Jump to content

Bret Baier: FBI Sources Believe Clinton Foundation Case Moving Towards "Likely an Indictment"

Valin

By Valin
in News & Opinion

 Share

Recommended Posts

Valin

Valin

Posted
Posted

fbi_sources_tell_fox_news_indictment_likely_in_clinton_foundation_case.htmlReal Clear Politics:

Tim Hains

November 2, 2016

 

Fox News Channel's Bret Baier reports the latest news about the Clinton Foundation investigation from two sources inside the FBI. He reveals five important new pieces of information in these two short clips:

 

1. The Clinton Foundation investigation is far more expansive than anybody has reported so far and has been going on for more than a year.

 

2. The laptops of Clinton aides Cherryl Mills and Heather Samuelson have not been destroyed, and agents are currently combing through them. The investigation has interviewed several people twice, and plans to interview some for a third time.

 

3. Agents have found emails believed to have originated on Hillary Clinton's secret server on Anthony Weiner's laptop. They say the emails are not duplicates and could potentially be classified in nature.

 

4. Sources within the FBI have told him that an indictment is "likely" in the case of pay-for-play at the Clinton Foundation, "barring some obstruction in some way" from the Justice Department.

 

5. FBI sources say with 99% accuracy that Hillary Clinton's server has been hacked by at least five foreign intelligence agencies, and that information had been taken from it.

 

Transcript:

 

(Snip)

 

___________________________________________________________________

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfsEEfNUk7o

 

 


  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Valin

Valin

Posted
  • Author
Posted

The Clinton E-mails Are Critical to the Clinton Foundation InvestigationWhy is Lynch rushing the search for classified e-mails but blocking the pay-to-play corruption probe?
Andrew C. McCarthy
November 1, 2016

The Wall Street Journal’s report that, for over a year, the FBI has been investigating the Clinton Foundation for potential financial crimes and influence peddling is, as Rich Lowry said Monday, a blockbuster. As I argued over the weekend, the manner in which the State Department was put in the service of the Foundation during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as secretary is shocking. It is suggestive of a pattern of pay-to-play bribery, the monetizing of political influence, fraud, and obstruction of justice that the Justice Department should be investigating as a possible RICO conspiracy under the federal anti-racketeering laws.

 

(Snip)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Geee

Geee

Posted
Posted

OBAMA DOJ: HANDMAIDEN OF CLINTON CORRUPTION

 

The Obama Department of Justice has been corruptly aiding and abetting the Democratic Party’s presidential nominee, Hillary Clinton, to escape legal accountability for her actions. From Attorney General Loretta Lynch on down through the Justice Department’s political ranks, the Department has blocked the FBI from searching for the truth and following the evidence of potential criminality to its logical conclusion. Whether it is Hillary’s use of a private e-mail server while serving as Secretary of State or her involvement in the pay-for-play Clinton enterprise known as the Clinton Foundation, the Obama administration is applying a banana republic-style double standard to pervert justice and the rule of law in order to shield her.

 

Lynch and President Obama were reportedly furious with FBI Director James Comey for sending a letter to Congress on October 28th indicating that new evidence potentially pertinent to the e-mail case had come to light, which required further investigation. This evidence consisted of a batch of e-mails FBI investigators had found on one or more computers belonging to Anthony Weiner, Clinton confidante Huma Abedin’s estranged husband, while they were searching for evidence in an unrelated case involving Weiner’s alleged sexting to an underage girl. Comey sent his letter after months of agonizing over his previous decision to let Hillary off the hook in the e-mail case last July. He was said by a source close to him to have been particularly disturbed by the mounting number of resignation letters from FBI agents who felt betrayed by that decision.

 

Department of Justice officials had leaned on Comey not to send the letter to Congress, claiming that it would violate Department protocols and procedures against taking any action that could be perceived as interfering with the upcoming presidential election. To his credit, Comey ignored the Department officials’ objections, claiming he had an obligation to keep the Congress and the public informed of any potentially significant new developments in the case.Scissors-32x32.png

 

http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/264705/obama-doj-handmaiden-clinton-corruption-joseph-klein

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
clearvision

clearvision

Posted
Posted

CBS is dragged in kicking and screaming tonight. They now say missing emails from her time at Dept of State are on Weiner's device.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
clearvision

clearvision

Posted
Posted

So we have the All Bill Clinton, the Need Bill Clinton, and the Clinton News Network against the Clinton BS network and the ... OK I can't come up with one for FOX....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Valin

Valin

Posted
  • Author
Posted

 

More From My Recently Retired, Long Time Federal Prosecutor, “Old Hand.”

Friday, November 4, 2016 | posted by Hugh Hewitt

 

(Snip)

 

A few days back I posted some emails from my long time, not-inside-the-Beltway friend and recently retired federal prosecutor. Let’s call the prosecutor “The Old Hand.” So yesterday The Old Hand lays down the files and reflected on the 48 hours of leaks pouring out of the FBI and DOJ:

In (almost) reverse order –I am saving a non-prosecutorial kicker for last. Read from the bottom up of the four if you want to read them in the order I received them:

 

(Snip)

 

Pete Williams in your shop now throwing cold water on the WSJ and Fox News (what about WaPo?), saying his sources are telling him that there is no active investigation into Clinton Foundation. I told you the leaks would be back and forth this week. Yesterday the FBI was leaking about what they were doing on the Foundation, and how the Weiner computer might be significant, and today DOJ fights back saying they arent’ doing anything.

Williams appeared on MSNBC with Chuck Todd.

 

Its clear from Williams comments that his sources are from inside DOJ. He’s just basically reporting the comments of the Public Integrity Section prosecutors who didn’t think much of the evidence presented to them by the FBI last February, and who thought they — along with the EDNY prosecutors — had shut the investigation down, only to later learn that the NY FBI agents were still pursuing information.

Its all semantic games. The prosecutors don’t think there is an “investigation” if they aren’t on board, because the FBI can’t go anywhere with what they have if the prosecutors turn them down.

The FBI thinks they are solely in charge of the “investigation” phase, and when they turn to the prosecutors its for the purpose of seeking an indictment with the evidence they present. Its only at that stage that the prosecutors get to voice an opinion.

 

An “Old School” FBI agent I met in the early 90s when I first started told me one time — “When I’m done with my investigation, I’ll call you. If I need your help, I’ll call you. If I want your input, I’ll call you. There’s really no reason for you to ever call me.”

But over the last 15 years, prosecutors have taken on more of a roll of “case supervisor”, and direct every thing the agents do. They expect the agents to follow instructions, as if the agents worked for them. Some agents like that arrangement — especially the ones who don’t like to think for themselves, and prefer to just take directions.

So what Pete Williams is reporting is the POV of prosecutors in DOJ with the opinion that “The FBI Agents don’t really understand that they are not in charge here — we are. If we say there’s no investigation, then there’s no investigation.”

It will be interesting to see how Comey deals with this as a former prosecutor.

 

 

3. My guess on one thing they learned in the 2 weeks that was significant.

They likely “de-duped” the new emails by meta data comparison against the emails they already had. De-duplification for Steeler fans (I’m a Raiders fan).

That means they could likely index the new emails by sender/receiver/date, etc., and then used that data against the sender/receiver/date meta data in the emails they reviewed the first time around, and learn quickly if it was likely that Weiner’s computer had Abedin/Clinton emails that were new.

They could then run a key terms search function on the new emails and get a list of positive hits for potential classified information. Because they didn’t really need a warrant at that point to read the emails — at least not with respect to Clinton — my guess is that the agents then sampled those positive hits to see what they found.

