Yesterday, the Office of Inspector General – Department of Justice released a statement titled:
Findings of Misconduct by a Senior DOJ Official for Ethical Misconduct, Sexual Harassment, Sexual Assault, and Lack of Candor to the OIG
Here is the full statement:
Because the statement doesn’t identify who the predator is, we’ve created a list of potential violators based on the criteria presented by the OIG – male, senior official, resigned/retired.
John Carlin – Assistant Attorney General – Head of DOJ’s National Security Division – announced resignation on September 27, 2016 after filing the Government’s proposed 2016 Section 702 certifications on September 26, 2016.
David Laufman – DOJ National Security Division, Deputy Asst. Attorney General in charge of counterintelligence – resigned on February 7, 2018. Laufman “played a leading role in the Clinton email server and Russian hacking investigations.”
James Baker – General Counsel FBI, senior most legal counsel. Resigned on May 4, 2018 after being reassigned in December 2017.
James Rybicki – Chief of Staff to FBI Director James Comey & successor Chris Wray – resigned/forced out January 23, 2018.
Josh Campbell – Special Assistant to James Comey – resigned on February 2, 2018.
Michael Kortan – FBI Asst. Director Public Affairs – resigned on February 8, 2018 – effective February 15, 2018. Kortan served as assistant director for public affairs, an influential job that controlled media access.
All of the above were members of, or had deep working knowledge of the “Insurance Policy” group that illegally conducted surveillance on Donald Trump and members of his campaign. But the timing of yesterday’s release would seem to align with someone else:
Unlike the other potential violators listed above, whose termination dates seem to be ancient history, Priestap’s retirement aligns precisely with the OIG’s statement – December 4, 2018.
As FBI Assistant Director of Counterintelligence (he was Peter Strzok’s immediate boss), Priestap was at the epicenter of every decision and move made by the Insurance Policy group. There is reason to believe that he escaped until now because he appeared to be a cooperating witness.
Then there’s the wording at the end of the OIG’s statement:
The OIG has completed its investigation and provided its report to the OJP for appropriate action
The suggestion is the referral to OJP was made recently. If the other candidates had been the guilty party it is reasonable to assume the OIG’s referral would’ve come months ago.
Is Priestap being allowed to leave under his own steam, and with little notoriety, in return for his cooperation?