To the amazement of probably even Clinton herself, the FBI recommended this morning to not indict former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on charges of mishandling classified emails during her tenure in the State Department. The recommendation however didn’t stop FBI Director James Comey from lambasting her, calling her actions “extremely careless.” What amazes me most about the FBI’s conclusion isn’t the verdict itself. Rather it’s the apparent contradiction between what the FBI uncovered during its investigation and their final decision to recommend exoneration.
Before getting into how and why they reached this conclusion, here’s a timeline compiled by Sharyl Attkisson of pertinent events in Clinton’s investigation. Dates and events in this piece are based on this timeline.
The trouble for me begins in the latter half of the timeline; when on May 25 the Inspector General found that Clinton violated federal records law and that Clinton’s emails were already under attack by hackers. A month later, on the June 27, Attorney General Loretta Lynch was caught having a meeting with Bill Clinton at a Phoenix airport. While both her and Bill Clinton claim the meeting was spontaneous and social the timing is simply impeccable, for it was less than a week before Hillary Clinton’s interview with the FBI and only 8 days before the shocking conclusion of the investigation. Loretta Lynch, following flak pressure for her meeting with Clinton a few days before, on July 1 announced she would accept whatever recommendation the FBI made regarding Clinton’s emails. It was clear at this point that Lynch was not only aware of the direction of the investigation but also hoped to exonerate herself before the FBI acquitting Clinton of any criminal wrongdoing. On the July 5, FBI Director James Comey finally announces Clinton’s vindication.
The FBI’s announcement, of course, comes in the same breath that Hillary Clinton lied to the American people time and time again. Comey’s statement included what New York Times writers Mark Landler and Eric Lichtbau called “the groundwork for…a legal charge.” After listing details including 110 classified emails unlawfully on Clinton’s private server, several thousand emails withheld by Clinton’s team, evidence her emails could’ve been under foreign attack, and that Clinton used multiple vulnerable servers for her professional emails, the legal charge never came. Instead Comey recommended that Clinton not be indicted and that no “reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.”
At this point the pieces come together: both Lynch and Comey have no choice but to not indict her. Politically speaking, both have everything to lose if they choose to pursue criminal charges. If they indict her, Clinton either loses the election or she resents them and they both lose their jobs next year. Whereas if they exonerate her, both not only keep their jobs with a Clinton win but their prospects for higher appointment open wide. The execution of the plan is even simpler than it seems. Firstly, Lynch is seen with Bill Clinton in late June. Although receiving lots of soon-to-be forgotten criticism, this opens Lynch to create the appearance that her decision is handcuffed to the FBI’s recommendation. When the FBI recommends non-indictment, Lynch’s hands are washed of wrong doing and both Lynch and Comey are ripe for promotions or at least retention next year.
What should be most alarming and disgusting for the American people, however, is not that the conspiracy happened; it’s that it was done so blatantly under our noses. She lied to and indoctrinated an entire electorate and despite the FBI Director himself heavily criticizing her conduct as Secretary of State — going so far as to say that she was actually in violation of Federal statutes — the woman who is responsible for the unnecessary death of Americans in Benghazi and overall weakening of our national security due to gross negligence will most likely be our next president. But anyone but Trump, right?