Plot Thickens: Analyst on Clinton, Alleged FBI Quid Pro Quo and Trump ‘Ouster’
Plot Thickens: Analyst on Clinton, Alleged FBI Quid Pro Quo and Trump ‘Ouster’ by Ekaterina Blinova for Sputnik News
New documents obtained by Judicial Watch and the bombshell interview with former acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe have shed new light on a double standard approach towards Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump on the part of high-ranking FBI officials, Wall Street analyst Сharles Ortel told Sputnik.
“The FBI must be run outside of partisan political considerations — yet, examination of FBI conduct tied to questionable and deeply suspicious activities of the Clintons suggests a two tier approach”, says Wall Street analyst and investigative journalist Charles Ortel, commenting on the Judicial Watch’s release of the Clinton emailgate documents.
On 11 February, Judicial Watch (JW), a conservative watchdog group, signalled that it had received 215 pages of records from the US Department of Justice.
The documents indicated that former FBI General Counsel James Baker had discussed the federal agency’s Clinton email investigation with Hillary Clinton’s lawyer, David Kendall. The Baker-Kendall email exchange followed then FBI chief James Comey’s 28 October 2016 announcement of the discovery of new emails on a laptop belonging to Anthony Weiner, the husband of the Clinton campaign’s then vice president, Huma Abedin. Kendall reached out to Baker and lashed out at the FBI for its “tantalizingly ambiguous” statement.
“It is big news that, just days before the presidential election, Hillary Clinton’s personal lawyer pressured the top lawyer for the FBI on the infamous Weiner laptop emails”, stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Earlier, Fox News turned the spotlight on Baker’s testimony, which said that the former FBI general counsel had personally taken part in securing a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant to spy on then Donald Trump aide Carter Page. Baker admitted that the practice was “unusual”.
The records obtained by JW also shed light on the apparent “quid pro quo” deal offered by the Obama administration. Former FBI attorney Lisa Page wrote on 13 October 2016 that US State Department officials had offered the FBI more legal attaché positions “if it would downgrade a redaction in an email found during the Hillary Clinton email investigation ‘from classified to something else'”.
— Tom Fitton (@TomFitton) February 12, 2019
“The most significant set of issues I see from the latest JW release is that certain persons may have been acting on behalf of unknown interests to limit the potential damage of an FBI investigation by offering the FBI perceived benefits (additional foreign locations for FBI staff) if the FBI agreed to downgrade the status of certain emails found on the Weiner laptop”, Ortel said commenting on the issue.
He highlighted that the latest trove of documents released by JW should be examined in the context of:
1) FBI Vault files on potential mishandling of classified information by Hillary Clinton;
2) An FBI memo released on 3 October 2016 and saying that some 340,000 emails on the Weiner laptop contained “a significant number of emails between Huma Abedin and Hillary Clinton”;
3) A warrant obtained 30 October 2016 to search the contents of the Weiner/Abedin laptop;
4) And, finally, US political commentator Paul Sperry’s findings showing that the FBI may have only reviewed 3,077 out of hundreds of thousands of the aforementioned emails.