FBNC| At this point it’s inarguable that the fix was in at the FBI with respect to burying the Clinton email scandal.
From the granting of gross immunity to the destruction of evidence to avoid future scrutiny to the writing of Hillary’s exoneration statement only shortly after the “investigation” was launched (and before anyone had been interviewed) Comey guaranteed that no case could ever be made against Hillary..
Former FBI Director Jim Comey’s granting of absolution to Clinton cast shade on his entire agency.
Coupled with the immensely high profile nature of this case we’ve always believed that all roads led to the involvement of Obama’s Attorney General Loretta Lynch as playing a key role in guiding Comey’s actions.
At the very least, it defies credulity to believe Lynch didn’t demand to be updated frequently on developments if she were interested in enforcing the law as she took an oath to do and, especially, considering this involved the potential next president of the United States.
And, if Lynch knew how is it possible that she never shared her knowledge with President Obama?
Put your partisanship aside and think about this rationally for just a minute. Would she ever be confronted with a more important investigation? Ever? Would the president? Yet, we’re to believe she punted because… well, we can’t think of a legitimate reason why. And, President Obama never asked why?
At the worst, there are reasons to believe that Lynch might’ve been working under orders directly from President Obama to squash the investigation because Hillary’s election was deemed vital to continue hiding his administration’s collective wrongdoing.
Now we have learned from Paul Sperry at Real Clear Investigations that there is reason to believe the worst:
What is known, based on press leaks and a letter Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley sent Lynch, is that in March 2016, the FBI received a batch of hacked documents from U.S. intelligence agencies that had access to stolen emails stored on Russian networks. One of the intercepted documents revealed an alleged email from then-DNC Chairwoman Wasserman Schultz to an operative working for billionaire Democratic fundraiser George Soros. It claimed Lynch had assured the Clinton campaign that investigators and prosecutors would go easy on the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee regarding her use of a private email server while serving as secretary of state. Lynch allegedly made the promise directly to Clinton political director Amanda Renteria.
This is not the first time Renteria’s name has surfaced in connection with the Clinton email scandal. Less than two weeks ago under questioning from Senator John Kennedy (R-LA), Inspector General Michael Horowitz declined to answer a question about Renteria because of the sensitive nature of the answer:
Sen. Kennedy: “Your classified index; does it contain or discuss an email that refers to a conversation allegedly between Attorney General Lynch and a person by the name of Amanda Renteria”
I.G. Horowitz: “I’m not sure what I can say about that publicly given the matter’s classified. So I would ask you if I can get back to you – I’m hesitant to say anything in a public forum about that.”
Comey had doubts about Lynch’s independence – re: willingness to prosecute wrongdoing by the Obama administration – as early as September of 2015.
According to Sperry, in August 2016, one month after Comey had exonerated Clinton, he confronted Lynch about the Russian intercept. Lynch refused to discuss the matter summarily dismissing Comey from her office. That was the end of that. No other parties were ever questioned about the documents.
Apparently, Comey cherished his job more than his country and it went no further except for the fact that the resources of Lynch’s DOJ and Comey’s FBI turned their considerable resources on taking down Donald Trump.
Let’s pivot back to Amanda Renteria, the Clinton operative.
Amanda Renteria has had a longstanding relationship with Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA). Feinstein is the ranking member on the Senate Judiciary Committee.\
As if that’s not enough to question Feinstein’s fealty to the truth she is also extremely close with Paige Herwig who served as Lynch’s counselor during her tenure as Attorney General. After Lynch left office, Herwig became Senator Feinstein’s deputy general counsel.
Jeez, you can’t tell the incest without a scorecard.
Now Feinstein is refusing to sign off on a subpoena to compel Loretta Lynch’s testimony in this matter. This effectively blocks any chance to hear Lynch’s version of these events because Judiciary Committee rules require both the chairman and the ranking member agree on the use of subpoenas.
Imagine that, a high-ranking Democrat blocking the testimony of a high-ranking Democrat! Why would that be? If not to protect Lynch (and others including potentially ex-President Obama then why?
What is Feinstein hiding?