FBI dissent against Comey leaking out to the public

Before we declare the election over, let’s hear from the dissenters within the FBI, who appear to be as outraged as I am by James Comey’s recommendation of no prosecution for Hillary Clinton.  The difference is that they know exactly what a legitimate investigation looks like and can accurately describe how Comey prevented that from happening.

As yet, no FBI agents have publicly stepped forward to denounce what they see.  But I have to imagine that least some sworn officers are reflecting on the duty of their oaths, and perhaps they see the future of the Republic at stake once corruption becomes not just tolerated, but the norm.

Meanwhile, we have to settle for an extraordinary document obtained by The Daily Caller.  It is presented as:

… an interview transcript given to The Daily Caller, provided by an intermediary who spoke to two federal agents with the bureau last Friday, agents [who] are frustrated by Comey’s leadership.

It is possible that this is a hoax, of course, though I doubt that.  The Daily Caller is highly reputable, although Hillaryites would contest that because they know that conservatives are bad.  On the other hand, what is presented makes perfect sense.  For example:

“This is a textbook case where a grand jury should have been convened, but was not. That is appalling,” an FBI special agent who has worked public corruption and criminal cases said of the decision. “We talk about it in the office and don’t know how Comey can keep going.”

The agent was also surprised that the bureau did not bother to search Clinton’s house during the investigation.

“We didn’t search their house. We always search the house. The search should not just have been for private electronics, which contained classified material, but even for printouts of such material,” he said.

“There should have been a complete search of their residence,” the agent pointed out. “That the FBI did not seize devices is unbelievable. The FBI even seizes devices that have been set on fire.”

There is more, so I urge you to read the whole thing.  One thing that leaps out at me is mentioned.  Comey faces a serious problem of credibility within the ranks:

“Comey was never an investigator or special agent. The special agents are trained investigators and they are insulted that Comey included them in ‘collective we’ statements in his testimony to imply that the SAs agreed that there was nothing there to prosecute,” the second agent said. “All the trained investigators agree that there is a lot to prosecuted but he stood in the way.”

As FBI agents fume, the clock is ticking toward Election Day, and voting is already underway.

Before we declare the election over, let’s hear from the dissenters within the FBI, who appear to be as outraged as I am by James Comey’s recommendation of no prosecution for Hillary Clinton.  The difference is that they know exactly what a legitimate investigation looks like and can accurately describe how Comey prevented that from happening.

As yet, no FBI agents have publicly stepped forward to denounce what they see.  But I have to imagine that least some sworn officers are reflecting on the duty of their oaths, and perhaps they see the future of the Republic at stake once corruption becomes not just tolerated, but the norm.

Meanwhile, we have to settle for an extraordinary document obtained by The Daily Caller.  It is presented as:

… an interview transcript given to The Daily Caller, provided by an intermediary who spoke to two federal agents with the bureau last Friday, agents [who] are frustrated by Comey’s leadership.

It is possible that this is a hoax, of course, though I doubt that.  The Daily Caller is highly reputable, although Hillaryites would contest that because they know that conservatives are bad.  On the other hand, what is presented makes perfect sense.  For example:

“This is a textbook case where a grand jury should have been convened, but was not. That is appalling,” an FBI special agent who has worked public corruption and criminal cases said of the decision. “We talk about it in the office and don’t know how Comey can keep going.”

The agent was also surprised that the bureau did not bother to search Clinton’s house during the investigation.

“We didn’t search their house. We always search the house. The search should not just have been for private electronics, which contained classified material, but even for printouts of such material,” he said.

“There should have been a complete search of their residence,” the agent pointed out. “That the FBI did not seize devices is unbelievable. The FBI even seizes devices that have been set on fire.”

There is more, so I urge you to read the whole thing.  One thing that leaps out at me is mentioned.  Comey faces a serious problem of credibility within the ranks:

“Comey was never an investigator or special agent. The special agents are trained investigators and they are insulted that Comey included them in ‘collective we’ statements in his testimony to imply that the SAs agreed that there was nothing there to prosecute,” the second agent said. “All the trained investigators agree that there is a lot to prosecuted but he stood in the way.”

As FBI agents fume, the clock is ticking toward Election Day, and voting is already underway.