Here’s one unverified file the feds won’t leak: about Loretta Lynch  

From RealClearInvestigations:

The FBI had little problem leaking “unverified” dirt from Russian sources on Donald Trump and his campaign aides – and even basing FISA wiretaps on it. But according to the Justice Department’s inspector general, the bureau is refusing to allow even members of Congress with top security clearance to see intercepted material alleging political interference by President Obama’s attorney general, Loretta Lynch.

That material – which has been outlined in press reports – consists of unverified accounts intercepted from putative Russian sources in which the head of the Democratic National Committee allegedly implicates the Hillary Clinton campaign and Lynch in a secret deal to fix the Clinton email investigation.

“It is remarkable how this Justice Department is protecting the corruption of the Obama Justice Department,” said Tom Fitton, president of Washington-based watchdog Judicial Watch, which is suing for the material.

Lynch and Clinton officials as well as the DNC chairman at the time, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, have denied the allegations and characterized them as Russian disinformation.

True or false, the material is consequential because it appears to have influenced former FBI Director James B. Comey’s decision to break with bureau protocols because he didn’t trust Lynch. In his recent book, Comey said he took the reins in the Clinton email probe, announcing Clinton should not be indicted, because of a “development still unknown to the American public” that “cast serious doubt” on Lynch’s credibility – clearly the intercepted material.

If the material documents an authentic exchange between Lynch and a Clinton aide, it would appear to be strong evidence that the Obama administration put partisan political considerations ahead of its duty to enforce the law.

Read the whole thing …

Comey casts doubt on judge who slammed Mueller probe

In asserting his views on an investigation he could not “possibly know enough about,” the judge went too far.

From Politico:

Former FBI Director James Comey on Tuesday criticized a judge who voiced skepticism about the prosecution of Paul Manafort, saying the judge’s comments about overstepping were themselves going too far.

“I don’t know how a federal judge could possibly know enough about an investigation … to offer a view like that,” Comey said in an interview with The Washington Post’s Carol Leonnig.

U.S. District Court Judge T.S. Ellis last week told Justice Department prosecutors that he thought the financial crimes charges against the former Trump campaign chairman were really about “getting information that Mr. Manafort can give you that would reflect on Mr. Trump and lead to his prosecution or impeachment or whatever.”

Read the whole thing …

James Comey dismisses GOP report on Russia as ‘political document’

In the former FBI director’s opinion, “special counsel Robert Mueller’s findings about Russia and the 2016 election is what really matters.”

From NBC News:

Former FBI Director James Comey on Sunday dismissed the findings of a GOP report claiming there is no evidence President Donald Trump’s campaign colluded with Russians during the 2016 election. He added that, as a former prosecutor, he has “serious doubts” about Trump’s credibility as a potential witness.

Comey called the recently released report by Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee “a political document” during an interview on “Meet The Press.”

“That is not my understanding of what the facts were before I left the FBI and I think the most important piece of work is the one the special counsel’s doing now,” Comey added.

Trump has seized on the report, tweeting that he believes it proves no collusion existed between his campaign and Russia, calling the investigations a “witch hunt” and “all a big Hoax by the Democrats based on payments and lies.”

Democrats on the committee have called the report evidence of the lengths Republicans will go to shield Trump and his allies from scrutiny.

Asked whether the committee has served a good investigative purpose overall, Comey said, “not that I can see.”

Read the whole thing …

Comey’s book swipes at Trump — but Mueller’s inquiry is the real threat

Trump must be wondering whether the shit that’s happening to him is ever gonna stop.

From The Guardian:

As the fired FBI director makes headlines, the bureau’s raid on the offices of Trump’s lawyer signals peril for his presidency.

The sky began to fall in for Trump on Monday, when FBI agents raided the offices and a hotel room used by Trump’s lawyer Michael Cohen. The raids were a strong sign that prosecutors might soon charge one of Trump’s fiercest loyalists with a serious crime or crimes, legal experts said.

“It’s a disgraceful situation,” Trump said. “It’s a total witch-hunt … It’s an attack on our country, what we all stand for.”

As the implications of those raids continue to sink in, Trump may be lured towards the kind of drastic action that would send fissures through the executive branch and beyond, multiple former White House and justice department officials interviewed by the Guardian said.

“The raid of Michael Cohen’s office was a seismic event, for any presidency,” said Andrew Wright, a former White House associate counsel and a professor at Savannah Law School. “I think he [Cohen] is in very serious trouble. […]

“And sure enough, the president appears to have really come pretty unhinged at that news, so I think that’s incredibly significant.”

Even for a White House that can seem to cycle from crisis to extreme crisis, the current pressure on Trump, and the resulting peril for his presidency and the country, is acute, according to seasoned prosecutors.

