Bad Week for the FBI, Continued.

Add to the FBI's failure to follow up on the Florida school shooter, the continued attention to the FBI's corruption in becoming an arm of the Hillary for President campaign.

Here is the Republicans response to the Democrat's efforts to paint the use of  politically funded campaign material to spy on Americans involved in the opposition political campaign as "perfectly normal."

If it is "perfectly normal", we are screwed as a country.

When did the premier law enforcement agency become so incompetent?

And why does that incompetence always work in Hillary's favor?

//The FBI didn’t flag that some emails from Hillary Clinton’s private email server were marked classified with a “(C)” when they were sent — something that seemingly would have been one of the first and most obvious checks in an investigation, and one that FBI agents instantly recognized put the facts at odds with Clinton’s public statements.

The Intelligence Community Inspector General noticed it after the FBI missed it, texts between FBI agent Peter Strzok and his mistress, FBI lawyer Lisa Page, reveal. “Holy cow,” Strzok wrote, “if the FBI missed this, what else was missed?”

“Remind me to tell you to flag for Andy [redacted] emails we (actually ICIG) found that have portion marks (C) on a couple of paras. DoJ was Very Concerned about this,” he wrote.

“Found on the 30k [emails] provided to State originally. No one noticed. It cuts against ‘I never sent or received anything marked classified,'” he wrote, referring to statements by Clinton downplaying the danger of her email practices.

Much of the more in-depth investigation considered whether Clinton and her aides emailed materials that were classified but were not marked as such, a harder determination to make.

The exchange occurred on June 12, 2016. FBI Director Jim Comey disclosed the findings of marked-classified emails to the House on July 7.

On May 10, 2016, Strzok had suggested that in his mind, the investigation was closer to being finished than to just getting started — suggesting that if it weren’t for the inspector general, it might have closed down and cleared her despite missing the most obvious first step.

“I cannot overstate to you the sense of urgency about wanting to logically and effectively conclude this investigation,” he said.

The ommission allowed Clinton to repeatedly and prominently state that she had “never received nor sent any material that was marked classified” on her private email server while secretary of state.

She even said so at major debates, and because the FBI hadn’t caught the letter (C), and therefore never stated its findings, PolitiFact rated the claim “Half True.”

When the FBI belatedly noticed and relayed the truth, the fact-checking site said “Now we know it’s just plain wrong.”//

The penny drops.

I have always been confused about Comey's indictment/exoneration news interview, where he laid out a compelling case to indict Clinton but then said, "Nope, not enough."

Prior to this presentation, the word was that Comey was facing a rebellion by FBI agents who knew that there was enough to indict Hillary and wouldn't put up with sweeping it under the rug. This article suggests that was the case.

So, probably, Comey's presentation was aimed at his FBI constituency and was intended to acknowledge what they knew but then "bafflegab" the presentation with "lawyerese" so that they might decide that he was acting in good faith and following the law.

If that's the case, Comey looks more corrupt.

//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.//

There is a cancer in the FBI and Deep State that needs to be excised.

Why is this woman not in jail already.

General Petraus was court martialed for handing classified information to his biographer.

So, why shouldn't HIllary get the same treatment for letting Marina Santos print off classified information.

//In a classified 2012 e-mail dealing with the new president of Malawi, another Clinton aide, Monica Hanley, advised Clinton, “We can ask Marina to print this.”

“Revisions to the Iran points” was the subject line of a classified April 2012 e-mail to Clinton from Hanley. In it, the text reads, “Marina is trying to print for you.”

Both classified e-mails were marked “confidential,” the tier below “secret” or “top secret.”

Santos also had access to a highly secure room called an SCIF (sensitive compartmented information facility) that diplomatic security agents set up at Whitehaven, according to FBI notes from an interview with Abedin.

From within the SCIF, Santos — who had no clearance — “collected documents from the secure facsimile machine for Clinton,” the FBI notes revealed.

Just how sensitive were the papers Santos presumably handled? The FBI noted Clinton periodically received the Presidential Daily Brief — a top-secret document prepared by the CIA and other US intelligence agencies — via the secure fax.

A 2012 “sensitive” but unclassified e-mail from Hanley to Clinton refers to a fax the staff wanted Clinton “to see before your Netanyahu mtg. Marina will grab for you.”

Yet it appears Clinton was never asked by the FBI in its yearlong investigation to turn over the iMac Santos used to receive the e-mails, or the printer she used to print out the documents, or the printouts themselves.//

Silly me....of course, I know that she is a Clinton and Clinton supporters think that the law only applies to the little people.

Brett Baier's report has not been debunked.
Basically, the "debunking" consists of the clarification that the FBI has enough information for an honest prosecutor to indict Hillary, but there is a question about whether the politically corrupt hacks at the Obama DOJ will do their job without public outcry.

And this vindicates Hillary supporters....because?

Amazing.

When Comey laid out the grounds for an indictment, but refused to indict, we heard all about "prosecutorial discretion" and "he's just doing his job."

But when he follows through on a commitment to inform Congress about re-opening the investigation, he's dangerous and should resign. 

The only thing that's changed is whether he's supporting the Clinton narrative.

The media is corrupt.