The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has refused to produce a variety of documents related to Hillary Clinton’s emails as required by a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, citing a “lack of public interest.”
Did you get that?
Our FBI cited a “lack of public interest” in refusing a FOIA request to produce documents relating to Hillary’s emails.
Why would the FBI take the position that the public isn’t interested?
A new Rasmussen Reports survey found that 54% of likely U.S. voters want the FBI to make public its files on the investigation of Clinton’s unauthorized use of a private email server while she was Secretary of State. Thirty-two percent said that the FBI should not make them public and 14% were undecided.
The public clearly IS interested. The public believes that it’s likely that she broke multiple laws by operating a secret, private email server apart from any government oversight. She went against State Department policy when she chose to keep her emails off of State Department servers and save them on her own system.
A large part of the country believes that Hillary’s reason for maintaining a secret, private email server was so that she could have total control of her email correspondence and could prevent Congress and FOIA requests from accessing them.
“Lack of public interest,” that’s a laugh.
Is it any wonder that much of the U.S. public now thinks that the FBI has apparently become a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Clinton Crime Family, Inc.
All one has to do is examine the past few years to see ample evidence that what was once a federal operation that was above reproach, has become a political entity influenced, if not controlled, by political motives. The agency has been badly tarnished, perhaps beyond recovery. And this most recent FOIA decision is just the latest evidence of the bureau being used for political purposes and controlled by their political masters – most likely, embedded Obama operatives.
In just the past weeks we’ve learned that apparently former FBI Director James Comey made the decision not to refer then democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton for prosecution long before ever interviewing key witnesses. That was months before agents had completed gathering all of the facts and before interviewing Hillary or her closest aides. It was before Bryan Pagliano, Hillary’s guy who set up and maintained the secret server was questioned and before Hillary’s Chief of Staff, Cheryl Mills testified.
In other words, long before the investigation was complete.
Why would the Director of the FBI decide to issue a statement exonerating Secretary Clinton months before the investigation was complete?
Doesn’t that sound like the “fix” was in?
There are (at least) two good reasons for not wanting to release documents relating to Hillary’s email scandal: 1) is to protect the agency from the public knowing how political they had become and, 2) is to protect both Clinton and President Barack Obama from charges arising out of evidence contained in Hillary’s emails.
Something smells really bad here and the stink seems to be coming from our venerated Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Garnet92.
Categories: Political
Pesky Truth 
Great post, Garnet. Looks like we can never underestimate the power and dirtiness of the Deep State.
LikeLike
The FBI is in clear need of a non-partisan investigation and subsequent house cleaning! Partisan politics should be walled off from equal enforcement of the law!
It is clear that Comey and company were far removed from those basic principles, perhaps criminally so. The Special Prosecutor came about from “poisoned fruit” as it is called, thus should be disbanded.
The same is true for the IRS, and we KNOW that criminality occurred there. Heads should roll, and prison terms enforced for those acts.
LikeLike
Two thoughts:
If the FBI has become a political operation, not grounded on our laws, the it has the perfect ability to go after political enemies. This is abhorent.
And 2, why hasn’t FBI Director Wray done anything on this matter? Or maybe he has? I just don’t know anything about him. This little denial of FOIA should blow up in their faces with Wray finding the culprit and firing him/her.
LikeLike
You’re right. I don’t know how honest they REALLY were prior to Obama, but I thought that they were above reproach. During Obama’s administration, there were all sorts of actions that were primarily political because Obama used the Justice, the IRS, the FBI as his own personal strike teams. Those agencies will never be the same.
I don’t know anything about Wray either, but it’s only been a month – we’ll see.
LikeLiked by 1 person
What they’re saying is that they only pursue justice if the public is interested. It no long matters if there were crimes committed that require lengthy investigations and processing large amounts of data. It’s true that people’s interest has been diverted to other issues, but we still want the truth and to see her punished.
As a whole, the public isn’t interested in crimes committed by John Does either, but you can bet they disregard that and go after him with gusto. That’s about the lamest excuse I ever heard of and Sessions needs to get on top of this.
LikeLike
I still can’t believe that Trump and Sessions haven’t drained any part of the swamp – you’d have thought that getting a few honest people in high places in Justice and the FBI could have had some measure of success in fixing this sort of problem. We all know enough about Hillary to know that she needs to be held accountable. If they allow her to “skate” on Trump’s watch, he’ll be no better than her.
He and Sessions need to take hard action to show that Hillary’s kind of lawlessness will no longer be tolerated. Does anyone think that if the democrats had evidence that Trump had done as much as Hillary that he would be allowed to walk free? Especially if democrats were in power – Trump would already be toast.
LikeLike