Archive for the ‘FBI’ category

FBI and DoJ are ignoring evidence of crimes in Project Veritas Action videos

October 23, 2016

FBI and DoJ are ignoring evidence of crimes in Project Veritas Action videos, American Thinker, Thomas Lifson, October 3, 2016

Ahem, where is the criminal investigation of apparent crimes, conspiracies to violate the civil rights of Trump supporters, and possibly riot, for starters?  And where is the media clamor to get to the bottom of this frightening perversion of democracy?  People were hurt in the near-riot at the Trump rally in Chicago, and their right to assemble negated by a conspiracy. The media are completely uninterested in asking any questions.

J. Christian Adams is one of my heroes. He resigned his career at the Justice Department on principle and now is a crusader. On Fox & Friends, he spoke frankly:

 Look, if this was a tea party group coordinating with the Trump campaign to incite violence at Clinton rallies or NAACP events or whatever, we know exactly what would be happening. This would be Justice Department fully investigating this for civil rights violations and all sorts of things. This is a Justice Department and an FBI that is dolling out justice based on your politics. If you support Clinton, if you are Clinton, you can engage in all sorts of misbehavior without consequence. If you are the IRS commissioner or an attorney general who is held in criminal contempt, he would give you a pass. You don’t face justice under this administration. (snip)

It feels like a rigged system. So you have got this operative Bob Creamer who is clearly in with the White House, 300 visits. I have had none. And then he is on tape saying we’re inciting violence at rallies. No accountability. What in a perfect world, non-rigged world, what happens to Bob creamer?

Spare me the rhetoric about “doctored” tapes and James O’Keefe’s criminal conviction for entering a senator’s office under false pretenses in the course of his investigative journalism. If Hollywood were magically switched 180 degrees to pervasive conservatism, there would already be a caper movie deal starring a hot male lead, the shenanigans generating many a knowing chuckle as the real crooks, the politicians and their minions,  are brought to public light, and then retaliate with criminal prosecution of the hero.

The FBI can subpoena all 40 hours of the uncut recordings and examine them for evidence of these crimes, and already would be doing so were Trump supporters involved. All they need to do is ask for a grand jury. In the corrupt Obama/Lynch Justice Department, so it will never happen.

 

(C) is For Cartwright

October 23, 2016

(C) is For Cartwright, Power Line, Scott Johnson, October 23, 2016

Retired Marine General James Cartwright pleaded guilty last week to lying to the FBI in its investigation of him for leaking classified information to a reporter. Drawing on Josh Rogin’s Washington Post column, I wrote briefly about the guilty plea in “The case of General Cartwright.”

Now former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy devotes his weekly NRO column to a comparison of the Clinton email investigation with the prosecution of General Cartwright. It’s a superb exposition of the double standard operative in the Clinton case.

It’s not funny, although it reads like a satire. It certainly warrants his addition to Hillary’s enemies list. If only we could get Slow Joe Biden to read it, he would want to invite Andy to meet him back behind the high school gym.

The video below places the Clinton email scandal in a musical setting. It takes us from James Comey to musical comedy. The video is aptly titled “Hillary Clinton & James Comey — what difference does it make?”

Gingrich on Undercover Video of Dem Operatives: ‘Where is the FBI?’

October 20, 2016

Gingrich on Undercover Video of Dem Operatives: ‘Where is the FBI?’ Fox News via YouTube, October 18, 2016

Teachers union protests FBI ‘Radical Ideologies’ website because it could single out Muslims

October 19, 2016

Teachers union protests FBI ‘Radical Ideologies’ website because it could single out Muslims, Jihad Watch,

Islamic jihadists are singling us out, but that doesn’t seem to matter. There have been almost 30,000 jihad attacks worldwide since 9/11 and no remotely comparable number of any other attacks by any other group, and they’re worried that Muslims will be “singled out” by a toothless program that doesn’t even name them in the first place.

james-comey

“Teachers Union Protests FBI ‘Radical Ideologies’ Website Because It Could Single Out Muslims,” by Amber Randall, Daily Caller, October 18, 2016:

A teacher’s union and associated groups are coming out against the FBI campaign to counter radical ideology, saying that it could lead to the singling out of Muslims.

