It’s been more than eight months since Salt Lake City-based U.S. Attorney John Huber was appointed by then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions to investigate ‘alleged’ abuses of the law by 2016 Democratic presidential nominee and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

It’s been about the same amount of time since Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz first revealed Obama-era FBI, DoJ, and intelligence community malfeasance and lawbreaking regarding the “Spygate” operation launched by the former president and his sycophantic #NeverTrump allies in the Deep State.

Yet to date, despite all of the claims that these two men are hot on the trail of various suspects, nary a one of them who stands accused of repeated violations of U.S. law, protocol, and departmental regulations has been brought before a grand jury and charged.

Supposedly, these ‘investigations’ are continuing to this day. What’s going on? Investigative reporter Paul Sperry, along with the well-connected sleuth journos at Conservative Treehouse, both have a theory: The investigations are all a sham designed to provide cover for the guilty parties so that, if nothing else, the statute of limitations will run out before anyone is charged.

Let’s start with Huber.

When Sessions appointed him, he called Huber a ‘special prosecutor in every way but name.’ That means Huber has ostensibly been given the authority to convene a grand jury, issue subpoenas, and charge people with crimes.



But he hasn’t done any of those things. The real special counsel, Robert Mueller, meanwhile, has.

Sperry notes:

RealClearInvestigations has learned from potential witnesses, their lawyers and others close to the investigations, that Huber has not impaneled a federal grand jury to subpoena witnesses or hear evidence.

They are puzzled as to why he has failed to interview key witnesses – such as disgraced FBI officials and Trump advisers targeted by them, as well as Clinton Foundation whistleblowers — who could shed light on whether FBI and Justice Department officials misused their power when they obtained spy warrants to monitor Trump adviser Carter Page; or whether such officials turned a blind eye to millions of dollars in foreign Clinton Foundation donations influencing Clinton’s official decisions as secretary of state. Even when whistleblowers have reached out to Huber, offering reams of evidence, his office has not followed up, they say.

Questions about what Huber’s actually doing have come up before. In October we reported that “hardly anyone” had heard from him, “and that includes key witnesses whom he should have interviewed by now — but hasn’t.”

Now as then, they are anxious to tell their stories to Huber — meaning, of course, that they have stories to tell.

So missing in action has Huber been that even members of Congress have begun to ask about him.

“I would just like to know what he’s doing,” Rep. Jim Jordan, Ohio Republican, told the Washington Times. “I’ll take anything. All I know is that we haven’t heard a single thing about what he’s doing.”

When it looked like Congress would finally have an opportunity to hear from Huber earlier this month — while the GOP still retains control of the House — the Justice Department refused to allow him to testify.

However, two whistleblowers – Lawrence Doyle of DM Income Advisors and John Moynihan of JFM Associates — informed House Freedom Caucus chairman Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., and his Government Oversight Committee that they turned over evidence to Huber’s office three times since Huber was assigned his investigation in April because those materials kept getting ‘lost.’

Sperry says this was all a sham:




While some witnesses and their attorneys complain he’s not doing his job, some critics who once had high hopes for Huber now suspect he was never expected to. They say Huber’s appointment was always political, that the Justice Department had no interest in exposing its own corruption and named this longtime department official to mollify Republicans who clamored for the appointment of a second special counsel to investigate FBI and Justice activities under the Obama administration.

“At the time, people wanted a special counsel, but Jeff Sessions announced he brought in Huber and people said, ‘OK, we got Huber on it,’ ” former Justice Department prosecutor Victoria Toensing told him. “But it was a head fake.”

Now in private practice, Toensing has dealt with Huber’s non-interest personally. She represents former FBI information Doug Campbell, “who claims to have evidence that Clinton helped Russians secure U.S.-based uranium rights in a quid pro quo for large donations to her family’s foundation and speaking fees for former President Bill Clinton from the Russian company at the heart of the deal,” Sperry rights.

Campbell said in February that the Russians bragged about the fact that they could get the money-grubbing Clintons to ‘seal the deal,’ giving Moscow 20 percent of all strategic U.S. uranium reserves.

Before the CIFUS (Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States — of which Hillary Clinton, as Obama’s secretary of state, was a member) approved the sale of Uranium One, nine investors in the company gave a total of $145 million to the Clinton Foundation.

Sessions also told Congress that he appointed Huber to look into FBI and Justice Department malfesance regarding abuses of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court (FISA), in regards to agents misrepresenting the “Steele dossier” as legitimate intelligence to get a spy warrant on Trump campaign official Carter Page when the document was nothing more than unsubstantiated trash bought and paid for by Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

Page told Sperry he hasn’t heard from Huber or anyone in the Justice Department this year.

But is Huber’s probe — which his office says is active and ongoing — really on the level? Sperry notes:

Defenders say what appears to be slow progress may be a function of Huber having to wait on Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz, who is conducting his own investigation into the department’s mishandling of the Clinton and Trump probes. They point out that Huber is shadowing Horowitz’s slow-moving probe and lending any prosecutorial support he sees fit to provide. Inspectors general do not have the power to subpoena outside witnesses and compel testimony, or convene grand juries and seek indictments.

Even if that’s true, Huber could still interview key witnesses he knows are connected to his investigations in a major way. And yet — he hasn’t.

“I am surprised by witnesses saying that they have not been contacted. And there has been no public indications of his use of grand juries or other powers,” George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley, who thought appointing Huber instead of a special counsel would bring faster results, told Sperry.

He added that some of the key witnesses may have already given statements and testimony to IG Michael Horowitz, so there is no need to re-interview them.

But that’s not the case, either; key witnesses and officials say neither Huber nor Horowitz has contacted them.

“Michael Horowitz assured me last summer he would have additional reports (including regarding the alleged FISA abuses), but there’s still no sign of them,” former State Department Inspector General Howard Krongard told Sperry.

“I’m disappointed,” he noted further. “I don’t know what is holding them up.”

The Conservative Treehouse says that the Huber and Horowitz probes are being negatively impacted by Mueller:




According to our own independent sourcing, as a direct consequence of the Sessions recusal issues, [Deputy Attorney General Rod] Rosenstein was in charge of approving all OIG investigative document production and DOJ/FBI scheduling for testimony.  Mueller’s team gave Rosenstein a list of restrictive lines of inquiry that would be considered obstructing their own investigation and should thereby be considered ‘out-of-bounds‘ for OIG review; those instructions broadly created limits on what Horowitz could see, and who Horowitz could interview.

According to a person directly involved, an internal investigative complaint was filed to the AG; however, due to recusal issues that complaint was forwarded (by Sessions) to FBI chief-legal-counsel Dana Boente.

General Counsel Boente, hired by Christopher Wray, ultimately concurred with Mueller and Rosenstein’s decision thereby blocking any internal investigative efforts under the auspices of protecting the integrity of the ongoing Mueller probe.

A bureaucratic catch-22.

Anyone still waiting on “justice” for the Clintons and those Obama-era officials involved in setting up “Spygate” to take down POTUS Donald Trump are going to be sorely disappointed.

The Deep State takes care of its own.

Never miss a story! Sign up for our daily email newsletter — Click here!


34
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x