First it was Hillary Clinton’s missing emails and the FBI’s subsequent handling of the investigation into her private server that raised concerns that the FBI was no longer a fact-based investigative organization the American people could rely on.
It’s amazing that, two and a half years after we first learned the details of the FBI’s investigation, Hillary Clinton is still walking around a free person.
She was in clear violation of the Espionage Act that defines the proper handling of intelligence by government officials.
As former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy wrote at the time; the Espionage Act does not refer to classified information; it refers to information relating to the national defense. Moreover, it does not prohibit solely the transmission of such information; it criminalizes the communication, delivery, or transmission of that information; causing communication, delivery, or transmission of that information; permitting the removal of that information from its proper place of custody through gross negligence; permitting that information to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed through gross negligence; or, failing to make a prompt report to superiors in the government when an official knows that the information has been removed from its proper place of custody, communicated to someone not authorized to have it, lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed. See also Title 18 United States Code Section 2071 (prohibiting destruction of records).
Comey knew the extent of Hillary’s criminality by January of 2016, and six months later came to the conclusion that the only way he could exonerate Clinton was to avoid using the words gross negligence. His July 5, 2016 exoneration statement of Clinton was a sickeningly duplicitous smokescreen.
Immediately after Comey provided his contorted reading of the law we asked what his intent was or whether he was simply grossly incompetent as well.
At the time then-candidate Donald Trump said, “the system is rigged.”
As has consistently been the case, Trump has been proven right.
Yesterday it was revealed that the FBI is now missing text messages between two of its employees – the then head of counter-intelligence Peter Strzok and his girlfriend attorney Lisa Page.
For an agency that is neurotically meticulous about its record keeping this cannot be dismissed as a “technical glitch,” especially in light of the fact that one message between Strzok and Page referenced a “Secret Society” of officials within the FBI that apparently met the day after the election of Donald J. Trump to plot against the president-elect. The day after that message, text messages between Strzok and Page went missing.
John Ratcliffe is an under-the-radar Congressman from Texas. He is a member of the House Homeland Security Committee, the House Judiciary Committee, and he chairs the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Protection Committee among his other committee assignments.
The FBI’s claim that it lost all of Strzok and Page’s texts starting the day after the “Secret Society” text is stunningly convenient. The missing texts span a five-month period until both Strzok and Page became part of Mueller ‘s team. Seriously?
Was this the “insurance policy” that Page and Strzok had discussed in an earlier exchange?
House investigators Ratcliffe and Trey Gowdy didn’t miss the “coincidence”. Keep in mind that both are former prosecutors.
“You have this insurance policy in the Spring of 2016 and then the day after the election … there’s a text exchange between these two FBI agents — these two (supposed to be objective, fact-centric) FBI agents saying, ‘perhaps this is the first meeting of the secret society. So of course I’m gonna want to know what ‘secret society’ are you talking about — because you’re supposed to be investigating objectively the person who just won the Electoral College.”
The to add emphasis Gowdy said:
“Yeah, I’m gonna want to know.”
Gowdy, who chairs the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, had met with House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte and House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes on Saturday and released this statement yesterday:
One thing that is now certain is that Comey committed perjury while being interrogated by Ratcliffe during an appearance before House investigators.
Ratcliffe: Did you make the decision not to recommend criminal charges relating to classified information before or after Hillary Clinton was interviewed by the FBI on July 2nd?
After Ratcliffe pushed back Comey Responded:
“All I can do is tell you again the decision was made after that because I didn’t know what was going to happen in that interview.”
We have since learned that Comey began drafting his statement exonerating Clinton in May.
Page acknowledged as much in a text the day before the Clinton interview took place when she sarcastically referenced then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s assertion that she would abide by whatever recommendation Comey made.
There’s simply no chance that Lynch would’ve made that promise unless she already had knowledge that Comey was set to exonerate Hillary.
Strangely, in what had to be the highest profile case Comey every handled he wasn’t even present for Clinton’s interview. Strzok handled it. No notes were recorded, no audio or video recordings were made, and Clinton wasn’t even put under oath.
Clearly, the fix was in.
Then there’s the “convenient loss” of five months of texts between Strzok and Page that likely contained detailed evidence about the “Secret Society” they had alluded to.
Call me a conspiracy theorist but the fact that those lost texts stopped immediately after Strzok and Page joined Mueller’s team is just too much of a coincidence to be believed. More likely, Mueller recruited them because knew he could trust both of them from his association with that Secret Society. And, that Mueller either ordered them to destroy all evidence of that Secret Society or they did so on their own to cover their tracks.
Gowdy also reported seeing “an interesting text” about FBI Director James Comey going to update then-President Obama about an investigation:
“I don’t know if it was the Hillary Clinton investigation, because remember that had been reopened in the fall of 2016, or whether it was the Trump investigation. I just find it interesting a head of the FBI was going to update the president of the United States, who at that point would have been President Obama.”
Ratcliffe stated the obvious to his twitter account:
“For former prosecutors like Chairman Gowdy and myself that worked at the Department and FBI, it makes it harder for us to explain away one exchange coincidence after another.”
This led Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who has purposefully slow-played his entry into the investigative process due to political considerations until now, feels the public is ready for the housecleaning that is about to ensue:
“We will leave no stone unturned to confirm with certainty why these text messages are not now available to be produced and will use every technology available to determine whether the missing messages are recoverable from another source.”
Gowdy also demanded the production of the text messages:
“Either the Bureau needs to find them, or we need to have someone who has really easy access to these text messages, and it may be law enforcement.”
Get ready for the sh*t to hit the fan in a bigger way than anyone could’ve anticipated.
While we had ample evidence of corrupt individuals inside the FBI no one believed that they had actually formalized a Secret Society to take down the President of the United States.
Two people do not refer themselves as a “society.” Comey, Bruce Ohr, Andrew McCabe, Rod Rosenstein and others at the FBI and the DOJ have a lot of explaining to do. Was Mueller a part of it? Was Obama? Was Susan Rice? What about the FISA court judge who issued the warrant that authorized the surveillance of the Trump campaign.
As Sessions ponders the appointment of a second special counsel consider that the current “reason” for Mueller’s appointment was a drunken rant by 28-year old campaign stringer, George Papadopoulos. If that is enough to warrant a special counsel then this is enough to warrant ten special counsels.