And what the IG says demolishes the idea that the laptop contents were not significant. It also demolishes the explanation that "The team" didn't want the contents to be significant. The IG concludes that none of the reasons offered explain "the team's" inaction makes any sense, and implies that SDNY, New York FBI, and other (unnamed) external players are the only reason the case was reopened. The whiff of a suggestion that a cover-up by "the team" was in progress tells you that regardless of what the MYE team wanted to believe, they knew quite well that what was on the laptop was toxic to Hillary's cause (and theirs.)
This is as far as the IG is going to go--because it's as far as he can go based on his mandate. The next step is for someone who can compel testimony under oath to ask the question of "the team's" members: "What is the real reason and why have you lied about your reasons for failing to reopen the investigation?"
That is the role of a Grand Jury, and although I see lots of commentators claiming that's what Huber is doing, I see no real evidence that this is true.
Huber has not been assigned to investigate or prosecute anyone. This is another CTH Sundunce grossly inaccurate guess of his, unsupported by any evidence whatsoever. Meanwhile, sessions appointment letter to huber listed the three things huber was assigned. It is an internal DOJ review of resource management. Nothing more. Nothing.
In other words, no one is investigating anything pertaining to clinton obama.
Dont believe mark bradman. He is almost always wrong.