THE MOST IMPORTANT WORDS Comey has said in the past year are the ones no one's talking about: ProPublica was right, McCabe *did* tell Comey there were Clinton emails on Weiner's PC *36 days before the election*. And Comey *ignored him* because "how could that be possible." (WTF?) 
2/ So the "McCabe conspiracy" is disproven. Now the question is (a) why Comey didn't do due diligence when he was informed there was potential new evidence in one of the FBI's two biggest cases of this century, and (b) why no one in the NYC FBI worked on those emails for 24 days.
3/ So McCabe was telling his boss that a PC used by Clinton's top aide had Clinton emails on it, in the context of a case in which the allegation was a mishandling of emails.
*What investigator* would say "how could that be possible" under those circumstances? It's inexplicable.
*What investigator* would say "how could that be possible" under those circumstances? It's inexplicable.
4/ This is not an attack on Comey. This is me (yes, yes, laugh if you like, but "former criminal attorney and investigator") saying that I've read thousands of pages of transcripts to catch their key/missed elements and *this*—that statement—is going to get Comey in some trouble.
5/ My theory based on the facts we have is that Comey and McCabe had some reason to think that appropriate review of these emails was being conducted, when in fact it was not. And that work was *not* being done—which hurt Clinton—as some of the same agents were leaking for Trump.
6/ I think @Comey is leaving out of his story everything that happened from October 3 to October 26 because the IG is investigating the hell out of it and the results are going to make the FBI look very bad (not for a pro-Clinton bias—but the *pro-Trump* bias of NYC FBI leakers).
