Guest post by Joe Hoft

The FBI leadership under the Obama Administration took many actions that deviated from standard practice and/or were corrupt and/or criminal in their efforts to exonerate Hillary from her crimes and then spy and frame candidate and then President Trump. Today current members of the FBI are embarrassed to even turn on their TV’s as a result.

Time magazine of all places reported recently about the many efforts the FBI took related to Hillary exoneration and then the Trump framing. These corrupt and criminal actions have taken a desperate toll on the current members of the FBI –

In normal times, the televisions are humming at the FBI’s 56 field offices nationwide, piping in the latest news as agents work their investigations. But these days, some agents say, the TVs are often off to avoid the crush of bad stories about the FBI itself. The bureau, which is used to making headlines for nabbing crooks, has been grabbing the spotlight for unwanted reasons: fired leaders, texts between lovers and, most of all, attacks by President Trump. “I don’t care what channel it’s on,” says Tom O’Connor, a veteran investigator in Washington who leads the FBI Agents Association. “All you hear is negative stuff about the FBI … It gets depressing.”

TRENDING: BREAKING: Senate Finance and Homeland Security Committees Release DEVASTATING Report on Hunter Biden, Burisma and Corruption -- CROOKED BIDEN FAMILY ENRICHED THEMSELVES AND OBAMA KNEW!

Of course the employees of the FBI are in a funk, their fearless and corrupt leaders, as well as leaders in Obama’s corrupt DOJ, went to extravagant links to exonerate the obvious criminal actions of Hillary Clinton, and then to do all they could to prevent candidate Trump from winning an election. Then once the election was won by President Trump, they went to unheard of depths of deceit and corruption to attempt to remove him from office.

Here’s a list of more than 100 actions the Deep State FBI and DOJ took that were either outside of policy and/or were corrupt and/or were criminal surrounding the 2016 Presidential election and exoneration of Hillary Clinton and the setup/attempts to remove Donald Trump from office –



In 2008, a questionable person on John McCain’s presidential campaign caught the attention of FBI counterintelligence, and the FBI privately approached McCain. That questionable person was quietly removed from Team McCain. The Trump campaign was never afforded this same courtesy [source]. Paul Manafort interviewed with the FBI twice before he joined the Trump campaign [source] (If Manafort was guilty of anything, he was guilty during the time period he served as McCain’s campaign manager, not Trump’s campaign manager, and if Manafort was guilty of anything, why did it take ten years for the FBI to take action against Manafort?) And why didn’t the FBI warn Trump about Manafort if they had concerns? Somehow every clear security breach in the Clinton camp was no big deal, while every fourth-hand contact with someone who could possibly be linked to Russia was evidence that Donald Trump was secretly serving as a Russian agent [source]. Comey made no public show of his announcement on the Oct. 28, 2016, decision to reopen the Clinton email investigation. Instead, Comey quietly sent a terse and private letter to the chairs and the ranking members of the oversight committees on the Hill, informing them, vaguely, that the FBI was taking additional steps in the Clinton email investigation, unlike the public announcement about the counterintelligence investigation of the Trump campaign [source]. FiveEyes has a standing agreement to not spy on each other’s citizens without a warrant, and yet, the FBI and the CIA frequently accepted both official and unofficial intelligence on members of the Trump campaign, from not only FiveEyes but other countries as well [source]. Additionally with regard to FiveEyes, not using normal intelligence channels for a major counterintelligence investigation and, instead, relying on political channels is another deviation from the standard practice, such as in the instance of Alexander Downer relaying information to the State Department who then passed it on to the FBI [source]. Andrew McCabe, the former deputy director of the FBI, told House lawmakers during a closed-door interview in late 2017 that other than the probe into Hillary Clinton’s unauthorized use of a private email server, he was not aware of any instance in which an FBI exoneration statement was drafted months prior to the conclusion of an investigation as was done (twice) in the case of the Midyear investigation [source]. Right before the election, the DOJ also inexplicably dropped all charges against Marc Turi in the Benghazi legal matter that had lasted for five years. Some saw it as a way to protect Clinton [source]. Comey sidestepped direct questions over whether Clinton’s carelessness should disqualify her from future access to classified information but indicated that any government employee who had similarly