Various groups penned a letter to FBI Director James Comey, declaring that the website made them feel “deeply troubled,” reports The Wall Street Journal.

The website, called “Don’t Be A Puppet,” was advertised for use in schools to teach younger people how to avoid being tempted by radical extremist thought. The website urges students to divulge any suspicious behavior they see to teachers and law enforcement.

The groups, which encompass the American Association of School Administrators and American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, wrote that they believed the website would cause people to view Muslims and Middle Eastern students in a negative light.

The website, introduced last year, functions as a game to teach teenagers how to identify and avoid “violent extremists.”

“The site emphasizes that by blindly accepting radical ideologies, teens are essentially becoming the “puppets” of violent extremists who simply want them to carry out their destructive mission—which often includes targeting or killing innocent people,” the FBI website explains.

Those who disagree with the website took issue with what the website calls warning signs of potential extremist actions. Some of the warning signs include “talking about traveling to places that sound suspicious” and “using code words or unusual language.”

“We know we need to be hyper-vigilant. But there’s a difference between being hyper-vigilant and engaging in racial profiling. This program, while probably well intended, shouldn’t go forward,” the American Federation of Teachers union President Randi Weingarten declared….

State Dept claims “no discussion” of quid pro quo regarding Clinton email, calls charge ‘insulting’

October 17, 2016

State Dept claims “no discussion” of quid pro quo regarding Clinton email, calls charge ‘insulting’, Washington Free Beacon via YouTube, October 17, 2016

(Please see also, Clinton Associate Tried to Bribe FBI to Bury Hillary Email Permanently. — DM)

 

Lawyers Reviewed Classified Clinton Communications Without Clearance

October 17, 2016

Lawyers Reviewed Classified Clinton Communications Without Clearance, Washington Free Beacon, , October 17, 2016

clinton-1Hillary Clinton / AP

Lawyers without security clearances viewed emails from Hillary Clinton’s personal server that included classified communications, according to files released by the FBI.

The revelation comes in a batch of interview summaries released by the bureau on Monday in connection with its investigation into Clinton’s use of personal email to conduct government business during her time as secretary of state.

Attorneys representing Clinton and Cheryl Mills, her chief of staff at the State Department, admitted to investigators during a meeting on August 17, 2015 that emails from Clinton’s private server “had been viewed by attorneys who did not have a security clearance at the time they reviewed the material.”

The meeting involved Katherine Turner, a partner at law firm Williams & Connolly, as well as another attorney from the firm and legal counsel for Mills from Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, whose names have been redacted. They met with FBI officials to discuss handing over six laptops used to review Clinton’s communications, which were “known to contain Top Secret classified information.”

During the August 17 meeting, Turner “acknowledged that these laptops contain Top Secret email communications” but said that attorneys who viewed them “were not aware that they were classified at the time” because the messages did not contain classification markings.

“Both [Mills’ counsel] and TURNER admitted that the emails contained on these laptops had been viewed by attorneys who did not have a security clearance at the time they reviewed the material,” the FBI documents state. “TURNER said the emails did not contain classification markers and thus they were not aware that they were classified at the time.”

FBI Director James Comey told a House panel in July that Clinton granted individuals without security clearances access to classified information, though he could not confirm that those individuals, particularly her lawyers, had read the classified material.

At the time, a spokesman for the Clinton campaign insisted that “the lawyers who sorted through Clinton’s emails had Top Secret-level clearance.”

Both David Kendall, Clinton’s personal attorney at Williams & Connolly, and Turner, his partner, had previously received top secret security clearances from the U.S. government. The files released Monday indicate that other lawyers without proper clearances also viewed Clinton’s emails.

The Clinton campaign did not respond to a request for comment.

Of the six laptops, one was in possession of Mills’ lawyer, whose name was redacted and who “admitted that the computer in his possession has been connected to the Internet on numerous occasions subsequent to being loaded with the classified email communications,” the FBI documents state.

This particular laptop was used by Heather Samuelson, a lawyer and 2008 Clinton campaign staffer, who worked under Mills to review Clinton’s 60,000 emails and delete half of them deemed personal.

The remaining work-related communications were eventually turned over to the FBI.

The FBI announced in July that it would not recommend charges in the case, though Comey faulted Clinton and her aides for being “extremely careless” in their handling of classified information.

Clinton has repeatedly stated that she never sent or received classified information on her personal system. However, the FBI found 113 emails on Clinton’s server that contained classified material at the time they were sent or received, including some communications that were top secret.

The bureau on Monday released nearly three dozen summaries of interviews in connection with its investigation into Clinton’s use of private email at the State Department. The FBI, which has previously published declassified documents related to the investigation, released the summaries under pressure from congressional lawmakers.

Clinton’s personal email use was first revealed by the New York Times in March 2015 and quickly became a flashpoint of the 2016 presidential election.

Clinton Associate Tried to Bribe FBI to Bury Hillary Email Permanently

October 17, 2016

Clinton Associate Tried to Bribe FBI to Bury Hillary Email Permanently, Front Page Magazine, Daniel Greenfield, October 16, 2016

clintonfiles

It’s truly stunning. If ordinary people had tried to pull even a fraction of these stunts. Even highly influential people for that matter. They would be sitting in a jail cell. The scope of Clinton arrogance and ambition is truly breathtaking in the most horrifying ways. Here’s what we are now learning about how Clinton associates tried to bury Hillary emails.

According to FBI interview summaries set to be released in the coming days. Patrick Kennedy, the undersecretary of state for management, discussed providing additional overseas slots for the FBI in exchange for revisions to classifications of the sensitive emails.

What that means is that Kennedy was using government power to try and bribe another government agency to aid the Hillary cover up.

One email in particular concerned Kennedy and, according to the FBI summary, providing a B9 exemption “would allow him to archive the document in the basement of the department of state never to be seen again.” The FBI official told Kennedy that he would look into the email if Kennedy would authorize a pending request for additional FBI personnel in Iraq.

A summary of an interview with the section chief of the FBI records management division provides further evidence of Kennedy’s attempts to have the classification of some sensitive emails changed. The FBI records official, whose job includes making determinations on classification, told investigators that he was approached by his colleague in international operations after the initial discussion with Kennedy. The FBI records official says that his colleague “pressured” him to declassify an email “in exchange for a quid pro quo,” according to the interview summary. “In exchange for making the email unclassified State would reciprocate by allowing the FBI to place more agents in countries where they are presently forbidden.” The request was denied.

In the days that followed, the FBI records official attended an “all-agency” meeting at the State Department to discuss the ongoing “classification review of pending Clinton FOIA materials.” One of the participants at the meeting asked Kennedy whether any of the emails were classified. Kennedy purposely looked at the FBI records chief and then replied: “Well, we’ll see.”

So we have rather blatant abuses in State and in the FBI… the agency that was ultimately tasked with investigating all this.

Clinton associates were absolutely shameless about throwing their weight around and the FBI appeared willing to at least listen.

FBI, DOJ roiled by Comey, Lynch decision to let Clinton slide by on emails, says insider

October 13, 2016

FBI, DOJ roiled by Comey, Lynch decision to let Clinton slide by on emails, says insider, Fox News, , October 13, 2016

fbi-agents-dismayed-by-failure-to-charge-clinton

A high-ranking FBI official told Fox News that while it might not have been a unanimous decision, “It was unanimous that we all wanted her [Clinton’s] security clearance yanked.”

“It is safe to say the vast majority felt she should be prosecuted,” the senior FBI official told Fox News. “We were floored while listening to the FBI briefing because Comey laid it all out, and then said ‘but we are doing nothing,’ which made no sense to us.”

********************************

The decision to let Hillary Clinton off the hook for mishandling classified information has roiled the FBI and Department of Justice, with one person closely involved in the year-long probe telling FoxNews.com that career agents and attorneys on the case unanimously believed the Democratic presidential nominee should have been charged.

The source, who spoke to FoxNews.com on the condition of anonymity, said FBI Director James Comey’s dramatic July 5 announcement that he would not recommend to the Attorney General’s office that the former secretary of state be charged left members of the investigative team dismayed and disgusted. More than 100 FBI agents and analysts worked around the clock with six attorneys from the DOJ’s National Security Division, Counter Espionage Section, to investigate the case.

