Comey drafted conclusions of Hillary investigation long before the evidence was in

Senators Grassley and Graham released some bombshell documents (complete file here) yesterday, demonstrating, "James Comey began drafting an exoneration statement in the Clinton email investigation before the FBI had interviewed key witnesses."

This indication that the fix was in is so shocking that the New York Times appears to be completely ignoring it at the time of this publication.

Paul Mirengoff offers a very cautious, benefit-of-the-doubt analysis of Comey asking for drafts before the evidence was in, but even he concludes:

It's one thing for Comey to form a preliminary view of the likely outcome of a matter still under investigation and even to jot that view down. It seems like quite another to circulate draft "exoneration" memos within the agency, as Comey elected to do.

My friend Clarice Feldman puts it more directly in an email: "He passed that draft to his lieutenants so they'd know what they were expected to do. It's utterly obvious."

Ace sees this as a crisis point for the Deep State:

This is partly why they're so insanely angry – they put the fix in and pulled out all the stops, but it didn't work.

They're terrified that they're losing power and may one day even be held to account for what they've done.

At a minimum, Comey may be facing serious charges, as Clarice points out.

As Sekulow and Fleisher note (video below), this conflicts with Comey's congressional statement.  If he had written another contrary letter to the files (remember: he said he kept meticulous notes), it would have been produced to Grassley's committee.  He wrote this and circulated to his top guys to set the marching orders.

Senators Grassley and Graham released some bombshell documents (complete file here) yesterday, demonstrating, "James Comey began drafting an exoneration statement in the Clinton email investigation before the FBI had interviewed key witnesses."

This indication that the fix was in is so shocking that the New York Times appears to be completely ignoring it at the time of this publication.

Paul Mirengoff offers a very cautious, benefit-of-the-doubt analysis of Comey asking for drafts before the evidence was in, but even he concludes:

It's one thing for Comey to form a preliminary view of the likely outcome of a matter still under investigation and even to jot that view down. It seems like quite another to circulate draft "exoneration" memos within the agency, as Comey elected to do.

My friend Clarice Feldman puts it more directly in an email: "He passed that draft to his lieutenants so they'd know what they were expected to do. It's utterly obvious."

Ace sees this as a crisis point for the Deep State:

This is partly why they're so insanely angry – they put the fix in and pulled out all the stops, but it didn't work.

They're terrified that they're losing power and may one day even be held to account for what they've done.

At a minimum, Comey may be facing serious charges, as Clarice points out.

As Sekulow and Fleisher note (video below), this conflicts with Comey's congressional statement.  If he had written another contrary letter to the files (remember: he said he kept meticulous notes), it would have been produced to Grassley's committee.  He wrote this and circulated to his top guys to set the marching orders.

RECENT VIDEOS