Clinton email scandal

Gregg Jarrett: How an FBI official with a political agenda corrupted both Mueller, Comey investigations

How is it possible that Hillary Clinton escaped criminal indictment for mishandling classified documents despite incriminating evidence that she violated the Espionage Act? Why did Donald Trump become the target of a criminal investigation for allegedly conspiring with Russia to influence the presidential election despite no evidence that he ever did so? The answer, it seems, comes down to one person who played a vital role in both cases: Peter Strzok, deputy director of counterintelligence at the FBI. Strzok was exchanging politically charged texts with an FBI lawyer that denigrated Trump and lauded Clinton at the same time he was leading the bureau’s criminal investigation of Clinton. He is also the one who changed the critical wording of then-FBI Director James Comey’s description of Clinton’s handling of classified material that resulted in no charges being brought against her. Then, Strzok reportedly signed the document launching the 2016 investigation into Russia’s meddling in the election and whether the Trump campaign played any role. After leading the FBI’s probe into Trump, he then joined Robert Mueller’s special counsel team as an integral investigator. Thus, it appears that one man with a strident political agenda accomplished his twin goals of clearing Clinton and accusing Trump, evidence be damned. And then he was caught. The Department of Justice inspector general, Michael Horowitz, discovered the electronic texts Strzok exchanged with his lover, FBI lawyer Lisa Page. The messages were so politically incendiary and so threatened the integrity of Mueller’s investigation that Strzok was quietly canned over the summer from the special counsel team, where he was a pivotal participant. Did Mueller or anyone else notify Congress that both the Trump investigation –and the Clinton case before it– were corrupted? Of course not. This was covered up. Mueller surely knew that if the truth were revealed, it would further discredit a Trump-Russia probe that had already taken on the stench of dead fish. The House Intelligence Committee could smell it and knew something was amiss. It demanded answers. But the Justice Department and the FBI refused to respond or otherwise produce relevant documents that the committee subpoenaed. They are still stonewalling many of Congress’s valid requests and should now face contempt charges. Importantly, all of the anti-Trump and pro-Clinton messages should be made public. Americans should decide for themselves whether our system of justice has been compromised by unscrupulous influences. Just how rife with political prejudice and corrupt motives is the special counsel’s investigation? Instead of choosing prosecutors who could be neutral, fair and objective, Mueller stacked his staff with Democratic donors. Apparently, he conducted little or no vetting of both prosecutors and investigators. How else does one explain the presence of Strzok and Lisa Page on the investigative team? It appears that Mueller selected people of a particular political persuasion without discerning review or scrutiny. We were supposed to simply trust Mueller’s judgment, notwithstanding his own disqualifying conflict of interest under the special counsel statute that demanded his recusal. The Trump-Russia investigation is now awash in illegitimacy. Mueller and those who work for him have squandered all credibility. It is imperative that the special counsel be dismissed, the current staff fired, and a new counsel appointed to re-evaluate the evidence objectively. Do not expect Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to make these changes. He, too, should be removed in his capacity as Mueller’s supervisor. As both a witness and prosecutor, Rosenstein has his own conspicuous and disabling conflict of interest. Yet he has refused to step aside. Attorney General Jeff Sessions is duty-bound to remove both Mueller and Rosenstein. Given what we know about the composition of the special counsel team, there may well be others who harbor a blatant political bias and have expressed their animus toward Trump in emails or texts. The computer accounts of the entire staff need to be examined by Congress and the DOJ Inspector General. Failing that, news organizations should file a request under the Freedom of Information Act. The examination should begin with Andrew Weissmann, who has close ties to Hui Chen, whom he hired at the Justice Department and with whom he worked at the U.S. Attorney’s office for the Eastern District of New York. Documents show the DOJ approved a salary for her position of $711,800 for two years of work, which is more than the attorney general earns.

No kidding!!  To read the rest of this spot-on legal op/ed by former defense attorney, and current Fox News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett, click on the text above.  Excellent!!

