One of the four FBI case agents working on the Hillary Clinton email investigation—who was also one of the two FBI agents who interviewed her at the conclusion of that investigation—triumphantly referred to Clinton as “the President” four days after that interview—and four months before the election.
Later, on election day, in an instant message exchange with another FBI agent who had also worked on the Clinton investigation, this FBI agent declared: “screw you trump.”
The other agent said in the same instant-message exchange: “You should know…that I’m…with her.”
These two FBI investigators who were in a “relationship” while they were working on the Clinton email investigation later were married.
The report released yesterday by the inspector general for the Department of Justice referred to these two FBI agents not by their names but as “Agent 1” and “Agent 5.”
The report said of these FBI agents that “we identified two instant message exchanges that appeared to combine a discussion of politics with the Midyear investigation.” (The FBI referred to the Clinton email investigation as “Midyear Exam,” “Midyear,” or “MYE.”)
On July 2, the FBI interviewed Hillary Clinton about her use of a private email server as secretary of state and the presence of classified information on emails that she sent through this server.
But, according to the IG report, the FBI had already decided not to prosecute Clinton prior to this interview–unless she confessed or lied.
“By the time of Clinton’s interview on July 2, we found that the Midyear agents and prosecutors, along with Comey, had decided that absent a confession or false statements by Clinton, the investigation would be closed without charges,” says the IG report.
Three days later, FBI Director James Comey unilaterally announced that the FBI would not be recommending that charges be brought against Clinton—despite “evidence of potential violations of statutes.”
“Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case,” he said.
At the same time, Comey thanked FBI personnel for what he called their “remarkable work” on the Clinton case and said that Americans would better understand how “proud” he was of these FBI agents when they had a “better sense” of the work they had done on the Clinton case.
“I want to start by thanking the FBI employees who did remarkable work in this case,” Comey said. “Once you have a better sense of how much we have done, you will understand why I am so grateful and proud of their efforts.”
Because of information released in the IG report, it is now known that the day after Comey’s announcement FBI “Agent 1”—“one of four agents responsible for the day-to-day activities” of the Clinton investigation—had an instant message exchange with another unidentified “FBI employee” in which he talked about his interview of Clinton four days before—and called her “the President.”
Here is the exchange—verbatim—as presented in the IG report:
On July 6, 2016, the day after Comey’s Midyear declination announcement, Agent 1 and an FBI employee not involved with Midyear exchanged messages about the investigation. During the course of this discussion, Agent 1 described the prior weekend’s activities, which included the interview of Clinton. A portion of this instant message exchange follows. The sender of each message is noted after the timestamp.
15:07:41, Agent 1: “…I’m done interviewing the President – then type the 302. 18 hour day….”
15:13:32, FBI Employee: “you interviewed the president?”
15:17:09, Agent 1: “you know – HRC” [Hillary Rodham Clinton]
15:17:18, Agent 1: “future pres”
15:17:22, Agent 1: “Trump cant win”
15:17:31, Agent 1: “demographics dont line up”
15:17:37, Agent 1: “America has changed”
The IG report then indicates that officials from the IG’s office asked this FBI agent if he thought he had dealt with Clinton differently because he was convinced she would be the next president. Here is how the IG reported the response of “Agent 1”:
“We asked Agent 1 if he thought of Clinton as the next president while conducting the Midyear investigation. Agent 1 stated, ‘I think my impression going into the election in that personal realm is that all of the polls were favoring Hillary Clinton.’ We asked Agent 1 if he treated Clinton differently because of this assumption. Agent 1 stated, ‘Absolutely not. I think the message they said that our leadership told us and our actions were to find whatever was there and whatever, whatever that means is what it means.’”
On August 29 and September 9, 2016, according to the IG report, Agent 1 and the woman he would marry, Agent 5, engaged in an instant message exchange in which they expressed their mutual contempt for Donald Trump. Here verbatim is how the IG report presented that:
On August 29, 2016, Agent 1 and Agent 5 exchanged the following instant messages as part of a discussion about their jobs. The sender of each message is noted after the timestamp.
10:39:49, Agent 1: “I find anyone who enjoys [this job] an absolute fucking idiot. If you dont think so, ask them one more question. Who are you voting for? I guarantee you it will be Donald Drumpf.”
10:40:13, Agent 5: “i forgot about drumpf…”
10:40:27, Agent 5: “that’s so sad and pathetic if they want to vote for him.”
10:40:43, Agent 5: “someone who can’t answer a question”
10:40:51, Agent 5: “someone who can’t be professional for even a second”
On September 9, 2016, Agent 1 and Agent 5 exchanged the following instant messages.
08:56:43, Agent 5: “i’m trying to think of a ‘would i rather’ instead of spending time with those people”
08:56:54, Agent 1: “stick your tongue in a fan??”
08:56:58, Agent 5: “i would rather have brunch with trump”
08:57:03, Agent 1: “ha”
08:57:15, Agent 1: “french toast with drumpf”
08:57:19, Agent 5: “i would rather have brunch with trump and a bunch of his supporters like the ones from ohio that are retarded”
08:57:23, Agent 5: “:)”
Agent 5 later explained to the IG that she was not attempting to make a specific criticism of people from Ohio in saying this. Here is how the IG reported her explanation:
“Agent 5 told the OIG these instant messages ‘referenced TV programming and commentary that Agent 1 and Agent 5 had recently viewed together.’ Agent 5 continued, ‘The reference was not a general statement about a particular part of the country, rather it was in jest and pertained to individuals’ inability to articulate any reason why they so strongly favored one candidate over another.’”