Grounded for Bad Behavior: Trump Kicks CNN Off of Air Force One for...
The Three Big Obvious Reasons Richard Linklater’s Latest Film Trilogy Is Facing a...
Grok Is Coming to X Group Chats, but Apparently You Have to Invite...
Crazy Commies Continue Clown Car Cavalcade in Last Ditch Bar Circus
Hasan Piker: ‘I Was Supposed to Get Arrested’ — Then Ithaca Paid Better...
The Fastest Rent Cut in America Is Named ICE, and Cooperating Cities Are...
Seth Dillon Shares 'One of the Craziest Headlines From the Woke Era' ......
Ed Sheeran’s Messy Gillette Gigs Get the Boot — Promoter Says ‘Safety’ Timeline...
What Happens When Government Forgets Who It Works for?
Hasan Piker Mocks Fallen Navy SEALs Who Drowned Stopping Iranian Weapons
Mamdani and Soros Locking Eyes in Photo Proves Zohran Only Hates Some Billionaires
It's NOT Difficult to Tell How the AP Feels About SCOTUS' Ruling on...
Bulwark’s Tim Miller Discovers English Proficiency Tests the Instant a Venezuelan PhD Owns...
Troy Jackson BOOTED From 'Mainers for Troy Jackson' Facebook Page and the Reason...
DNC Trips All Over Fellow Dems During Attempt to Ridicule Trump Over Red...

What we know now about the IG investigations into Hillary Clinton's emails (Hint: It's not any better for Hillary)

Here’s what we know now on the story of a possible criminal investigation (as reported by the New York Times late last night) into the handling of emails by the State Department and Hillary Clinton.

Advertisement

The inspectors general for the intelligence community (IC) and State Department are now saying this was a “counterintelligence referral, not criminal” which contradicts what the NYT reported earlier:

But this “counterintelligence referral” is still a big deal and was prompted by government investigators discovering potentially classified emails on Hillary Clinton’s private server as well as the thumb drive of Clinton’s lawyer, David Kendall:

Advertisement

In other words:

Exactly. And contrary to what Team Hillary wants you to believe, this story isn’t going away:

It should be noted that the New York Times article from last night, written by Michael S. Schmidt and Matt Apuzzo, still has the “Criminal Inquiry” headline:

NYT_1

Will the NYT change the headline? It doesn’t look like it…

A new article by Schmidt and Apuzzo was just posted to NYTimes.com where they write, “Regardless of the terminology, the referral raises the possibility of a Justice Department criminal investigation” and that it was the DOJ that called this a “criminal referral” in the first place:

Advertisement

NYT_2

John Sexton of Breitbart News adds a little more clarity to the whole “criminal” vs. “counterintelligence” debate:

The NYT also responded to David Brock’s call for the Times to launch an internal investigation into its “flawed” reporting on Hillary Clinton:

David Brock is a partisan. It is not surprising that he is unhappy with some of our aggressive coverage of important political figures. We are proud of that coverage and obviously disagree with his opinion.

We shall see if the “aggressive coverage” continues or if the paper cracks under pressure from Clinton and her minions.

Advertisement

***

Related:

‘Orange is the new pantsuit’: DOJ asked to open criminal investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email account

‘Wrong’: Ron Fournier demolishes Hillary Clinton’s email excuses & scapegoats

Pathetic: Hillary Clinton’s campaign ‘steamrolled NYT for a rewrite’ (and got it)

What makes Hillary Clinton’s rapid response steamrolling of NYT even worse? THIS shattering perspective

‘OH SNAP!’ Actor Adam Baldwin sums up just how foul Hillary Clinton is with only 3 letters

‘They have a criminal referral’: Rep. Cummings’ spin for Hillary brought to an abrupt halt

So Good: ‘BOOM!’ This GIF nutshells (emphasis on nut) media’s lapdoggery for Hillary Clinton

Crazy from the heat: Hillary just blamed WHAT for her email deception? (Brace yourselves!)

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement

TRENDING ON TOWNHALL MEDIA