How the FBI Went Easy on Hillary Clinton
By Paul Sperry, The New York Post
It’s clear now the FBI conducted a sweetheart investigation into Hillary Clinton’s e-mail shenanigans that appears to have been fixed from the start to go nowhere.
Far from exonerating Clinton, the nearly 60 pages of documents expose both the systematic destruction of subpoenaed evidence by Clinton’s aides and the curious lack of interest by investigators in recovering it.
Agents also failed to resolve unanswered questions, reconcile contradictory testimony or sweat uncooperative witnesses.
Comey declared the investigation free of undue influence three days after his agents interviewed Clinton at FBI headquarters under special terms. Agents weren’t allowed to Mirandize Clinton or place her under oath, even though she was the subject of a criminal investigation possibly involving espionage. They weren’t even allowed to record her answers.
What’s more, Comey made the two FBI agents who interviewed Clinton — along with all agents and forensic analysts involved in the so-called investigation — sign non-disclosure agreements gagging them from talking about the case even with other employees.
Comey even let Clinton’s State Department aides Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson sit in on the interview with Clinton’s other lawyers, despite the glaring conflict of interest. FBI documents make clear Mills and Samuelson led the effort to search and destroy Clinton’s subpoenaed e-mails and should’ve been prime targets of the investigation.
Comey didn’t even attend her interview and, per his testimony, only read a “summary” of it.
The FBI failed to pursue even the most basic lines of questioning. When Clinton pleaded ignorance about basic classification symbols, agents could’ve produced the State documents she signed acknowledging she was briefed about how to ID and handle classified information at the highest levels.
When Clinton claimed she couldn’t recall “ever contacting” the government computer specialist who set up her unsecured home e-mail server, Comey could’ve produced the same evidence the State inspector general found showing Clinton had in fact paid the aide, Bryan Pagliano, “by check or wire transfer in varying amounts between 2009 and 2013.”
Pagliano was a critical witness. But instead of pressuring him to sing on Clinton and other higher-ups, Comey agreed to give him immunity from criminal prosecution.
Nor did Comey squeeze the Platte River Networks engineer who agents complained gave them “inconsistent statements over the course of three interviews regarding from where on the server he extracted Clinton’s e-mails.”