Wednesday, October 5, 2016

The FBI's Shameful and Possible Illegal Destruction of Evidence

It was quite shocking for me to read the report that the FBI allowed for the destruction of evidence, that could have potentially been used in the investigation of Hillary Clinton or others, in order to assure the testimony of Clinton's subordinates who had already been granted immunity from criminal prosecution (source). If that report is true and correct:

That they did so would have been akin to me investigating a major narcotics kingpin and telling his mules that they had immunity and that I would also destroy not only their heroin or cocaine but the records of their drug pick-ups, deliveries, clients and cash receipts. Even though the mules would have had immunity, all of those things so destroyed could have been preserved as evidence and used in the investigation and prosecution of the narcotics kingpin. As for the computers and the records on them, they could have been used in the investigation and possible prosecution of Clinton even though her aides would not have been prosecuted because they had immunity.

Clinton's minion already were in essence untouchable (no pun intended) by the FBI. It is absolutely unthinkable, based upon my 32 years in federal law enforcement, that the FBI agreed to destroy their computers and not completely examine them and gather evidence from them  and then preserve that evidence. Since Clinton's people had been granted immunity and could not be prosecuted for anything found on them, the only reason to do so, as far as I can fathom, would be to cover something up such as Clinton's guilt. Clinton may have destroyed many of the emails on her server but my bet is that her aides, at least some of them, did not erase the ones they received from her.

I believe not only that it was shameful for the FBI to have done so but that it was quite possibly illegal for them to have done it.  Even if not illegal, it was both unethical (because it hints of outright corruption) and constituted an what amounted to an extremely poor investigative technique (if you can call it an investigation, to me it seems more like a cover-up). This reeks of blatant corruption at the highest levels of government. Most certainly, if none of those, then if not the worst, it was among the worst off all investigative blunders I have ever witnessed and the persons responsible need to be removed from office.

The truth is that not only does Clinton need further investigating but I think so too does the Attorney General (remember it was only two or three days after Clinton had a meeting with her on an airport tarmac, that the case was closed), the head of the FBI and any agent or technician involved in said case. I very seriously believe that if I was working for the FBI, when that happened, I would either have commenced such and investigation myself or if I did not do that then I would have transferred to another agency or resigned/retired in shame if not disgrace.

All the best,
Glenn B

No comments: