The Department of Justice Inspector General will report on the FBI handling of this and that. The NY Times attempts to soundbite the plot, and good luck to them:
Did the F.B.I. really put the fix in to save Mrs. Clinton?
This has become the most important question of the report, and it is one that the inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz, did not even set out to answer. He began his investigation last year to scrutinize the actions of the F.B.I. director at the time, James B. Comey, and his deputy, Andrew G. McCabe.
But Mr. Trump has pushed a theory that a secret cabal of Mrs. Clinton’s supporters inside the F.B.I. conspired to clear her of wrongdoing over her handling of classified information. This same group of agents, Mr. Trump argues, then cooked up a phony investigation into his campaign’s ties to Russia as a way to undermine his presidency.
No public evidence has surfaced to prove this theory, and the inspector general is unlikely to claim a wide-ranging political conspiracy at the heart of the F.B.I. There is evidence that at least some agents on the Clinton investigation disliked Mr. Trump. But look for Mr. Trump to seize on aspects of the report that support him, and probably discard those that do not.
Let me pause for a moment - if public evidence had in fact surfaced proving this point we wouldn't be waiting with bated breath for the IG report, now would we?
Mrs. Clinton’s supporters find this entire argument baffling. It was Mr. Comey, after all, who chastised her at a nationally televised news conference, and then — over the objection of the Justice Department — announced just days before Election Day that the F.B.I. was again investigating Mrs. Clinton. Mr. Trump now says the F.B.I. was on her side all along.
Mrs. Clinton's supporters are baffled by the possibility that the FBI is not monolithic and that Comey occasionally pushed back against a pro-Clinton-faction? Geez, these supporters must be hopelessly over their heads with "Game of Thrones". Or even "The New Girl".
A major concern is that McCabe slow-walked the investigation of the Hillary emails discovered on Anthony Weiner's server in late September. On the one hand, announcing bad news just before an election is not standard FBI procedure. On the other hand, if sometime after the election the FBI finally established that the Weiner email trove constituted clear evidence of Clinton crimes, well, there was the ever-so-slight possibility that people would infer the FBI had dragged their feet to protect the candidate of the incumbent's party. Awkward! But is that really baffling? Is maintaining a Clinton cover-up so as to avoid interfering with the election really the best thing for the FBI or the country?
I do not share their puzzlement.