So I have just seen the early reports on Andrew McCabe’s firing. At first I was angry at McCabe but after hearing the early reporting I think I will hold my fire. Things may not be as they are currently being spun. But one aspect of the story, perhaps the most important aspect, will quickly get buried as it might hurt a fellow member in good standing of the traditional media. It seems what started all this was that Devlin Barrett had a story about Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation and the FBI investigation of it and he was going to go with it. Even after asking McCabe for comment (I assume) and McCabe telling him it was wrong, he was still going to go with it. McCabe was so worried about the erroneous nature of the story that he arranged for Barrett to meet with two FBI agents working on the case so they could tell him what was actually going on. Was this a good idea. It depends on the original story that Barrett had that he was going to run in the Wall Street Journal. Was the story exculpatory of Hillary Clinton. Come on, there is no way that story would have been run. So Barrett had a negative story of the Clinton Foundation and how the FBI was handling and he was going to run with it even after being told the story was not true. Here are some questions that Barrett must answer.
1) What was the original story of the Clinton Foundation Barrett was using against the FBI (Barrett can’t lie about this because McCabe knows and he is really pissed).
2) Who were his original sources for this story.
3) Why didn’t he spike the story after McCabe told him it was wrong (assuming he did before he set up the meeting).
4) What did the agents actually say to Barrett? We are all assuming that Barrett reported the story as the FBI explained it to him in the meeting. But he may have gone into the meeting thinking he would get corroboration for what he already had and then using information selectively from “sources close to McCabe.”
5) Who burned McCabe on this. Maybe McCabe just reported it which means he didn’t think anything was wrong. Maybe it was the FBI agents — who were they and why did they report it? The only other person who could have done this was Barrett.
There are other questions. There has been no accountability on the part of the press for the role they played in election Trump (much bigger than a few Russian hackers). Maybe it is time to start. Barrett, like so many of the other reporters who destroyed Hillary Clinton has been rewards with a cushy new gig — this one at the Washington Post. I bet he has a book deal as well.