קלינטאן אינוועסטיגעישן און לעגאלע פראבלעמען

[רה''ק דקהל פורים]

וואס גענוי איז די חילוק צווישן עקסטריעם קעירלעסנעס און גראוס נעגלידזשענס?

[SPUSMN]

WOW WOW WOW
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/3589 ... -on-emails

פאר די משומרים (אשריכם!): דא שטייט אז קאומי האט זיך געהאט אנגעגרייט צו זאגן אז קלינטאן איז זיך באגאנגען מיט 'גראוס נעגלידזשענס' מיט די אימעילס. צום סוף איז עס געטוישט געווארן צו 'עקסטריעם קעירלעסנעס.

די וויכטיגקייט פונ'ם טויש איז אז אינ'ם געזעץ וואס פארבאט נאכלעסיגקייט אין באהאנדלען קלאספיצירטע דאקומענטן שטייט דער לשון 'גראוס נעגלידזשענס'.

אבער למען האמת איז עס נישט קיין סקאנדאל ווייל גראוס נעגלידזשענס און עקסטריעם קעירלעסנעס זענען גענוי די זעלבע זאך און קאומי האט איר באפרייט צוליב דעם אויסגעטראכטן תירוץ פון אינטענט, אבער עס ווייזט יא ווי שטארק ער איז ארויס פון זיין וועג איר צו באשיצן.

דארף מען אים נאר אויס פרעגען; ווער האט דיר געהייסען טוישען?

[וויכטיג מאכער]

גראוז נעגלידזשענס איז נישט שייך קיין אינטענט... סאו די ווארט אינטענט וואלט נישט געהאלפן... פארדעם האט מענעס געטוישט...

[SPUSMN]

און פאר דעם דארף מען גיין זיצען.

געניצט דער דזאסטיס דעפארטמענט צו ווערען עלעקטעד. מען דארף אויך סופיענען לארעטע לינטש און איר אויס פרעגען.

[abeg]

Chuck Grassley

[SPUSMN]

איך ווינדער זיך; גייט מען טאקע באקומען אן ענטפער ווער האט עס ארגינעל געשריבען; ווער האט עס געטוישט; און ווען האט מען עס געטוישט?

[פנחס בן חיים]

ווערט נישט איבערגענימען פון וויכי אויפדעקנוגען! איך געדענק ווער ער האט געזאגט אז פערי גייט געווינען..!

דא איז נישטא קיין סקאנדאל, נאטינג, זערא, זילטש, נאדא.... פאר א פאר סיבות

1} עס איז קלאר אז די רפובליקאנער רעדן יעצט פון קלינטאן נאר ווייל זיי ווילען פארדרייען די שמועס פון טראמפ - רוסלאנד געשפרעכן, בפרט נאכען ארעסטירען טראמפ'ס הויכע געהילפן.

2} ביג דיעל אז מען האט געטוישט עטליכע ווערטער פון א דרעפט, מעשם בכל יום אז מען טוט עס, {די מנהלים טיען עס דא אפילו פאר פיינעל תגובות נאכען דרעפט} יעדע אפציעלע דאקאמענט האט געהאט קודם א דרעפט אין וואס מען האט געטוישט ווערטער.

3} וויצע עף בי איי דירעקטער האט זיך למעשה יא אפגעזאגט פון די אינוועסטעגעישן, עס אזי געווען א "גאנצע וואך" בעפאר מען האט ארויס געגעבן די רעזולטאטען שוין נאכדעם וואס מען האט זיך אפגעזאגט, און קאמי האט דערפאר געהאט גענוג צייט צו טוישן וואס ער האט געוואלט.

4} קאמי האט שפעטער אפאר טעג פאר די וואלן נאכאמאל געפענט די אינוועטעיגעישן, סאו אפילו אויב די ערשטע מאל איז עס נישט גוט געווען האט ער מיט די צווייטע מאל זיכער געמאכט אז אלעס קלאפט און עס איז די ריכטיגע אויספיר.

לאור האמור הנ"ל איז צייט נישט צו ווערן כסדר דיסטרעקיט פון די ריכטיגע סקאנדאלן, און לאזט דאנא בראזיל, הילערי קלינטאן, קאמי, לארא לינטש, אויסלעבן זייערע לעבענס בשלום אלץ הכרת הטוב פאר אוועק געבן זייער גאנצע לעבן פאר פובליק סערוויס.

[סאבסיטוט]

איך האב גאנץ אן אנדערע סיבה פארוואס ס'אינטערסירט מיך נישט. קודם ווייל די נאמען קלינטאן איז שוין אומרעלעוואנט, טוה מיט איר וואס דו ווילסט, הו קעירס? נאכדעם ווייל די רעפובליקאנער זענען שוין היינט צוטאגס אין טשארדזש איז במילא איז נישטא וואס צו קוקן מיט צעעפענטע אויגן, אמער אויב איז עניטינג ראונג כאפ איר אן און אינדייט איר צוזאמען מיט לינטש,אבאמא,ביל,קאומי,רייס וכו' ווען דאס וועט געשעהן וועל איך וויסן אז ס'דא א סקאנדאל

[פנחס בן חיים]

איך האב גאנץ אן אנדערע סיבה פארוואס ס'אינטערסירט מיך נישט.

קודם ווייל די נאמען קלינטאן איז שוין אומרעלעוואנט, טוה מיט איר וואס דו ווילסט, הו קעירס?

נאכדעם ווייל די רעפובליקאנער זענען שוין היינט צוטאגס אין טשארדזש איז במילא איז נישטא וואס צו קוקן מיט צעעפענטע אויגן,

אמער אויב איז עניטינג ראונג כאפ איר אן און אינדייט איר צוזאמען מיט לינטש,אבאמא,ביל,קאומי,רייס וכו' ווען דאס וועט געשעהן וועל איך וויסן אז ס'דא א סקאנדאל

חוץ אויב ביסט איינער וואס פאליטיק אינטערסירט דיר לגמרי נישט, פארשטיי איך נישט קיין איינע פון דיינע דריי סיבות ווען די נושא האשכול איז יעצט איבער די עף בי איי קארופציע.

[סאבסיטוט]

עף בי איי קארופציע אינטערסירט איינעם? ליידער איז די גאנצע יוסטיץ סיסטעם פארפוילט- נישט דאס באדערט דיך גלייב איך

[טשאדעלע באדעלע]

איך האב גאנץ אן אנדערע סיבה פארוואס ס'אינטערסירט מיך נישט. קודם ווייל די נאמען קלינטאן איז שוין אומרעלעוואנט, טוה מיט איר וואס דו ווילסט, הו קעירס? נאכדעם ווייל די רעפובליקאנער זענען שוין היינט צוטאגס אין טשארדזש איז במילא איז נישטא וואס צו קוקן מיט צעעפענטע אויגן, אמער אויב איז עניטינג ראונג כאפ איר אן און אינדייט איר צוזאמען מיט לינטש,אבאמא,ביל,קאומי,רייס וכו' ווען דאס וועט געשעהן וועל איך וויסן אז ס'דא א סקאנדאל

העי.. אבער לשיטתך אז ס׳געווען קאלאוזשען, און אז ראשע האט מינאפאלירט אינזערע וואלן, קען מעגליך זיין אז קלינטאן ברויך יעצט זיין אינזער פרעזידענט. ברויך מען קודם זעכער מאכן אז קלינטאן איז ריין פון סקאנדאלן. אבער אויב ביסטו מודה אז ד׳גאנצע טראמפ ראשע איז הוילע שטותים, גיב איך דיר רעכט.

[רה''ק דקהל פורים]

Anti-Kremlin Banker: Fusion GPS Assisted Putin Regime In Effort ‘To Have Me Imprisoned And Killed’

פון די דעילי קאלער


The target of a Fusion GPS opposition research investigation is accusing the firm, best known for its work on the Trump dossier, of assisting the Kremlin in its effort to have him “imprisoned and killed.”

The strong allegation comes from Bill Browder, a London-based banker who spearheaded the Magnitsky Act, a sanctions law vehemently opposed by the Russian government.

Browder made the allegation in response to the recent revelation that Fusion GPS and its founder Glenn Simpson compiled what he says is false information about him that was given to Yuri Chaika, Russia’s prosecutor general, and to Donald Trump Jr. during the infamous June 2016 Trump Tower meeting.

“If it is true that Glenn Simpson was supplying information about me to the Russian government, it’s far more serious than smear campaigning or Foreign Agents Registration Act violations,” said Browder, the head of Hermitage Capital. (RELATED: EXCLUSIVE: Oppo Researcher Behind The Trump Dossier Worked On Pro-Kremlin Lobbying Effort)


“It would mean that Simpson was assisting the Putin regime in their plot to get me back to Russia to have me imprisoned and killed.”

It was previously known that the Washington, D.C-based Fusion GPS’s investigation of Browder was beneficial to the Russian government and its effort to reverse the Magnitsky Act. But it was revealed only last week that information Fusion collected on Browder was shared directly with Chaika, whose position is the Russian equivalent of the U.S. attorney general.


Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya speaks during an interview in Moscow, Russia November 8, 2016. Picture taken November 8, 2016. REUTERS/Kommersant Photo/Yury Martyanov

Natalia Veselnitskaya, the Russian attorney who attended the Trump Tower meeting, is who provided both Chaika and Trump Jr. with the Fusion-generated information on Browder. She took a four-page report into the June 9, 2016 Trump Tower meeting, which was attended by Jared Kushner and then-campaign chairman Paul Manafort.

Veselnitskaya worked with Simpson, a former Wall Street Journal reporter, on the anti-Browder project. Reuters reported on Thursday that Simpson compiled the research for the Trump Tower memo. And NBC News reported on Friday that similar research put together by Simpson was given by Veselnitskaya to Chaika in Oct. 2015. (RELATED: Russian Lawyer Took Fusion GPS Report To Trump Tower, Russia’s General Prosecutor)



Browder, who was born in Chicago but is a British citizen, is a target of the Kremlin’s ire because of his role in pushing through the Magnitsky Act, which passed Congress in 2012. The Russian government recently issued an Interpol arrest in an attempt to apprehend Browder. Vladimir Putin reportedly approved the move against the 53-year-old money manager, who wrote a book about his travails called “Red Notice,” a reference to the term used for Interpol warrants.

Fusion GPS, which is based in Washington, D.C., became involved in the Browder matter after being hired by BakerHostetler, a law firm representing Denis Katsyv, a Russian businessman who faced penalties because of the Magnitsky Act.

Simpson worked closely on the investigation with the Moscow-based Veselnitskaya, who represents Katsyv and his firm, Prevezon Holdings.

Veselnitskaya’s affiliation with Simpson is one of the stranger story lines arising from both the Trump Tower meeting and the dossier, which was funded by the Clinton campaign and DNC.

Theories have circulated that Fusion GPS arranged the Trump Tower meeting in order to compromise the Trump campaign or that Simpson relayed details of the meeting provided by Veselnitskaya to Christopher Steele, the former British spy who wrote the dossier.

Fusion was being paid for its dossier work at the same time it was being paid by BakerHostetler to investigate Browder.

Adding even more fuel to those theories was a report from Fox News this week that Simpson and Veselnitskaya met just before and just after she attended the Trump Tower session. (RELATED: Fusion GPS Founder Met With Russian Lawyer Before And After Trump Tower Meeting)

The pair were together in a Manhattan federal court room just before the meeting for a hearing related to the Katsyv/Prevezon case.

Fusion’s lawyer has denied that Simpson knew of the Trump Tower meeting.

The dossier, published by BuzzFeed in January, has fueled allegations that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government during the presidential campaign.

Trump Jr. accepted the meeting after being told by an acquaintance that a “Russian government attorney” — now known to be Veselnitskaya — would provide damaging information about Hillary Clinton.

Trump Jr. accepted with enthusiasm, writing back, “I love it.”

