- What “feelings” does Fiona Hill have about all this?
The (Watch)Dog That Didn’t Bark
Perhaps one of the most overused analogies in punditry, it’s the title and premise of a Sherlock Holmes story.
Here is a brief expression of its origin as a way to describe a solid clue as to why the expected didn’t occur. It’s from a 2004 column by Rachel Neuwirth, writing in the American Thinker:
‘The dog that didn’t bark’ is an expression from a Sherlock Holmes mystery. It was an important clue that led to identifying the criminal. It seems that the killer entered and left the estate grounds one night but without the guard dog barking an alarm at the intruder’s presence as expected. From this non—event Holmes reasoned that the dog must have known the killer and that clue led to solving the case.
This describes perfectly what is coming, we are told, from the Justice Department’s Inspector General’s “exhaustive” and long, long awaited investigation into the FBI’s surveillance of the Trump campaign.
To some of us it is very disappointing, but also unsurprising.
“Anti-climatic doesn’t begin to describe IG Michael Horowitz’s conclusions regarding the steps the FBI took in the early phases of of its “Russian investigation”.
Despite rumors and bits of apparently solid evidence, as indication of corruption and partisan political motivation by the Bureau’s leadership and at the highest levels of the Justice Dept., Mr. Horowitz reached essentially the same conclusion he did in his earlier investigation of the FBI’s political corruption arising out of the Strzok-Page-McCabe, et al scandal.
In that case, ‘watchdog’ Horowitz concluded that there was some bad behavior but doggone if he could find any “political bias” !
And this is where the analogy to the Sherlock Holmes story comes in.
– For months the nation waited to learn what the IG had found as it related to clear indication that the FBI at its highest levels had defrauded the FISA court in order to obtain authorization to spy on the Trump presidential campaign.
– Also apparent was that the knowledge of (and approval for) this illegal and very ugly effort to destroy the Trump campaign and assure the election of his political opponent, Hillary Clinton, went to the very top of the government…the Oval Office!
– Although President Obama was very slow in filling Inspector General positions (8 of 33 were vacant going into the last year of his administration), Michael Horowitz was one of Obama’s earliest appointments (2012)…and he’s still there under Trump’s administration!
– Upon completion of his investigation, Horowitz submitted his “draft” report TO THE FBI for ‘vetting’ to ‘insure’ that “confidential information” is identified.
– Under Director Christopher Wray the FBI has shown little inclination to readily respond to requests for information from congress, other agencies, the courts, and the media; it was then given the ‘draft’ report to review for “confidential” information?! What would that bureau consider information that would expose serious wrongdoing by FBI officials. Would that be “confidential”?
– Finally, Where’s the ‘bombshell’ revelations that were expected based on the reporting by “respected” investigative reporters, Sara Carter, and John Solomon?
– The “draft” report had also been submitted to the Attorney General. Famous for saying that much of the information, stories and reports coming out of the FBI, Justice, and other federal agencies “didn’t hang together”, what did Mr. Barr think of this report? Is it OK to change (‘alter”) information submitted with the approval of FBI and Justice officials to the FISA court just “lapses in judgment’???!!
– “Horowitz has been investigating the FBI’s use of a FISA warrant to spy on Trump campaign associate Carter Page. The FISA applications relied on an unverified opposition research dossier that was compiled by former foreign spy Christopher Steele, who was hired by opposition research firm Fusion GPS and funded by Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC).”
– “Top FBI and DOJ officials signed off on the FISA application to spy on Page, despite evidence that Steele’s dossier was unverified and that the former British spy was biased against Trump. The FISA application omitted the fact that the Clinton campaign funded the dossier, as well as exculpatory details of Page’s assistance to the FBI.”
– The “draft report” was submitted to the FBI and DOJ in SEPTEMBER. Apparently takes a long time to ‘ferret out’ that “confidential information!
– Maybe we better get Fiona back and get her “impression” of all this…hmm? dlh
