With so much in the news every day, it’s easy for something earth-shaking to be overlooked, even for those of us not tied to the mainstream media narrative. On Thursday, I wrote about a breaking story uncovered by Paul Sperry of Real Clear Investigations about the way the FBI dealt with those Hillary emails found (along with lots of porn) on the laptop of Anthony Weiner, former husband of Hillary aide and confidante Huma Abedin, in the months before the 2016 election. But the story, outrageous as it was, didn’t seem to get traction until Jason Chaffetz did a segment on it for the Laura Ingraham show Thursday night.
Ever since Donald Trump shocked the Democrats by winning in November of 2016, Democrats have espoused a theory that then-FBI Director James Comey hurt Hillary’s chances with the October timing of his “re-opening” of that investigation. (Of course, they never mention that she wouldn’t have even been a candidate by then if Comey had made her do the perp-walk back in July, but I digress.) The actual story surrounding those emails is much more insidious. And it’s no theory.
These new findings are so important, and reflect so badly on Comey and the FBI’s kid-glove treatment of then-candidate Hillary, that I’d rather leave the discussion of porn-star payoffs and plea-bargaining sleazebag lawyers for another time.
As told to Chaffetz by Sperry, the vast majority of Hillary’s State Department emails discovered on Weiner’s nasty laptop were never examined. (Chaffetz happens to have been the one who received Comey’s October 2016 letter about those emails.) Comey’s claim that the FBI had individually examined hundreds of thousands of emails (“all of the communications”) for classified information and incriminating evidence was wildly untrue --- in reality, they looked at only about 3,000 out of almost 700,000. And just how did the FBI decide which 3,000 to look at? Was it random, with agents checking the first 3,000 they came to? Why, no, they were hand-picked by the head of the “MYE” (Mid-Year Exam) investigation...Peter Strzok.
And, case closed.
According to Sperry, the story Comey gave Congress was that some miraculous breakthrough in technology had made it possible for the FBI to look through all those thousands of emails, and they worked “night after night after night” until they got it done. That story did not check out; as it happened, a technical glitch thwarted their effort to process the bulk of the emails. (All together now: “Awwwww!!”) Strzok and a couple of other investigators ordered in some pizza and went through a relatively tiny number of emails for 12 hours before calling it a night. But, hey, the FBI just COULDN’T look at every single email, with the election coming up and all. They didn’t have enough time! What else could they do? They just HAD to put the case to bed before Hillary was elect---I mean, before the election.
Okay, then, so why didn’t Comey admit to Congress that they had done such a half-arsed job? He made it seem, falsely, as though Hillary’s “mid-year exam” had been comprehensive and that she’d passed. They all get an “incomplete” on this exam, and an “F” overall.
Sperry points out that all this email evidence is still relevant, as the investigation into the Clinton Foundation is ongoing. But he sees this story as one more example of politicization at the FBI, and he calls for an outside independent prosecutor to go through everything and see if agents were trying to protect Hillary by covering up material evidence. Chaffetz concurs, saying the inspector general, Attorney General Sessions and potentially a second special counsel should take up this case.
A more concise version of Sperry’s story appears at the link below, outlining the ways the investigation of Hillary was spectacularly –- and, I believe, intentionally –- botched. If anyone still doubts that we have a two-tier “justice” system, just read this. And Hillary...well, she might want to grab a few bottles of chardonnay, take a long walk far into the Chappaqua woods and hide there until the statute of limitations runs out.