Trump Jr. and Veselnitskaya have both said that no substantive information was provided about Clinton. Instead, both sides say that Veselnitskaya wanted to discuss the Magnitsky Act.

The memo that she took into the meeting includes only one passing reference to the Clinton campaign. It suggested that the Clinton campaign took illegal campaign contributions from Ziff Brothers, an investment fund affiliated with Browder.

***

The Trump Tower memo contains a slew of allegations about Browder, all of which he denies. The document also embraces Kremlin rhetoric, accusing Browder of manipulating U.S. lawmakers who have “earned their political dividends on fomenting a cold war with Russia to use this false story.”

“This Act was in fact the beginning of a new round of the Cold War between the United States and Russia, putting on the scales the interests of a group of scammers and interstate relations,” reads the memo.

In an interview with NBC, Veselnitskaya said that she worked as a consultant to Chaika on the Browder case. The admission is significant because it ties Veselnitskaya to the upper echelons of the Kremlin, a link which she has previously denied.

“I was in effect, the primary source of this information for the Russian Prosecutor General’s office. They then published the facts I uncovered,” she told NBC News in an Aug. 31 interview that the network did not release until last week.


Russian President Vladimir Putin greets Prosecutor General Yury Chaika in Moscow on January 31, 2013. (ALEXANDER ZEMLIANICHENKO/POOL/REUTERS)

Fusion provided the information on Browder to Veselnitskaya in 2014, she said.

It is unclear whether Fusion GPS wrote the memos provided to Chaika and Trump Jr. or merely provided the research for the documents. It is also not known whether Fusion was aware that Veselnitskaya provided its research to Chaika and Trump Jr.

Simpson did not respond to emails, text messages or a voice mail seeking comment.

Browder has said that his former lawyer, Sergey Magnitsky, the namesake of the Magnitsky Act, was murdered in a Russian prison in 2009 because he had uncovered a $230 million money laundering scheme involving Russian businessmen.

The Russian government, including Chaika, has disputed that, and accuses Browder of fabricating the Magnitsky story in order to cover up for his own financial misdealings. Veselnitskaya appears to have taken the case personally. She frequently posts about Browder on social media.

Fusion research given to Chaika was used by the Kremlin official to call for legal assistance from the U.S. government in going after Browder.

Browder pushed back against the Fusion GPS attacks last year, filing a complaint with the Justice Department accusing Fusion GPS and Simpson of working as foreign agents of Russia but failing to properly register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA).

Lobbyists and consultants who provide services to foreign governments are required to register under FARA.

Fusion GPS has rejected the idea that it needed to register as a foreign agent.

[זאכליך]

דזשעף סעשאנס גייט באלד טעסטיפייען פאר קאנגרעס קאמיטע איבער די לעצטע אנטוויקלונגען.

ווארט מיט שפאנונג...

[פאליטקלי קארעקט]

During an appearance before the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, an animated Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) pressed Sessions on what Jordan felt was the need to appoint a second special counsel to look into Democrats' role in that anti-Trump dossier. And Sessions rebuffed him.

"We know one fact: We know the Clinton campaign and the [Democratic] National Committee paid for -- through the law firm, paid for the dossier. We know that happened," Jordan began. "And it sure looks like the FBI was paying the author of that document. And it sure looks like a major political party was working with the federal government to then turn an opposition research document that quoted some National Enquirer story into an intelligence document, take that to the FISA court so that they could then get a warrant to spy on Americans associated with President Trump's campaign. That's what it looks like."

Sessions's retort: "I would say 'looks like' is not enough basis to appoint a special counsel."

[תורה לערנער]

what about it looks like trump coluded with russia thats enough basis?>??

[פאליטקלי קארעקט]

what about it looks like trump coluded with russia thats enough basis?>??

Apparently

[רה''ק דקהל פורים]

what about it looks like trump coluded with russia thats enough basis?>??

Apparently

דאן זייטסזשע מוחל ערקלער פארוואס אויסזען אז קלינטאן האט פארקויפט אמעריקע פאר רוסלאנד איז נישט גענוג באזיס?