“The pressure on the president is actually unimaginable to me,” said Betsy de la Vega, who was a federal prosecutor for more than 20 years.

Read the whole thing …

Comey ‘friend’ who leaked FBI memos now claims to be his attorney

From The Federalist:

A friend of former FBI director James Comey who leaked sensitive FBI memos to The New York Times in the wake of Comey’s firing in 2017 now claims to be Comey’s personal attorney. Daniel Richman, a law professor at Columbia University, told The Federalist via phone on Tuesday afternoon that he was now personally representing Comey.

The revelation comes in the wake of news that Comey was interviewed by the special counsel’s office last year. According to The New York Times, the line of questioning from the office of special counsel Robert Mueller focused on memos that Comey wrote and later leaked after he was fired from his job by President Donald Trump. A review of FBI policies governing the handling of sensitive government documents suggests Comey violated FBI policy by leaking the memos, which were produced on government time, using government equipment, and directly related to his official government responsibilities, according to Comey’s own testimony before Congress.

This new development “raises questions about whether the special counsel may be investigating Comey and Richman for their roles in leaking classified information to the news media.” It could be a tactic to use “attorney-client privilege to shield potentially illegal communications from law enforcement scrutiny.”

Was Lynch coordinating with Comey in the Clinton investigation?

From The Hill:

Former Attorney General Loretta Lynch knew well in advance of FBI Director James Comey’s 2016 press conference that he would recommend against charging Hillary Clinton, according to information turned over to the Senate Homeland Security Committee on Friday.

The revelation was included in 384 pages of text messages exchanged between FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, and it significantly diminishes the credibility of Lynch’s earlier commitment to accept Comey’s recommendation — a commitment she made under the pretense that the two were not coordinating with each other.

And it gets worse. Comey and Lynch reportedly knew that Clinton would never face charges even before the FBI conducted its three-hour interview with Clinton, which was supposedly meant to gather more information into her mishandling of classified information.

Comey and Clinton: Rigged From the Beginning

Fox News contributor Steve Cortes writes:

Newly disclosed evidence that then-FBI Director James Comey began working on a statement to reject criminal charges against former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton months before she and other key witnesses were interviewed by the FBI shows that President Trump was right to fire Comey.

The evidence proves that Trump and his supporters were correct to say throughout the presidential campaign that Washington operates on a “rigged” crony system that serves the interests of the powerful and rewards corporate globalists to the detriment of the American people.

As evidence of the rigged system, voters sided with Trump during the campaign in often citing Clinton’s apparent immunity from consequences regarding her unsavory acts as secretary of state, especially her hidden emails on a private server, as well as corrupt Clinton Foundation dealings.

Given what we learned in recent days about Comey, the investigation he oversaw of Clinton represented the very worst of the rigged process. Instead of acting as an impartial, honest fact-finder on behalf of the American people, Comey behaved like a partisan hack.

The former FBI director’s reprehensible behavior both during and after his tenure surely validates the judgment of President Trump in firing a man totally unfit to oversee our most revered law enforcement agency in our nation.

FBI agents say Comey ‘stood in the way’ of the Clinton email investigation  

FBI agents are increasingly expressing their frustration over Director James Comey’s refusal to recommend “that the Justice Department prosecute Hillary Clinton over her mishandling of classified information.”

According to an interview transcript given to The Daily Caller, provided by an intermediary who spoke to two federal agents with the bureau last Friday, agents are frustrated by Comey’s leadership.

“This is a textbook case where a grand jury should have convened but was not. That is appalling,” an FBI special agent who has worked public corruption and criminal cases said of the decision. “We talk about it in the office and don’t know how Comey can keep going.”

The agent was also surprised that the bureau did not bother to search Clinton’s house during the investigation.

“We didn’t search their house. We always search the house. The search should not just have been for private electronics, which contained classified material, but even for printouts of such material,” he said.

“There should have been a complete search of their residence,” the agent pointed out. “That the FBI did not seize devices is unbelievable. The FBI even seizes devices that have been set on fire.”

Washington D.C. attorney Joe DiGenova says more FBI agents will be talking about Comey’s handling of the Hillary Clinton case “when Congress comes back into session and decides to force them to testify by subpoena.”

He explained, “It’s not. People inside the bureau are furious. They are embarrassed. They feel like they are being led by a hack but more than that that they think he’s a crook. They think he’s fundamentally dishonest. They have no confidence in him. The bureau inside right now is a mess.”

He added, “The most important thing of all is that the agents have decided that they are going to talk.”

The above doesn’t quite equate with what Comey told Congress, that his decision to not recommend that Hillary Clinton be prosecuted was supported by all the agents — without so much as one exception.

Far from going away anytime soon, this story looks set to grow exponentially.