http://www.wsj.com/articles/jim-comeys-blind-eye-1475191703

[partial quote follows]
By 
KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL
Sept. 29, 2016 7:28 p.m. ET
1067 COMMENTS
Two revealing, if largely unnoticed, moments came in the middle of FBI Director 
Jim Comey’s Wednesday testimony before the House Judiciary Committee. When 
combined, these moments prove that Mr. Comey gave Hillary Clinton a pass.
Congress hauled Mr. Comey in to account for the explosive revelation that the 
government granted immunity to Clinton staffers Cheryl Mills and Heather 
Samuelson as part of its investigation into whether Mrs. Clinton had mishandled 
classified information. Rep. Tom Marino (R., Pa.), who was once a Justice 
Department prosecutor and knows how these investigations roll, provided the 
first moment. He asked Mr. Comey why Ms. Mills was so courteously offered 
immunity in return for her laptop—a laptop that Mr. Comey admitted 
investigators were very keen to obtain. Why not simply impanel a grand jury, 
get a subpoena, and seize the evidence?
Mr. Comey’s answer was enlightening: “It’s a reasonable question. . . . Any 
time you are talking about the prospect of subpoenaing a computer from a 
lawyer—that involves the lawyer’s practice of law—you know you are getting into 
a big megillah.” Pressed further, he added: “In general, you can often do 
things faster with informal agreements, especially when you are interacting 
with lawyers.”
The key words: “The lawyer’s practice of law.” What Mr. Comey was referencing 
here is attorney-client privilege. Ms. Mills was able to extract an immunity 
deal, avoid answering questions, and sit in on Mrs. Clinton’s FBI interview 
because she has positioned herself as Hillary’s personal lawyer. Ms. Mills 
could therefore claim that any conversations or interactions she had with Mrs. 
Clinton about the private server were protected by attorney-client privilege.  
Only here’s the rub: When Ms. Mills worked at the State Department she was not 
acting as Mrs. Clinton’s personal lawyer. She was the secretary's chief of 
staff. Any interaction with Mrs. Clinton about her server, or any evidence from 
that time, should have been fair game for the FBI and the Justice Department.
Ms. Mills was allowed to get away with this “attorney-client privilege” 
nonsense only because she claimed that she did not know about Mrs. Clinton’s 
server until after they had both left the State Department. Ergo, no questions 
about the server.   [end of partial quote]

             Jim Bell

Reply via email to