If you’re going to conduct a legitimate investigation, it’s probably a good idea to wait until all the facts come in before actually coming to a conclusion, much less drafting a statement about the decision you plan to make.
Of course, if the ‘fix is in,’ why not go ahead and get your paperwork over with, right?
James Comey has yet again found himself in the national spotlight, this time over memos obtained by the Senate Judiciary Committee in their role of investigating Comey’s May 9 firing which show that the former FBI director had begun drafting a statement exonerating Hillary Clinton before all witnesses had even been interviewed.
In fact, the exoneration statement was so premature that the FBI hadn’t even interviewed Clinton herself yet.
Either Comey and his cohorts had a crystal ball, or the so-called ‘investigation’ into Clinton’s emails was corrupt to the core.
The revelations come from interview transcripts of Comey’s chief of staff, James Rybicki, and FBI counsel Trisha Anderson, which were given last Fall as a part of an Office of Special Counsel investigation into the FBI’s role in investigating Clinton’s emails.
Even though the transcripts are heavily redacted, they still show that the former FBI director began work on an exoneration announcement in either April or May of 2016, when the FBI had yet to interview 17 witnesses, including Clinton herself.
When was Clinton eventually interviewed? July 2, three days before Comey’s big reveal.
From the Daily Caller:
In a letter to the FBI, Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley and South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham also noted that Comey’s draft was prepared even before two Clinton aides, Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson, had reached what the two Republicans called a “highly unusual” immunity deal with the Justice Department.
The limited immunity deal prohibited investigators and prosecutors from asking about conversations between the two Clinton aides and Platte River Networks, a Denver-based tech firm that maintained Clinton’s server after she left the State Department.
Which begs the question:
Grassley and Graham, like the rest of us, wonder how Comey could have possibly performed an impartial investigation if his mind seems to have already been made up.
“Conclusion first, fact-gathering second — that’s no way to run an investigation,” the senators wrote to the FBI. “The FBI should be held to a higher standard than that, especially in a matter of such great public interest and controversy. The outcome of an investigation should not be prejudged while FBI agents are still hard at work trying to gather the facts.”
Unclear whether the FBI agents investigating the case were aware that Comey had already decided on the outcome while their work was ongoing pic.twitter.com/arJu2HvnMM
— Nick Short (@PoliticalShort) August 31, 2017
Op-ed views and opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of BizPac Review.
Wake up right! Receive our free morning news blast HERE
Latest posts by Scott Morefield (see all)
- West Point accepts Parkland student’s application to military academy after his tragic death - February 21, 2018
- Nancy Pelosi is in middle of grandstanding at Arizona townhall when question yelled from audience grinds it to a halt - February 21, 2018
- Columbine survivor blows media’s plan to exploit naive students – here’s what happens when they grow up - February 20, 2018