As part of a “side arrangement” made in June, the FBI agreed to destroy the laptops of two of former secretary of state Hillary Clinton’s top aides after granting each immunity – according to a letter House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) sent to Attorney General Loretta Lynch on Monday.

In the letter, Goodlatte alleges that the FBI promised to destroy the laptop of Clinton’s former chief-of-staff, Cheryl Mills, as well as the laptop of her ex-campaign staffer – and deputy to Mills – Heather Samuelson. The destruction of the evidence was agreed to take place after the FBI conducted its search.

Who’s the FBI and DOJ taking their orders from?

It was also discovered from unnamed sources that the covert operation was to take place under strict time parameters, apparently in order to cover any tracks.

“Sources said the arrangement with former Clinton chief of staff Cheryl Mills and ex-campaign staffer Heather Samuelson also limited the search to no later than Jan. 31, 2015,” Fox News reported. “This meant investigators could not review documents for the period after the email server became public – in turn preventing the bureau from discovering if there was any evidence of obstruction of justice, sources said.”

Why destroy ‘irrelevant’ info?

Looking for answers to figure out the true nature of the immunity deals, Goodlatte asked Lynch in his letter for an explanation as to why the Department of Justice (DOJ) and FBI agreed to the restrictive conditions, which included the FBI’s promise that it would destroy the laptops at the conclusion of its search.

“Like many things about this case, these new materials raise more questions than answers,” the Republican chairman expressed to the attorney general in the letter obtained by Fox News.

Goodlatte then questioned Lynch on the contradicting accounts that he observed.

“Doesn’t the willingness of Ms. Mills and Ms. Samuelson to have their laptops destroyed by the FBI contradict their claim that the laptops could have been withheld because they contained non-relevant, privileged information?” he inquired. “If so, doesn’t that undermine the claim that the side agreements were necessary?”

The revealed information unfolds yet another page in the Democratic presidential nominee’s ongoing email server scandal that has escalated in recent months.

“The immunity deals for Mills and Samuelson – made as part of the FBI’s probe into Clinton’s use of a private email server when she served as secretary of state – apparently included a series of ‘side agreements’ that were negotiated by Samuelson and Mills’ attorney Beth Wilkinson,” Fox News divulged. “The side deals were agreed to on June 10, less than a month before FBI Director James Comey announced that the agency would recommend no charges be brought against Clinton or her staff.”

According to a statement given to Fox News by House Judiciary Committee aides, the destruction of the laptops poses major problems because it precluded the computers from being used as evidence for future legal proceedings, if changes in the case occur.

Another point brought up by the aides had to do with the side deal. They were confounded as to why the FBI and DOJ would enter into a voluntary negotiation in the first place – especially considering the fact that the laptops were accessible “condition-free” through the use of a subpoena.

What are you hiding?

Goodlatte inquired in his letter to the attorney general why the DOJ agreed to restrict its search of the laptops to files dated before January 31, 2015.

“[The limited search would] give up any opportunity to find evidence related to the destruction of evidence or obstruction of justice related to Secretary Clinton’s unauthorized use of a private email server during her tenure as Secretary of State,” he reasoned to Lynch.

Fox News reported that the Committee aides indicated they were shocked over the set parameter, expressing that the news is deeply problematic because both Mills and Samuelson had already been granted immunity from being held accountable for anything discovered on the laptops.

“You’re essentially extending immunity to everyone,” an aide told the conservative news group.

Goodlatte wrote Lynch with the intention of finding out the approximate number of documents that were restricted from FBI investigators – due to the fact that they were dated beyond the DOJ’s agreed-upon date of January 31, 2015.


Copyright American Family News. Reprinted with permission.

No votes yet.
Please wait...