# The FBI may have failed to thoroughly investigate Clinton - Tracking Thread **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 31, 2018, 12:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-may-have-failed-to-thoroughly-investigate-clinton-tracking-thread/807844 "2018-01-31T00:02:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2018, 12:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-may-have-failed-to-thoroughly-investigate-clinton-tracking-thread/807844/21 "2018-01-31T12:25:39Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > Some further detail about McCabe’s involvement with the Clinton investigation: > > [http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-justice-department-andrew-mccabe-clinton-emails-20180130-story.html](http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-justice-department-andrew-mccabe-clinton-emails-20180130-story.html) > > It sounds like this might somewhat explain Comey’s surprise announcement just as the election day was closing in; information about the contribution to McCabe’s wife was circling, so he had to move on the laptop despite any other considerations. I’m not sure how this is really a major story. McCabe’s wife has public campaign finance reporting requirements, so there’s nothing particularly hushed about that. I’m sure it wasn’t _that_ much of a secret that McCabe worked at the Bureau. I just don’t see this being a story, except for Republicans who deliberately want to rewrite history. The real story here (that the media isn’t reporting) is how the Republican party has managed to politicize the criminal investigations and the criminal justice system at the federal level in this country, to the point where ordinary people now have doubts about the objectivity of the Justice Department, the FBI, and other law enforcement agencies at the federal level. Yet there never should have been these doubts at all. People are now at a point where they’re not sure of what the truth really is, and that is a grave danger to a democracy. This is not to say that agencies aren’t influenced by politics - they always are. A Republican DoJ is going to operate differently and have different priorities than a Democratic-led DoJ - that’s always been the case. But what’s remarkably different now is how the priorities have shifted from relatively ordinary differences in law enforcement policy (i.e. incarcerating more drug dealers vs. giving them more supervised probation and job training) to basically using the criminal investigations against political opponents, starting with Hillary Clinton. That’s the story. Regarding the OP, my guess is that Wray is ready to move on with putting his own personal stamp on the FBI. McCabe was already on his way out and at this point, he was just serving as a distraction to Wray. Put yourself in Wray’s shoes: you’ve inherited a Bureau that is now facing stinging criticism and rebuke from a major political party. You want to find a way to somehow allow the organization to function. One of the major lightning rods for that criticism is there but doing nothing. Why not just get him out of the way? McCabe was serving no good purpose at that point, and only bringing in negative attention. Beyond that, yes, it’s possible that McCabe may have done something that caught the attention of the IG. I’d add that again, the real issue isn’t McCabe or Comey – they were placed **by congressional Republicans** in the impossible decision of responding to a potential criminal complaint over a relatively minor set of infractions involving the use of private emails and serves that have been committed by every single administration going back to George W Bush at least. They were placed in the impossible position of trying to decide how to conduct an investigation that _might_ have merit while knowing it probably didn’t, and they were faced with the wrath of a political party that used their law enforcement agency to prosecute a political opponent, and was enraged when Comey and McCabe (and presumably many others) didn’t agree to frame the outcome the way that they wanted. That’s the real story here, not McCabe, not the IG. The significance of all this is that, we’re in deep shit as a country right now. ---
**Author:** ![Happy\_Fun\_Ball](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/happy_fun_ball/32/17664_2.png) [@Happy\_Fun\_Ball](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Happy_Fun_Ball)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2018, 2:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-may-have-failed-to-thoroughly-investigate-clinton-tracking-thread/807844/22 "2018-01-31T14:35:19Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > I’m not sure how this is really a major story. McCabe’s wife has public campaign finance reporting requirements, so there’s nothing particularly hushed about that. I’m sure it wasn’t _that_ much of a secret that McCabe worked at the Bureau. I just don’t see this being a story, except for Republicans who deliberately want to rewrite history. > > The real story here (that the media isn’t reporting) is how the Republican party has managed to politicize the criminal investigations and the criminal justice system at the federal level in this country, to the point where ordinary people now have doubts about the objectivity of the Justice Department, the FBI, and other law enforcement agencies at the federal level. Yet there never should have been these doubts at all. People are now at a point where they’re not sure of what the truth really is, and that is a grave danger to a democracy. > > This is not to say that agencies aren’t influenced by politics - they always are. A Republican DoJ is going to operate differently and have different priorities than a Democratic-led DoJ - that’s always been the case. But what’s remarkably different now is how the priorities have shifted from relatively ordinary differences in law enforcement policy (i.e. incarcerating more drug dealers vs. giving them more supervised probation and job training) to basically using the criminal investigations against political opponents, starting with Hillary Clinton. That’s the story. > > Regarding the OP, my guess is that Wray is ready to move on with putting his own personal stamp on the FBI. McCabe was already on his way out and at this point, he was just serving as a distraction to Wray. Put yourself in Wray’s shoes: you’ve inherited a Bureau that is now facing stinging criticism and rebuke from a major political party. You want to find a way to somehow allow the organization to function. One of the major lightning rods for that criticism is there but doing nothing. Why not just get him out of the way? McCabe was serving no good purpose at that point, and only bringing in negative attention. Beyond that, yes, it’s possible that McCabe may have done something that caught the attention of the IG. > > I’d add that again, the real issue isn’t McCabe or Comey – they were placed **by congressional Republicans** in the impossible decision of responding to a potential criminal complaint over a relatively minor set of infractions involving the use of private emails and serves that have been committed by every single administration going back to George W Bush at least. They were placed in the impossible position of trying to decide how to conduct an investigation that _might_ have merit while knowing it probably didn’t, and they were faced with the wrath of a political party that used their law enforcement agency to prosecute a political opponent, and was enraged when Comey and McCabe (and presumably many others) didn’t agree to frame the outcome the way that they wanted. That’s the real story here, not McCabe, not the IG. > > The significance of all this is that, we’re in deep shit as a country right now. Quoted for truth, well said. ---
**Author:** ![BeenJammin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/beenjammin/32/448_2.png) [@BeenJammin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BeenJammin)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2018, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-may-have-failed-to-thoroughly-investigate-clinton-tracking-thread/807844/23 "2018-01-31T15:42:46Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > IThe significance of all this is that, we’re in deep shit as a country right now. And still suffering collective amnesia about how we got here. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Airbeck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/airbeck/32/6574_2.png) [@Airbeck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airbeck)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2018, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-may-have-failed-to-thoroughly-investigate-clinton-tracking-thread/807844/24 "2018-01-31T15:48:48Z")
> [@BeenJammin](#): > > And still suffering collective amnesia about how we got here. :rolleyes: Let me guess, it’s all the Democrats’ fault?:rolleyes: Or did you have some actual point you were trying to make with this? ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2018, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-may-have-failed-to-thoroughly-investigate-clinton-tracking-thread/807844/25 "2018-01-31T15:57:46Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > Some further detail about McCabe’s involvement with the Clinton investigation: > > [http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-justice-department-andrew-mccabe-clinton-emails-20180130-story.html](http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-justice-department-andrew-mccabe-clinton-emails-20180130-story.html) The part of that article which interested me more was something else: > [@WaPo](#): > > At the same time, the FBI was facing a new set of questions, this time about McCabe’s role in a stalled probe into the Clinton Foundation. Some within the FBI felt McCabe had repeatedly moved to hamstring that probe and were suspicious of his motives for doing so, according to people familiar with the matter. > > McCabe’s defenders inside federal law enforcement have repeatedly said he tried to navigate a sensitive political investigation between Justice Department officials who thought the probe was going nowhere and FBI agents who believed they were being blocked from issuing subpoenas and taking other steps that could uncover critical evidence. The thing about the email probe is that the bottom line about the underlying facts is not going to change. Which means it will be very difficult for the details of that investigation to ever become a big deal unless there’s particularly egregious wrongdoing, which is unlikely. By contrast, the CF itself is potentially a much bigger deal, so there’s a possibility that there was more serious political favoritism at work. Again, that’s not to say anything nefarious was actually happening WRT either. But if we’re keeping an eye on potential developments, ISTM that the CF investigation might offer more potential. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2018, 1:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-may-have-failed-to-thoroughly-investigate-clinton-tracking-thread/807844/26 "2018-02-01T01:31:22Z")
Apparently, Strzok was the one to write the initial draft of the letter giving the expected result of the Clinton case, which charged her with gross negligence (or whatever the term was): > **[Exclusive: Controversial FBI agent co-wrote initial draft of explosive Comey...](https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/31/politics/strzok-fbi-comey-clinton-letter/index.html)** > > Emails obtained by CNN show the FBI agent at the center of a Capitol Hill storm played a key role in a controversial FBI decision that upended Hillary Clinton's campaign just days before the 2016 election: the letter to Congress by then-FBI Director... And he’s the one to trigger reopening the case against Clinton. ---
**Author:** ![Pantastic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3bc359/32.png) [@Pantastic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pantastic)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2018, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-may-have-failed-to-thoroughly-investigate-clinton-tracking-thread/807844/27 "2018-02-01T21:31:39Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > By contrast, the CF itself is potentially a much bigger deal, so there’s a possibility that there was more serious political favoritism at work. > > Again, that’s not to say anything nefarious was actually happening WRT either. But if we’re keeping an eye on potential developments, ISTM that the CF investigation might offer more potential. It’s also useful to keep in mind that Clinton has a history of covering things up needlessly - IMO the email probe wouldn’t have gained so much traction if she had just treated it as a minor thing instead of initially denying everything and only later admitting to it. I think there’s a reasonable chance that she (or someone on her behalf) pushed the FBI to ditch the CF investigation even if there’s actually no problem with the CF in the first place. If there was pressure to close the investigation early, it’s going to look bad (and be repeated by Trump), even if there’s absolutely nothing (or something incredibly minor) to the CF allegations. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2018, 2:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-may-have-failed-to-thoroughly-investigate-clinton-tracking-thread/807844/28 "2018-02-03T02:48:31Z")
> [@Pantastic](#): > > It’s also useful to keep in mind that Clinton has a history of covering things up needlessly - IMO the email probe wouldn’t have gained so much traction if she had just treated it as a minor thing instead of initially denying everything and only later admitting to it. I think there’s a reasonable chance that she (or someone on her behalf) pushed the FBI to ditch the CF investigation even if there’s actually no problem with the CF in the first place. If there was pressure to close the investigation early, it’s going to look bad (and be repeated by Trump), even if there’s absolutely nothing (or something incredibly minor) to the CF allegations. There probably never should have been an investigation in the first place. Almost any elected official could be investigated for something and the congressional special investigators and/or the DoJ could probably find something in the criminal code to justify their investigation. Investigating someone because they can be investigated and investigating someone because they should are two different things. The Republicans have over the past 3 decades been increasingly investigating political opponents because they’ve had the power to do it. They intentionally put federal investigators in a situation where they’re required to make a call, and now they’re getting the Monday morning QB treatment because of being placed in an impossible situation, which is trying to conduct a criminal investigation of a major political candidate during a presidential campaign. This never should have happened. ---
**Author:** ![Chimera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/8e8cbc/32.png) [@Chimera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chimera)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2018, 2:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-may-have-failed-to-thoroughly-investigate-clinton-tracking-thread/807844/29 "2018-02-03T02:56:29Z")
> [@BeenJammin](#): > > And still suffering collective amnesia about how we got here. :rolleyes: The previous administration had exactly zero charges against anyone, despite constant attempts to create scandal and find something to investigate. The only one in my lifetime. Surely you can’t be suggesting that the previous, crime free administration led to this festering corruption of an administration, can you? :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![BeenJammin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/beenjammin/32/448_2.png) [@BeenJammin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BeenJammin)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2018, 3:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-may-have-failed-to-thoroughly-investigate-clinton-tracking-thread/807844/30 "2018-02-03T03:56:08Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > … investigated for …special investigators and…their investigation. Investigating someone…investigated and investigating someone because…increasingly investigating…intentionally put federal investigators…an impossible situation, which is trying to conduct a criminal investigation of a major political candidate during a presidential campaign. This never should have happened. So we should just like not expect the cops to do their goddamn jobs, or what? ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2018, 4:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-may-have-failed-to-thoroughly-investigate-clinton-tracking-thread/807844/31 "2018-02-03T04:05:52Z")
> [@BeenJammin](#): > > So we should just like not expect the cops to do their goddamn jobs, or what? What would be their job in this case? ---
**Author:** ![Chimera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/8e8cbc/32.png) [@Chimera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chimera)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2018, 4:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-may-have-failed-to-thoroughly-investigate-clinton-tracking-thread/807844/32 "2018-02-03T04:28:03Z")
I believe their job in this could be defined by the following directive; _ **"Find something! ANYTHING!!!"** _ ---
**Author:** ![Rick\_Kitchen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rick_kitchen/32/522_2.png) [@Rick\_Kitchen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Kitchen)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2018, 4:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-may-have-failed-to-thoroughly-investigate-clinton-tracking-thread/807844/33 "2018-02-03T04:31:23Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > I don’t think this is an accurate summary of the events to date at all. It has been known that McCabe would be retiring when he was eligible for full pension benefits, and that at the tail end he’d use his remaining accrued vacation to get him to that date. That’s the story of what happened thus far. The idea that he’s been fired, that he won’t earn the full pension as planned, etc. has no basis that I can see. Donald Trump Jr. says McCabe was fired. ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2018, 4:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-may-have-failed-to-thoroughly-investigate-clinton-tracking-thread/807844/34 "2018-02-03T04:45:16Z")
> [@Rick\_Kitchen](#): > > Donald Trump Jr. says McCabe was fired. Funny how the only time any of them tell the truth is when they shouldn’t. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2018, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-may-have-failed-to-thoroughly-investigate-clinton-tracking-thread/807844/35 "2018-02-03T20:26:51Z")
> [@Chimera](#): > > Oh for fuck’s sake. > > Hillary was investigated for more than 25 years and not one charge was ever levied against her. Not even close. She’s the most persecuted politician in the modern era, and I say that as someone who doesn’t like her. Yes, we just have to forget that her files from the Rose Law firm disappeared during the investigation that convicted 15 people in the Whitewater investigation. 4 of whom were pardoned by Bill Clinton. And we need to forget she attacked the women who accused her husband of assault. She was too busy cashing in Weinstien’s checks. We need to forget she lied about Beghazi. Or that her department was in charge of security and ignored requests to increase it. We need to forget she hired someone to build a server in her private residence to circumvent government communications and then permanently erased 30,000 files. We need to forget she paid for a phony document and use it to spy on her political opponent. She’s not the most persecuted politician, she’s the least prosecuted. ---
**Author:** ![Chisquirrel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6bbea6/32.png) [@Chisquirrel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chisquirrel)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2018, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-may-have-failed-to-thoroughly-investigate-clinton-tracking-thread/807844/36 "2018-02-03T21:33:50Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Yes, we just have to forget that her files from the Rose Law firm disappeared during the investigation that convicted 15 people in the Whitewater investigation. 4 of whom were pardoned by Bill Clinton. > > And we need to forget she attacked the women who accused her husband of assault. She was too busy cashing in Weinstien’s checks. > > We need to forget she lied about Beghazi. Or that her department was in charge of security and ignored requests to increase it. > > We need to forget she hired someone to build a server in her private residence to circumvent government communications and then permanently erased 30,000 files. > > We need to forget she paid for a phony document and use it to spy on her political opponent. > > She’s not the most persecuted politician, she’s the least prosecuted. Uh huh. 1, 3, and 5 require cites. 2 is undesirably common behavior from women who feel their SO is unjustly attacked. 4 is false, at least about in motivation. I take that back. 5 is such a ridiculously mangled falsehood that the only thing that makes it look remotely plausible is the ridiculously mangled falsehoods in the Nunes memo. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2018, 12:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-may-have-failed-to-thoroughly-investigate-clinton-tracking-thread/807844/37 "2018-02-06T12:08:32Z")
Decent overview of Horowitz: > **[IG poised to reignite war over FBI’s Clinton case](https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/372457-ig-poised-to-reignite-war-over-fbis-clinton-case/)** > > Few people have heard of Michael Horowitz, but that’s about to change.Horowitz, the Department of Justice (DOJ) inspector general, is an increasingly critical player in the controversy surrounding … ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2018, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-may-have-failed-to-thoroughly-investigate-clinton-tracking-thread/807844/38 "2018-02-06T14:26:11Z")
One note about that. There’s no hint in that article to support your claim that the Horowitz investigation has been expanded to include the Trump-Russia probe, and indeed the article suggests that Horowitz has been reluctant to get involved in matters which might conflict with the Mueller investigation. ---
**Author:** ![steronz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steronz/32/11765_2.png) [@steronz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/steronz)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2018, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-may-have-failed-to-thoroughly-investigate-clinton-tracking-thread/807844/39 "2018-02-06T14:42:24Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > Retire, not fired. I know this is like a week old at this point, but to clear up some confusion here, gov’t employees can deal with accrued leave one of two ways – terminal leave or a cash equivalent. That is to say, if I say I’m going to retire on 30 March of this year, and I have 30 days of accrued leave, I can choose to stop working on the last day of February and still collect a paycheck until my actual retirement on the 30th. Or I can keep working right up to the 30th and get a check for a month’s salary. Most people choose to use terminal leave, because they collect benefits while not working which makes it more lucrative than getting a cash equivalent, but it’s very possible that McCabe had a sense of duty or simply a desire to see out certain projects. Therefore, it’s possible that he was “fired” in the sense that he was strong-armed into using his accrued leave as terminal leave instead of accepting a cash equivalent like he had planned, just to get him out of the building. That wouldn’t have affected his retirement date or his pension. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2018, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-may-have-failed-to-thoroughly-investigate-clinton-tracking-thread/807844/40 "2018-02-06T14:52:35Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > One note about that. There’s no hint in that article to support your claim that the Horowitz investigation has been expanded to include the Trump-Russia probe, and indeed the article suggests that Horowitz has been reluctant to get involved in matters which might conflict with the Mueller investigation. I assume that you’re talking about the part where the article comments on Trump’s Obstruction of Justice interactions with the FBI. I don’t recall saying that Horowitz would look into Trumpian obstruction of justice at any point before? That’s all post-election. Horowitz is looking at 2016, to check whether the FBI was partisan in its handling of the Clinton investigation. That investigation has been extended into questions of whether there was a partisan, “deep state” effort to manufacture a conspiracy theory around Trump (e.g., at the behest of Democratic interests). It’s possible that you or I misunderstood each other. Though that said, I think I did specify that I was relaying my takeaway from Christopher Wray’s first public hearing with the House Judiciary Committee and his regular deflection, to refer them to Horowitz’s investigation, on pretty much every single politically sensitive question in that meeting. If you care about the subject, you would do better to watch that and see if your takeaway is the same. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-may-have-failed-to-thoroughly-investigate-clinton-tracking-thread/807844.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-may-have-failed-to-thoroughly-investigate-clinton-tracking-thread/807844.md?page=3)