It’s been almost a year since special counsel Robert Mueller started his probe into President Trump’s alleged campaign collusion with the Russian government, and at this point, there’s still not a single evidence that can impeach the President’s credibility. However, recent revelations about conflicts of interest within the FBI and the DOJ turned out to be a bigger scandal than the alleged collusion itself.
According to Conservative Institute, U.S. Rep. Trey Gowdy, a South Carolina Republican, blasted the Justice Department and FBI’s foot-dragging to provide documents related to the largely discredited Trump-Russian dossier.
He compared that with the kid-glove handling the Hillary Clinton email investigation received and concluded that justice has taken different avenues in the two instances.
Gowdy told former U.S. Rep. Jason Chaffetz, who was guest-hosting Fox News Channel’s The Ingraham Angle, that a Congressional investigation is only as good as the documents and witnesses it has at its disposal, and the FBI and Justice Department have been slow to provide them.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, a California Republican, subpoenaed the DOJ and FBI for records on Aug. 24, and the committee hasn’t yet received them.
“In this case, we need what are called 302s,” which the agency generates after interviewing a witness, he told Chaffetz. “We also need what’s called 1023s, another summary of an interaction between an FBI agent and a source.”
Gowdy emphasized that the committee will need those forms to adequately question FBI agent Peter Strzok and FBI lawyer Lisa Page, who exchanged numerous text messages blasting President Donald Trump while praising Clinton.
Strzok was a former member of special counsel Robert Mueller’s team investigating possible collusion between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin. He also played a key role in the Clinton emails investigation that ended in her exoneration.
“This has taken longer than it should, and longer than it needs to,” Gowdy told Chaffetz. He also said that as a former Justice Department lawyer, his bias would normally run toward the government.
Not like Clinton investigation
Chaffetz asked Gowdy for the differences between the 2016 Clinton email investigation and the Trump-Russian investigation.
“Almost everything,” Gowdy said. “I’m not interested in litigating their decision not to charge [Clinton]. Just forget about that. You can like it or you can not like it.”
Gowdy focused instead on the way in which the two matters were investigated, explaining:
If you have made the decision not to charge someone in May of 2016 before you have interviewed two dozen witnesses, before you have interviewed the target of the investigation, then you’re going to have to explain how you reached that decision not to charge before you ended the investigation.
I want to know about the immunity agreements. I want to know why you allow fact witnesses to sit in on witness interviews. I want to know why you allow witness interviews to be voluntary.
Since it’s already known that the FBI did things differently with Hillary, Gowdy said, the question for the FBI and the DOJ now is “Why did you do it differently in her case?”
Gowdy concluded that they’re “big enough to withstand those questions.” We’ll be waiting to hear what they come up with.
Right now the liberal media is practically ignoring this.
That shouldn’t be much of a surprise. The media has been sweeping Clinton family dirt under the rug for years.
However this time the rug may not be enough to cover up what the Clintons did.