אגב, ביי טראמפ האט ניטאמאל אויזגעזען. עס איז נישט געווען קיין איין קאנטאקט מיט די רוסן וואס האבן אויסגעזען פארדעכטיגט אז מען זאל עפענען אן אויספארשונג.

[צהלה ושמחה]

http://thehill.com/homenews/administrat ... andling-of

Congressional investigators find irregularities in FBI's handling of Clinton email case

Republicans on key congressional committees say they have uncovered new irregularities and contradictions inside the FBI’s probe of Hillary Clinton’s email server

For the first time, investigators say they have secured written evidence that the FBI believed there was evidence that some laws were broken when the former secretary of State and her top aides transmitted classified information through her insecure private email server, lawmakers and investigators told The Hill

That evidence includes passages in FBI documents stating the “sheer volume” of classified information that flowed through Clinton’s insecure emails was proof of criminality as well as an admission of false statements by one key witness in the case, the investigators said


The name of the witness is redacted from the FBI documents but lawmakers said he was an employee of a computer firm that helped maintain her personal server after she left office as America’s top diplomat and who belatedly admitted he had permanently erased an archive of her messages in 2015 after they had been subpoenaed by Congress

The investigators also confirmed that the FBI began drafting a statement exonerating Clinton of any crimes while evidence responsive to subpoenas was still outstanding and before agents had interviewed more than a dozen key witnesses

Those witnesses included Clinton and the computer firm employee who permanently erased her email archives just days after the emails were subpoenaed by Congress, the investigators said

Lawmakers on the House Judiciary Committee who attended a Dec. 21 closed-door briefing by FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe say the bureau official confirmed that the investigation and charging decisions were controlled by a small group in Washington headquarters rather the normal process of allowing field offices to investigate possible criminality in their localities. The Clinton email server in question was based in New York

In normal FBI cases, field offices where crimes are believed to have been committed investigate the evidence and then recommend to bureau hierarchy whether to pursue charges with prosecutors. In this case, the bureau hierarchy controlled both the investigation and the charging decision from Washington, a scenario known in FBI parlance as a “special,” the lawmakers said

The FBI declined comment on McCabe’s closed-door testimony and the evidence being shared with Congress

Some Republicans on the committee say the findings and revelations have left them more convinced than ever that FBI leadership rigged the outcome to clear Clinton

“This was an effort to pre-bake the cake, pre-bake the outcome,” said Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), a House Judiciary Committee member who attended the McCabe briefing before the holidays. “Hillary Clinton obviously benefited from people taking actions to ensure she wasn’t held accountable

Gaetz said he could not divulge the specifics of what McCabe told lawmakers, but that he left the Dec. 21 session believing the FBI had deviated from its “normal objective practices” while investigating Clinto

The top Democrat on the panel acknowledged the FBI’s handling of the case was unique, but argued Republicans are politicizing their own panel’s work

“To the extent that the Assistant Director of the FBI was involved in that investigation, and recognizing that the investigation itself presented a unique set of circumstances, his testimony did not raise any concerns that would justify the Republicans’ outsized obsession with Hillary Clinton’s emails two years after the fact,” said Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y) who recently took over as the top Democrat on House Judiciary after former Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.) stepped aside after - misconduct allegations were made against him

Gaetz said he has growing questions about the role the Obama Justice Department played in the case

Former FBI Director James Comey has testified he made the decision not to seek criminal charges against Clinton — with no Justice Department input — because he feared any involvement from the department might taint the findings after then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch met with former President Bill Clinton on a tarmac during the closing days of the probe in June 2016.