I think that’s a good guess about what Comey got back after 2 weeks

 

4. New revelation yesterday in WSJ and now WaPo that Comey waited 2 weeks after first learning of emails to send letter to Cong. last Friday, and in that time had the agents glean everything they could from the meta data and then get back to him, makes me rock-solid in my belief that his letter to Congress was done for the purpose of overcoming DOJ’s roadblocks to getting a warrant.

He knew there were no warrants in the first go-round, and that was a matter of great embarrassment when he testified about the investigation before Congress. He was not going to let that happen again, and he knew that by going public there was no way the Clinton partisans in DOJ who were obstructing the case would be able to continue doing so 10 days before the election. And he was exactly correct.

But think about “why” he wanted a warrant, from a prosecutorial standpoint — and he is actually standing-in for DOJ prosecutors in the way he’s conducting this.

Legally, there was nothing preventing the FBI from looking at all the emails on the laptop without a warrant. If there was a 4th amendment violation in doing so, the only person who could assert that right in an effort to have the evidence suppressed is a person who had an expectation of privacy in the location where the evidence was found. This is Weiner’s laptop — he’s got the most obvious 4th amendment expectation with regard to its contents. Hillary Clinton has no expectation of privacy with regard to the contents in Weiners laptop, and it makes no difference that the emails came from her or were at one point on her server, which she would have an expectation of privacy over.

Here is a real world example — I had a fraud case where the defendant was in jail on other charges. We didn’t have enough evidence to get a search warrant for the defendant’s office. I got a call about 2 months after the guy had been in jail from the landlord of the guy’s office. He said the guy was 4 months behind on his rent for his office and he wanted to evict him, but didn’t want to interfere with the investigation. I told him to do in the ordinary course of business what he would do to any other tenant under the same circumstances. He said he would change the lock and put all the tenant’s property on the curb for the tenant to pick up or the garbage company to haul away. I told him to do whatever he would normally, do, but just give the FBI a call on the day he planned on doing so.

Once the defendant’s stuff was on the curb, he lost his expectation of privacy since the public at large could pick through all his stuff and take what they wanted. For legal purposes it was “abandoned” property. MY agents were on the scene when the stuff was being placed on the curb, and they loaded up all the file cabinets, computers, etc., and hauled them away. No warrant necessary.

So Comey didn’t a warrant for either the email case or the Foundation investigation — because the Clintons didn’t have an expectation of privacy in Weiner’s laptop so they would have lacked standing to assert a violation of Weiner’s 4th Amendment rights.

For Abedin its a closer call since they were married at the time she used it, and it was in their shared residence. But its possible that when she moved she abandoned that expectation of privacy. That’s a question that would need to be researched.

He truly only needed another warrant for Weiner’s laptop if they suspected there was evidence on the laptop of other crimes by Weiner which would have been beyond the scope of their original authorized search. But even in that instance, Weiner was cooperating and would have likely just provided consent.

So, why does Comey lay the ground work for, and then publicly go after a warrant???? So he can breach that firewall at DOJ, and knock down the obstacles that DOJ’s partisans had put in front of the investigations of the Clintons by denying the agents the tools they regularly get in the same kinds of investigations.

I predicted for you over the weekend that this week would be a “leak-fest”. And Ed Rendell was exactly correct in his warning to the Clintons to not attack the FBI. Today’s articles in the WSJ and WaPo on the nature and extent of the investigations into the Clinton Foundation, and the history of obstruction from DOJ attorneys and the EDNY, is “payback” from inside the Bureau.

 

(Snip)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Valin

Valin

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Bret Baier corrects
Scott Johnson
Nov. 5 2016

Bret Baier opened this past Wednesday night’s edition of Special Report with several scoops on the progress of the FBI investigations of Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation. Baier slightly expanded on his scoops in an interview with Brit Hume on On the Record, the video and transcript of which are posted here. I posted the video of Baier reporting his scoops in “Analyze this.” Paul Mirengoff commented on Baier’s report in this post.

(Snip)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Valin

Valin

Posted
  • Author
Posted

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hw4DM98z8Tw

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
  • 1715732900
×
×
  • Create New...