handled secret government information would be subject to a rigorous security review to determine “suitability” [source]. IG Report: Nobody was listed as a subject of this [Clinton email] investigation at any point in time (So neither Hillary nor her top aides were formally under investigation by FBI at any time in 2015-2016, but the agents handling the issue thought it was a criminal action) [source]. There was no investigation regarding Bill Clinton’s famously clandestine meeting with the head of the Department of Justice, Loretta Lynch, on a private plane in Phoenix just days before the FBI announced its decision to exonerate Clinton [source]. Lindsey Graham recently argued, in the Washington Post, “You can be an FBI informant. You can be a political operative. But you can’t be both, particularly at the same time.” (The FBI knew of Steele’s politics but continued to engage him). A deviation from the standard practice is to start an investigation without a crime. Under FBI and Justice Department guidelines for opening a full investigation, agents have to first establish an “articulable factual basis,” which means facts must be specified and verified. And investigators have to have a “reasonable suspicion,” as opposed to mere speculation, that a suspect committed a crime. In a May 19, 2017, text message to McCabe’s counsel Lisa Page, Strzok remarked, “My gut sense and concern is there’s no big there, there” regarding collusion. Page also admitted during a private 2018 congressional interview that when McCabe opened the probes, “We still couldn’t answer the question [of whether Trump conspired with the Kremlin]. … It still existed in the scope of possibility that there would be literally nothing” to connect Trump with Russia [source]. Investigators are tasked with “detecting and interrupting criminal activities at their early stages, and preventing crimes from occurring in the first place,” which is much more preferable than “allowing criminal plots to come to fruition.” According to the DIOG, assessments and investigations should be proactive to stop crimes or “national security-threatening activities.” In other words, law enforcement can’t just sit back and eat popcorn while they watch subjects weave their way toward a crime so they can catch them in the act. The purpose of law enforcement is to actively stop danger in its tracks, not urge it on with passive observation (This occurred not only during the Russian hacking incidents but also with the elements of the Trump campaign that the FBI/Obama admin declared to be troubling) [source]. The FBI’s miss of the Russian influence operation against the 2016 election, which went largely undetected for more than two years (The FBI had the chance to kill this Russian intrusion years before it reached crisis point in the election). Mueller’s Russia probe has found that Moscow’s operation against the 2016 election first got underway in 2014, but the FBI failed to grasp the scope and danger of what was unfolding [source]. The bureau missed the significance of the damaging 2015 hack of the DNC database [source]. Instead of opening an investigation as procedure demands, Comey usurped the role of Loretta Lynch, further compounding the first error) Comey would later say he broke with normal procedures whereby the FBI collects evidence and the Department of Justice decides whether to bring charges, because he believed Attorney General Loretta Lynch had engaged in actions that raised doubts about her credibility, including secretly meeting with Clinton’s husband, the former president, just days before the FBI interviewed her [source]. Peter Strzok forwarded a draft of the warrant to his personal email account in violation of FBI policy and further violated department policy by editing the warrant affidavit on his home email account, bypassing the FBI system for recording such government business. He also began drafting a second exoneration statement before conducting the search [source]. Two FBI investigators were in a “relationship” while they were working on the Clinton email investigation and later were married [source]. Peter Strzok/Lisa Page were having an affair in the middle of a counterintelligence probe and later became part of the Special Counsel Mueller probe, which in and of itself is a compromise [source]. Initially, the FBI and Department of Justice claimed [Bruce Ohr] had no involvement in the probe, despite his marriage to a Fusion GPS contractor. Then they claimed his role was unique and was unknown by others in the department [source]. The Obama administration pulled the levers of every available tool of the state (CIA, FBI, NSA, FISA etc.) to not only illegally surveil the campaign of their political opponents but to usurp and obstruct Mr. Trump’s every effort even after assuming the office of the Presidency [source]. The FISA Court continued to authorize FISA warrants on the Trump campaign members after finding that the Obama admin had used the FISA process to punish political foes [source]. James Clapper limited the IC report for review to only 3 agencies rather than send the report out to all 17 agencies for review. This way he was able to control the outcome of the investigation [source]. The FBI failed to farm out the classified information found on the unsecured laptop to other intelligence agencies for review as part of a national security damage assessment — even though Horowitz confirmed that Clinton’s illegal email activity, in a major security breach, gave “foreign actors” access to unknowable quantities of classified material and despite the fact that an internal FBI review did find that the server was compromised by unauthorized individuals [source]. 2016-08-02 Peter Strzok, while still in London, submits a report on his interview of UK intelligence officials “Summarizing report was a “break in diplomatic protocol.” The following text message from Peter Strzok-Lisa Page is referring to this report. This information in this report “helped provide the foundation” for the case – instead of sparked the case – as has been claimed” [source]. Comey’s FBI did not pursue “intent” with Mrs. Clinton during the late hour interview. While this may not sound all that important, simple acceptance of the explanation that the server was purely for personal convenience allowed for Mrs. Clinton not to be charged with evading federal statutes. Indeed, lack of intent was one of the primary excuses Comey used in his decision to declare her cleared [source]. However, in the case of Dr. John M. Deutch (similar case to Clinton’s), “intent” was never a factor of that investigation [source]. “An unclassified email system is no place for classified information,” he [Comey] added. “The root of the problem is people using personal email systems to conduct business that is classified’’ while FBI agents in charge of the Clinton email investigation violated these same policies [source]. During the low-level assessment stage (before the counterintelligence investigation is formally opened), there can be no use of a confidential human source or undercover agent (such as was done in the case of Stefan Halper). It’s strictly forbidden. Only public records, information from other departments, voluntary interviews, etc., can be used at this stage [source]. Roger Stone and Mike Caputo say they believe they were the targets of a setup by U.S. law enforcement officials hostile to Trump….They cite records showing that the man who approached Stone is actually a Russian national who has claimed to work as an FBI informant, which, if true, was before an official investigation had commenced, a deviation from standard practice [source]. The DOJ knew that political actors were involved in the creation and use of the Steele Dossier at the time of initial FISA application [source]. Peter Kadzik requested that the subject of his investigation employ his son and then shared classified case information with the representative of the same subject (John Podesta) and attended intimate dinner parties with that representative as well. Additionally, records indicate Kadzik and Podesta were close friends in college [source]. Peter Kadzik refuses to confirm or deny whether the DOJ is investigating Clinton [source]. Joe Biden (whom the DOJ and FBI reported to) and his son enter into a financial relationship with China who was concurrently under investigation for hacking at the time [source]. The FBI wasn’t adequately investigating “high-risk” employees who failed polygraph tests (but, in fact, putting them in charge of high-profile investigations, like Peter Strzok who failed his poly). In one instance, an FBI IT specialist with top-secret security clearance failed four polygraph tests and admitted to having created a fictitious Facebook account to communicate with a foreign national but received no disciplinary action for that [source]. And the FBI agents in charge of investigating the polygraph results, like Andrew Castor, had questionable pasts all their own [source]. The threat assessment stage of the FBI’s investigation in 2016 likely occurred sometime in late winter/early spring because former Attorney General Loretta Lynch testified that she met with Comey about the intelligence “matter” during this period. At this early stage, she and Comey decided not to tell the Trump campaign about possible national security threats regarding his campaign. When the topic was revisited in late spring, they again decided to say nothing. This choice to remain silent was a deviation from established guidelines (At the same time, however, Lynch was warning the Trump admin about Michael Flynn) [source]. The Obama administration took extraordinary measures to withhold information from Congress about its Trump-Russia probe — such as not briefing the bipartisan leaders of the both chambers and their intelligence committees, the “Gang of Eight” [source]. Andrew McCabe entered into a financial relationship with the DNC/Terry McAuliffe, a close friend and confidante of Hillary Clinton, who was also the subject of the