He also argued in an initial July 5, 2016, press conference announcing the decision that he did not believe he could show that Clinton intended to send classified information over her server

But Gaetz said his panel has evidence the FBI took actions while writing the exoneration statement that required Justice input, such as immunizing witnesses in June 2016. He said he would like to learn more about what instructions, sentiments and communications were conveyed between the department and the FBI

“I think we have more questions than answers based on what we’ve learned,” Gaetz said

Both parties are likely to learn more in the first quarter of 2018 when the Justice Department inspector general is expected to release initial findings in what has become a wide-ranging probe into the FBI’s handling of the Clinton email case as well as whether agents and supervisors had political connections, ethical conflicts or biases that affected their work

In the meantime, Republicans on three House committees and the Senate Judiciary Committee have pieced together new evidence from recent interviews and document productions

That information wasn’t available to them when Comey announced in July 2016 that he would not seek charges against Clinton even though she and her aides had transmitted more than 110 pieces of classified information through her insecure email server, some of it at the “top secret” and “secret” levels

One storyline that has emerged is that the FBI’s own documents stated there was evidence some laws had been broken, but bureau leaders declined to pursue charges on the grounds they could not prove Clinton and her aides intended to violate the law

Those concerns were reflected in the initial draft statements Comey and his leadership team began writing in spring 2016. The Hill first reported in November that Comey’s original May 2, 2016, draft included the words “grossly negligent” — the language supporting a criminal charge for mishandling classified information — but it was later changed to the softer “extremely careless

GOP congressional investigators told The Hill multiple drafts of the statement also included specific language acknowledging there was “evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information

Furthermore, the May 2, 2016, draft included a second passage that suggested the large amount of highly classified information — eight top secret passages and 37 secret passages — that passed through Clinton’s private server suggested criminality

“The sheer volume of information that was properly classified as Secret at the time it was discussed on email (that is, excluding the “up classified” emails) supports an inference that the participants were grossly negligent in their handling of that information,” the FBI’s original draft read, according to a source who has seen it

Comey used some of the language the agents had put in the initial drafts of the memo when he made his announcement of no charges

“Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case,” Comey said

The FBI also confirmed that a key witness, a computer technician who deleted Clinton emails from her server in March 2015 after a congressional subpoena had been issued for them, originally lied to the FBI during his interviews, memos show. The witness's name was redacted from documents released by the FBI but he was identified as an employee of a computer firm that helped maintained Clinton’s email server

His admission of false statements came one day after the Comey statement was already being drafted, investigators told The Hill

The computer employee originally told the FBI in a February 2016 interview that he did not recall making any deletions from Clinton’s server in March 2015, FBI records show

But then on May 3, 2016, the same employee in a subsequent FBI interview told agents he had an “oh shit moment” and in late March 2015 deleted Clinton’s email archive from the server, according to FBI documents reviewed by The Hill

Lying to the FBI is a federal felony, a crime that former Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn recently pleaded guilty to. But the FBI decided not to pursue criminal charges against the witness, and instead gave the technician an immunity deal so he could correct his story, congressional investigators said

Republican investigators say the most glaring irregularity they have found is the decision to begin drafting a statement exonerating Clinton before much of the investigative interviewing and evidence gathering was even done

While the first draft of the statement was dated May 2, 2016, FBI records gathered by congressional investigators show agents were still receiving evidence responsive to grand jury subpoenas well after that, including documents and other evidentiary items logged on May 13, May 19 and May 26

A House GOP lawmaker told The Hill his staff also has identified at least a dozen interviews that were conducted after the drafting effort began, including of some figures who would have key information about intent or possible destruction of evidence

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley's (R-Iowa) staff has a higher number: 17 witnesses including Clinton were interviewed after the decision was already made

“Making a conclusion before you interview key fact witnesses and the subject herself violates the very premise of good investigation. You don't lock into a theory until you have the facts. Here the evidence that isn't public yet shows they locked into the theory and then edited out the facts that contradicted it,” the GOP lawmaker said, speaking only on condition of anonymity because the documents are not yet authorized for release

A senior law enforcement official directly familiar with the investigation, speaking only on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to talk to the media, told The Hill that the FBI “did have evidence of statutory violations” but the decision not to prosecute was driven by a belief that there wasn’t enough proof Clinton and aides intended to violate those laws or even knew they were violating them

The official also acknowledged evidence gathering continued even as Comey began drafting the public statement, including the execution of an immunity deal on June 10, 2016, with Clinton advisers Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson that resulted in laptops with evidence being turned over to agents late in the probe

“The leadership had a sense of where the evidence was likely headed and the idea was they would begin drafting their conclusions and if we found anything that changed that sense we’d alert them,” the official said

The official said the decision to grant immunity to the Clinton advisers as well as the computer technician involved in the email deletions was made “with the idea it would be better to know all the circumstances” before the case was closed out

Comey has told Congress he made the decision not to charge Clinton after she was interviewed on July 2, 2016

Congressional investigators told The Hill they also have found some contradictions between the FBI’s official account of what happened and what more recently released documents show

One that is being pursued aggressively by Grassley involves whether the FBI actually investigated possible violations of the Federal Records Act, which required the preservation of all of Clinton’s work-related emails

The FBI admits it recovered thousands of State emails that originated or passed through Clinton’s private server — some which had been deleted — that were never turned over to the State Department as government records by Clinton’s team

While the FBI believed none of those were deleted intentionally to keep them from the government, the Records Act allows for a misdemeanor charge in each instance where a government document is destroyed carelessly, investigators said

Comey told Grassley back in 2016 that the FBI did investigate whether the unlawful destruction of federal records occurred

But Grassley’s staff has now obtained a sworn affidavit from an FBI agent that directly contradicts the former director’s assurance. The agent testified under penalty of perjury that the Clinton email case did not address the destruction of federal records, Grassley said

The longtime Senate chairman went to the Senate floor before the holidays to raise another concern: the FBI did not pursue criminal charges when Clinton’s email archives were permanently deleted from her private server days after a subpoena for them was issued by a congressional committee investigating the 2012 attack on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi

The deletion occurred on the same day Clinton’s former chief of staff and her lawyer had a call with the computer firm that handled the erasure using an anti-recovery software called BleachBit, Grassley said

“You have a conference call with Secretary Clinton’s attorneys on March 31, 2015, and on that very same day her emails are deleted by someone who was on that conference call using special BleachBit software,” Grassley said. “The emails were State Department records under subpoena by Congress

“What did the FBI do to investigate this apparent obstruction?” Grassley asked. “According to affidavits filed in federal court — absolutely nothing. The FBI focused only on the handling of classified information

[אור]

א פייער האט אויסגעבראכן ביי די קלינטאן הויז אין טשעפעקווא וועסטשעסטער

[ggg]

א פייער האט אויסגעבראכן ביי די קלינטאן הויז אין טשעפעקווא וועסטשעסטער

איך זאג נישט גארנישט אבער סאיז לכאורה זיכער אז אויב וואלט געווען א פייער ערגעץ נעבען טראמפ וואלט מען געזאגט ער פארברענט באווייזן פון רוסלאנד...

[צד תמות]

א פייער האט אויסגעבראכן ביי די קלינטאן הויז אין טשעפעקווא וועסטשעסטער

!Trump: you're fired

[סאבסיטוט]

שוין, א פייער! כאדעך געוויסט מעקען איר נידט טראסטן

ווען קומט די אינוועסטיגעישאן?!

#לאק הער אפ

[רה''ק דקהל פורים]

ס'נאך עניטיים אזא העדליין ווי טראמפ'ס קאוק אדער די ווייסע טראק ביי מאר א לאגא, און איך געדענק נישט יענץ זאל דיר אזוי שטארק באדערן.

(כאטש ס'מעגליך נישט אין ריכטיגן אשכול - פשוט ווייל ס'נישטא קיין כלליות'דיגע אשכול פאר קלינטאן נייעס [ב"ה פאר דעם])

[משה כספי]

שוין, א פייער! כאדעך געוויסט מעקען איר נידט טראסטן

ווען קומט די אינוועסטיגעישאן?!

#לאק הער אפ

ווער ווייסט אפשר איז די בליעטשיגע שמאטע הייס געווארן פונעם סערווער און עס האט זיך גענומען ברענען

[וואוילע שעפעלע]

פאלטער נישט ביי אז מ'האט פשוט פארברענט די שיריים פון די סערווערס

(אדער נאנדערע סערווערס וואס קאנגרעס האט יעצט אויפגעדעקט ביי די פרישע אויספארשונגען... שפין ווייטער)