There May Be Another Shoe To Drop

On Wednesday, Fox News reported a recent comment by FBI Director James Comey about the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s emails. Mrs. Clinton has repeatedly stated while on the campaign trail that the FBI is conducting a mere “security inquiry.”

The article at Fox News reported:

But when asked Wednesday by Fox News about Clinton’s characterization of the bureau’s probe, FBI Director James Comey said he doesn’t know what “security inquiry” means — adding, “We’re conducting an investigation. … That’s what we do.”

The FBI director reiterated that he’s “not familiar with the term security inquiry” when told that is the phrase Clinton has used.

As for the timeline for the investigation, Comey, during a briefing with reporters, said he prefers doing the investigation “well” over promptly and said he’s not “tethered” to a schedule.

The people that I know who have held security clearances and handled classified material have all said that there is no question that Mrs. Clinton broke a number of laws during her time as Secretary of State. It will be very interesting to see if she is ever held accountable for her actions.

Some Of Our Justice Department Actually Works

Yesterday Scott Johnson posted an article at Power Line about the ongoing investigation of Hillary Clinton’s emails. Scott Johnson is an attorney and understands what words mean when they are carefully used.

A few highlights from the article:

On the rare occasions when she is asked about the FBI investigation arising from her use of an insecure email server to conduct official business as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton refers to it as “a security review.” It is, moreover, “a security review” that “was requested,” as though the FBI is doing someone a favor.

…Clinton makes it sound routine. The FBI, however, does not perform “security reviews.” It conducts criminal investigations. Its handling of the Clinton email matter clearly constitutes a criminal investigation.

Yesterday FBI Director James Comey was questioned about the investigation by Representative Steve Chabot.

This is Director Comey’s response:

“As you know we don’t talk about our investigations. What I can assure you is that I am very close, personally, to that investigation to ensure that we have the resources we need including people and technology. And that it is done the way the FBI tries to do all of its work: independently, competently, and promptly. That’s our goal and I’m confident that it’s being done that way but I can’t give you any more details than that.”

In the article at Power Line, Scott Johnson notes that Director Comey is taking responsibility for the investigation. Because Director Comey has a reputation for being an honest man, this could get interesting. I have never believed that Hillary Clinton would pay any price for mishandling classified information. I hope I am wrong. Director Comey’s statement is encouraging.

Is The Justice Department Just?

The American Thinker posted an article today about some recent remarks made by White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest. In what I am sure was an innocent attempt to blunt the force of new revelations about Hillary Clinton and her emails, Mr. Earnest stated, “That will be a decision made by the Department of Justice and prosecutors over there. What I know that some officials over there have said is that she is not a target of the investigation. So that does not seem to be the direction that it’s trending. But I’m certainly not going to weigh in on a decision or in that process in any way. That is a decision to be made solely by independent prosecutors but again, based on what we know from the Department of Justice, it does not seem to be headed in that direction.”

There are some problems with this statement. How do ‘we’ know anything from the Department of Justice?

The article reminds us:

It would be entirely improper for the White House to be in communication with the Justice Department over an ongoing criminal investigation. This would constitute political interference. A congressional committee could well issue a subpoena for Earnest, which would raise the Watergate flag when executive privilege likely would be claimed.

Second, this claim is likely to infuriate the FBI and those DoJ prosecutors with integrity. The normally staid ace reporter Catherine Herridge used the expression “super pissed off” to describe it to Greta Van Susteren.

There are people of integrity working in our government. I suspect they are having a very difficult time right now. I wish this story would go away. I am tired of it, as I am sure most Americans are, but there is the concept of ‘equal justice under the law’ which on the surface seems to have been violated. That aspect of this needs to be investigated, along with finding out what damage was done by the mishandling of classified information that Secretary of State Clinton exhibited.

Why Didn’t They Just Send Him A Fed-Ex Package?

Fed-Ex seems to have the ability to deliver a package to anyone anywhere in the world. They are a whiz at locating people. The FBI should have contacted them to arrange an interview with one of the suspects in the Benghazi attack.

Mediaite reported yesterday that CNN had interviewed Ahmed Abdu Khattala.

The article states:

Khattala told Damon that no one from either the Libyan or American governments has contacted him asking for his take on the events of that deadly night in 2012. “Even the investigative team did not try to contact me,” he said of the FBI team that traveled to Libya in the wake of the attack.

Damon said that Khattala told her that he would be happy to speak with American investigators about what happened on the night of the Benghazi attack. She stressed, however, that he would not voluntarily submit to interrogation.

CNN posted an article today about their success in locating a possible suspect in the Benghazi attack. The article states:

Eight GOP lawmakers are asking that incoming FBI Director James Comey brief Congress within 30 days about the investigation. They say the administration’s inquiry into the September 11, 2011, attacks in Libya has been “simply unacceptable,” according to a draft letter obtained by CNN.

“One of the pertinent questions today is why we have not captured or killed the terrorist who committed these attacks?” Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, told reporters. “News out today that CNN was able to go in and talk to one of the suspected terrorists, how come the military hasn’t been able to get after them and capture or kill the people? How come the FBI isn’t doing this and yet CNN is?”

It is really pathetic that CNN spends two hours interviewing someone who may be connected with the attack on Benghazi and the FBI doesn’t seem to be interested in talking to the person.

It has been almost a year since the attack on Benghazi. Congress is right to demand more information from the FBI regarding the investigation. Hopefully, someone at the FBI will provide that information. Unfortunately the Obama Administration has not been kind to whistleblowers when they reveal things that are unfavorable to the administration, so it is a safe bet that we will not find the people responsible for the attack on Benghazi until we have a totally different administration in Washington.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta