Good Reason for Trump to Blast FBI's McCabe

Assuming it is true what President Trump tweeted on Dec. 23, 2017, “FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe is racing the clock to retire with full benefits. 90 days to go?!!!,” there should be no need for the president’s question mark.

According to the same Newsmax article that quotes President Trump’s tweet, “The Justice Department’s inspector general is conducting a broad investigation into how the department and FBI have handled recent matters, including the Clinton investigation. McCabe’s activities have been under scrutiny by the inspector general as well.”

As explained in same Newsmax article, “Most recently, House Republicans demanded to know what discussions McCabe might have had in 2016 with two FBI officials who exchanged text messages critical of Trump. One of them referred to a meeting in ‘Andy’s office’ where they discussed ‘that there’s no way’ Trump would be elected but ‘we can’t take that risk.'

“Republicans have suggested, without proof, that this may have spawned an action plan for the FBI to exploit a dossier of unverified allegations against Trump that was compiled by a former British spy and financed largely by Clinton’s campaign . . . The officials, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, are no longer part of the investigation, which is now being led by Special Counsel Robert Mueller.”

In addition to no need for the question mark in the president’s tweet, there also should be no need to assume that “FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe [will] retire with full benefits,” especially as the Hatch Act provides that: “any individual, other than the President and the Vice President, employed or holding office in . . . an Executive agency other than the Government Accountability Office [5 U.S.C. §7322] may not . . . use his official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering with or affecting the result of an election [5 U.S.C. §7323(a)(1)]; and that, An employee or individual who violates section 7323 . . . shall be subject to removal, reduction in grade, debarment from Federal employment for a period not to exceed 5 years, suspension, reprimand, or an assessment of a civil penalty not to exceed $1,000 [5 U.S.C. §7326]."

In the interest of upholding the law, including the Hatch Act, and otherwise restoring the confidence of the American people in their government, the inspector general should accelerate his scrutiny of FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe’s activities. If the inspector general substantiates that FBI Deputy Director McCabe violated the Hatch Act by using "his official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering with or affecting the result of an election,” why should the American people be expected to pay for his retirement with full benefits?

If FBI Deputy Director McCabe is found by the inspector general to have used "his official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering with or affecting the result of an election,” according to the Hatch Act, the FBI deputy director should be held accountable to the American people for his abuse of authority in violation of the Hatch Act.

If substantiated, depending upon the severity of his violation, the FBI deputy director “shall be subject to removal . . .  debarment from Federal employment for a period not to exceed 5 years, suspension, reprimand, or an assessment of a civil penalty not to exceed $1,000 [5 U.S.C. §7326]."

In the course of performing his duties under the Inspector General Act, the inspector general of the Department of Justice should, of course, provide McCabe with what the U.S. Supreme Court recently referred to as “these essential constitutional promises” of procedural due process: “the right to notice and an opportunity to be heard must be granted at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner.”

The inspector general of the Department of Justice should also take heed of the motto engraved on the front of the United States Supreme Court building: “Equal Justice Under Law.”

Joseph E. Schmitz served as a foreign policy and national security advisor to Donald Trump during the 2016 presidential campaign. The opinions expressed in this article are his personal opinions. Schmitz served as Inspector General of the Department of Defense from 2002-2005 and is now a Partner in the law firm Schmitz & Socarras LLP. He graduated with distinction from the U.S. Naval Academy, earned his J.D. degree from Stanford Law School, and is author of "The Inspector General Handbook: Fraud, Waste, Abuse, and Other Constitutional ‘Enemies, Foreign and Domestic.’" Read more reports from Joseph E. Schmitz — Click Here Now.