Comey began drafting ‘exoneration statement’ before interviewing Clinton, senators say

Then-FBI Director James Comey began drafting a statement exonerating Hillary Clinton in the investigation into her private email use before interviewing key witnesses, including Clinton herself, two Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee said Thursday. “Conclusion first, fact-gathering second—that’s no way to run an investigation,” Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley and South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham wrote in a letter this week to the FBI. “The FBI should be held to a higher standard than that, especially in a matter of such great public interest and controversy.” Grassley and Graham said they learned about Comey’s draft “exoneration statement” after reviewing transcripts of interviews with top Comey aides. “According to the unredacted portions of the transcripts, it appears that in April or early May of 2016, Mr. Comey had already decided he would issue a statement exonerating Secretary Clinton,” the senators said. They added, “That was long before FBI agents finished their work. Mr. Comey even circulated an early draft statement to select members of senior FBI leadership. The outcome of an investigation should not be prejudged while FBI agents are still hard at work trying to gather the facts.” Clinton, the Democratic presidential nominee in 2016, was investigated by the FBI for using a private email address and server to handle classified information while serving as secretary of state. In July 2016, Comey famously called Clinton’s email arrangement “extremely careless” though he decided against recommending criminal charges. In a news release Thursday, the senators said Comey began drafting a statement in April or May 2016, which was before the FBI interviewed 17 key witnesses, including Clinton herself and other top aides. The statement preceded the FBI entering into an immunity agreement with top Clinton aides with Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson. The transcripts are from interviews conducted by the Office of Special Counsel, which interviewed James Rybicki, Comey’s chief of staff, and Trisha Anderson, the principal deputy general counsel of national security and cyberlaw, the senators said. “It is unclear whether the FBI agents actually investigating the case were aware that Mr. Comey had already decided on the investigation’s outcome while their work was ongoing,” the senators wrote. In the Wednesday letter to FBI Director Chris Wray, the two senators said they have requested all records relating to the drafting of the statement. Comey was fired as FBI director by President Trump in May..

And he had not only the legal authority to do so, but the moral imperative to fire James Comey.  And despite the hypocritical hand wringing by the dominantly liberal mainstream media, and so many Democrat politicians, Trump’s firing of Comey was NOT a “constitutional crisis.”  Clinton fired his FBI director and nobody said boo about it.  So, when MSNBC and other media organs were trumping up (pun intended) that story, it fell flat.  James Comey was a self-serving, narcissistic, corrupt tool who should be investigated for corruption, perjury, and on and on..  This story is just getting started..  So, stay tuned..

Email Headache Returns: New Clinton messages show passwords, schedules flowed freely

The election’s over – but Hillary Clinton’s emails are still coming to light. And they help illustrate why the FBI declared she was “extremely careless” with the information flowing across her secret server. A new batch of messages released by the State Department on Tuesday shows the former secretary of state and her team routinely shared her upcoming schedules, talking points and sensitive items – such as her iPad password – via the homebrewed system. Other newly revealed emails, which were posted as the result of litigation, show Clinton’s top advisers griping about her during her time as secretary of State; an Asian ruler who later implemented Sharia law saying he considered former President Bill Clinton part of his “family”; and Clinton talking about Justin Cooper, one of the key figures who administered to her private server.

Drip drip…  To read the rest of this article, click on the text above.

‘Guccifer’ casts doubt on Obama administration’s Russia hacking claims

Romanian hacker Marcel Lehel Lazar, weighing in from a prison 3,700 miles away on the latest diplomatic dust-up between the U.S. and Russia, told Fox News in an exclusive interview that he doubts the Obama administration’s allegations about Moscow directing cyberattacks against Democratic groups in the 2016 election. Lazar, 44, also known as “Guccifer,” spoke to Fox News Senior Executive Producer Pamela Browne in a series of recorded phone calls from his Romanian jail cell in late December. He described the administration’s allegation of Russia cyber-attacks during the 2016 elections as part of “a fake cyber war.” “Americans are crazy about the Russian thing and that Russians are invading the United States,” Lazar said, suggesting the allegations are overblown because of Cold War sensitivities. “It’s crazy … it’s this hysteria you know?” he said. Lazar has been convicted and sentenced to prison in two separate countries, the U.S. and Romania, for his hacking and taunting of major celebrity and political figures. Lazar is expected to finish his Romanian sentence in 2019 and then will be returned to the U.S. to face 52 months in an American prison after pleading guilty to two counts of a nine-count indictment. Largely regarded as a nuisance hacker motivated through his disillusionment and frustration — and some say obsession — with political figures both in the U.S. and Romania, Lazar was the first to expose Hillary Clinton’s use of the private Clintonemail.com address. This revelation ultimately led to the identification of Clinton’s personal account used for all government business while she served as secretary of State. FBI Director James Comey described the handling of classified material as “extremely careless.” The FBI and administration have since turned their attention to responding to alleged Russian hacking of Democratic accounts, which some Clinton allies have blamed for her election loss.  In interviews conducted two weeks before the Obama administration’s expulsion of 35 Russian diplomats in retaliation for alleged interference in the U.S. elections, Lazar predicted there “will be probes and indictments against some Russian people.”