investigation that McCabe was overseeing. Then the DNC endorsed McCabe’s wife’s political candidacy. McCabe later recuses himself from the investigation into Hillary Clinton but then maintains some amount of control over the investigation after the recusal [source]. Andrew McCabe lied to the bureau’s internal investigations branch to cover up a leak he orchestrated about Clinton’s family foundation less than two weeks before the election and had lied for months about it [source]. Not following the Woods Procedure: Trisha Anderson admitted that the Page FISA process was handled outside of normal procedures, receiving early approvals from leadership officials at both the FBI and DOJ—including Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe and Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates—prior to the document reaching her desk [source]. The FBI interviewed Carter Page in March of 2016 about his Russian ties before his being hired by Team Trump. Two months later, Comey is briefing the NSC about his concerns about Carter Page. Nothing of any note happened in those intervening months to cause a rise of concerns, so whatever concerns Comey had Comey had them before Page was hired on as an adviser. It was a deviation from the standard practice for Comey to not have warned Trump about Page. Comey warns Obama instead who also takes no steps to warn Trump either. Comey had the opportunity to prevent someone he believed to be a Russian spy from infiltrating the Trump campaign and failed to do so [source]. “The attorney general seemed to be directing me to align with the Clinton campaign strategy. Her ‘just do it’ response to my question indicated that she had no legal or procedural justification for her request, at least not one grounded in our practices or traditions. Otherwise, I assume, she would have said so,” Comey later recounted in his memoir, A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies, and Leadership [source]. Comey also said he had seen material that he thought might cast “serious doubt” about Lynch’s independence [source]. Later, though Comey repeatedly told President Trump he was not a suspect, he gave House testimony patently geared to lead the public and the media to believe Trump was a suspect – which is exactly how the media reported it. In so doing, the FBI (and the Obama holdovers in the Justice Department who authorized Comey’s testimony) violated DOJ rules about publicly confirming the existence of an investigation, and publicly identifying a subject of an investigation: the Trump campaign, which Comey publicly announced was suspected of “coordinating” in the Kremlin’s widely reported cyber-espionage interference in the 2016 campaign [source]. Comey’s unprecedented leaking of classified material to the press and then denying it [source]. Comey sent FBI agents to question General Michael Flynn about perfectly legal conversations they already had transcripts of, without following White House protocol, in a deliberate effort to entrap him [source]. Unprecedented leaking to the press: 13 different individuals at the FBI were feeding a journalist information [source]. IG report has “profound concerns” about the volume and extent of unauthorized media contact by FBI personnel which influenced the 2016 investigations [source]. FBI employees improperly received graft from journalists [source]. The “probable cause” arrest of George Papadopoulos is a deviation from the standard practice [source]. Dan Bongino asks the question: How did Halper go from being a CIA informant to an FBI informant? It is a deviation from the standard practice for law enforcement agencies to give up/share their assets. Furthermore, the CIA is prohibited from spying on American citizens. Was this transfer enabled to bypass this prohibition? [source]. The Director of the FBI is either a blatant liar, completely ignorant, or both: “I kind of just put it out of my mind,” he [Comey] said, because he claimed it did not “index” with him that Abedin was loosely connected to Clinton. “I don’t know that I knew that [Weiner] was married to Huma Abedin at the time” [source]. The FBI found Clinton guilty of essentially every act they investigated. Despite these findings, Director Comey cleared Clinton by making a statement that “no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case”. This allowed Loretta Lynch at DOJ to announce the matter closed. It also allowed Clinton to pronounce herself cleared of all wrongdoing. Note, the FBI does not decide who will be prosecuted. They investigate [source]. James Comey made it clear that the exoneration of Hillary Clinton’s crimes is only a one-time offer; that others committing the same offenses could not expect to be cleared as well: “To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions” [source]. James Comey took copious notes in the form of the Comey memos that were later leaked to the press and diligently informed others of all interactions with Trump while lying about having had any interactions with