Now Hillary Claims It Was the ‘Invisible State’, a ‘Subterranean, Anti-Clinton Network’ Which Cost Her the Election (and Just Like Deep State Trump Says Is Out to Get Him, James Comey Led It)

Forget the Deep State, it was the ‘Invisible State’ cost Hillary Clinton the election.

One of the Democratic Presidential candidate’s closest confidants has come up with the term to describe the dark forces he claims handed victory to Donald Trump.

Lanny Davis blames a ‘subterranean, anti-Clinton network’ that included current and former FBI agents including its ex-chief James Comey.

In a new book Davis says that the FBI New York office was a ‘cell of rabid pro Trump and anti Clinton agents’ that worked against her.

The book, called ‘The Unmaking of the President 2016: How FBI Director James Comey Cost Hillary Clinton the Presidency’ says there could have even been collusion between Comey and Trump adviser Rudy Giuliani as part of a ‘deep and hidden narrative’.

‘Unmaking’ makes little attempt to hide its pro-Clinton point of view.

Davis has known the former First Lady since they attended Yale Law School together and he was special counsel to her husband Bill when he was President.

Clinton was seen silently nodding along while passages of the book were read out at its launch at a Georgetown mansion in Washington D.C., according to Axios reporter Jonathan Swan.

Ironically the wild allegations in the book echoes Trump’s claims about the FBI – the only difference being that the President says the Bureau is biased against him, not Clinton.

The main argument of ‘Unmaking’ is that Comey and the FBI cost Clinton the election over their improper investigation of her use of a private email server.

The FBI investigation had been closed until October 28 2016 when Comey wrote a letter to Congress saying he was reopening it due to new emails that had been found on the laptop of Anthony Weiner, the husband of Clinton’s top aide Huma Abedin.

The book says that Comey was notified about the emails on October 3 but waited until October 30 before getting a warrant to search them

Comey closed the investigation again on November 6, two days before the election, after the emails turned up nothing new.

The way the FBI handled the investigation is the subject of an investigation by the Justice Department’s internal watchdog.

But according to ‘Unmasking’ there can be only ‘one clear conclusion’.

The book says: ‘Had Comey promptly sought a warrant there would have been sufficient time to review all Clinton’s emails on Weiner’s laptop and conclude in October – rather than two days before the election – there was nothing new to justify opening a new investigation.

‘The crucial, history changing consequence is that had Comey and the FBI moved expeditiously there would have been not Comey letter on October 28 and Hillary Clinton would have won the Presidency’.

‘Unmasking’ says that the ‘inexplicable slow walk’ when handling Weiner’s laptop appeared to have been because the FBI’s New York office was full of Trump supporters.

The book says that Giuliani, the former Mayor of New York, was central to this because he had a ‘long standing hostility’ towards Clinton.

‘Unmasking’ questions how close Giuliani and Comey were and points out they worked together at the Southern District of New York US Attorney’s Office.

The book says: ‘Whether Comey communicated with Giuliani during this critical three week period prior to the October 28 letter should be a crucial fact to be investigated by the Justice Department’.

The investigation should also look into whether any FBI agents spoke with Giuliani or right wing media outlets to ‘build pressure on Comey’.

Click here to read more.
Source: Daily Mail