Outrageous political bias determined the course of the Clinton 'investigation'

Outrageous political bias determined the course of the Clinton 'investigation'
© Getty Images

If we glean anything from the Department of Justice (DOJ) Report of the Inspector General (IG), it is that some FBI agents not only wanted Hillary ClintonHillary Diane Rodham ClintonGOP struggles with retirement wave Overnight Energy: Trump to revoke California's tailpipe waiver | Democrats propose bill to revoke Trump endangered species rollback | Trump officials finalize rule allowing fewer inspectors at pork plants Mark Mellman: The most important moment in history? MORE to be the next president but that this outcome dictated the investigation, not the other way around. In addition to the outright statements of loathing of candidate Donald Trump and blind admiration for candidate Clinton, the FBI and DOJ approached all things Clinton with kid gloves — a double standard explained solely by political favoritism.

Did anyone admit outright that “we did this to cover for Hillary Clinton?” No, but no one should have expected a confession from any of this crowd; they knew the inspector general could not prosecute them.


First, look at just a few of the quotes reflecting what they really thought of Trump, against whom they were simultaneously ramping up the bogus “Russia-collusion” investigation as a priority over the thousands of State Department emails on the laptop in Clinton aide Huma Abedin’s home with Anthony Weiner.


At least five FBI agents working on the Clinton “matter” despised Donald Trump.  They wanted to "protect the country from that menace.” They viewed anyone who voted for "Donald Drumpf" as "an absolute … idiot," especially the "retarded" supporters in Ohio.  It went on and on.

The IG recognized that “when one senior FBI official, (Peter) Strzok, who was helping to lead the Russia investigation at the time, conveys in a text message to another senior FBI official, (Lisa) Page, that ‘we’ll stop’ candidate Trump from being elected — after other extensive text messages between the two disparaging candidate Trump — it is not only indicative of a biased state of mind but, even more seriously, implies a willingness to take official action to impact the presidential candidate’s electoral prospects.”

Astonishingly, the “we’ll stop” text was revealed for the first time Thursday — despite relentless efforts by Congress to obtain all the messages for months. Apparently Strzok and Page had deleted it — as it took the IG’s forensics team until May of this year to find it.

Then there’s the glaring disparity in the way the DOJ and the FBI treated Clinton, her colleagues and her attorneys versus the way they have treated President TrumpDonald John TrumpJimmy Carter: 'I hope there's an age limit' on presidency White House fires DHS general counsel: report Trump to cap California trip with visit to the border MORE, his lawyers and associates.

Irrefutable facts establish that Clinton had classified information on her private server and it was accessed by a foreign power. That is a violation of the Espionage Act (18 U.S.C. Section 793), plain and simple.

FBI agents wanted to use subpoenas and search warrants because they caught the Hillary team hiding things, but they never got those subpoenas and search warrants. Not a single witness was brought before a federal grand jury. Paul Combetta, the guy who set up Clinton’s server and then wiped it clean, not only lied to the FBI but destroyed the evidence after Congress subpoenaed it. They gave him immunity. I’ll bet Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos would have taken that deal.

Clinton told everyone she set up the private server because she wanted to use only one device. The truth, reflected in the IG’s report, is that she had 13 devices — identified by the FBI from her phone records. Somehow, Clinton’s multiple attorneys “were unable to locate” any of them. Notably, the inspector general documented that FBI agents believed Clinton’s attorneys “were not forthcoming about the existence of potential sources of evidence.” Translation: They thought her lawyers were lying and hiding evidence.

Of course, then, the FBI executed a search warrant on Mrs. Clinton’s home, offices and the offices of her attorneys, right? No.

Yet, we’ve all heard the news of FBI agents executing search warrants and raiding the home, office and hotel room of Michael Cohen, the personal attorney of the president of the United States.

And don’t forget Paul ManafortPaul John ManafortLewandowski refuses to say whether Trump has offered him a pardon Democrats return to a battered Trump Manafort's legal team argues NY prosecution constitutes double jeopardy MORE. The FBI did not hesitate a minute to raid his home in the early morning, enter without warning, terrify him and his wife as they awoke to armed agents in their bedroom, then searched him and his wife in their bed.

Not only were no search warrants executed to seize anything important to the Clinton “investigation,” but the FBI only looked at laptops under terms dictated by Cheryl Mills, Heather Samuelson and other counsel for Clinton pursuant to “consent agreements.” I’ll bet Paul Manafort would have liked to have had one of those.

Here’s another thing that won’t square: FBI agents who interviewed Trump national security adviser and retired Army general Michael Flynn thought he was being truthful; both McCabe and Comey testified under oath to Congress that was the case. Nonetheless, Gen. Flynn has been bludgeoned into a guilty plea by special counsel Robert MuellerRobert (Bob) Swan MuellerFox's Cavuto roasts Trump over criticism of network Mueller report fades from political conversation Trump calls for probe of Obama book deal MORE’s hit squad for lying to the FBI in violation of 18 USC 1001.

However, according to the inspector general, the FBI agents who interviewed Clinton found her “hard to impossible” to believe. Not even James ComeyJames Brien ComeyWe've lost sight of the real scandal Former Obama officials willing to testify on McCabe's behalf: report House Democrats seeking Sessions's testimony in impeachment probe MORE believed her, but she walked free.

At bottom, there is only one explanation for the blatant disparity. The people in power in the FBI and DOJ wanted and expected Hillary Clinton to be the next president; they expressly said so. Their conduct created the illusion of an investigation, but it was never intended to result in a prosecution that might impede their shared desire and objective for her to reign supreme.

Sidney Powell is a former federal prosecutor and appellate section chief, serving 10 years in three districts, and the author of “Licensed to Lie: Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice.” She is a senior advisor for America First Policies, a political action committee supporting President Trump's policy agenda, and a fellow at the London Center for Policy Research, based at King’s College in New York City, which examines national security, energy, risk-analysis and other public policy issues.