Obama, never taking notes or notifying anyone [source]. James Comey briefed John Brennan, James Clapper, Samantha Power, Loretta Lynch on the alleged Russian interference into the Trump campaign, yet the Trump campaign was left in the dark [source]. The FBI notifies members of Congress of sensitive matters on a quarterly basis; however, James Comey failed to notify Congress of the Trump-Russian investigation due to the “sensitivity of the matter” [source]. James Comey breached Justice Department protocols in a July 5, 2016, press conference when he criticized Hillary Clinton for using a private email server as Secretary of State even as he cleared her of any crimes [source]. James Comey reopened the Clinton email probe less than two weeks before the election (which violates the FBI’s policy of taking action so close to an election date) [source]. James Comey broke with Justice Department rules and norms by assuming authority usually held by prosecutors and speaking in public about a case that did not produce criminal charges [source]. Comey’s follow-up release of the FBI’s investigated file was done on the Friday before the long Labor Day weekend – a timing sure to stymie full reporting [source]. Director Comey did not interview Clinton until the end of the investigation – three days before the press conference where he announced his conclusions. This runs against standard FBI protocol. Typically (always) they get the witness on record early so they can see how the testimony holds against what they find in the investigation [source]. The FISA court application to surveil Carter Page — an application that breaks every rule in the book: anonymous foreign sources spouting multiple hearsay, no corroboration, no disclosure to the court that it comes from the opposition presidential campaign, no explanation that the foreigner who supplied the unverified allegations has been booted from the investigation for lying, etc., [source]. The initial FISA application does not include Steele’s employment by Fusion GPS or founder Glenn Simpson. Fusion GPS was paid by Perkins Coie – a law firm representing the DNC. Neither the initial FISA application in October 21, 2016 – nor any of the renewals – disclosed the role of the DNC and/or the Clinton Campaign’s funding of the Steel Dossier [source]. The political origins (funding) of the Steele dossier were known to senior DOJ and FBI officials when all FISA applications were made (and yet failed to disclose this information to the FISA Court) [source]. So even after having been warned of Mr. Steele’s motivations, even after having fired him for violating the rules, the FBI continued to seek his information—using Mr. Ohr as a back channel. This surely violates the FBI manual governing interaction with confidential human sources [source]. Newly released messages between Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr and Christopher Steele show that the pair maintained frequent contact as late as Nov. 27, 2017, more than a year after the FBI cut ties with Steele for disclosing to the media his association with the FBI, in violation of the bureau’s rules for confidential human sources [source]. Ohr was not assigned to the Trump–Russia investigation by the DOJ and apparently[?] kept his relationship with Steele secret from Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, his boss at the DOJ [source]. The FBI claimed it was “unaware of any derogatory information” about Steele, that Steele was “never advised … as to the motivation behind the research” but that the FBI “speculates” that those who hired Steele were “likely looking for information to discredit” Trump’s campaign [source], despite the fact that FOIA records later revealed that Steele was “admonished” by the FBI in 2/2/2016 and then ultimately fired by the FBI in November of 2016 for lying [source]. 2017-07-19 The FBI files a 302 in regard to Michael Flynn and Peter Strzok/Pientka interview. This 302 report was taken six months after the interview. This is a violation of FBI policy to have a contemporaneous record when interviewing a subject — Sara Carter noted that FBI reports must be placed in the system in a 1-A file within five days of the interview,” said Jeff Danik, former FBI SAC” [source]. The bureau also sat on the disputed dossier prepared by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele [source]. Nellie Ohr worked for Fusion GPS and, for a time, worked on the same Clinton-financed Russian research project as Steele, according to the testimony. DOJ ethics rules forbid department officials from working in cases where a spouse has a financial interest, a prohibition that Bruce Ohr said he knew about when he forwarded his wife’s evidence to the FBI. Ohr admitted his conduct was extremely unusual [source]. Even though the unique classified material was improperly stored and transmitted on an unsecured device, the FBI did not refer the matter to U.S. intelligence agencies to determine if national security had been compromised, as required under a