The New York Analysis of Policy and Government examines, in two parts, the mounting indications that the charges against the President, and the refusal to conduct an investigation against Ms. Clinton, are part of an overall attempt to use the legal process as a partisan political tool.
So far, Robert Mueller’s investigation of the Trump campaign remains unsupported by substantive evidence sufficient to warrant further action. When compared against the extraordinary and growing evidence of wrongdoing involving national security misdeeds and uranium sales to Russia, (in return for remuneration to Ms. Clinton under various means) which the Department of Justice has wholly refused to prosecute, it is increasingly difficult to make the case that Mueller’s investigation against the Trump campaign is anything more than a biased political witch hunt in which the Justice Department is employed as a partisan weapon.
Additionally, it is being conducted by individuals so openly biased that any results they obtain would be incurably tainted. When linked to the recent news that James Comey, while serving as head of the FBI, decided against prosecuting the former Secretary of State, who clearly endangered U.S. national security by her reckless and lawless email handling (not to mention her personally profiting from the sale of uranium to the Russians) before even interviewing the suspect and key witnesses, it presents a clear picture of a justice system gone utterly rogue with overt political bias.
The stunning report that former FBI director James Comey decided to exonerate Hillary Clinton before the agency’s investigators had interviewed key witnesses may be one of the most profound political and governmental scandals in U.S. history.
The New York Post’s Michael Godwin notes “It remains a blot on the legacy of the Obama administration, the Justice Department and the FBI, and now comes fresh evidence that the investigation that cleared her was a total sham. The revelation from the Senate Judiciary Committee that…Comey drafted his statement exonerating her about two months before FBI agents interviewed Clinton or 16 other witnesses confirms suspicions that the probe was neither honest nor thorough. When the outcome is decided long before the investigation is over, the result can’t be trusted.”
Senators Charles E. Grassley, (R-Iowa) Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary, and Lindsey O. Graham, (R-S.C.) Chairman, Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism, Committee on the Judiciary issued a statement noting:
“Transcripts reviewed by the Senate Judiciary Committee reveal that former FBI Director James Comey began drafting an exoneration statement in the Clinton email investigation before the FBI had interviewed key witnesses. Chairman Chuck Grassley and Senator Lindsey Graham, chairman of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism, requested all records relating to the drafting of the statement as the committee continues to review the circumstances surrounding Comey’s removal from the Bureau…Conclusion first, fact-gathering second—that’s no way to run an investigation. The FBI should be held to a higher standard than that, especially in a matter of such great public interest and controversy…”
The statement went on to note:
“Last fall, following allegations from Democrats in Congress, the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) began investigating whether Comey’s actions in the Clinton email investigation violated the Hatch Act, which prohibits government employees from using their official position to influence an election. In the course of that investigation, OSC interviewed two FBI officials close to Comey: James Rybicki, Comey’s Chief of Staff, and Trisha Anderson, the Principal Deputy General Counsel of National Security and Cyberlaw. OSC provided transcripts of those interviews at Grassley’s request after it closed the investigation due to Comey’s termination.
“Both transcripts are heavily redacted without explanation. However, they indicate that Comey began drafting a statement to announce the conclusion of the Clinton email investigation in April or May of 2016, before the FBI interviewed up to 17 key witnesses including former Secretary Clinton and several of her closest aides. The draft statement also came before the Department entered into immunity agreements with Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson where the Department agreed to a very limited review of Secretary Clinton’s emails and to destroy their laptops after review. In an extraordinary July announcement, Comey exonerated Clinton despite noting “there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information.”
In a letter, (reproduced below) the two chairmen requested all drafts of Comey’s statement closing the Clinton investigation, all related emails and any records previously provided to OSC [the permanent, independent investigative agency for personnel matters in the federal government; it is not related to Robert Mueller’s temporary prosecutorial office within the Justice Department.] in the course of its investigation.
August 30, 2017
The Honorable Christopher Wray
Director
Federal Bureau of Investigation
935 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20535
Dear Director Wray:
The Senate Judiciary Committee has been investigating the circumstances surrounding Director Comey’s removal, including his conduct in handling the Clinton and Russia investigations. On June 30, 2017, the Committee wrote to the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) requesting transcripts of OSC’s interviews with then-Director Comey’s Chief of Staff, Jim Rybicki, and the Principal Deputy General Counsel of National Security and Cyberlaw, Trisha Anderson. OSC investigators had interviewed them as part of the OSC’s investigation into whether then-Director Comey’s actions in the Clinton investigation violated the Hatch Act.[2] OSC closed its inquiry after Mr. Comey’s removal pursuant to its standard policy of not investigating former government employees. On August 8, 2017, the OSC provided transcripts of those interviews at the Committee’s request. Since then, Committee staff has been asking the Department informally to explain the reasons for the extensive redactions to the transcripts.
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. 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.
OSC attorneys questioned two witnesses, presumably Mr. Rybicki and Ms. Anderson, about Mr. Comey’s July 5, 2016, statement exonerating Secretary Clinton. The transcript of what appears to be Mr. Rybicki’s interview contains the following exchanges:
Q: … We talked about outcome of the investigation, … how did
the statement – I guess the idea of the statement come about?
A: Sure. We’re talking about July 5th, correct?
Q: Yes. I’m sorry. July 5th.
A: The – so in the – sometime in the spring – again, I don’t remember exactly when, I – early spring I would say, the Director emailed a couple folks – I can’t remember exactly; I know I was on there, probably the Deputy Director, not the full, what I’ll call the briefing group, but a subset of that – to say, you know, again knowing sort of where – knowing the direction the investigation is headed, right, what would be the most forward-leaning thing we could do, right, information that we could put out about it…And — and, you know, by that — you know, so that — and he sent a draft around of, you know what – what it might look like. . . .
***
A: …So that was the early spring.
Q: Yeah. And I think we’ve seen maybe that email where he sent it out, it was early May of 2016; does that sound about right?
A: That sounds right. That — quite honestly, that strikes me as a little late, but may —
Physiotherapy is a technique prescription du canada viagra to promote, develop, maintain and restore the maximum functional ability and movement of their patients’ bodies. All High Quality Medications Available At viagra 100mg for sale The Cheapest Prices in the UK. It can be easily bought online order cheap levitra without filling long forms. Antidepressants will make the problem cialis canada generic worse.
Q: Okay.
A: — but again, I definitely remember spring. I had in my head like the April timeframe, but May doesn’t seem out of the — out of the realm.
***
Q: And so at that point in time, whether it was April or early May, the team hadn’t yet interviewed Secretary Clinton –
A: Correct.
Q: – but was there – I guess, based on what you’re saying, it sounds like there was an idea of where the outcome of the investigation was going to go?
A: Sure. There was a – right, there was – based on – [redacted section].
Similarly, the transcript of what appears to be Ms. Anderson’s interview states:
Q: So moving along to the first public statement on the case or Director Comey’s first statement the July 5, 2016 statement. When did you first learn that Director Comey was planning to make some kind of public statement about the outcome of the Clinton email investigation?
A: The idea, I’m not entirely sure exactly when the idea of the public statement um first emerged. Um it was, I just, I can’t put a precise timeframe on it um but [redaction]. And then I believe it was in early May of 2016 that the Director himself wrote a draft of that statement …
Q: So when you found out in early May that there was, that the Director had written a draft of what the statement might look like, how did you learn about that?
A: [Redacted] gave me a hard copy of it…
Q: So what happened next with respect to the draft?
A: I don’t know for sure um, I don’t know. There were many iterations, at some point there were many iterations of the draft that circulated…
As of early May 2016, the FBI had not yet interviewed Secretary Clinton. Moreover, it had yet to finish interviewing sixteen other key witnesses, including Cheryl Mills, Bryan Pagliano, Heather Samuelson, Justin Cooper, and John Bentel.
These individuals had intimate and personal knowledge relating to Secretary Clinton’s non-government server, including helping her build and administer the device. Yet, it appears that the following key FBI interviews had not yet occurred when Mr. Comey began drafting his exoneration statement:
- May 3, 2016 – Paul Combetta
- May 12, 2016 – Sean Misko
- May 17, 2016 – Unnamed CIA employee
- May 19, 2016 – Unnamed CIA employee
- May 24, 2016 – Heather Samuelson
- May 26, 2016 – Marcel Lehel (aka Guccifer)
- May 28, 2016 – Cheryl Mills
- June 3, 2016 – Charlie Wisecarver
- June 10, 2016 – John Bentel
- June 15, 2016 – Lewis Lukens
- June 21, 2016 – Justin Cooper
- June 21, 2016 – Unnamed State Dept. Employee[7]
- June 21, 2016 – Bryan Pagliano
- June 21, 2016 – Purcell Lee
- June 23, 2016 – Monica Hanley
- June 29, 2016 – Hannah Richert
- July 2, 2016 – Hillary Clinton
The Report concludes tomorrow.