New developments in the investigation into the Hillary emails have exposed it for the insane witch-hunt that it is, thanks to the discovery of a Trump-hating lead investigator, former FBI section chief Peter Strzok. Strzok was relieved of his duties by Mueller after it was discovered that he was sending anti-Trump emails to his mistress a lawyer also working for Mueller. But there’s more to this story …
It has now been discovered that Strzok had been the lead interrogator of Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin, as well as Michael Flynn. Flynn was charged with lying to the FBI. – but both Mills and Abedin were also caught lying to Strzok, yet he didn’t charge either one of them. Mills had been granted immunity from prosecution but that went away the moment she lied. There’s obviously favoritism going on around here.
The FBI agent who was fired from Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation team for sending anti-Donald Trump text messages conducted the interviews with two Hillary Clinton aides accused of giving false statements about what they knew of the former secretary of state’s private email server.
Neither of the Clinton associates, Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin, faced legal consequences for their misleading statements, which they made in interviews last year with former FBI section chief Peter Strzok
But another Strzok interview subject was not so lucky.
Michael Flynn, the former national security adviser, pleaded guilty last week to lying during an interview he gave on Jan. 24 to Strzok and another FBI agent.
This new discovery now calls into question the investigation into Hillary’s emails as well as the charges against Michael Flynn. Unlike Abedin and Mills, who participated in the investigation into the illegal emails of Hillary Clinton, Flynn has not been arrested for anything more than lying about a perfectly legal contact with a Russian official on behalf of President Elect Trump. That means this goes far beyond a double standard.
This should trigger a special prosecutor to investigate the investigations conducted by close friends James Comey and Robert Mueller. Mueller could be charged with obstruction of justice for covering up the firing of Peter Strzok. How deliciously ironic. By the same token, Comey needs to explain why he allowed Mills and Abedin to get away with perjury and his cover up when he announced a lack of intent. If there was no intent, why did Mills and Abedin lie?
More From The Daily Caller
Summaries of the interviews, known as 302s, were released by the FBI last year.
A review of those documents conducted by The Daily Caller shows that Mills and Abedin told Strzok and Laufman that they were not aware of Clinton’s server until after she left the State Department.
“Mills did not learn Clinton was using a private server until after Clinton’s [Department of State] tenure,” reads notes from Mills’ April 9, 2016 interview. “Mills stated she was not even sure she knew what a server was at the time.”
Both Mills and Abedin claimed they did not know that Hillary was using a private server until Hillary left the State Department. That was a total lie – emails received by Mills and Abedin during Clinton’s time at State shows they both knew about the server at that time.
Comey defended Abedin and Mills while testifying before the House Oversight Committee, claiming that they just didn’t recollect the incident properly. Yeah, and John Dillinger thought that was his money he removed from the bank. Committee Chairman jason Chaffetz did not let Comey off the hook and pressed him on the issue.
“I think she lied to everybody,” he said of Mills in an interview on Fox News the night of the Comey hearing.
“There’s direct evidence that she actually did know [about the server],” said Chaffetz, who added that Comey’s defense of Mills “makes no sense.”
Comey’s defense of Mills makes a lot of sense. He’s corrupt. That’s easy enough to understand.