federally mandated “damage assessment” directive [source]. FBI guidelines state that unverified information should not be submitted to the FISA court [source]; however, the FBI used the admittedly “salacious and unverified” opposition research called the Steele dossier paid for by the opponent in a political campaign to open a counterintelligence investigation and obtain warrants against US persons of the opposing campaign (Andrew McCabe testifies in private to HPSCI that no warrant would have been sought from FISA Court without Steele dossier [source]). Congressional investigators have confirmed that James Baker met with Democratic Party lawyers to talk about allegations of Donald Trump-Russia collusion weeks before the 2016 election and before the bureau secured a search warrant targeting Trump’s campaign [source]. The Justice Department is forbidden by federal law from hiring employees based on political affiliation. Yet the resumes revealed the following ideological breakdown among the new hires: Leftist lawyers: 113; Moderate, non-ideological, or conservative lawyers: 0 [source]. 97 Percent of the DOJ’s political donations went to the DNC [source]. An analyst with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and also a member of #Resist was charged for leaking Michael Cohen’s bank records to Michael Avenatti and The New Yorker [source]. The bureau’s decision to surveil former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page was influenced by politics [source]. IG report indicates a strong pro-Clinton/anti-Trump bias in FBI investigators of Midyear and Operation Russian Collusion [source]. FBI agents demonstrating the desire to affect the outcome of an investigation for political purposes: 2016-11-09 Unnamed Anti-Trump FBI agent assigned to Clinton email investigation and later to Team Mueller texting event-“I am numb,” the attorney wrote on Nov. 9, 2016, the day after President Trump’s election. “I am so stressed about what I could have done differently,” the lawyer continued, apparently referring to the FBI’s handling of the Clinton email probe [source]. Peter Strzok/Lisa Page texts appeared to show that they were prepared to take action in their official capacity as FBI agents to “stop” candidate Trump from winning the election, citing an “insurance policy” that they had put together [source] and [source]. Former prosecutors say that politics is the only explanation for why FBI brass dragged their feet for a month after the New York office alerted them about the Clinton emails [source]. Comey later admitted in his memoir “A Higher Loyalty,” that political calculations shaped his decisions during this period. But, he wrote, they were calibrated to help Clinton [source]. Peter Kadzik, who was forced to recuse himself from the Clinton email scandal due to his close relationship with Podesta and whose wife, Amy Weiss, currently at Weiss Public Affairs worked on the 1992 Clinton/Gore Campaign as a Press Secretary, and Communications Director for the Democratic National Committee, and a White House Deputy Assistant to the President/Deputy Press Secretary to President Bill Clinton [source], was the DOJ representative chosen to head up a “thorough” review of the new Huma Abedin emails as revealed by a letter he wrote to Congress [source], and this despite the fact that McCabe was forced to recuse himself from the email investigation “because of the perception” [source]. Robert Mueller obtains Trump transition emails without first obtaining a warrant [source]. Special Counsel Bob Mueller investigates Paul Manafort for his questionable ties to Viktor Yanukovych while Mueller has his own questionable ties to Yanukovych [source]. James Baker leaks evidence [Steele dossier] to the press [Mother Jones] during an ongoing investigation [source]. Special Counsel placing potential witnesses in charge of an investigation: Bruce Ohr informed then DOJ Andrew Weissman and Zainab Ahmad of Ohr’s contacts with Christopher Steele. Weissman and Ahmad later become a part of the Special Counsel’s team [source]. Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz believes Mueller has a conflict of interest because his FBI previously accepted financial help from a Russian that is, at the very least, a witness in the current probe [source]. Planting evidence [Isikoff article] in order to later be used in court to obtain a warrant [source]. Peter Strzok’s and Lisa Page’s phones should have been immediately seized and sealed in evidence bags and locked up tight the moment the IG requested those devices from the DOJ [source] but they were not. FBI was getting information it shouldn’t have had access to when it used controversial parts of the Patriot Act to obtain business records in terrorism and counterintelligence cases [source]. Before the Clinton email investigation was even begun, the FBI drafted exoneration letters: At the urging of Lynch, Comey began drafting a new exoneration statement several days before investigators finished reviewing the sample of emails