Fired FBI Director James Comey prematurely closed the investigation into Hillary Clinton‘s email server based on political motivations and lied to the American people when he claimed the bureau had “reviewed all of the communications” found on Anthony Weiner‘s laptop, according to Real Clear Investigations. And, unsurprising to many, there’s largely a media blackout on this bombshell report.
The damning report from RCI’s Paul Sperry makes the compelling argument that evidence appears to show Comey closed the investigation before investigators had reviewed a vast majority of the communications on Weiner’s laptop, many of which featured classified information from Clinton and her top ally Huma Abedin, who is married to Weiner and recently filed for a divorce after he pleaded guilty to sending sexually explicit text messages to a minor.
Sperry’s premise is simple: how did the FBI review and analyze hundreds of thousands of emails found on Weiner’s laptop in just a few weeks?
According to a lengthy investigative report from Sperry, they didn’t — and evidence appears to show that Comey assuring the American public that a thorough investigation was completed is a complete lie.
Comey later told Congress that “thanks to the wizardry of our technology,” the FBI was able to eliminate the vast majority of messages as “duplicates” of emails they’d previously seen. Tireless agents, he claimed, then worked “night after night after night” to scrutinize the remaining material.
But virtually none of his account was true, a growing body of evidence reveals.
In fact, a technical glitch prevented FBI technicians from accurately comparing the new emails with the old emails. Only 3,077 of the 694,000 emails were directly reviewed for classified or incriminating information. Three FBI officials completed that work in a single 12-hour spurt the day before Comey again cleared Clinton of criminal charges.
Sperry draws attention to the fact that the “extremely narrow” review of just a tiny portion of the emails found that Clinton and Abedin had sent and received countless emails that contained classified information. In fact, many of the classified emails found on Weiner‘s laptop were traced back to Clinton’s private email server, which Comey admitted was hidden in the basement of her home and also had hundreds of emails with classified information on it.
“Contradicting Comey’s testimony, this included highly sensitive information dealing with Israel and the U.S.-designated terrorist group Hamas,” Sperry reports. “The former secretary of state, however, was never confronted with the sensitive new information and it was never analyzed for damage to national security.”
So, Abedin and Clinton were sending and receiving classified emails from State Department computers to Clinton’s unsecured email server and Weiner’s private, also non-secure laptop.
And, the FBI found a ton of classified emails on Weiner’s laptop in the small fraction of records that they did analyze. Imagine how many more possibly incriminating emails could have been found if Comey allowed investigators to do their job and review all of the information.
Sperry also notes that the FBI allegedly never referred the matter to U.S. intelligence agencies, which is required by federal law:
Even though the unique classified material was improperly stored and transmitted on an unsecured device, the FBI did not refer the matter to U.S. intelligence agencies to determine if national security had been compromised, as required under a federally mandated “damage assessment” directive.
The newly discovered classified material “was never previously sent out to the relevant original classification authorities for security review,” the official, who spoke to RealClearInvestigations on the condition of anonymity, said.
Sperry rounds out his bombshell report by revealing that critical aspects of the investigation remained open when Comey prematurely announced that he was wrapping it up in front of Congress just prior to the 2016 presidential election.
“One career FBI special agent involved in the case complained to New York colleagues that officials in Washington tried to ‘bury’ the new trove of evidence, which he believed contained the full archive of Clinton’s emails — including long-sought missing messages from her first months at the State Department,” Sperry writes.
“There was no real investigation and no real search,” said FBI veteran Michael Biasello. “It was all just show — eyewash — to make it look like there was an investigation before the election.”
So what does it all mean?
Sperry’s report makes a strong case that Comey concluded the bureau’s investigation into Weiner’s laptop just a few weeks into the probe. In the tiny fractions of emails the agency did a review, they found several emails from Clinton and Abedin that contained classified information.
Many argue that Comey closed the investigation because the election was less than two weeks away, and he didn’t want it to harm Clinton’s campaign, who he more than likely believed was going to win and become the next president.
It would appear that he abused his power, closed an investigation before it was even close to being concluded, and gave Clinton and Abedin a pass for breaking the law and mishandling classified information because he apparently wanted to protect Clinton.
Wherever it might be, there could be a treasure trove of evidence of Clinton and her allies potentially committing serious federal crimes — ranging from obstruction of justice to espionage — and Comey apparently never allowed the bureau to make that determination.