Posted on 09/08/2016 6:13:33 AM PDT by KeyLargo
The FBI’s Blind Clinton Trust Comey’s agents were forgiving about some incriminating evidence.
Sept. 7, 2016
The closer we look at the FBI’s investigative file on Hillary Clinton’s emails, the more we wonder if Director James Comey always intended to let her off the hook. The calculated release before the long Labor Day weekend suggests political favoritism, and the report shows the FBI didn’t pursue evidence of potential false statements, obstruction of justice and destruction of evidence.
Mr. Comey’s concessions start with his decision not to interview Mrs. Clinton until the end of his investigation, a mere three days before he announced his conclusions. Regular FBI practice is to get a subject on the record early then see if his story meshes with what agents find. In this case they accepted Mrs. Clinton’s I-don’t-recall defenses after the fact.
The notes also show the G-men never did grill Mrs. Clinton on her “intent” in setting up her server. Instead they bought her explanation that it was for personal convenience. This helped Mr. Comey avoid concluding that her purpose was to evade statutes like the Federal Records Act. Mr. Comey also told Congress that indicting her without criminal intent would pose a constitutional problem. But Congress has written many laws that don’t require criminal intent, and negligent homicide (for example) has never been unconstitutional.
The FBI notes also blow past evidence that Clinton advisers may have engaged in a cover-up. Consider page 10 of the FBI report: “Clinton’s immediate aides, to include [Huma] Abedin, [Cheryl] Mills, Jacob Sullivan, and [redacted] told the FBI they were unaware of the existence of the private server until after Clinton’s tenure at State or when it became public knowledge.”
That’s amazing given that Ms. Abedin had her own email account on the private server.
(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...
Note: Try to Google the headline if full article is not at the link.
I’m hoping the Wall Street Journal will do a piece on the WSJ’s blind Clinton trust.
:: the more we wonder if Director James Comey always intended to let her off the hook ::
Really? And where do we place Vince Foster in this concern?
... the more we wonder if Director James Comey always intended to let her off the hook.
LOL. Many here have known all along what the outcome would be. The outcome is independent of the facts, and an investigation is a necessary predicate to a good whitewash.
Same goes for Congressional investigations. Hot talk, no action.
This isn’t rocket science for anyone with a modicum of logic within their grasp. The evidence is overwhelming that Hillary was guilty of several crimes of which several other high profile individuals were convicted of earlier (for lesser infractions I may say).
The FBI, IRS, DOJ, SCOTUS, FEDERAL COURTS, BOTH HOUSES OF CONGRESS, BOTH PARTIES ARE COMPLETELY CORRUPT
Useless Comey’s attempt to explain why he let Hillary off the hook yesterday in a memo yesterday, does not erase the fact that he whitewashed the so-called investigation.
Comey defends Clinton private email server investigation in FBI memo
September 7, 2016 KID News National News
Should read: ‘Comey defends Clinton’
Unfortunately, with great regret, I have to agree with your statement. A very sad state of affairs.
Yeah, Key, I hear you.
I’ve always said that Comey’s statement of “no reasonable prosecutor would” can be translated into “I don’t want to die.”
It was rigged from the beginning.
August 20, 2015
Watchdog: Two National Security Laws Appear Broken in Clinton Email Scandal
EXCERPT
Two laws apply to the mishandling of classified data on unsecure networks, Farrell said.
The first is 18 USC Sec. 1924, which outlaws the unauthorized removal and storage of classified information. Penalties can include fines and imprisonment for up to one year.
That statute was used to prosecute retired Army General David Petraeus, a former CIA director who provided classified documents to his mistress and biographer, Paula Broadwell. Petraeus was sentenced to two years’ probation and a $40,000 fine as part of a plea deal in March.
A second federal statute that prosecutors could use to charge Clinton and her aides is 18 USC Sec. 793, a more serious felony statute Farrell described as a “hammer.”
That law covers national defense information and people who misuse it to injure the United States or benefit a foreign power.
Those convicted of violating that law face fines and up to 10 years in prison.
http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/post?id=3466946%2C11
September 27, 2015
On April 23, Petraeus pled guilty to a single misdemeanor charge of unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or materials under 18 USC §1924. Many in the intelligence community were outraged at the perceived “slap on the wrist” he received, at a time when the Justice Department was seeking very strong penalties against lesser officials for leaks to the media.
According to the law, there are five elements that must be met for a violation of the statute, and they can all be found in section (a) of the statute: “(1) Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, (2) by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, (3) knowingly removes such documents or materials (4) without authority and (5) with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location [shall be guilty of this offense].”
CAUGHT! Hillary Wore Earpiece Radio Receiver During Live TV Townhall Event; Needed words fed to her to answer questions!
Post by Newsroom
- Sep 08, 2016
SuperStation95 in New York City has confirmed with our sources in the NYPD, that Clinton was using a very expensive earpiece receiver to receive stealth communications from her campaign handlers during Wednesday’s Presidential Forum carried live on NBC.
