Guest Column: FBI Pros Question Decision Not to Charge Hillary Clinton

If some in the general public were outraged, so were some in the FBI
Excerpt from Sharyl Attkisson column, July 9, 2016

AttkissonThe excerpt below is from Sharyl’s full column referred to by Jon Rappoport in his column, “Inside the FBI: agents’ outrage at Hillary email decision,” July 13, 2016. Rappoport’s column also contains several important observations about the outrageously corrupt behavior of federal officials in the Hillary email scandal. The quote below is from Jon:

“—You’re an FBI agent. You sit and watch television night after night, as a Presidential candidate who should have been brought up on felony charges, and thereby disqualified and scuttled, moves through the land and makes promises about what she’ll do as the next leader of the nation. You sit and watch, deepening your grasp on how the system actually works—”

 This week, FBI Director James Comey testified that Hillary Clinton and her aides had compromised classified information in an extremely careless fashion, exposed it to hostile adversaries, violated public records law, destroyed public documents (some permanently, so that they cannot be forensically recovered) and that Clinton made repeated false statements in public about her actions. But, he concluded, no charges should be filed. Clinton apparently told the FBI she didn’t understand classified markings and all the technology at issue, and that she didn’t know she was doing anything wrong. And the FBI takes her at her word.

Comey is well-respected by politicians in both political parties and by many within his own ranks. But there is new dissent after his Clinton decision, which some FBI insiders found baffling and contrary to normal practices.

“Many people at the FBI are outraged, but cannot speak out,” one insider told me.

Here are some of the observations by FBI professionals who wish to remain anonymous because their opinions could affect their job prospects:

  • Why wasn’t Clinton’s interview recorded?
  • Typically it’s the U.S. Attorney’s office, not FBI agents, deciding whether charges will be filed.
  • “It appears no Grand Jury was empaneled for this investigation,” says an insider.
  • A two-day turnaround between the interview with the target and a decision not to prosecute is “unheard of.”
  • During his Congressional testimony, Comey indicated he didn’t look into Clinton’s false statements.
  • The Director commented that it wouldn’t be fair to charge Clinton for her reckless behavior because no one else had ever been charged by the standard before.

These are all indications that Clinton’s case received uniquely exonerating treatment.

Full Attkisson column here.

Full Rappoport column here.


This post has been read 1060 times!

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *