When FBI Director James Comey let Hillary Clinton off the hook at the conclusion of the investigation into her private email server, many of us had the impression it wasn’t what he truly wanted. After all, he read off a number of facts that proved Hillary to have been a liar on numerous occasions when she gave a defense of her actions and cited copious evidence of her “extreme carelessness.”
So why did the investigation turn out the way it did? While I had assumed that Comey was the one facing political pressure to not indict Hillary from the rest of the FBI, it turns out that most of the FBI thought otherwise.
Via Louder With Crowder:We learned a thing or two about the decision since then. The latest development confirms that tons of FBI and DOJ agents had a strong case against Clinton. So when they found out they wouldn’t be prosecuting? It didn’t go over too well…
To quote from the video: “The decision by Comey and Lynch… [left] the investigative team dismayed and disgusted. More than 100 FBI agents and analysts worked around the clock with six attorneys to investigate the case.”
“No trial level attorney agreed, no agent working on the case agreed – it was a top-down decision,” said the source… “It was unanimous that we all wanted her [Clinton’s] security clearance yanked. The vast majority felt she should be prosecuted.”
“Loretta Lynch simply wants to stay on as [AG] under Clinton, so there is no way she would indict. Every agent and attorney I [spoke] to is embarrassed and has lost total respect for James Comey and Loretta Lynch,” the source said.
We’ve also learned from an email released in the Wikileaks dump that Clinton’s team may have had access to Justice Department employees during the investigation that helped her and her staff receive favorable treatment.
The FBI is now investigating the hack that allowed for that Wikileaks dump to occur — though I’m pretty sure they’ll be able to do their jobs in that investigation.
[Note: This post was authored by Matt Palumbo. Follow him on Twitter @MattPalumbo12]