they took from the Weiner laptop. High-level meeting notes reveal they even discussed sending Congress “more-clarifying” statements during the week to “correct misimpressions out there” [source]. We then learned through Comey’s congressional testimony that he decided to take it upon himself to clear Hillary Clinton on her email controversy, and that the memo clearing her was drafted months in advance of much of the actual investigating. Once he believed the attorney general was compromised, as he testified, he should have asked for an independent counsel. Instead he exceeded his role and authority, politicizing the FBI in the process [source]. IG found that the FBI and DOJ, during MidYearExam probe of Hillary Clinton email server, “did not require any witnesses to testify before the grand jury,” despite at least three witnesses lying to FBI agents [source]. Per Peter Strzok: “Re 302s, didn’t search the laptops given to us voluntarily by various attorneys” [source]. The IG report found: “The MYE Team did not seek to obtain every device, including those of Clinton’s senior aides, or the contents of every email account through which a classified email may have traversed [source]. The FBI granted immunity to five Clinton staff members — and agreed to destroy what evidence they did collect — when finished [source]. In his May 2017 testimony, however, Comey maintained that both Abedin and Weiner had been investigated [source]; however, it was later revealed that the FBI did not interview key witnesses Huma Abedin or Anthony Weiner in regard to the Weiner laptop issue [source]. The FBI ignored direct evidence that Clinton’s aides knew about the server and helped to cover its existence up. This is particularly important in regards to Cheryl Mills. She took on the role of personal attorney to Clinton upon leaving the State Department – since she was able to claim she didn’t know about the server until that time all conversations with Mrs. Clinton are protected by attorney-client privilege. There are emails that were public at the time and in the possession of the FBI that directly show Mills and Huma Abedin discussing the server as far back as 2010 [source]. On March 2, 2015 the NY Times broke the server story. On March 4, 2015, the House Select Committee on Benghazi issued a subpoena for Clinton to produce her emails. On March 31, 2015 an employee of the company that maintained the server deleted the archive mailbox from the server. The FBI found a work ticket related to the deletion that referenced a call with Clinton attorneys David Kendall and Cheryl Mills. This is destruction of evidence under subpoena and somehow the FBI chose not to investigate further [source]. FBI agents found Abedin deleting classified & Clinton emails from her Yahoo account but failed to subpoena her devices. If they had, maybe they wouldn’t have had to reopen the case in 11th hour when NY agents found work emails on the laptop she shared w her perv husband [source]. One career FBI special agent involved in the case complained to New York colleagues that officials in Washington tried to “bury” the new trove of evidence, which he believed contained the full archive of Clinton’s emails — including long-sought missing messages from her first months at the State Department [source]. After being notified of the “mother lode” of emails found on the Weiner laptop, Strzok remained uninterested. “This isn’t a ticking terrorist bomb,” he was quoted as saying in the recently issued inspector general’s report. Besides, he had bigger concerns, such as, “You know, is the government of Russia trying to get somebody elected here in the United States?” Strzok and headquarters sat on the mountain of evidence for another 26 days [source]. The FBI made public claims that the new emails were duplicates, but at least five classified emails recovered were not duplicates but new to investigators [source]. Sally Moyer — a registered Democrat, the lead FBI attorney on the Midyear team who had initially discounted the trove of new emails as “duplicates” and failed to act upon their discovery, who drafted an unusually narrow scope for the search warrant, and was also head of the email “filtering” team — after various searches of the laptop, she and the Midyear team came up with 6,827 emails they classified as being tied directly to Clinton. Moyer then culled away from that batch emails she deemed to be personal in nature and outside the scope of legal agreements, cutting the stack in half. That left 3,077 which she deemed “work related” out of 694,000 emails On Nov. 5, Moyer, Strzok and a third investigator divided up the remaining pool of 3,077 emails — roughly 1,000 emails each — and rifled through them for classified information and incriminating evidence in less than 12 hours, even though the identification of classified material is a complicated and prolonged process that requires soliciting input from the original classification authorities within the intelligence community [source]. The search warrant crafted