As anyone who knows me will tell you, I am not by nature a patient man. I can and do fake it, with mixed results. I say this as I continue to slog through the IG’s report I shared with you on Thursday. The going is slow as I’m having to take copious notes, and then cross reference them. A quick example.
Footnote 74 of the Inspector General’s Report
For example, one analyst told us that within the Blackberry back-ups on the Cooper laptop, the FBI team found an email from former Secretary of State Colin Powell to Clinton on January 23, 2009, in which Powell warned Clinton that if it became “public” that she used a Blackberry to “do business,” her emails could become “official record[s] and subject to the law.” In the email, Powell further warned Clinton, “Be very careful. I got around it all by not saying much and not using systems that captured the data.”
Which was promptly leaked, and caused this kerfuffle. Little did I know I was already covering this story back then!
By Rodney Graves, Wizbang
Deceitfully, of course.
THE DEMOCRATS’ NEW GAME: STATE GOES BACK AND RETROACTIVELY CLASSIFIES EMAILS SENT TO POWELL’S AND RICE’S PERSONAL ACCOUNTS, SO THEY CAN SAY “EVERYBODY DOES IT”
By Ace, Ace of Spades
hen they leak this to Hillary Mob Lawyer Elijah Cummings, who in turn passes it on to the media.
The interesting thing here is that State can classify, or declassify, information originating with State. But they cannot classify, nor declassify, information originating with another service, like the CIA or NSA.
Hillary is claiming that State “disputes” the CIA’s and NSA’s determination that the information she was passing around was top-top-secret. Shockingly secret. State is disputing this on her behalf — but they have no such power to classify or declassify CIA or NSA information.
Indeed. The Agency which generates Intelligence determines the Classification Level of that Intelligence to protect assets and means of collection, the revelation of which would cause damage to the National Interests of the United States. This extends to classifying a collection of demonstrably un-classified information (from open sources) which, taken as a body and with the implication that the Agency views it as accurate, make it sensitive despite its mundane origins.
Both are short, click on over and read the whole thing.
Now back to current business… Lot’s of folks are digging into the IG report, but again, it’s long and non-trivial. But as I mentioned in the comments of my article introducing the report, “I am noting that it seems like the authors of the Executive Summary didn’t read the actual report…” Anyone who claims that the IG’s report “proves that there was no bias” has read only the Executive Summary, and not the body of the report.
The inspector general report is careful in its conclusions, but damning on the facts, writes @KimStrassel
By Kimberly A. Strassel, the Wall Street Journal
Yet it is the report’s findings on the wider culture of the FBI and Justice Department that are most alarming. The report depicts agencies that operate outside the rules to which they hold everybody else, and that showed extraordinary bias while investigating two presidential candidates.
Be ready to hear the report absolves the FBI and DOJ of “bias.” Not true. It very carefully states that “our review did not find documentary or testimonial evidence directly connecting the political views these employees expressed in their text messages and instant messages to the specific investigative decisions we reviewed.” Put another way, he never caught anyone writing down: Let’s start this Trump investigation so we can help Hillary win.
And oh hell yes, they were playing for one side and against the other.