I recently wrote a column on FBI investigation into the Clinton email scandal and revised my view as to the handling of the investigation in light of the five immunity deals handed out by the Justice Department. I had previously noted that FBI Director James Comey was within accepted lines of prosecutorial discretion in declining criminal charges, even though I believed that such charges could have been brought. However, the news of the immunity deals (and particularly the deal given top ranking Clinton aide Cheryl Mills) was baffling and those deals seriously undermined the ability to bring criminal charges in my view. Now, Comey has testified before both the Senate and the House. His answers only magnified concerns over the impact and even the intent of granting immunity to those most at risk of criminal charges.
Hillary Clinton’s position on the email scandal has repeatedly changed from its first emergence in the presidential campaign from denial of bad judgment to the denial of the use of the private server for any classified information to the denial of any material “marked” as classified to the denial of seeing or understanding classified markings. However, one claim has remained unchanged. Clinton has maintained that she and her staff have “cooperated fully” with investigators. That claim was previously shown to be untrue when it was revealed that neither Clinton nor her staff would agree to speak with State Department investigators even though they said that such interviews were needed to determine the scope any damage to national security or security breaches. Now, however, the lack of cooperation has been put into sharper relief with the testimony of FBI Director James B. Comey this week. My column this week raised serious misgivings over the handling of the investigation with the disclosure of five immunity grants by the Justice Department, including one given to Cheryl Mills. Those misgivings were raised with Comey before the United States Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee where Comey revealed the extent to which Clinton aides refused to cooperate, including an assertion of the privilege against self-incrimination raised before answering questions about a key telephone conference conversation before the infamous “bleaching” over email records being sought by Congress. Comey testifies today before the House Oversight Committee. I am currently scheduled to discuss these issues tonight on the O’Reilly Factor.
The controversy over the death of Keith Lamont Scott continues to get more complicated. While the family insisted that Scott was unarmed, that now appears false. Not only was a gun found at the scene but it reportedly had his DNA and fingerprints on it. Now, reports now indicate that Scott’s gun was stolen and bought illegally from the thief. In the meantime, however, protesters are now calling for the resignation of the mayor and the police chief in Charlotte.
Last week, the disclosure of a total of five immunity agreements handed out by the Justice Department as part of its investigation of the Clinton email scandal. The extent of the deals and the recipients were surprising, particularly in the failure to previously disclose those deals. As a criminal defense lawyer, I was surprised to see the deals include Cheryl Mills, one of the highest officials accused in the deletion of tens of thousands of emails and the failure to heed warnings over the risk to national security from the use of the Clinton private server. Below is the column.
Customs officials at Graz airport in Austria made a shocking discovery in the carry on luggage of a Moroccan woman: the entrails of her husband. If that is not bizarre enough, Austrian police insist that there is nothing illegal in taking body parts of your loved ones as carry on — subject to any size limitations of the airline of course.
Let it not be said that football does not bring people together . . . or at least the hatred of certain teams. When South Carolina Officer Michael Blackmore saw a man about to jump off a bridge, he struggled to find a common connection or interest. He found it in their mutual hatred for the Dallas Cowboys. With the crushing defeat of my Chicago Bears last night, I also have found a new reason to live.
If you were still wondering what the thousands of dead and wounded U.S. soldiers (and billions in funds) lost in Afghanistan accomplished, your confusion is about to be exponentially increased. This week, our Afghan allies in the government pardoned one of the most ruthless terrorists in the world — a man who murdered Americans, supported throwing acid in the faces of girls and women, and stood out among the most blood-soaked terrorists in the world. He is now effectively the ally of the Afghan government and by extension the United States. The man is Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, the hated leader of the militant group, Hezb-i-Islami. He is better known by his popular and well-earned nickname: “The Butcher of Kabul.”