Further evidence that the investigation that the FBI conducted of the Clinton e-mails was a bad farce from beginning to end:
We learned last month that an early draft of Comey’s statement on the Clinton email investigation concluded she was “grossly negligent” in her handling of classified information. Then, earlier this month, we learned that the person who edited the draft to remove that legally significant language was Trump-hating FBI agent Peter Strzok. Today, Fox News reports it has obtained an early draft of the memo which confirms the language was changed at least twice. But there were also other changes made to the document which, you’ll be shocked to learn, benefitted Hillary Clinton:
The original statement said it was “reasonably likely” that “hostile actors” gained access to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email account. That was changed later to say the scenario was merely “possible.”
Another edit showed language was changed to describe the actions of Clinton and her colleagues as “extremely careless” as opposed to “grossly negligent.” This is a key legal distinction…
The edits also showed that references to specific potential violations of statutes on “gross negligence” of classified information and “misdemeanor handling” were removed.
The final statement also removed a reference to the “sheer volume” of classified information discussed on email.
Sen. Ron Johnson, who released the draft today, said in a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray that the original draft “could be read as a finding of criminality in Secretary Clinton’s handling of classified material.” In the same letter Johnson wrote there were, “repeated edits to reduce Secretary Clinton’s culpability in mishandling classified information.”
Go here to read the rest. For my sins I have drafted a myriad of legal documents over the past 35 years. With legal draftsmanship you first start with the conclusion you wish to reach and you continue to polish the language in the document until the fore-ordained conclusion is reached. Former FBI Director Comey did the first draft of this document prior to interviewing Hillary Clinton or the other major players of the e-mail scandal. The fix was always in as to this investigation, a fix engineered by Comey and his merry band of “non-partisan” FBI agents. What boundless and barely concealed contempt Comey, and the other higher ups of the FBI, must possess for the American people they purportedly serve.
Instapundit, Glenn Reynolds, brings us the news of just how tainted the FBI has become:
SO THE FBI SUPERVISOR WHO WAS TEXTING ABOUT HOW MUCH HE HATED TRUMP is the one who interviewed Mike Flynn. “A supervisory special agent who is now under scrutiny after being removed from Robert Mueller’s Special Counsel’s Office for alleged bias against President Trump also oversaw the bureau’s interviews of embattled former National Security advisor Michael Flynn, this reporter has learned. Flynn recently pled guilty to one-count of lying to the FBI last week. . . . Strzok was removed from his role in the Special Counsel’s Office after it was discovered he had made disparaging comments about President Trump in text messages between him and his alleged lover FBI attorney Lisa Page, according to the New York Times and Washington Post, which first reported the stories. Strzok is also under investigation by the Department of Justice Inspector General for his role in Hillary Clinton’s email server and the ongoing investigation into Russia’s election meddling. On Saturday, the House Intelligence Committee’s Chairman Devin Nunes chided the Justice Department and the FBI for not disclosing why Strzok had been removed from the Special Counsel three months ago, according to a statement given by the Chairman.”
This stinks to high heaven. But wait, there’s more involving shady FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe:
According to another source, with direct knowledge of the Jan. 24 interview, McCabe had contacted Flynn by phone directly at the White House. White House officials had spent the “earlier part of the week with the FBI overseeing training and security measures associated with their new roles so it was no surprise to Flynn that McCabe had called,” the source said.
McCabe told Flynn “some agents were heading over (to the White House) but Flynn thought it was part of the routine work the FBI had been doing and said they would be cleared at the gate,” the source said.
“It wasn’t until after they were already in (Flynn’s) office that he realized he was being formally interviewed. He didn’t have an attorney with him,” they added.
Go here to read the rest and the comments. Deputy Director Andrew McCabe’s wife was running for a Virginia Senate seat as a Democrat in 2015 and received 675,000 in campaign funds from the Clintons’ old hatchet man Terry McCauliffe, then Governor of Virginia, and the Democrat Party of Virginia. In spite of this McCabe did not recuse himself from the Clinton e-mail investigation. Peter Strzok, the anti-Trump FBI agent, was instrumental in the Clinton e-mail investigation and purportedly helped convince Comey that Clinton should not be indicted. It would be fair to say that if the FBI were directly controlled by the Democrat Party, it is hard to see how these “investigations” would have been conducted much differently.
James Comey, former FBI Director, is one very strange individual. Go here to read the rest about the above image that Comey tweeted. So now Comey is concerned about the rep of the FBI? Perhaps he should have been concerned about the reputation of the FBI when he was prostituting it during the last administration. The more we learn about the Clinton e-mail investigation, the more we realize that it was an elaborate dog and pony show, orchestrated by Comey, with no intention of ever bringing before the DOJ a recommendation for prosecution. Ironically, Comey’s pretense of performing a serious investigation probably ended up hurting Clinton worse than a prosecution would have, although there is zero chance of the Obama administration ever having initiated such a prosecution. This type of garbage is why I find all the fake horror about Donald Trump hard to take seriously. Smarmy con-men like Comey are held up as dedicated public servants by the media and the party establishments, and much of the real horror about Donald Trump, at least from political insiders, is that in his boastful, crude and bumbling manner, he is revealing that the Wizards behind the veils are, at best, no better than he is. Whatever else is fake about Trump, his calling Washington a swamp is right on target.
If we needed further proof that the voters made the right decision in deciding that Hillary Clinton would not sit in the Oval Office:
According to new transcripts released by the Senate Judiciary Thursday afternoon, former FBI Director James Comey made the decision not to refer then Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton for prosecution long before ever interviewing key witnesses. Members of the Committee allege Comey made the decision months before FBI agents were finished with the criminal investigation of her mishandling classified information during her time as Secretary of State.
The transcripts were revealed in a letter sent to current FBI Director Christopher Wray, in which lawmakers are demanding an explanation and more documents surrounding the case.
The Comey testimony was the best farce I have ever viewed on live television. My take:
- Comey came across as a cowardly lion, constantly trembling in fear of the White House.
- He admitted that Loretta Lynch, former Attorney General, told him to call the criminal investigation of Hillary Clinton a “matter” rather than a criminal investigation and that this disturbed him greatly.
- That he leaked material which may expose him to criminal indictment. Comey stated that he did so in order to spur the appointment of a special prosecutor.
- That he was most outraged by the Trump administration stating the obvious truths that Comey had been a poor Director of the FBI and that the Bureau was in disarray under his leadership.
- He refused to state whether he thought that Trump was trying to obstruct the Russia investigation by asking him if the investigation of Mike Flynn could be dropped. If Comey did think that Trump was trying to obstruct an investigation he was required to immediately report it, and failure to do so would constitute a possible criminal offense.
- Comey confirmed that he told Trump on three occasions that he was not the subject of an investigation. He had no good explanation as to why he refused Trump’s request to announce this publicly.
- I kept imagining how J.Edgar Hoover would have handled this. I picture Hoover telling a President trying to pressure him that an FBI Director led an arduous life with many duties. That one of his duties was to restrain overzealous FBI agents gathering huge amounts of embarrassing material about lots of politicians, and that as Director he was continuously engaged in making sure such shocking material did not end up being revealed, ending careers and unduly alarming and disturbing the American people. Hoover was quite a few things, but a simpering, impotent non-entity like Comey, placed in a job well above his capacity, he never was.
Miss Me Yet?
This is going to cause a firestorm, although after the events of last year I don’t see how any President could trust Comey.
President Trump has fired FBI Director James B. Comey, who had been criticized by Democrats and Republicans since the presidential election.
“The president has accepted the recommendation of the attorney general and the deputy attorney general regarding the dismissal of the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation,” Press Secretary Sean Spicer told reporters in the briefing room Tuesday afternoon.
Comey was confirmed in 2013. He has been investigating Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election and any potential collusion with the Trump campaign.
Hillary Clinton blamed his late disclosures of an investigation of her emails for her electoral loss
In a statement, the White House said that Trump had told Comey that he has been fired. No reason was provided. Continue Reading
FBI Director James Comey delivers a November surprise:
Dear Messrs. Chairmen:
I write to supplement my October 28, 2016 letter that notified you the FBI would be taking additional investigative steps with respect to former Secretary of State Clinton’s use of a personal email server. Since my letter, the FBI investigative team has been working around the clock to process and review a large volume of emails from a device obtained in connection with an unrelated criminal investigation. During that process, we reviewed all of the communications that were to or from Hillary Clinton while she was Secretary of State.
Based on our review, we have not changed our conclusions that we expressed in July with respect to Secretary Clinton.
