I'm shocked he wasn't fired via twitter.
I imagine you'd have to look pretty far to find someone in the intelligence community who isn't biased against Trump or at the very least doesn't have the occasional "what a moron!" moment.
Trump did not have the authority to fire him or he might have. Technically he had to go through Sessions the same way Trump can't fire Mueller directly. Instead Trump pressured Sessions who himself is putting up with being called Mr Magoo in public by Trump and knows he's walking on shaky ground. Sessions just proved he's nothing but a weak-willed ass-kisser.
What may be of interest is who was involved in and how the IG came out against McCabe. But we'll have to wait to find that out. I find it hard to believe there weren't some Trump lovers involved even if Trump didn't directly appoint any of them. And McCabe said his involvement in the leak was mischaracterized, so I'm holding out some benefit of the doubt.
Regardless, the punishment did not fit the offense, and I have to bite my tongue to get that out because McCabe was no more a saint than Comey was in this whole mess.
To hear Fox News tell it, McCabe committed the same crime as Flynn pleaded guilty to. The hypocrisy reeks.
The irony of this bullshit:
WA Po: Report said to fault FBI’s former No. 2 for approving improper media disclosure, misleading inspector general. The disclosure (aka leak) was that the FBI was investigating the Clinton Foundation.
The McCabe offense was indeed offensive, just like Comey's offense of discussing Clinton's email server investigation in public while keeping the investigation of the Trump campaign secret.
Part of me wants to say fuck these assholes, they got the POTUS they wanted. And we're all suffering the consequences.
Going back further, the reason the FBI was investigating the Clinton Foundation was almost entirely partisan based. There were more than a few FBI investigators so biased against Clinton they readily bought into the outright lies and misleading BS in the book,
Clinton Cash. The book used misleading assertions and outright falsehoods supposedly establishing quid pro quo between donations to the Clinton Foundation and actions Clinton took as Secretary of State in the donors' favor.
The reason the investigation went nowhere, to the ire of those biased FBI investigators, is because there was no actual evidence of any quid pro quo. The timing of donations the book claimed were connected didn't match up at all. Many of the decisions attributed to Clinton were not made by her. And there were many supposedly corrupt donations to the Foundation that had actual, clearly not corrupt, charitable goals. The foundation has an excellent independent rating for the donated money going to the charities intended.
[Pro-Clinton digression into the foundation and Clintons, feel free to skip] The foundation did have failures or mistakes and actions imperfectly executed. Money spent on housing in Haiti went to a Clinton's friend's company and the housing was never built. Bill and Hillary do hobnob with world leaders and the obscenely rich. I am not saying the Clintons are saintly philanthropists. But the Clinton Foundation actually has provided many good works around the globe from work with HIV and AIDs to significant actions to promote women's economic independence.
There is no evidence it is or ever was some slush fund for the Clintons. And the speaking fees Hillary earned were not out of range for those of men with similar credentials. But it's so easy to feed anti-Clinton confirmation bias that has been cultivated for decades. Too many people want to believe the crap that is in the
Clinton Cash book just as they want to believe the speaking fees Hillary earned must have been corrupt payments and must not have been deserved. [End digression before I start ranting.
]