The ultra corrupt FBI and Obama’s so-called “Justice Department” stuck “side agreements” with two of Hillary Clinton’s aides that limited the searches that could be done on the devices and also allowed Clinton’s aides to completely destroy their laptops after the FBI search was done.
Corrupt FBI & Justice Department “Side Agreements” Allowed Two Clinton Aides To Destroy Laptops & Evidence
The thing is that I seriously doubt that any of Hillary Clinton’s aides’ computers were EVER searched in the first place, and the “agreement” to allow these criminals to destroy the evidence that was contained on their laptops was done to protect them and Hillary Clinton from prosecution and prison.
IF the laptops had nothing incriminating on them, why on Earth would they need to be destroyed? Most normal people would wipe the hard drive (if they didn’t know how they should have asked Hillary, since she is an expert now in destruction of evidence) and then re-install Windows, or what ever operating system they wanted to use.
But no, these criminals wanted to destroy the laptops to keep the evidence out of the hands of a hacker or anyone else that may want to use it to bring down the Clinton Criminal Organization.
“You can call us wrong, but don’t call us weasels … We are not weasels,” – Corrupt FBI Director Weasel James Comey
Comey is wrong again. I think the term “weasels” very accurately describes James Comey and the current sad state of the FBI.
We are even hearing a lot of talk about top officials at the highest level of the FBI who plan to resign over the way Director James Comey protected Hillary Clinton with the sham “investigation” of Hillary’s email crimes.
Just when you think the Hillary email scandal can’t get any more bizarre and corrupt, it does. According to a just released letter from the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Bob Goodlatte (R – Virginia), to Attorney General Lynch, the FBI apparently struck “side agreements” with both Cheryl Mills an Heather Samuelson to “destroy” their “laptops after concluding its search.”
While we parse the letter to understand what basis for action the FBI may have had when pursuing such a course of action, we can’t help but note that the FBI appears to have acted as a co-conspirator in what appears to be an unprecedented case of destruction of key evidence.
Below are some of the key excerpts from the letter (full document attached at the end of this post):
As part of the Judiciary Committee’s ongoing oversight of Secretary Clinton’s unauthorized use of a private email server during her tenure as Secretary of State, the Justice Department (DOJ) provided in camera review’ of certain immunity agreements. After a specific request from the Committee, based on references made in the immunity agreements to certain “side agreements,” DOJ subsequently provided in camera review of those “side agreements” between DOJ, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and Beth Wilkinson, the lawyer representing both Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson. Like many things about this case, these new materials raise more questions than answers. Please provide a written response to the below questions and make DOJ staff available for a briefing on this matter no later than October 10, 2016.
- Why did the FBI agree to destroy both Cheryl Mills’ and Heather Samuelson’s laptops after concluding its search?
- Doesn’t the willingness of Ms. Mills and Ms. Samuelson to have their laptops destroyed by the FBI contradict their claim that the laptops could have been withheld because they contained non-relevant, privileged information? If so, doesn’t that undermine the claim that the side agreements were necessary?
- Please explain why DOJ agreed to limit their search of the Mills and Samuelson laptops to a date no later than January 31, 2015 and therefore give up any opportunity to find evidence related to the destruction of evidence or obstruction of justice related to Secretary Clinton’s unauthorized use of a private email server during her tenure as Secretary of State.
- Why was this time limit necessary when Ms. Mills and Ms. Samuelson were granted immunity for any potential destruction of evidence charges?
- Please confirm whether a grand jury was convened to investigate Secretary Clinton’s unauthorized use of a private email server. Disclosure is authorized under Fed. R. Crim. P. 6(e)(3)(A)(i) and (e)(3)(D).
Of course, since this will be promptly spun as just more “plumes of smoke” we hope people will stop trying to “criminalize behavior that is normal.”
Stand Up To Government Corruption and Hypocrisy – usbacklash.org