“No trial level attorney agreed, no agent working the case agreed, with the decision not to prosecute — it was a top-down decision,” said the source, whose identity and role in the case has been verified by FoxNews.com.

A high-ranking FBI official told Fox News that while it might not have been a unanimous decision, “It was unanimous that we all wanted her [Clinton’s] security clearance yanked.”

“It is safe to say the vast majority felt she should be prosecuted,” the senior FBI official told Fox News. “We were floored while listening to the FBI briefing because Comey laid it all out, and then said ‘but we are doing nothing,’ which made no sense to us.”

The FBI declined to comment directly, but instead referred Fox News to multiple public statements Comey has made in which he has thrown water on the idea that politics played a role in the agency’s decision not to recommend charges.

“I know there were many opinions expressed by people who were not part of the investigation – including people in government – but none of that mattered to us,” Comey said July 5  in announcing the FBI’s decision on the Clinton emails. “Opinions are irrelevant, and they were all uninformed by insight into our investigation, because we did the investigation the right way. Only facts matter, and the FBI found them here in an entirely apolitical and professional way.”

Andrew Napolitano, former judge and senior judicial analyst for Fox News Channel, said many law enforcement agents involved with the Clinton email investigation have similar beliefs.

“It is well known that the FBI agents on the ground, the human beings who did the investigative work, had built an extremely strong case against Hillary Clinton and were furious when the case did not move forward,” said Napolitano. “They believe the decision not to prosecute came from The White House.”

The claim also is backed up by a report in the New York Post this week, which quotes a number of veteran FBI agents saying FBI Director James Comey “has permanently damaged the bureau’s reputation for uncompromising investigations with his cowardly whitewash of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s mishandling of classified information using an unauthorized private email server.”

“The FBI has politicized itself, and its reputation will suffer for a long time. I hold Director Comey responsible,” Dennis V. Hughes, the first chief of the FBI’s computer investigations unit, told the Post.  Retired FBI agent Michael M. Biasello added to the report, saying, “Comey has singlehandedly ruined the reputation of the organization.”

Especially angering the team, which painstakingly pieced together deleted emails and interviewed witnesses to prove that sensitive information was left unprotected, was the fact that Comey based his decision on a conclusion that a recommendation to charge would not be followed by DOJ prosecutors, even though the bureau’s role was merely to advise, Fox News was told.

“Basically, James Comey hijacked the DOJ’s role by saying ‘no reasonable prosecutor would bring this case,’” the Fox News source said. “The FBI does not decide who to prosecute and when, that is the sole province of a prosecutor — that never happens.

“I know zero prosecutors in the DOJ’s National Security Division who would not have taken the case to a grand jury,” the source added. “One was never even convened.”

Napolitano agreed, saying the FBI investigation was hampered from the beginning, because there was no grand jury, and no search warrants or subpoenas issued.

“The FBI could not seize anything related to the investigation, only request things. As an example, in order to get the laptop, they had to agree to grant immunity,” Napolitano said.

In early 2015, it was revealed that Clinton had used a private email server in her Chappaqua, N.Y., home to conduct government business while serving from 2009-2013. The emails on the private server included thousands of messages that would later be marked classified by the State Department retroactively. Federal law makes it a crime for a government employee to possess classified information in an unsecure manner, and the relevant statute does not require a finding of intent.

Although Comey found that Clinton was “extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information,” he said “no charges are appropriate in this case.”

Well before Comey’s announcement, which came days after Bill Clinton met in secret with Comey’s boss, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, there were signs the investigation would go nowhere, the source told FoxNews.com. One was the fact that the FBI forced its agents and analysts involved in the case to sign non-disclosure agreements.

“This is unheard of, because of the stifling nature it has on the investigative process,” the source said.

Another oddity was the five so-called immunity agreements granted to Clinton’s State Department aides and IT experts.

Cheryl Mills, Clinton’s former chief of staff, along with two other State Department staffers, John Bentel and Heather Samuelson, were afforded immunity agreements, as was Bryan Pagliano, Clinton’s former IT aide, and Paul Combetta, an employee at Platte River networks, the firm hired to manage her server after she left the State Department.

