Andrew McCabe gets his pension back despite IG finding that he 'lacked candor' under oath

(AP Photo/Alex Brandon, File)

It seems like a long time ago that all of this happened. Remember when Andrew McCabe was fired from his job by AG Sessions in March of 2018? The left claimed the firing was political but two reports, one from the Office of Professional Responsibility and the other from the DOJ Inspector General both concluded that McCabe had “lacked candor” (FBI speak for lying) in various discussions, including when questioned under oath by fellow FBI agents. More on that in a moment but the news today is that McCabe just got his pension back:

On Thursday, the department reversed Mr. McCabe’s firing, settling a lawsuit he filed asserting that he was dismissed for political reasons. Under the settlement, Mr. McCabe, 53, will be able to officially retire, receive his pension and other benefits, and get about $200,000 in missed pension payments.

In addition, the department agreed to expunge any mention of his firing from F.B.I. personnel records. The agreement even made clear that he would receive the cuff links given to senior executives and a plaque with his mounted F.B.I. credentials and badge.

The Justice Department did not admit any wrongdoing. But the settlement amounted to a rejection by the Biden administration of how Mr. McCabe’s case had been handled under Mr. Trump, who perceived Mr. McCabe as one of his so-called deep-state enemies and repeatedly attacked him. A notice of the lawsuit’s dismissal was also filed in federal court.

McCabe was fired because of the two previously mentioned reports. The OPR report concluded Director Comey held a meeting in 2016 to denounce a leak to the press. Comey’s recollection is that McCabe specifically denied having authorized that leak. But McCabe claimed the opposite, that he had told Comey at the time he had authorized the leak.

The DOJ Inspector General’s report also concluded that McCabe “lacked candor” when he denied authorizing the leak in his conversation with Comey but also found that he’d denied the same thing during two subsequent interviews when he was under oath.

We found that, in a conversation with then-Director Comey shortly after the WSJ article was published, McCabe lacked candor when he told Comey, or made statements that led Comey to believe, that McCabe had not authorized the disclosure and did not know who did. This conduct violated FBI Offense Code 2.5 (Lack of Candor – No Oath).

We also found that on May 9, 2017, when questioned under oath by FBI agents from INSD, McCabe lacked candor when he told the agents that he had not authorized the disclosure to the WSJ and did not know who did. This conduct violated FBI Offense Code 2.6 (Lack of Candor – Under Oath).

We further found that on July 28, 2017, when questioned under oath by the OIG in a recorded interview, McCabe lacked candor when he stated: (a) that he was not aware of Special Counsel having been authorized to speak to reporters around October 30 and (b) that, because he was not in Washington, D.C., on October 27 and 28, 2016, he was unable to say where Special Counsel was or what she was doing at that time. This conduct violated FBI Offense Code 2.6 (Lack of Candor – Under Oath).

After the May 9th interview where McCabe denied having any idea who had leaked the information, the agents who had interviewed him sent a summary of the conversation so that he could sign it and return it. Instead, McCabe sat on the summary. A month later he still hadn’t returned it.

Finally, in another meeting that took place in November 2017 (six months later), McCabe changed his story and said he had no idea how the agents who had interviewed him back in May got the idea that he was denying authorizing the leak.

McCabe said that he did not believe he told INSD that he did not authorize the disclosure, but added “I don’t remember what I said to them.” He added “I don’t remember discussing authorization of that article” with INSD and that “the INSD folks and I walked away from that, from that exchange with a difference in understanding.” However, he acknowledged to the OIG that his initials appeared on the copy of the WSJ article that INSD presented to him for review during the interview. McCabe told the OIG that he did not know and could not explain how INSD got the impression that he thought it was an unauthorized leak because he said he does not believe he told INSD that.

I don’t know how McCabe and his lawyers managed to tap dance away from all of this evidence that he lied to the FBI. It doesn’t make much sense to me apart from the fact that the Biden administration approves of anyone who was willing to go on CNN and tell Anderson Cooper that Trump might be a Russian asset.