A pretty interesting development..  We’ll, of course, keep an eye on it.  To read the rest of this article, click on the text above.

Federal Appeals Court Reinstates Clinton Email Lawsuits

A federal appeals court has ordered lawsuits by Judicial Watch and Cause of Action seeking to force the federal government to recover Hillary Clinton’s missing emails to move forward, reversing a lower court’s dismissal. When Secretary of State John Kerry refused to take all lawful measures mandated by federal law to recover Clinton’s emails, Judicial Watch and Cause of Action brought separate lawsuits seeking to force Attorney General Loretta Lynch to launch a Justice Department investigation, a request that federal law says should have originated from Kerry or from the national archivist. A federal trial judge on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed these lawsuits, holding they were moot and no longer appropriate for judicial action. On Dec. 27, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit reversed, ordering the lower court to restart proceedings on the lawsuit. The panel included both liberal and conservative judges. “The Federal Records Act governs the creation, management and disposal of federal records,” Senior Judge Stephen Williams wrote for the court, quoting a previous case. “Due to the importance of maintaining federal records (which are generally accessible to the public through the Freedom of Information Act), the act strictly limits the circumstances under which records can be removed from federal custody or destroyed.” When a Cabinet officer becomes aware that the removal or destruction of federal records has happened or is imminent, he must notify the head of the National Archives, and then “initiate action through the Attorney General” to recover those records. Despite the Federal Records Act’s clear and unambiguous language, Kerry never did so. D.C. Circuit precedent holds that the Federal Records Act commands Cabinet secretaries and the Archivist to pursue claims of missing or destroyed records, and does not allow any discretion on whether to do so. Another law—the Administrative Procedure Act (APA)—allows a person to sue over nonperformance of a federal agency action that federal law requires the agency to take. Judicial Watch and Cause of Action brought their suits under the authority of the APA. Although the State Department’s requesting that Clinton please turn over emails produced some results, the D.C.-based appeals court noted that “the Department has not explained why shaking the tree harder—e.g., by following the statutory mandate to seek action by the Attorney General—might not bear more still.” “In terms of assuring government recovery of emails, appellants have not been given everything they asked for,” the court concluded. “Absent a showing that the requested enforcement action could not shake loose a few more emails, the case is not moot.” The D.C. Circuit therefore sent the case back down to the district court for additional proceedings. The watchdog groups’ lawyers can now seek a ruling on the merits of their case and a court order to Kerry (or his successor) asking the Justice Department to begin law enforcement actions to recover Clinton’s emails. The appeals are consolidated under the name Judicial Watch v. Kerry, D.C. Circuit docket nos. 16-5015, 16-5060, 16-5061, and 16-5077.

Drip drip..  The real question is..  Will Obama pardon Hillary or not?  Conventional wisdom is that he will.

