Former AG: Call Special Prosecutor Now for Clinton Emails
Alberto Gonzales says FBI director should not be the 'ultimate decision-maker'
Judge Alberto Gonzales, Former attorney general under George W. Bush, Thursday questioned the decision not to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server to conduct official business as secretary of state.
On “The Laura Ingraham Show,” Gonzales said, “It tells me either that [Americans] don’t have information that the FBI has in its possession, they may have looked at this [case] and decided there’s nothing there, or they may not have looked at it and for whatever reason decided ‘we don’t want to go there,'” Gonzales said, continuing that he doesn’t understand why the “ultimate decision-maker” was the FBI director — “when it should have been a prosecutor at the Department of Justice.”
LifeZette Editor-in-Chief Laura Ingraham noted that a Wall Street Journal article, “The FBI’s Blind Clinton Trust,” essentially concludes that, given the known information and the timing, “It seems it was always [FBI Director] Jim Comey’s intent to let Mrs. Clinton off the hook because otherwise none of this makes sense.” There would not have been an obstruction inquiry and there would not be an effort to immunize the young man who was charged with using a hammer to destroy Blackberrys Clinton used to access to her unauthorized email account.
“There is so much here that’s very, very troubling,” Gonzales said. “I think that we need to get more information,” he added, noting that Congress is limited in terms of what it can do without the full cooperation of the FBI.
“I really do think this is a serious issue for Hillary Clinton as a candidate and it just feeds into this narrative that she cannot be trusted and that this whole episode, in my judgement, I think is a powerful indicator about her judgment,” like how she tried to place the blame on Colin Powell instead of owning up to her poor decision-making.
Gonzales said it was “painful” to watch Clinton at last night’s “Commander-in-Chief Forum,” pretending she didn’t know “C” stood for confidential, classified documents.
“Even if it wasn’t marked, and there was marking, you look at the subject matter and you know what is important, what should be protected or is protected, whether it’s marked or not,” Gonzales said, continuing that in his judgement Clinton “either knew otherwise or she should have known otherwise.”
Indeed, WikiLeaks tweeted last Friday that it is sitting on “thousands” of cables Secretary Clinton sent or received with the “C” marking.
Ingraham pointed out that the media once “wanted to tar everybody in the [George W.] Bush White House with compromising national security for political purposes,” and pointed out the irony that many of those so targeted while working under Bush are now supporting Clinton.
Gonzales also noted that a special prosecutor was used to investigate the Bush administration over concerns it had illegally endangered national security.
In fact, this special prosecutor investigated, prosecuted, and ultimately won a jury conviction of former top aide to then-Vice President Cheney, Scooter Libby, for deliberately exposing the identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame. Then-Attorney General John Ashcroft recused himself from the case and tapped his new U.S. deputy attorney general to appoint the special prosecutor. Who was that deputy attorney general? One James Comey.