As Fox News has reported, Combetta utilized the computer program “Bleachbit” to destroy Clinton’s records, despite an order from Congress to preserve them, and Samuelson also destroyed Clinton’s emails. Pagliano established the system that illegally transferred classified and top secret information to Clinton’s private server. Mills disclosed classified information to the Clinton’s family foundation in the process, breaking federal laws.

None should have been granted immunity if no charges were being brought, the source said.

“[Immunity] is issued because you know someone possesses evidence you need to charge the target, and you almost always know what it is they possess,” the source said. “That’s why you give immunity.”

Mills and Samuelson also received immunity for what was found on their computers, which were then destroyed as a part of negotiations with the FBI.

“Mills and Samuelson receiving immunity with the agreement their laptops would be destroyed by the FBI afterwards is, in itself, illegal,” the source said. “We know those laptops contained classified information. That’s also illegal, and they got a pass.”

Mills’ dual role as Clinton’s attorney and a witness in her own right should never have been tolerated either.

“Mills was allowed to sit in on the interview of Clinton as her lawyer. That’s absurd. Someone who is supposedly cooperating against the target of an investigation [being] permitted to sit by the target as counsel violates any semblance of ethical responsibility,” the source said.

“Every agent and attorney I have spoken to is embarrassed and has lost total respect for James Comey and Loretta Lynch,” the source said. “The bar for DOJ is whether the evidence supports a case for charges — it did here. It should have been taken to the grand jury.”

Also infuriating agents, the New York Post reported, was the fact that Clinton’s interview spanned just 3½ hours with no follow-up questioning, despite her “40 bouts of amnesia,” and then, three days later, Comey cleared her of criminal wrongdoing.

Many FBI and DOJ staffers believe Comey and Lynch were motivated by ambition, and not justice, the source said.

“Loretta Lynch simply wants to stay on as Attorney General under Clinton, so there is no way she would indict,” the source said. “James Comey thought his position [excoriating Clinton even as he let her off the hook] gave himself cover to remain on as director regardless of who wins.”

The decision by Comey and Lynch not to prosecute has renewed FBI agents’ belief that the agency should be autonomous.

“This is why so many agents believe the FBI needs to be an entity by itself to truly be effective,” the senior FBI official told Fox News. “We all feel very strongly about it — and the need to be objective. But that truly cannot be done when the AG is appointed by a president and attends daily briefings.”

Adding to the controversy, WikiLeaks released internal Clinton communication records this week that show the Department of Justice kept Clinton’s campaign and her staff informed about the progress of its investigation.

Leaked emails from Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s gmail account show the Clinton campaign was contacted by the DOJ on May 19, 2015.

“DOJ folks inform me there is a status hearing in this case this morning, so we could have a window into the judge’s thinking about this proposed production schedule as quickly as today,” Clinton press secretary Brian Fallon wrote in relation to the email documentation the State Department would be required to turn over to the Justice Department.

Jay Sekulow, chief counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice, who previously served in the U.S. Treasury Department in the Office of Chief Counsel for the IRS, where he was responsible for litigation in the U.S. Tax Court, said it was clear from the start that the FBI never intended to prosecute.

“This was a fake, false investigation from the outset,” Sekulow said.

FBI Colluded with Democrats, Team Clinton on Email ‘Prosecution’

October 3, 2016

FBI Colluded with Democrats, Team Clinton on Email ‘Prosecution’, PJ Media, Michael Walsh, October 3, 2016

ap_16274607214849-sized-770x415xt(AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais, File)

[I]f we don’t stop it on Nov. 8, expect things to get much, much worse very, very quickly.

*********************

The fix was in from the start, and we are now being governed by a gang of criminals. How else to explain this:

Immunity deals for two top Hillary Clinton aides included a side arrangement obliging the FBI to destroy their laptops after reviewing the devices, House Judiciary Committee sources told Fox News on Monday.Sources said the arrangement with former Clinton chief of staff Cheryl Mills and ex-campaign staffer Heather Samuelson also limited the search to no later than Jan. 31, 2015. This meant investigators could not review documents for the period after the email server became public — in turn preventing the bureau from discovering if there was any evidence of obstruction of justice, sources said. [Emphasis added — DM)

The Republican-led House Judiciary Committee fired off a letter Monday to Attorney General Loretta Lynch asking why the DOJ and FBI agreed to the restrictive terms, including that the FBI would destroy the laptops after finishing the search. “Like many things about this case, these new materials raise more questions than answers,” Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., wrote in the letter obtained by Fox News.

