A newly declassified timeline sheds light on the Clinton Foundation investigation, revealing an alarming pattern of interference by high-ranking officials within the Department of Justice and the FBI. As the 2016 election approached, evidence surfaced suggesting pay-to-play schemes at the Clinton Foundation, but agents reported facing significant obstacles when trying to pursue this information.
FBI Director Kash Patel stated, “FBI agents uncovered evidence of pay-to-play at the Clinton Foundation in 2016. DOJ leadership & McCabe ordered them to ‘Shut it down.’” This quote encapsulates the crux of the issue: obstruction and political protection at the highest levels. The timeline, prepared by a DOJ lawyer, illustrates that as early as February 2016, the DOJ expressed reluctance to support any investigation into Clinton and her foundation.
Former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe played a significant role in inhibiting the investigation. He is reported to have ordered that no investigative actions could proceed without his explicit approval. This directive was emphasized repeatedly over the months. It raises questions about the independence of federal law enforcement in matters that could influence a presidential election.
Moreover, a revealing email from Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates ordered agents to stop pursuing the investigation, effectively shielding Clinton from scrutiny at a critical moment. Investigative reporter John Solomon noted that agents had well-founded reasons to believe foreign donors were buying favors from the State Department in exchange for contributions to the foundation.
Despite having evidence and leads, four U.S. Attorneys’ offices declined to assist FBI agents in building a case. The DOJ’s directives were clear: suppress the investigation until after the election. This inaction continued well into 2017, despite a change in administration.
The reality of these developments illustrates a troubling potential for political influence within law enforcement. The timeline and internal correspondence paint a picture of an inquiry stifled by those in positions of power who had a vested interest in the outcome of the investigation. As more information comes to light, the implications of these revelations demand scrutiny and reflection on the integrity of political processes in the United States.
"*" indicates required fields