by Sally Moyer on the Abedin/Weiner laptop was too narrow: “The FBI only reviewed emails to or from Clinton during the period in which she was Secretary of State, and not emails from Abedin or other parties or emails outside that period,” Horowitz pointed out in a section of his report discussing concerns that the search warrant request was “too narrow” [source]. Also excluded from the search warrant were Abedin’s Yahoo emails, even though investigators had previously found classified information on her Yahoo account and would arguably have probable cause to look at those emails as well [source]. Also removed from the search warrant were the BlackBerry data — even though the FBI had previously described them as the “golden emails,” because they covered the dark period early in Clinton’s term [source]. “Noticeably absent from the search warrant application prepared by the Midyear team is both any mention that the NYO agent had seen Clinton’s emails on the laptop and any mention of the potential presence of BlackBerry emails from early in Clinton’s tenure,” Horowitz noted [source]. Even though the BlackBerry messages were “critical to [the] assessment of the potential significance of the emails on the Weiner laptop, the information was not included in the search warrant application,” he stressed, adding that the search warrant application appeared to misrepresent the information provided by the New York field agent. It also grossly underestimated the extent of the material. The affidavit warrant mentioned “thousands of emails,” while the New York agent had told them that the laptop contained “hundreds of thousands” of relevant emails [source]. Strzok and his team never forensically examined the Weiner laptop to see if classified information residing on it had been hacked or compromised by a foreign power before Nov. 6, law enforcement sources say. A complete forensic analysis was never performed by technicians at the FBI’s lab at Quantico [source]. No electronic record exists of the case agent’s initial review of the Weiner laptop. The case agent told us that at some point in mid-October 2016 the NYO ASAC instructed the case agent to wipe his work station. The case agent explained that the ASAC was concerned about the presence of potentially classified information on the case agent’s work station, which was not authorized to process classified information. The case agent told us that he followed the ASAC’s instructions, but that this request concerned him because the audit trail of his initial processing of the laptop would no longer be available. The case agent clarified that none of the evidence on the Weiner laptop was impacted by this, explaining that the FBI retained the Weiner laptop and only the image that had been copied onto his work station was deleted. The ASAC recalled that the case agent “worked through the security department to address the concern” of classified information on an unclassified system. He told us that he did not recall how the issue was resolved [source]. The Department of Justice reportedly refused to impanel a grand jury in either the e-mail case or in connection with the FBI’s investigation of the Clinton Foundation pay-for-play allegations [source]. “Los Angeles agents had picked up information about the Clinton Foundation from an unrelated public-corruption case and had issued some subpoenas for bank records related to the foundation. Anti-corruption prosecutors at the Justice Department told the FBI they wouldn’t authorize more aggressive investigative techniques, such as subpoenas, formal witness interviews, or grand-jury activity” [source]. Anthony Weiner’s laptop was sent out to a private company, Granite Intelligence, after being seized by the FBI instead of preserving the chain of custody within the FBI evidence lockers [source]. “Most of the emails were never examined, even though they made up potentially 10 times the evidence” of what was reviewed in the original year-long case that Comey closed in July 2016, said a law enforcement official with direct knowledge of the investigation. Yet even the “extremely narrow” search that was finally conducted, after more than a month of delay, uncovered more classified material sent and/or received by Clinton through her unauthorized basement server, the official said. Contradicting Comey’s testimony, this included highly sensitive information dealing with Israel and the U.S.-designated terrorist group Hamas. The former secretary of state, however, was never confronted with the sensitive new information and it was never analyzed for damage to national security [source].

The FBI and DOJ are two of the most mistrusted entities in the US today because of the actions of the leaders of these departments during the Obama Administration through today. The Mueller investigation which resulted from their corrupt and criminal acts is an extension of the corruption. Until this all is addressed, the US is officially a banana republic.

Major hat tip to D. Manny who put this list together!