Her base is really too stupid to understand it this way.
I could have written this, our thoughts are so alike. We’ve all seen rich and powerful people get away or get off lightly, and we’ve all seen some of them go on and prosper, and go to their graves without appearing to pay any price for it. This is why we are wise to understand the folly of worrying about things we cannot control, and leaving judgement to a much higher pay-grade.
“But given his options he picked the most viable one and the most damaging one to her public image and presidential campaign, simply because the facts were laid out for all to see.”
You’re right ...he is no hero. Knowing that the DOJ would not do anything was all the more reason to recommend charges. You end up in the same place, but with a lot more bang. And to boot, you force Lynch and Obama to do the dirty work. What possible good could come about by letting these two off the hook?
If he really wanted to make a statement, he would have showed the American public and the MSM that she deserved to face the music.
However, I do think that the FBI should have put all the facts in the hands of the Justice Department and let them decide to prosecute or not. The FBI is law enforcement and not a group of prosecutors. They second guessed what DOJ would have done. By doing so they protected DOJ from the rightful wrath of the American public.
Yes, Hillary would never have been charged. But the image of Lynch meeting with slick Willy on a jet and Lynch not charging Hillary would have been a lasting legacy for the Democratic Party and Obama.
Right now the Sanders supporters now understand how utterly corrupt the Democratic Party is and how corrupt the primary voting process is. They would have seen how corrupt government agencies like the DOJ are as well.
There is a need to “clean up” government. This is a magic moment where a large number of Republicans, a significant number of Democrats agree that there is rampant corruption in the counting of votes, running of candidates and in government in general. It is time to pull everyone together and make structural changes.
Sorry, I don’t believe the silver linings theories. He screwed up, just like Roberts did. And these two men have both left an ibdellble black marks on the USA.
It might be good for people to understand who Comey really is. Remember, he was the guy who sicked his pal (and godfather to one of his children) Patrick Fitzgerald on Scooter Libby and they used Judith Miller to put him in jail for 3 years.
http://www.scooterlibby.com/
Prosecution witness Judith Miller recently revealed that she testified falsely in the 2007 perjury trial of Scooter Libby. Worse yet, she reveals that her false testimony stemmed from “unscrupulous conduct” by Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald. Miller laments her role in convicting Libby, an innocent man.
You see far from being a warrior for the good, Comey is nothing but a DC insider, playing the game for his own ambitions. We could have guessed what kind of animal he would be; he was groomed and lifted into the circle by the always corrupt Chuck Schumer of NY.
Yup... James Comey is no hero.
Come said
“In our system, the prosecutors make the decisions about whether charges are appropriate based on evidence the FBI has helped collect. Although we don’t normally make public our recommendations to the prosecutors, we frequently make recommendations and engage in productive conversations with prosecutors about what resolution may be appropriate, given the evidence. In this case, given the importance of the matter, I think unusual transparency is in order.
Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past.
In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here.”
The big hint is in this paragraph
“Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past.”
Here Comey is saying that she is probably guilty as heck but that he feels it's futile to prosecute her based on a number of reasons, including, “and how similar situations have been handled in the past.”.
What Comey seems to have been referring to is how issues regarding bringing felony indictments on Hillary Clinton have been handled in the past
As per Judicial watch, the Independent Prosecutor tied very hard to bring felony indictments against Hillary Clinton back in the 1990s but the indictments were spiked by the Clinton DOJ .
Judicial Watch has been using multiple FOIA requests trying to pry these document out of the grip of the National Archives , but the Archives are , like all other Clinton and Obama controlled entities, stonewalling and refusing to produce the documents
In this Judicial Watch brief on the Clinton White Water Indictment written in May 2016, they lay out the history of what happens to federal Prosecutor who try to indict Hillary Clinton and how the Clintons used Grand Jury secrecy to avoid public disclosure of their criminal behavior.
Whitewater: Twelve Versions of Hillary Clinton Draft Indictment, 451 Pages, Withheld By National Archives
MAY 10, 2016
New details continue to emerge from Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act fight with the National Archives over the release of draft indictments of Hillary Clinton in the Whitewater case. According to the Archives, release of the indictments—drafted by an independent counsel examining the Clintons’ relationship to a corrupt Arkansas S&L and an alleged cover-up—would violate grand jury secrecy and Mrs. Clinton’s personal privacy. FOIA request denied.
Judicial Watch declined to take “no” for an answer, and so off to court we went. The case is now in the hands of a federal judge.
In the course of litigation, new facts have come to light. Under FOIA, the Archives must produce a “Vaughn Index”—a tantalizing and at times maddening document. A Vaughn Index is the government saying: we are not giving you the documents, but here is an “index” of what we are not giving you, and why we are not giving it to you. Your tax dollars at work.
In the National Archives Vaughn Index for the case, we learn that the government is sitting on at least twelve versions of the the draft indictment of Mrs. Clinton, including one “listing overt acts.” From the public record, we know that the Whitewater case centered around whether Mrs. Clinton, while First Lady, lied to federal investigators about her role in the corrupt Arkansas S&L, concealed documents (including material under federal subpoena), and took other steps to cover-up her involvement. Prosecutors ultimately decided not to indict Mrs. Clinton, concluding that they could not win the complicated, largely circumstantial case against such a high-profile figure.
