324 Was There Probable Cause for Comeygate? The Criminal Investigation Without a Subject

📖 Chapter Title: Was There Probable Cause for Comeygate? The Criminal Investigation Without a Subject

Emailgate, James Comey, Dean Baquet, and the anatomy of a scandal shaped more by spectacle than substance.

From the moment the Clinton email probe launched, it carried the signature traits of Comey’s moral ad hockery: substituting his own personal convictions for Department of Justice protocol. The Inspector General report would later call it “insubordination.” Meanwhile, the press—particularly Dean Baquet’s New York Times—framed the story in a haze of weasel words and speculative noise. The media didn’t just report Emailgate. It echo-chambered it into being.

🕵️‍♂️ A Scandal Without a Subject

So let’s start with the fundamental question: Was there ever probable cause for this investigation?

From the outset, confusion reigned. Was this a criminal probe into Hillary Clinton? Or a bureaucratic review of State Department email policies? The initial reporting—suggesting Clinton was the subject—was incorrect. As the IG later clarified, Clinton was never formally the subject or target of the “Midyear Exam.” This was, quite literally, an investigation without a subject.

Still, accurate statements pointing this out—such as White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest’s clarification in January 2016—were treated by Comey’s team as threats. The IG report quotes Earnest’s statement:

“She is not a target of the investigation… it does not seem to be headed in that direction.”

Rather than clarifying the public narrative, Comey and his circle viewed such remarks as obstructionist. Comey himself heaped scorn on AG Loretta Lynch for calling it a “matter” instead of an “investigation.” But as irony would have it, her phrasing was closer to the legal truth than his.

📺 Presidential Commentary and FBI Panic

In October 2015, President Obama appeared on 60 Minutes, stating that Clinton’s server use was a “mistake” that did not pose a national security threat. Former FBI EAD John Giacalone and AD Randy Coleman reportedly saw red—not because of a breach, but because of a factually correct presidential comment. Giacalone told the IG:

“You have the President of the United States saying this is just a mistake… That’s a problem, right?”

And yet, just a few years later—during Trump’s first term—when President Trump publicly and repeatedly trashed the Russia investigation as a “witch hunt,” these same officials were conspicuously silent