French: The FBI’s October Surprise Is Devastating for Hillary Clinton

The Democratic presidential nominee is again under criminal investigation less than two weeks before the election. Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441552/fbi-hillary-clinton-email-server-investigation-reopened-over-new-emails On Friday afternoon, the FBI uncorked the mother of all October surprises, announcing in a letter to Congress that it has re-opened its investigation of Hillary Clinton’s “personal email server.” The reason? During an “unrelated investigation”* it uncovered e-mails that “appear to be pertinent” to Clinton’s case. It is seeking to determine whether the e-mails contain classified information and can’t yet determine their significance. Stripped of the legalese, it means that Hillary is back in legal jeopardy. The FBI doesn’t investigate and recommend enforcement actions against computer servers. It holds people accountable, and Hillary is the person most responsible for her own e-mail. I have three initial thoughts. First, these e-mails must be prima facie problematic. There is no way the FBI publicly re-opens this investigation on the eve of a presidential election if the new e-mails contained information about yoga routines or wedding plans. Moreover, the very fact that the FBI is trying to determine whether the e-mails contain classified information indicates that their content is setting off alarm bells in the Bureau. In other words, this is serious. Second, the e-mails could have an impact on the decision whether to charge Hillary or her aides either under the Espionage Act or for obstructing the initial investigation, perhaps by lying to the FBI. Recall that Comey previously exonerated Clinton under a made-up legal standard, but if there are more e-mails — and if Clinton or her aides worked to conceal their existence from the FBI — then their conduct may even rise to the FBI’s arbitrary, higher threshold of lawlessness. At the very least, it renders the FBI’s previous decision not to prosecute even more suspect. Third, unless the FBI announces the investigation and clears her within the span of basically one work week (an action that would be deeply problematic on its own terms), Hillary’s closing argument to the American people is going to be that Donald Trump is so dangerous that it’s worth gambling your vote on a woman under current criminal investigation. Will there be any Democrats who will urge Clinton to step aside?

Of course not, David.  Attorney David French was the author of that piece.

Opinion/Analysis: Hillary, the hypocrite – She touts a code of conduct that she and her operatives routinely violate

In the modern history of American politics has there ever been a bigger hypocrite than Hillary Clinton? Her 30 years in politics has taught us clearly that Hillary lives by one set of rules and wants to impose different rules for everyone else. She constantly accuses Donald Trump of transgressions that she has been caught red-handed of herself. She sermonizes about a code of conduct that she and her husband and her operatives routinely violate. We have learned from her emails that she has two personas: she tells voters one thing and her donors the opposite. After the last presidential debate, I started to jot down her double standards and the list went on and on. This column can’t possibly do justice to all her double dealings (and I welcome readers to add to the list). Here are some of the biggest whoppers and I paraphrase Hillary here: • I stand with working-class Americans unless they are coal miners who I want to throw out of work and put in unemployment lines. • I have devoted my whole life to helping children. Except that I’m for the infanticide of partial birth abortion. • It is reprehensible that a major presidential candidate would ever question the validity of the election results … unless that candidates name is Al Gore or John Kerry. • We should do everything possible to ensure the fairness and integrity in our elections … unless it means that people have to show a valid photo identification when they vote which might prohibit illegal immigrants from voting for me. • We have to take special interest money out of politics and repeal Citizens United after I raise a world record $1 billion of special interest money from Wall Street and Washington lobbyists. • The Pacific Trade Deal is the “gold standard” of trade deals. No I’m against it … No I’m for it. • We cannot tolerate religious bigotry from a presidential candidate … unless it is bigotry against Catholic or even worse, evangelical Christians. • I have been in “public service” for 30 years selflessly “helping families and children” and that is how Bill and I got rich amassing $100 million of wealth. • Donald Trump’s tax plan would explode the debt and my plan won’t “add a penny to the deficit,” but I worked for the president who borrowed as much money as every president in the history of the country and I never raised a peep of protest. • Donald Trump is a racist for questioning whether Barack Obama was born in the United States even though it was my campaign brain trust that raised this issue in the 2008 primary campaign. • I have apologized for using a private email that imperiled our national security and have not broken any laws … which explains why I did everything possible to obstruct the investigation of the State Department Inspector General, My team destroyed the servers with a hammer and bleached the disks clean, and I and all my colleagues lawyered up when confronted by the FBI. • Only the richest one percent will pay higher taxes under my plan — which is exactly what Bill Clinton and Barack Obama said before they were elected and the first thing they did was raise taxes on everyone. • Donald Trump favors the rich and powerful but under my plan I’m going to give $200 billion to my green friends and donors in the solar industry in the biggest corporate welfare handout in American history.

Exactly!!  Hillary’s hypocrisy is truly breathtaking.  She is a self-righteous, self-serving, arrogant, lying, elitist, limousine liberal, opportunist…that is suckering the low-information voters like no other.  Unfortunately, thanks to the willing accomplices in the dominantly liberal mainstream media who are the tank for her and willfully turn a blind eye to her lies and hypocrisies, we’ll probably get stuck with that pant-suit wearing diva…God help us.  I think that’s enough pronouns for now..  Anyway, to read the rest of this list from economist Stephen Moore, just click on the text above.