Thursday, March 4, 2021

Former FBI Attorney Pleads Guilty in First Case Brought by John Durham

The FBI attorney who altered an email as part of the process to obtain a secret court warrant to spy..

By Sunday Herald Team , in US Politics , at August 19, 2020

The FBI attorney who altered an email as part of the process to obtain a secret court warrant to spy on a former Trump campaign adviser admitted to one count of making a false statement on Aug. 19 before a federal judge in Washington.

Former FBI assistant general counsel Kevin Clinesmith made the plea as part of a deal with prosecutors, who agreed to propose a sentencing range of zero to six months. Judge James Boasberg set the sentencing hearing for Dec. 10.

At the opening of the hearing, Boasberg noted that hes the head judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), which signed off on the warrant application cited in the charge against Clinesmith. The judge said he didnt see any issues with the overlap, but offered the parties to call for his recusal because the FISC could be viewed as a victim. The government and Clinesmith declined the offer.

Clinesmiths guilty plea is the first secured as part of an investigation by special attorney John Durham, who is investigating whether the FBIs probe of the Trump campaign was conducted lawfully and free of improper motive. President Donald Trump has long claimed that the Obama administration weaponized government surveillance against his campaign.

As part of the plea agreement, Durhams team agreed not to prosecute Clinesmith for any of the conduct described in the 10-page statement of offense, which wasnt public at the time of the hearing. The prosecutors also agreed not to modify the conditions of Clinesmiths release.

Although the government proposed a sentencing range of up to six months, Boasberg may still sentence Clinesmith above the proposed range, depending on the review of the case.

Before accepting the plea, Boasberg asked if Clinesmith altered the email in question knowing that the statement he added was not true. Clinesmith said that he thought at the time that the statement was true, but admitted to forging the email.

“At the time, I believed that the information I was providing in the email was accurate, but I am agreeing that the information I entered into the email was not originally there and that I have inserted that information,” Clinesmith said.

Clinesmith altered the email on June 19, 2017, while working as the primary FBI attorney assigned to the “Crossfire Hurricane” investigation, which Mueller had inherited a month earlier.

According to the court documents, Clinesmith inserted the words “and not a source” into an email from a CIA liaison that described the relationship between Trump campaign foreign policy adviser Carter Page and the CIA. As the primary FBI attorney on the case, Clinesmith was asked to find out if Page was a source for the agency before the FBI applied for the fourth and final warrant to continue surveilling Page.

As a result, an FBI special agent relied on the altered email to submit a warrant application to the FISC, which described Page as a Russian asset without disclosing that he was an approved operational contact for the CIA who reported on his interactions with Russian intelligence officers.

The Department of Justice inspector general last year flagged Clinesmiths admitted forgery as one of the most egregious faults among the 17 serious errors and omissions contained in the applications the FBI used to surveil Page.

The CIA had provided certain members of the FBIs team working the Crossfire Hurricane case—the codename for the probe of the Trump campaign—with a copy of the memo about Page in August 2016, two months before the FBI applied for the first Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant on Page. None of the subsequent FISA applications mentioned Pages history or work with the CIA.

Clinesmith was assigned as the primary FBI attorney providing legal support to the Crossfire Hurricane team in early 2017 and was removed in February 2018.

While the inspector generals reports and other evidenceRead More From Source

[contf] [contfnew]

The Epoch Times

[contfnewc] [contfnewc]