Here's some evidence from the report that shows Coleman's notes DO NOT SHOW Hillary Clinton emails involving sex crimes. The evidence begins in the executive summary. It's not hard to find.

Page Vii Here's your Crime against children. Anthony Weiner's warrant.

A federal search warrant was obtained on September 26, 2016, for Weiner’s iPhone, iPad, and laptop computer. The FBI obtained these devices the same day. The search warrant authorized the government to search for evidence relating to the following crimes: transmitting obscene material to a minor, sexual exploitation of children, and activities related to child pornography.

same page Here's Clinton's relevant emails found

The Weiner case agent told the OIG that he began processing Weiner’s devices on September 26, and that he noticed “within hours” that there were “over 300,000 emails on the laptop.” He said that either that evening or the next morning, he saw at least one BlackBerry PIN message between Clinton and Abedin, as well as emails between them. He said that he recalled seeing emails associated with “about seven domains,” such as yahoo.com, state.gov, clintonfoundation.org, clintonemail.com, and hillaryclinton.com.

same page However, they couldn't read them. new warrant needed.

• Sweeney said he also spoke to FBI Assistant Director E.W. “Bill” Priestap on September 28 and 29, 2016. Emails indicate that during their conversation on September 29, they discussed the limited scope of the Weiner search warrant (i.e., the need to obtain additional legal process to review any Midyear-related email on the Weiner laptop)

page 274 What to do with Clinton emails

The SSA told us that he specifically recalled the case agent mentioning domain names associated with Hillary Clinton, the Clinton Foundation, and possibly Clinton for President. The SSA also recalled the case agent telling him “early on” that there were “hundreds of thousands” of emails. The case agent and SSA told us that because the search warrant for the laptop was limited to child exploitation offenses, they agreed during this meeting that the emails were not covered under the search warrant and the case agent should not review those emails..... The ASAC told us that he immediately instructed the case agent and SSA to stay focused on the Weiner investigation and to “stay completely out of” the Clinton email case. The SSA and case agent stated that the ASAC told them to stop reviewing the emails pending further guidance from FBI Headquarters.

page 276 What emails to review for Crimes Against Children Case

The AUSAs provided written guidance to the case agent about how to handle review of the laptop. In a September 28 email to the case agent and the SSA, AUSA 1 advised that the case agent should review “only evidence of crimes related to the sexual exploitation of children, enticement, and obscenity” and instructed the case agent “that all emails and other communications between Anthony Weiner and Huma Abedin (even if there are other parties to the communication) should be sequestered and not reviewed at this time.” The case agent agreed and responded that the “[o]nly emails I will review are those to/from Weiner accounts to which [Huma Abedin] is not party.”

The IG report makes pretty clear that Athony Wiener didn't try to hide anything. All through this section of the report, it's clear they have not seem criminal activity in the Clinton emails. They call them "potentially relevant emails."

Page 283 what Coleman knew

On 09/28/2016, EAD Randall Coleman received for [sic] call from AD Bill Sweeney indicating team of Agents investigating Anthony Weiner sexting case had discovered emails relevant to Clinton email investigation. AD Sweeney advised team had halted further review and would be requesting guidance from FBIHQ.

There's nothing there about Clinton and sex crimes. And it's apparent there are separate email reviews needed and only the Weiner review was going forward.

Page 285-291 NY-DC conference call. Just destroys the True Pundit claims.

“I’m sure I told him exactly what I’d been representing to others, that, look, there are a lot of emails. You may want to get a search warrant. We can’t, we’re not looking at anything. ....... “[W]e’ve got some Clinton emails here, explained what it was. And they weren’t sure what to do with it in that it was outside the scope of what they were working on.” .....The NYO participants told us that they provided the Midyear team with an overview of what they had found on the Weiner laptop. This included the fact that the laptop contained “hundreds of thousands” of emails potentially relevant to the Midyear investigation......Each of the NYO participants told us that the limited nature of Weiner search warrant was discussed. The ASAC stated, “I know that we said to them that the warrant didn’t authorize us to look at these particular emails.” He continued, “And [the Midyear personnel] understood that. There was no pushback from them on that.” .....The Midyear SSA also told us that “content-wise” NYO “had only seen a couple” of emails because “they couldn’t review content.” ......The Midyear SSA stated that Midyear personnel were informed that the Weiner search warrant had a very limited scope. He stated that Midyear personnel knew that they “were going to need to get a warrant to review this.”.....Well, from my standpoint, I said we were going to, we were going to address whether we had enough for a warrant. And that we would run this up the chain on our side. And...they agreed especially that they would go back to SDNY and see what the exact parameters of what they could and couldn’t do, because they were not going to cross a line that would compromise their case......Analyst 1 stated that NYO reported that they had seen metadata showing “what they were characterizing as like [Hillary Clinton’s] email addresses.” Analyst 1 stated that the Midyear team was trying to determine if these were Clinton’s or were from the clintonemail.com domain.........Analyst 2’s notes included a reference to “2007 dates on PC.” Each of the three also said that NYO emphasized the limited nature of the Weiner search warrant and the fact that the Midyear team was “going to need to get a warrant to review this.” Agent 2’s notes included the following references: “SDNY advised to avoid emails” and “not looked @ any content.” Analyst 2’s notes included the following references: “SDNY—said put them aside” and “Huma has not waived marrital [sic] priv.” Analyst 2 described the limited nature of the Weiner search warrant as an “overarching theme” of the call.......We didn’t know if it was the right timeframe. So, you know, Huma we knew, Huma had...worked for [Clinton] for a long time. So we weren’t sure of exactly, one, what, how much of the information on this was Huma’s versus Weiner’s. Because we thought it was his laptop. And then, two, whether it would have been relevant to the right timeframe. We were looking for Clinton’s emails, not Huma’s emails. We also knew Huma had a clintonemail address, so she could have been using that for her own personal activities, so we just didn’t know the full extent of what was on there.......FBI Attorney 1 told us that NYO relayed that “SDNY was very concerned about staying within the scope of their warrant.” FBI Attorney 1 stated that the Midyear team told NYO, “well when you get further clarity about what this laptop is, get back to us and let us know, and we’ll try to figure out what to do from there.” ........When asked whether NYO was supposed to create an inventory or list for Midyear, FBI Attorney 1 stated that she “thought we talked about [the Weiner case agent] not being able to do that. Because of the instructions. I mean, because of how the warrant was drafted.” ......the September 28 email from AUSA 1 to the Weiner case agent (detailed above) outlining the limited scope of the Weiner search warrant and providing instructions for the case agent’s search of the laptop. The ASAC told us that he forwarded this email to make sure “they understood the directives that we had from [SDNY] in terms of limitations and really kind of under what circumstances we would be able to look at anything that was attached to an email.” Witnesses in NYO and SDNY told us that the case agent was told not to affirmatively search the emails for information unrelated to the Weiner child exploitation investigation. ....... It is something that we need to look into. There is work they’ve got to do. We’re not there yet, but it isn’t something we can just say, ah, let, there’s nothing relevant there. ..... the next step was for NYO to process the laptop and for NYO to look for the type of data on the laptop that the Midyear team would need. .... [A]nd...when you’re done with that, you know, call us back and let us know. And again...there is no sense of this is going to be huge and horrible......Anderson said that she was informed that it was unclear what was on the laptop at this point and NYO was going “to try to figure out as much as they could” consistent with the terms of their search warrant.