I am very grateful to the professionals at the FBI for doing an extraordinary amount of high-quality work in a short period of time.
James B. Comey
Impact? Hard to say. We are right on top of the election and normally a big event in an election needs a few days to seep into the public consciousness. Most people will probably hear about it tomorrow, and the number of people who haven’t made up their minds by this time how they are going to vote, if they are going to vote, is probably small. It is probably marginally good news for Clinton, but I doubt if will have much influence due to the lateness of this revelation and the fact that most people have probably reached a decision on Clinton, one way or another. Whoever is elected, Comey needs to go. Having Prince Hamlet as FBI Director is bad for the country.
FBI Director James Comey was grilled before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee for four hours/ A few interesting revelations came out.
- Hillary Clinton’s interview was not recorded and she was not placed under oath. Not recording the interview was not unusual, the FBI relying on written section 302 reports based upon contemporaneous notes of the interview made by an FBI agent. Normally one FBI agent conducts an interview while a second agent writes out notes. Federal judges have often expressed skepticism as to the reliability of these reports. Congress should subpoena the 302 report of the Clinton interview.
- Comey revealed that he is no longer a registered Republican.
- Comey noted that if Clinton had worked for the FBI she could have been subject to a broad range of disciplinary measures, up to termination.
- Comey refused to confirm or deny that the FBI is investigating the Clinton Foundation.
This is devastating. From Reason TV a video contrasting Clinton’s version with the truth as explained by FBI Director Comey. Most politicians lie at one time or another. Few politicians lie all the time about matters small and great. Hillary Clinton is in the latter category. Comey, and I think deliberately, in his presentation handed Donald Trump a weapon to bring out this aspect of Clinton that only her most die hard partisans can possibly dispute.
That is the only conclusion one can draw from the presentation by the FBI Director today. The mishandling of the e-mails was a strict liability offense, no mens rea required. In other words no criminal intent need be shown in regard to Hillary Clinton which would make the prosecution much simpler. Former Federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy at National Review Online explains how Director Comey in effect rewrote the applicable criminal statute to get Hillary off the hook:
There is no way of getting around this: According to Director James Comey (disclosure: a former colleague and longtime friend of mine), Hillary Clinton checked every box required for a felony violation of Section 793(f) of the federal penal code (Title 18): With lawful access to highly classified information she acted with gross negligence in removing and causing it to be removed it from its proper place of custody, and she transmitted it and caused it to be transmitted to others not authorized to have it, in patent violation of her trust. Director Comey even conceded that former Secretary Clinton was “extremely careless” and strongly suggested that her recklessness very likely led to communications (her own and those she corresponded with) being intercepted by foreign intelligence services. Yet, Director Comey recommended against prosecution of the law violations he clearly found on the ground that there was no intent to harm the United States.
In essence, in order to give Mrs. Clinton a pass, the FBI rewrote the statute, inserting an intent element that Congress did not require. The added intent element, moreover, makes no sense: The point of having a statute that criminalizes gross negligence is to underscore that government officials have a special obligation to safeguard national defense secrets; when they fail to carry out that obligation due to gross negligence, they are guilty of serious wrongdoing. The lack of intent to harm our country is irrelevant. People never intend the bad things that happen due to gross negligence. I would point out, moreover, that there are other statutes that criminalize unlawfully removing and transmitting highly classified information with intent to harm the United States. Being not guilty (and, indeed, not even accused) of Offense B does not absolve a person of guilt on Offense A, which she has committed.
I am in the law mines right now. I will have two reactions to this later: one legal and one political.
Remarks prepared for delivery at press briefing.
Good morning. I’m here to give you an update on the FBI’s investigation of Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail system during her time as Secretary of State.
After a tremendous amount of work over the last year, the FBI is completing its investigation and referring the case to the Department of Justice for a prosecutive decision. What I would like to do today is tell you three things: what we did; what we found; and what we are recommending to the Department of Justice.
This will be an unusual statement in at least a couple ways. First, I am going to include more detail about our process than I ordinarily would, because I think the American people deserve those details in a case of intense public interest. Second, I have not coordinated or reviewed this statement in any way with the Department of Justice or any other part of the government. They do not know what I am about to say.
I want to start by thanking the FBI employees who did remarkable work in this case. Once you have a better sense of how much we have done, you will understand why I am so grateful and proud of their efforts. Continue Reading