This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-50720345

The article has changed 9 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 2 Version 3
'No political bias' in FBI probe of Trump campaign 'No political bias' in FBI probe of Trump campaign
(30 minutes later)
A US watchdog has found no evidence of political bias when the FBI launched a probe into the 2016 Trump campaign, despite "serious performance failures".A US watchdog has found no evidence of political bias when the FBI launched a probe into the 2016 Trump campaign, despite "serious performance failures".
The US Department of Justice inspector general's report concluded the law enforcement bureau had "authorised purpose" to initiate the inquiry.The US Department of Justice inspector general's report concluded the law enforcement bureau had "authorised purpose" to initiate the inquiry.
But the report also found applications to spy on a Trump aide had "significant inaccuracies and omissions".But the report also found applications to spy on a Trump aide had "significant inaccuracies and omissions".
The 476-page report provides fodder for Trump critics and supporters alike.The 476-page report provides fodder for Trump critics and supporters alike.
Inspector General Michael Horowitz first announced the Department of Justice investigation in March last year. While it undercuts President Donald Trump's repeated claims that he was the victim of a "witch hunt", the report also raises questions about the integrity of the FBI's process.
Since then, he has reviewed more than one million records and conducted over 100 interviews. What did the watchdog find?
The FBI launched its inquiry in 2016 to look for any collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government before the US presidential election.
The watchdog's report sought to assess the basis for the FBI's surveillance of Carter Page, a former Trump campaign adviser who had lived and worked in Russia.The watchdog's report sought to assess the basis for the FBI's surveillance of Carter Page, a former Trump campaign adviser who had lived and worked in Russia.
Mr Horowitz's report found the FBI's use of confidential informants was in compliance with agency rules. Mr Horowitz found the FBI's use of confidential informants was in compliance with agency rules.
But the inspector general identified 17 "significant inaccuracies or omissions" when the FBI applied to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (Fisa) for surveillance warrants to monitor the communications of former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.But the inspector general identified 17 "significant inaccuracies or omissions" when the FBI applied to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (Fisa) for surveillance warrants to monitor the communications of former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.
The watchdog said the errors resulted in "applications that made it appear that the information supporting probable cause was stronger than was actually the case".The watchdog said the errors resulted in "applications that made it appear that the information supporting probable cause was stronger than was actually the case".
"That so many basic and fundamental errors were made on four Fisa applications by three separate, hand-picked teams, on one of the most sensitive FBI investigations... raised significant questions regarding the FBI chain of command's management and supervision of the Fisa process," the report says. Mr Horowitz also found that an FBI lawyer assigned to the Russia case doctored an email from the CIA to a colleague that was used in an application from the bureau to monitor Mr Page.
The watchdog also faulted how the FBI presented the work of former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele, who authored the so-called Steele dossier - a series of largely unsubstantiated allegations about Mr Trump. The attorney "altered an email that the other US government agency had sent" with the effect that "the email inaccurately stated that Page was 'not a source' for the other agency", the report said.
The watchdog also found FBI personnel "fell far short of the requirement in FBI policy that they ensure that all factual statements in a Fisa application are 'scrupulously accurate'".
The report said "so many basic and fundamental errors... raised significant questions regarding the FBI chain of command's management and supervision of the Fisa process".
What about the 'Steele dossier'?
The watchdog faulted how the FBI presented the work of former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele, who authored the so-called Steele dossier - a series of largely unsubstantiated allegations about Mr Trump.
Mr Steele was hired to do the research through a law firm on behalf of Mr Trump's political opponents, including Hillary Clinton's campaign.Mr Steele was hired to do the research through a law firm on behalf of Mr Trump's political opponents, including Hillary Clinton's campaign.
Mr Horowitz said the FBI "overstated the significance" of Mr Steele's past work when asserting it had been "corroborated and used in criminal proceedings".Mr Horowitz said the FBI "overstated the significance" of Mr Steele's past work when asserting it had been "corroborated and used in criminal proceedings".
The watchdog also said the FBI left out relevant information about one of Mr Steele's sources, whom Mr Steele himself had called a "boaster" prone to "embellishment".The watchdog also said the FBI left out relevant information about one of Mr Steele's sources, whom Mr Steele himself had called a "boaster" prone to "embellishment".
US Attorney General William Barr issued a statement on Monday undercutting the inspector general's main conclusion that there was enough evidence for the FBI to launch its investigation of the Trump campaign. Mr Horowitz is expected to discuss his findings on Wednesday during a public hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
What's the reaction?
US Attorney General William Barr issued a statement on Monday rejecting the inspector general's main conclusion that there was enough evidence for the FBI to launch its investigation of the Trump campaign.
"The Inspector General's report now makes clear that the FBI launched an intrusive investigation of a US presidential campaign on the thinnest of suspicions that, in my view, were insufficient to justify the steps taken," America's top law official said."The Inspector General's report now makes clear that the FBI launched an intrusive investigation of a US presidential campaign on the thinnest of suspicions that, in my view, were insufficient to justify the steps taken," America's top law official said.
President Donald Trump commented on the report ahead of its release, tweeting on Sunday that it would be "the big story". President Trump commented on the report ahead of its release, tweeting on Sunday that it would be "the big story".
What's the background?
Inspector General Michael Horowitz has reviewed more than one million records and conducted over 170 interviews since launching his investigation in March last year.
He scrutinised the FBI's process for launching its 2016 inquiry to look for any collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government before the US presidential election.
That FBI investigation was ultimately taken over by special counsel Robert Mueller.
Mr Mueller's own inquiry concluded in April this year there was not enough evidence to conclude the Trump campaign conspired with the Kremlin to sway the 2016 US presidential election.