That last remark would be funny if it were’t so pathetic. The clueless Republicans — like most Americans — simply cannot bring themselves to realize what sort of government we are now living under. Destroying evidence? Impeding congressional inquiry? Granting immunity to some of the very persons likely involved in the crime?

The immunity deals for Mills and Samuelson, made as part of the FBI’s probe into Clinton’s use of a private email server when she served as secretary of state, apparently included a series of “side agreements” that were negotiated by Samuelson and Mills’ attorney Beth Wilkinson.The side deals were agreed to on June 10, less than a month before FBI Director James Comey announced that the agency would recommend no charges be brought against Clinton or her staff. Judiciary Committee aides told FoxNews.com that the destruction of the laptops isparticularly troubling as it means that the computers could not be used as evidence in future legal proceedings, should new information or circumstances arise.

As PJ Media columnist Andrew McCarthy writes at NRO:

In a nutshell, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Justice Department permitted Hillary Clinton’s aide Cheryl Mills — the subject of a criminal investigation, who had been given immunity from prosecution despite strong evidence that she had lied to investigators — to participate as a lawyer for Clinton, the principal subject of the same criminal investigation. This unheard-of accommodation was made in violation not only of rudimentary investigative protocols and attorney-ethics rules, but also of the federal criminal law. Yet, the FBI and the Justice Department, the nation’s chief enforcers of the federal criminal law, tell us they were powerless to object. Seriously?I genuinely hate this case. I don’t mind disagreeing with the Bureau, a not infrequent occurrence in my former career. But I am hardwired to presume the FBI’s integrity. Thus, no matter how much irregularities in the Clinton investigation have rankled me, I’ve chalked them up to the Bureau’s being hamstrung. There was no chance on God’s green earth that President Obama and his Justice Department were ever going to permit an indictment of Hillary Clinton.

And that’s the bottom line. The Obama administration has corrupted and weaponized the major enforcement agencies of the federal government, including the IRS and the FBI, and now is reaching down to the local level in order to bring municipal police forces under Washington’s control. As Andy says in the context of Islam, it’s “willful blindness,” and if we don’t stop it on Nov. 8, expect things to get much, much worse very, very quickly.

Maryland imam openly endorses the Islamic State, finances jihad terror plots, calls concerns about him “McCarthyism”

October 3, 2016

Maryland imam openly endorses the Islamic State, finances jihad terror plots, calls concerns about him “McCarthyism” Jihad Watch

The idea that the relentlessly clueless, willfully ignorant Obamoid FBI would be persecuting this man out of “Islamophobia” is ludicrous. We can only hope that the feds don’t decide that it is too “Islamophobic” to continue watching him closely.

suleiman-bengharsa

“Extremist Imam Tests F.B.I. and the Limits of the Law,” by Scott Shane and Adam Goldman, New York Times, September 30, 2016 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

WASHINGTON — For more than a decade, Suleiman Anwar Bengharsa has served as a Muslim cleric in Maryland, working as a prison chaplain and as an imam at mosques in Annapolis and outside Baltimore. He gave a two-week course in 2011 on Islamic teachings on marriage at the Islamic Society of Baltimore, where President Obama made a much-publicized visit this year.

But in the last two years, Imam Bengharsa’s public pronouncements have taken a dark turn. On Facebook, he has openly endorsed the Islamic State, posted gruesome videos showing ISIS fighters beheading and burning alive their enemies and praised terrorist attacks overseas. The “Islamic Jurisprudence Center” website he set up last year has condemned American mosques as un-Islamic and declared that homosexual acts should be punished by death.

That is not all. An affidavit filed in federal court by the F.B.I. says that Imam Bengharsa, 59, supplied $1,300 in June 2015 to a Detroit man who used it to expand his arsenal of firearms and grenades. The man, Sebastian Gregerson, 29, a Muslim convert who sometimes calls himself Abdurrahaman Bin Mikaayl, was arrested in late July and indicted on explosives charges.

