Internal watchdog to review FBI's handling of Clinton emails probe before election

FBI Director James Comey's handling of an investigation into Hillary Clinton's private email server – including last-minute developments the weekend before the election – have prompted complaints from Democrats upset over Donald Trump's win.

|
Joshua Roberts/ Reuters
FBI Director James Comey waits to testify to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence hearing on "Russia’s intelligence activities" on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S. January 10, 2017.

In yet another aftershock from the chaotic presidential campaign, the Justice Department inspector general opened an investigation Thursday into department and FBI actions before the election, including whether FBI Director James Comey followed established policies in the email investigation of Hillary Clinton.

Democrats have blamed Comey's handling of the inquiry into Clinton's use of a private email server, and his late-October public letter about the case, as one reason for her loss to Republican Donald Trump.

Workers are now putting final touches on preparations for next week's Inauguration Day festivities, and the new probe will not change the election results. But it revives questions of whether the FBI took actions that might have influenced the outcome.

IG Michael Horowitz, the department's internal watchdog, will direct the investigation, which comes in response to requests from members of Congress and the public.

Comey said he was pleased about the review and the FBI would cooperate fully with the inspector general.

"I hope very much he is able to share his conclusions and observations with the public because everyone will benefit from thoughtful evaluation and transparency regarding this matter," he said in a statement.

One part of the review will concern Comey's news conference last July in which he said the FBI would not recommend charges against Clinton for her use of a private email system during her tenure as secretary of state. Trump repeatedly criticized that practice, contending it put national security secrets at risk.

Trump also declared at raucous rallies during the campaign that he would seek a special prosecutor to investigate Clinton and that she would be in jail if he were elected. But he said after the election that he did not intend to seek a new investigation of her.

Comey, during his announcement in the summer, broke protocol when he chastised Clinton and her aides as "extremely careless" in their email practices. It's highly unusual for federal law enforcement officials to discuss a criminal case that ends without charges being filed.

Comey reignited the email controversy on Oct. 28 when he informed Congress that agents would be reviewing a cache of emails between Clinton aide Huma Abedin and Clinton for any new evidence related to Clinton's handling of sensitive State Department material.

That move boiled in the campaign for nine days, before Comey announced on Nov. 6 – two days before Election Day – that the inquiry had found no new evidence of wrongdoing.

Clinton and her aides have said the disclosure of the "new" emails, found on a laptop belonging to former New York Rep. Anthony Weiner, Abedin's estranged husband, hurt the candidate in several battleground states. Trump won the election in part with narrow victories in Democratic-leaning states like Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania.

Given the unprecedented last-minute rush to review Clinton's emails, members of Congress from both parties were likely to seek an investigation regardless of who won, as the Monitor's Peter Grier wrote the day before the general election.

"If there is any clear loser in this whole affair it is likely to be the FBI itself," Mr. Grier added. "Leaks have portrayed in agency riven by internal warfare over the seriousness of the emails and other perceived Clinton transgressions. It seems far from the just-the-facts-ma’am image of the FBI long featured in popular media portrayals."

Comey's statements prompted outrage from Clinton and other Democrats who said they needlessly placed her under fresh suspicion when the FBI didn't even know whether the emails were relevant.

Court documents released last month said the FBI had been trying to get a look at thousands of Clinton's emails on the disgraced former congressman's computer to see if anyone had hacked in to steal classified information. Weiner's laptop was initially seized by agents for an investigation into his online relationship with a teenage girl in North Carolina.

Rep. Jason Chaffetz, a Utah Republican who leads the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, wrote Thursday on Twitter that he supports the IG's review "of what happened at the (hashtag)DOJ and (hashtag)FBI during the Clinton investigation."

Horowitz's broad investigation will also look into allegations that the FBI's deputy director should have been recused from participating in certain investigative matters and allegations that department officials improperly disclosed non-public information to the Clinton campaign.

It will also delve into decision-making related to the timing of the FBI's release of Freedom of Information Act documents in the days before the election and the use of a Twitter account to publicize them.

Asked about the new investigation, Attorney General Loretta Lynch told The Associated Press in Baltimore that "we let them conduct their review before we make any statement about that." She added that "obviously everyone's going to await the results of that."

Associated Press writer Eric Tucker in Baltimore contributed to this report.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Internal watchdog to review FBI's handling of Clinton emails probe before election
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2017/0112/Internal-watchdog-to-review-FBI-s-handling-of-Clinton-emails-probe-before-election
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe