6 Republican Presidental nomination race begins with debate between 7 lesser ranked candidates in Cleveland, Ohio

Aug 10 Google announces its restructure as Alphabet, a holding company with Google, YouTube, Android and Chrome as subsidiaries

Aug 13 Swedish Prosecutors announce they are dropping allegations against Wikileaks founder Julian Assange of sexual molestation and coercion

Aug 13 76 people are killed & 212 are wounded by an ISIL truck bomb in Baghdad, Iraq

Aug 15 North Korea creates its own time zone -moving its clocks back half an hour to GMT+8.5

I only picked out a few that seem to be "relevant" to current threads. (?)

originally posted by: Tempter
Reusing oneself is a voluntary act, right? I understand the implications of not doing so against ones honor, but McCabe didn't HAVE to recuse himself because he was notified of a conflict of interest, did he?

Just playing the Devils Advocate...

He was notified 3 times...

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: Vasa Croe

What is second. You mean this guy was conducting the investigation while under formal notification that he was in a conflict of interest?

Am i getting that right?

Yes.

Also of note is on the conflict of interest forms is 2 of them were modified months after the initial filing and the modified by name is redacted....

What possible reason could these have to be modified 5 months after? Anyone have any idea what came up right before August 24, 2015?

You realise that every time a document is opened it gets modified right? The metadata is modified to indicate access. Not saying thats the case here but hardly indicative of anything.

originally posted by: Kukri

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: Vasa Croe

What is second. You mean this guy was conducting the investigation while under formal notification that he was in a conflict of interest?

Am i getting that right?

Yes.

Also of note is on the conflict of interest forms is 2 of them were modified months after the initial filing and the modified by name is redacted....

What possible reason could these have to be modified 5 months after? Anyone have any idea what came up right before August 24, 2015?

You realise that every time a document is opened it gets modified right? The metadata is modified to indicate access. Not saying thats the case here but hardly indicative of anything.

I realize you can see that in word when it does. This is a physically modified stamp...hence the name redaction.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

Possibly. I just noticed the footer indicates the creation date and last modification date which is typical of other documents. It may be due to being a DOJ document and shows chain of custody type attributes.

I think seeing the original would clear that up if it's been archived also.

After a cursory look and speculation, I'll say 'b7E' is your missing name 'b7c' is the person prior who edited first and 'b6' is the author (P.W. Kelley) you could try a search using the b*? Parameters and see if you get a hit. Assuming that archives are searchable

Lock her up! LOCK HER UP! LOCK HER UP!

MAGA, ladies & gents.

"Get in. We're Making America Great Again."

a reply to: Kukri

Exemption Codes B(*):

(b)(7) records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that the production of such law enforcement records or information ( A ) could be reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings, ( B ) would deprive a person of a right to a fair trial or an impartial adjudication, ( C ) could be reasonably expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, ( D ) could reasonably be expected to disclose the identity of confidential source, including a State, local, or foreign agency or authority or any private institution which furnished information on a confidential basis, and, in the case of record or information compiled by a criminal law enforcement authority in the course of a criminal investigation, or by an agency conducting a lawful national security intelligence investigation, information furnished by a confidential source, ( E ) would disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions, or would disclose guidelines for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions if such disclosure could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the law, or ( F ) could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any individual;

FBI Vault

Exemption code B7(C) is not that interesting as it pertains to personally identifiable information. B7(E), however, is much more intriguing as it pertains to ongoing investigations not being compromised. Which means that this document is part of an existing investigation and having that particular bit of information redacted is to protect the investigatory process.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Thanks for the clarification J&C!

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Interesting JaC. Should of guessed it wouldn't be that easy to track a name or dept.. Thanks for the clarification on the codes.

Seems Rybicki is now a strong contender for the redacted name of the modifier for the McCabe docs!

truepundit.com...

originally posted by: hoteffentuna
FBI ruled McCabe had no conflict of interest in Clinton probe: docs

The deep state is really deep.

Yep,

Synopsis: According to the usually reliable True Pundit, as Robert Mueller was headed out the door for the last time as head of the FBI in 2013, he gave his old friend, Andrew McCabe a $35,000 performance bonus.