Nearly a year ago, in fact, the F.B.I. said in a court filing — accidentally and temporarily made public in an online database — that agents suspected the two men were plotting terrorism. “Based on the totality of the aforementioned information and evidence, there is reason to believe that Bengharsa and Gregerson are engaged in discussions and preparations for some violent act on behalf of” the Islamic State, an agent wrote.

Yet Imam Bengharsa has not been arrested or charged. It appears that the authorities do not have clear evidence that he has broken the law. His inflammatory statements are protected by the First Amendment, and agents appear to have no proof that he knew Mr. Gregerson planned to buy illegal explosives. In his checkbook, next to the notation for the $1,300 check, Imam Bengharsa wrote “zakat,” or charity, the documents show.

The case poses in a striking way the dilemma for the F.B.I. in deciding when constitutionally protected speech crosses into inciting violence or conspiring to commit a terrorist act.

The bureau was sharply criticized for not acting more aggressively on prior warnings about the men who carried out attacks in Orlando, Fla., in June and in New York and New Jersey last month. And in early August, the F.B.I. arrested a transit police officer from Fairfax, Va., after watching him for six years before charging him with providing support to the Islamic State. It was another case that raised questions — even among agents — about why the F.B.I. and federal prosecutors waited so long to act, potentially putting the public at risk.

In testimony before Congress this week, the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, said the challenge for F.B.I. agents was determining when someone has crossed the line from speech to criminal activity. “It’s even protected speech to say I’m a fan of the Islamic State so-called,” Mr. Comey said.

When the suspect is a cleric, like Imam Bengharsa, the matter is especially delicate.

“It’s very possible that he’s never crossed the legal threshold,” said Seamus Hughes, deputy director of the Program on Extremism at George Washington University, who has closely followed the imam’s story. But Mr. Hughes called the situation “perplexing and concerning.” The imam “can take his supporters right up to the line. It’s like a making a cake and not putting in the final ingredient. It’s winks and nods all the way.”

Imam Bengharsa appears to have plenty of money. Court records say he received $902,710 in wire transfers in 2014 and 2015, possibly an inheritance. He told The Detroit News that he often helped needy people like Mr. Gregerson. “If that individual turns around and wants to use that money for something else that’s illegal, the person who gave the money cannot be held responsible,” Imam Bengharsa said. “It’s pathetic if they are making those connections. If that’s what this country has become, I’d rather be in jail.”

The documents say he transferred money three times to an unnamed person in Yemen.

Investigators are also exploring contacts between Imam Bengharsa and other people suspected of extremism or terrorism. One is Yusuf Wehelie, 25, a Virginia man arrested in July and charged with weapons possession, which would be illegal because he has a previous felony conviction for burglary.

Mr. Wehelie first came to public attention in 2010, when he and his brother, Yahya Wehelie, both American citizens, were temporarily detained in Cairo and prevented by the F.B.I. from flying home. American officials said such delays were sometimes necessary to assess whether a person posed a security threat. The American Civil Liberties Union and the Council on American-Islamic Relations protested that the rights of such travelers were being violated.

At Yusuf Wehelie’s detention hearing in July, the authorities said he had told undercover agents that he supported the Islamic State and that if he couldn’t join it overseas, he would attack a military recruiting center, possibly using explosives. (Mr. Wehelie’s lawyer, Nina Ginsberg, said that in later recorded conversations, he disavowed those statements and later stopped replying to the undercover agents.)

In Baltimore, another young man named Maalik Alim Jones was arrested late last year and charged with joining a terrorist group in Africa. Imam Bengharsa had preached on occasion at a Baltimore mosque Mr. Jones attended, but it is not clear that they knew each other.

The F.B.I. has been closely watching the imam for months, law enforcement officials say. A spokesman for the bureau declined to comment.

The authorities are concerned that Imam Bengharsa, who claims an impressive list of scholarly credentials, may be spreading the Islamic State message that violence can be justified against perceived enemies of the faith. In view of the payment to Mr. Gregerson, they also fear he may be financing other supporters of the Islamic State. The F.B.I. has said in court that he is under investigation for conspiring and providing material support to the Islamic State….