While Clinton was fielding questions from NBC’s Matt Lauer and the public Wednesday night on live television, a quiet buzz started circulating in New York law enforcement circles about Hillary’s left ear. NYPD sources confirm Clinton was wearing an ‘inductive earpiece,” the same technology employed by almost all lead Broadway actors to receive forgotten lines and stealth off-stage cues from directors.
The skin-tone piece Clinton was wearing, however, was somewhat different from the standard issued stealth earpiece and is much different in appearance from a hearing aid. This unit is considered a “micro” earbud which contains all the technology but is a fraction of the size with a very high price tag. In fact, most of the units this size, approximately 3mm or comparable to a small pearl stud earring, are normally issued to law enforcement or corporate security teams, sources said.
Ironically, the revelation that Clinton was wearing such a unit might have only been recognized because of astute NYPD officers attached to her security details who are accustomed to seeing the stealth apparatus at stage shows and security personnel of VIPs and international dignitaries at the United nations and elsewhere in the five boroughs. Likewise, NYPD detectives employ a parallel technology to communicate during undercover Ops.
Based on experts familiar with the technology, the stealth earpiece operates on a bandwidth from 300 Hz to 4KHz. Many such units are powered by SONY. The range of the unit can be unlimited depending on how the back end is set up. Technically, you could receive cues from 100 feet away or someone sitting in Washington D.C., experts said. The set up and range is flexible based on need and use.
Story is Developing. We Will update it more as we receive additional details. Once again, Hillary is caught CHEATING her way toward the White House.
https://www.superstation95.com/index.php/world/1968
FYI, HSBC Bank is the Swiss bank that handles all of the Clinton Slush Fund banking biz:
Gee whiz, YA THINK??????????
The FBI and Comey totally slimed themselves. ‘Well hellary did a bunch of unlawful things relating to the handling of confidential classified emails and committed perjury when questioned about them but we have decided not to recommend prosecution. After all she and her aides weren’t under oath so it was all hearsay. But she is a clinton, a woman, and meant well so we will move on.’ This is what he said in a nutshell. Move on, nothing to see here.
So why did Bill meet with AG Lynch?
It does not make sense unless Willie was worried about something else....
Imagine a Politically Weaponized FBI in Clinton’s Hands
Agents actively avoided catching Hillary lying and didn’t want the media to catch her either
by Eddie Zipperer | Updated 08 Sep 2016 at 10:09
..............
Imagining a politicized FBI ready to do the bidding of another President Clinton is scarier than a stack of Stephen King books. Here are three signs the FBI is already putting politics before justice for Clinton:
1) The FBI tried not to catch Hillary in a lie.
If you’re ever the target of a criminal investigation, don’t bank on law enforcement believing whatever everything you tell them — unless you’re a Clinton.
The narrative Hillary sold the FBI holds water about as well as a slice of swiss cheese. She told them she thought a bracketed “C” was “referencing paragraphs marked in alphabetical order” which would make perfect sense if it weren’t for the total absence of A, B, and D-Z.
Julian Assange blew this nonsense out of the water on Sean Hannity’s show last night, saying Wikileaks has released “thousands of examples, where she [Clinton], herself, has used a c in brackets, and signed it off, and more than 22,000 times that she has received cables from others with this c in brackets. So, it’s absolutely incredible for Clinton to lie. She is lying about not knowing what that is.”
Not only did the FBI try not to catch her in a lie, they didn’t want the media to catch her in one either. Why else is there no transcript or recording of her FBI interview? Comey said he wanted to treat her like anyone else — so where’s the recording? Everyone else’s interview was recorded.
Now, all the media can do is wonder what exactly she said to the FBI special agents. One thing’s for sure, if she told them any of the nonsense she’s been telling us about her emails all year, she likely committed a felony or two.
2) Does Obama have ESP?
It was almost like President Obama somehow knew how this would all turn out.
When Comey delivered his “non-indictment indictment” of Hillary Clinton, he stated, “I have not coordinated or reviewed this statement in any way with the Department of Justice or any other part of the government.” That seemed questionable given that at the same moment, Hillary Clinton was aboard Air Force One with President Obama about to make a triumphant, I’m-not-going-to-jail landing in North Carolina. Would President Obama be plane-pooling with someone if he thought there was a chance she might be indicted for mishandling classified information?
In June, when President Obama decided to endorse Hillary Clinton for president — even though she was under criminal investigation — did that not send a message to the FBI regarding how he’d like to see the case decided?
What if the president had endorsed a candidate who turned out to be a criminal?
There’s no question that the president would have wound up looking supremely ridiculous if Hillary had been indicted.
He sure got lucky.
3) The FBI uses holidays as human shields.
Remember when the FBI interrog- er, I mean, “interviewed” Hillary Clinton? It was the Saturday morning of July 4 weekend. