Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

House Judiciary Committee Calls for Second Special Counsel to Investigate Hillary, Lynch, and Comey

House Judiciary Committee Calls for Second Special Counsel to Investigate Hillary, Lynch, and Comey

“to Address Issues Outside the Scope of Special Counsel Mueller’s Investigation”

Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) sent a letter to Attorney General Sessions and Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein Thursday with an interesting and long overdue ask.

The Judiciary Committee is requesting a new probe spearheaded by a second special counsel outside of Mueller, “to investigate unaddressed matters, some connected to the 2016 election and others, including many actions taken by Obama Administration officials like Attorney General Loretta Lynch, FBI Director James Comey, and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.”

Chairman Goodlatte and crew outlined their investigative request, which includes what Comey knew about Hillary’s dealings with Uranium One by way of the Clinton Foundation, why former AG Loretta Lynch directed then FBI Director Comey to “mislead the American people”, a probe into Comey’s intentional information leaks, the unmasking fiasco (which we still don’t have public answers to), and the DNC computer systems.

We call on a newly appointed special counsel to investigate, consistent with appropriate regulations, the following questions, many of which were previously posed by this Committee and remain unanswered:

  1. Then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch directing Mr. Comey to mislead the American people on the nature of the Clinton investigation;
  2. The shadow cast over our system of justice concerning Secretary Clinton and her involvement in mishandling classified information;
  3. FBI and DOJ’s investigative decisions related to former Secretary Clinton’s email investigation, including the propriety and consequence of immunity deals given to potential Clinton co-conspirators Cheryl Mills, Heather Samuelson, John Bentel and possibly others;
  4. The apparent failure of DOJ to empanel a grand jury to investigate allegations of mishandling of classified information by Hillary Clinton and her associates;
  5. The Department of State and its employees’ involvement in determining which communications of Secretary Clinton’s and her associates to turn over for public scrutiny;
  6. WikiLeaks disclosures concerning the Clinton Foundation and its potentially unlawful international dealings;
  7. Connections between the Clinton campaign, or the Clinton Foundation, and foreign entities, including those from Russia and Ukraine;
  8. Mr. Comey’s knowledge of the purchase of Uranium One by the company Rosatom, whether the approval of the sale was connected to any donations made to the Clinton Foundation, and what role Secretary Clinton played in the approval of that sale that had national security ramifications;
  9. Disclosures arising from unlawful access to the Democratic National Committee’s (DNC) computer systems, including inappropriate collusion between the DNC and the Clinton campaign to undermine Senator Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign;
  10. Post-election accusations by the President that he was wiretapped by the previous Administration, and whether Mr. Comey and Ms. Lynch had any knowledge of efforts made by any federal agency to unlawfully monitor communications of then-candidate Trump or his associates;
  11. Selected leaks of classified information related to the unmasking of U.S. person identities incidentally collected upon by the intelligence community, including an assessment of whether anyone in the Obama Administration, including Mr. Comey, Ms. Lynch, Ms. Susan Rice, Ms. Samantha Power, or others, had any knowledge about the “unmasking” of individuals on then candidate-Trump’s campaign team, transition team, or both;
  12. Admitted leaks by Mr. Comey to Columbia University law professor, Daniel Richman, regarding conversations between Mr. Comey and President Trump, how the leaked information was purposefully released to lead to the appointment of a special counsel, and whether any classified information was included in the now infamous “Comey memos”;
  13. Mr. Comey’s and the FBI’s apparent reliance on “Fusion GPS” in its investigation of the Trump campaign, including the company’s creation of a “dossier” of information about Mr. Trump, that dossier’s commission and dissemination in the months before and after the 2016 election, whether the FBI paid anyone connected to the dossier, and the intelligence sources of Fusion GPS or any person or company working for Fusion GPS and its affiliates; and
  14. Any and all potential leaks originated by Mr. Comey and provide to author Michael Schmidt dating back to 1993.

The entire letter is here.

You would think calls for a second Special Counsel would be all over headlines, but this isn’t the right kind of Russian collusion story for the political media.

Follow Kemberlee on Twitter @kemberleekaye


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


In an ideal world, it would be the function of the DoJ to investigate these charges. But since it was the DoJ itself that enabled most of these crimes (and they ARE crimes), I guess a Special Prosecutor is going to be required. The Swamp isn’t going to investigate itself.

As a matter of course when there is a special prosecutor a second one should be set up with the sole mandate to investigate the first one.


Of course, Der Donald has signaled he has no interest in doing this, and it belongs to him (or his subordinates) to name a special prosecutor.

    4th armored div in reply to Ragspierre. | July 28, 2017 at 9:52 am

    this item needs to be SHOUTED from all non communist media/bloggers/’reporters’/late nite ‘comics’ – ain’t gonna happen, sadly for the USA.

    BTW Rags, I’ve been on your ‘T-Rump’ posts, but slowly, I am coming around to your POV.

    In addition ‘Fusion GPS’ needs sanctioning for NOT registering as a foreign entity propagandist org.

    Remember: if ‘Der Donald’ was not in office – and ‘Der Jeb’ was (or worse, Frau Hillary,) this wouldn’t be possible.

Could they not change to terms of references that Mueller is following so that he can actually investigate proper crimes instead of the Democrat made up crimes?

Oh…silly me…thinking Mueller actually has something as arcane as terms of references for his witch hunt…oh, I mean…investigation in to collusion!!

Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) sent a letter to Attorney General Sessions and Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein Thursday with an interesting and long overdue ask.

Should be request, not ask.

I suspect this is just a laundry list covering as much range of investigation as possible. That list would not take *a* special counsel, it would take a thousand, and some of them are not crimes (which the SC is restricted to).

It *does* make a pretty good list to hold the Justice dept. accountable for, though. As an example, I suspect all of the investigative notes and evidence accumulated in the Clinton email scheme would get quietly swept under the rug if somebody doesn’t do a proper post-investigative review and issue the appropriate spankings to the relevant parties. After all, the FBI dumped its whole playbook in the trash by not recording the testimony, disposing of the evidence laptops, etc..

Gee that’s nice. They can’t get rid of Obamacare so they’ll have a little show trial that will accomplish nothing because DC protects their own.

Bucky Barkingham | July 28, 2017 at 10:02 am

Should a new Special Counsel be appointed he would immediately hire more LibDem lawyers and start looking into the affairs of anyone connected to Trump. The Swamp Critters are never going to help drain the swamp.

House Judiciary Committee Calls for Second Special Counsel to Investigate Hillary, Lynch, and Comey

You mean “Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee Call for Second Special Counsel to Investigate Hillary, Lynch, and Comey”.

Don’t get to excited about this. The down side to a SC to investigate these issues is that it would effectively remove these issues from the province of the DOJ. Right now, the President, through the AG, can run a much more efficient investigation into all of these issues AND still maintain control of the investigation. However, if they are turned over to a SC, then that party assumes control of the investigation and steer them anywhere he, or she, wishes. Why on earth would the President wish to relinquish control of investigations in these areas. If the AG is reluctant to pursue them, get another AG.

No, all n SC would do is protect the targets of these investigations.

Time to even the score…

Maybe a few Republican donors and more than a few Bush/Reagan/Trump attorneys on the team!

Who cares what the Demoncrats think about it!

    Evening the score is always fun, but let’s no lose sight of this as an investigation into corruption of our government at its highest levels, with some conduct on the part of clinton giving rise to treason.

There was no real limits to what Mueller is to investigate. His appointment should never have happened as you are supposed to have a crime, or alleged crime, for which the investigation is focused. Any issue or suspicion of a crime not enumerated under the investigation is supposed to have permission from the AG for the special investigation to proceed to this new area of investigation.

This original investigation is nothing less than a witch hunt for anything that can be found to bring Trump down.

There should be a full investigation into the Clintons crimes, as well as into Comey and Lynch for their cover up of Clinton’s crimes.

I don’t have much faith in our government to do the right thing, as we just saw yet again with the Obamacare BS. Every conservative who is registered as a Republican needs to quit the party. The Republicans do not represent us and our desires.

    DaveGinOly in reply to oldgoat36. | July 28, 2017 at 1:40 pm

    Leaving Obamacare standing is for the best. If the Republicans had managed to repeal and replace, no matter how good the replacement, it would have been criticized as “not as good as Obamacare.” By allowing Obamacare to fail, a demand for its replacement will arise at that time, and the earlier (the current) failure to repeal it will fall on the shoulders of the Democrats, who had a decisive hand in the failure to repeal. (The handful of Republicans who prevented its repeal could not have stymied the repeal without the Dems voting in a block to prevent it. It was not a bi-partisan failure.)

      Mac45 in reply to DaveGinOly. | July 28, 2017 at 3:47 pm

      Once Obamacare implodes, it will be too late to save the healthcare insurance industry. The only “save” available will be a single payer, government funded insurance program much like Medicare. And, if a Republican Congress does the “saving”, then people will applaud them.

Coloradoopenrange | July 28, 2017 at 2:22 pm

I am afraid I agree. Skinny Repeal was a slap in the face. Democrats refuse to admit they screwed the American public and the Media is trying it’s damndest to paint this as a Republican failure. Disgusted is what I am!

The corruption of the Left and its collusion with the MSM to hide these issues should turn the stomach of everyone. How disgusting is it that after almost a year of investigating Trump and no evidence is found that “they” determine that there is no greater justification for a special prosecutor to investigate Trump ad nauseum while these 14 counts where there is an over abundance of evidence of wrong doing and subsequent coverup are deemed to be nothing worth pursuing? Of course, these 14 points do not include the Debbie Wasserman Schultz IT debacle with her grossly overpaid Pakistanian computer experts. How in the world has our justice system become so absurdly perverted?