The draft indictments range from three to forty pages—the former likely excerpts or “scraps” from longer documents, the Vaughn Index indicates. Some of the drafts doubtless are copies but many clearly are not. A total of 451 pages of draft indictments are being withheld by the Archives.
In its final brief in the case, Judicial Watch took a wrecking ball to the Archives’ grand jury secrecy and personal privacy claims. Judicial Watch noted “the truly enormous quantities of grand jury material already made public” in the independent counsel’s final report. Judicial Watch provided the court with a detailed list of grand jury and non-grand jury material that had already been made public. If there ever was a valid claim to grand jury secrecy in this closely scrutinized case, it is long gone.
The Judicial Watch brief noted that the Archives “fails to identify a single, specific privacy interest Mrs. Clinton still has in the draft indictments” following publication of the independent counsel’s report and “hundreds of pages of grand jury materials, non-grand jury materials, and independent counsel legal theories and analysis that are already in the public domain.”
A typical FOIA privacy claim centers on unwarranted invasions of personal privacy. But in Mrs. Clinton’s case, the brief noted, the Archives “makes no claims that disclosure of the draft indictments will reveal any particular personal, medical or financial information about Mrs. Clinton, much less anything intimate or potentially embarrassing.”
Mrs. Clinton of course is one of the most famous women in the world, a former First Lady, senator and secretary of state, and the Democratic Party’s presumptive nominee for president of the United States. The findings of an investigation into whether Mrs. Clinton told the truth to federal investigators and withheld evidence under subpoena while she was First Lady is clearly matter of public interest as voters weigh her suitability for the highest office in the land.
The A}National Archives are refusing to respond to the FOIA requests
“New details continue to emerge from Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act fight with the National Archives over the release of draft indictments of Hillary Clinton in the Whitewater case. According to the Archives, release of the indictments—drafted by an independent counsel examining the Clintons’ relationship to a corrupt Arkansas S&L and an alleged cover-up—would violate grand jury secrecy and Mrs. Clinton’s personal privacy. FOIA request denied.”
And then the revelation that sets the present on Indicting Hillary Clinton that FBI Director Comey refers to
“In the National Archives Vaughn Index for the case, we learn that the government is sitting on at least twelve versions of the the draft indictment of Mrs. Clinton, including one “listing overt acts.” From the public record, we know that the Whitewater case centered around whether Mrs. Clinton, while First Lady, lied to federal investigators about her role in the corrupt Arkansas S&L, concealed documents (including material under federal subpoena), and took other steps to cover-up her involvement. Prosecutors ultimately decided not to indict Mrs. Clinton, concluding that they could not win the complicated, largely circumstantial case against such a high-profile figure.”
So Comey has been down this road with the Clinton's before and he knew how this was going to shake out.
Just like in Independent Prosecutor's White Water investigation and attempted indictment 20 years ago , Loretta Lynch would send the FBI Clinton E Mail referral to the Grand Jury where they would spike the case and hide the information on Hillary Clinton's misconduct and criminal acts using the seal of Grand Jury secrecy -just like they did with White Water
And the public would still be in the dark 20 years later when Judaical Watch was still fighting to get the fact of the email investigation released in 2036
Comey completely out maneuvered the Obama, Lynch, and Clinton cover-up of Clinton's email crimes and made sure the American people knew the truth before they elected Clinton to be President .
This is the best Comey could of done without going to jail himself- Obama, Clinton and Lynch are that criminally corrupt and willing to abuse the powers of government we , the People of the United States, have granted to them.
Nonsense. Law-abiding Americans got sh*t on again.
So, by laying out all of the damning evidence against Hillary Clinton and then recommending not to indict her FBI Director Comey has done us a favor... would not the same favor had been done if he’d laid out all the damning evidence against her and then actually done his job and recommended her indictment? All the same damning evidence would still be out there and in the second case it would have been backed up by the (now ruined) reputation of the FBI. My opinion... Comey punted ‘cuz he’s a wuss.
I’ve been thinking about the Hillary $100,000 gain on cattle futures lately - wondering who was on the losing end of that gain. My guess is that there was or is a way of off-setting a bet on futures that directly relates to another specific bet going to opposite way.
What a great set up for passing dirty money to a politician or political family. I also wonder if this trick is currently being used.
And John Roberts gave the country a big boost with his mystical re-writing of Obamacare. /s
Comey could have laid out all the exact same facts and recommended an indictment. He is the one who invented her “No criminal intent” defense. He is a bought and paid for lefty. Period!
Yes, Comey did Trump a favor. If Trump can’t beat her, he can’t beat anyone. People should quit complaining.
You may be right.
No, we suspected the FBI, DOJ were corrupt.
thanks.
a lot of people don’t know about comey vs. hillary - whitewater.
What has troubled me is that Comey went into the E-mail investigation knowing what Hillary was from 20 years ago and that didn’t seem to matter.
The democraps only want free stuff. God forbid they might actaully have to work for a living.