FBI’s Alleged Double Standard
The handling of the two matters—the Clinton email investigation and the Trump-Russia allegations—has drawn intense scrutiny. Critics point to a perceived double standard:
- Clinton Email Probe: The FBI’s inquiry, led by then-Director James Comey, was ultimately closed without criminal charges, despite Comey’s public statement describing Clinton’s conduct as “extremely careless” in handling classified material.
- Trump-Russia Probe: The Crossfire Hurricane investigation was aggressively pursued, despite relying heavily on the unverified Steele dossier and other contested intelligence.
This contrast has fueled claims that the FBI’s decision-making was politically motivated and improperly tilted in favor of one presidential candidate while targeting another.
The Grand Jury’s Role
Bondi’s directive for a federal prosecutor to bring evidence before a grand jury signals a shift from political debate to legal examination. According to a letter from the Attorney General’s office, the prosecutor will present department evidence “to secure a potential indictment” if the grand jury finds probable cause.
Tulsi Gabbard has been explicit in her accusations:
“These documents detail a treasonous conspiracy by officials at the highest levels of the Obama White House to subvert the will of the American people and try to usurp the President from fulfilling his mandate.”
While no charges have been filed at this stage, the grand jury investigation is expected to scrutinize the origins of the Russia collusion narrative, the handling of intelligence by senior Obama administration officials, and whether the Clinton campaign’s alleged actions constituted criminal misconduct.
