Washington, D.C. – A high-ranking FBI official has blown the whistle on what they say was a politically motivated, top-down decision to not recommend Hillary Clinton face criminal charges for her mishandling of classified intelligence.
The anonymous source that worked intimately on the Clinton investigation told Fox News that FBI agents working the case, as well as DOJ attorneys on the case, unanimously believed that Clinton should have her security clearance revoked, with the “vast majority” believing she should be criminally charged.
“It was unanimous that we all wanted her [Clinton’s] security clearance yanked,” the senior FBI official told Fox news. “It is safe to say the vast majority felt she should be prosecuted. We were floored while listening to the FBI briefing because Comey laid it all out, and then said ‘but we are doing nothing,’ which made no sense to us.”
The entire team was stunned when FBI Director Comey announced on July 5 that he would not be recommending a criminal indictment to the Attorney General’s office, according to the source.
“No trial level attorney agreed, no agent working the case agreed, with the decision not to prosecute — it was a top-down decision,” said the source, whose identity and actual role in the case were vetted and verified by Fox News.
The year-long Clinton investigation involved over 100 FBI agents and analysts, as well as six attorneys from the DOJ’s National Security Division – Counter Espionage Section. Per their usual course of action, the FBI declined to comment directly on the damning allegations, referring people to their official public statements on the matter by Comey – which essentially say that politics didn’t play into the decision – a blatant and utter lie.
“I know there were many opinions expressed by people who were not part of the investigation – including people in government – but none of that mattered to us,” Comey said during his July 5 announcement that the FBI would not be recommending Clinton for prosecution. “Opinions are irrelevant, and they were all uninformed by insight into our investigation, because we did the investigation the right way. Only facts matter, and the FBI found them here in an entirely apolitical and professional way.”
But Comey’s statements seem at odds with the sentiments of a number of veteran FBI agents, who this week came forward in the New York Post to claim that FBI Director James Comey “has permanently damaged the bureau’s reputation for uncompromising investigations with his cowardly whitewash of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s mishandling of classified information using an unauthorized private email server.”
That claim also is backed up by a number of veteran FBI agents who have come forward to rebuke Comey’s politicization of a once respected law enforcement organization.
“The FBI has politicized itself, and its reputation will suffer for a long time. I hold Director Comey responsible,” Dennis V. Hughes, the first chief of the FBI’s computer investigations unit, told the NY Post.
Retired FBI agent Michael M. Biasello also noted in the Post’s report that, “Comey has singlehandedly ruined the reputation of the organization.”
Andrew Napolitano, a former judge and senior judicial analyst for Fox News, said many FBI agents involved in the investigation felt that the decision was based solely on politics, with the White House in control.
“It is well known that the FBI agents on the ground, the human beings who did the investigative work, had built an extremely strong case against Hillary Clinton and were furious when the case did not move forward,” said Napolitano. “They believe the decision not to prosecute came from The White House.”
One of the biggest points of contention amongst the FBI team that had worked so tirelessly to piece together the case was the fact that Comey had based his decision on his conclusion that the DOJ wouldn’t charge Clinton – something that should be completely irrelevant as to whether or not a prosecution recommendation is made by the FBI as the agency’s role is to simply advise on such matters.
“Basically, James Comey hijacked the DOJ’s role by saying ‘no reasonable prosecutor would bring this case,’” the Fox News source said. “The FBI does not decide who to prosecute and when, that is the sole province of a prosecutor — that never happens,” said the senior FBI official.
“I know zero prosecutors in the DOJ’s National Security Division who would not have taken the case to a grand jury,” the source added. “One was never even convened.”
The FBI investigation was fatally flawed from the beginning, because there were no subpoenas issued, no grand jury convened, and no search warrants issued – absolutely anomalous behavior in an FBI criminal investigation.
“The FBI could not seize anything related to the investigation, only request things. As an example, in order to get the laptop, they had to agree to grant immunity,” Napolitano said.
According to a report by Fox News:
In early 2015, it was revealed that Clinton had used a private email server in her Chappaqua, N.Y., home to conduct government business while serving from 2009-2013. The emails on the private server included thousands of messages that would later be marked classified by the State Department retroactively. Federal law makes it a crime for a government employee to possess classified information in an unsecure manner, and the relevant statute does not require a finding of intent.
Although Comey found that Clinton was “extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information,” he said “no charges are appropriate in this case.”
Just days before Comey’s announcement, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, who was originally appointed as a federal prosecutor by Bill Clinton, met with in secret on the tarmac of an airport runway Bill Clinton.
Another oddity of the investigation, signaling that it was intentionally being manipulated from above, was the fact that the FBI forced its agents and analysts involved in the case to sign non-disclosure agreements.
“This is unheard of, because of the stifling nature it has on the investigative process,” the source said.
Adding the strange behavior displayed by FBI during its investigation, immunity agreements granted to Clinton’s State Department aides and IT experts. Immunity agreements are par for the course in an FBI investigation, but immunity is given when charges are being brought.
Fox News reports:
Cheryl Mills, Clinton’s former chief of staff, along with two other State Department staffers, John Bentel and Heather Samuelson, were afforded immunity agreements, as was Bryan Pagliano, Clinton’s former IT aide, and Paul Combetta, an employee at Platte River networks, the firm hired to manage her server after she left the State Department.
Combetta utilized the computer program “Bleachbit” to destroy Clinton’s records, despite an order from Congress to preserve them, and Samuelson also destroyed Clinton’s emails. Pagliano established the system that illegally transferred classified and top secret information to Clinton’s private server. Mills disclosed classified information to the Clinton’s family foundation in the process, breaking federal laws.
None of these people should have been granted immunity if no charges were ultimately being brought, the source told Fox News. With no charges being brought, immunity only served to act as a cover for illicit actions.
“[Immunity] is issued because you know someone possesses evidence you need to charge the target, and you almost always know what it is they possess,” the source said. “That’s why you give immunity.”
Immunity was also given to Mills and Samuelson for what was found on their computers, which were then destroyed as a part of negotiations with the FBI – something well outside the boundary of normalcy in a criminal investigation.
“Mills and Samuelson receiving immunity with the agreement their laptops would be destroyed by the FBI afterwards is, in itself, illegal,” the source said. “We know those laptops contained classified information. That’s also illegal, and they got a pass.”
Revealing the extremely disturbing favoritism shown by the FBI to Clinton, Mills was allowed to operate as Clinton’s attorney while a witness in the actual criminal investigation – something that should never have been allowed.
“Mills was allowed to sit in on the interview of Clinton as her lawyer. That’s absurd. Someone who is supposedly cooperating against the target of an investigation [being] permitted to sit by the target as counsel violates any semblance of ethical responsibility,” the senior FBI official said.
“Every agent and attorney I have spoken to is embarrassed and has lost total respect for James Comey and Loretta Lynch,” the agent said. “The bar for DOJ is whether the evidence supports a case for charges — it did here. It should have been taken to the grand jury.”
FBI agents were incensed with the fact that Clinton’s interview took just 3½ hours with no follow-up interview ever taking place, in spite of her “40 bouts of amnesia,” during the interview. Then, three days later, Comey cleared her of any criminal wrongdoing.
The FBI source claims that the majority of FBI and DOJ staffers involved in the investigation believe Comey and Lynch were motivated not by justice, but out of personal ambition.
“Loretta Lynch simply wants to stay on as Attorney General under Clinton, so there is no way she would indict,” the source said. “James Comey thought his position [excoriating Clinton even as he let her off the hook] gave himself cover to remain on as director regardless of who wins.”
Bolstering the contention that the entire FBI investigation was simply political theater meant to appease an angry public, WikiLeaks released internal Clinton communication records this week that revealed the U.S. Department of Justice kept the Clinton campaign updated to the progress of its investigation.
“DOJ folks inform me there is a status hearing in this case this morning, so we could have a window into the judge’s thinking about this proposed production schedule as quickly as today,” Clinton press secretary Brian Fallon wrote regarding the email documentation the State Department would be required to turn over to the Justice Department.
There is a painfully obvious truth in that the FBI itself has been co-opted as a tool to legitimize the oligarchy that rules. Instead of assigning responsibility for actions, the agency has shown itself to bend to the will of the political elite.
If the FBI ever hopes to be a respected law enforcement entity again, they need a revolt from within to show the American public that they stand with them.
Where are the brave FBI agents that are unafraid to go public with their feelings about the politicization of this case and the favoritism displayed to those with money, power, and political connections?
Please share this story as a call to action in hopes that some fearless FBI agents will come together and finally take a stand for the American people!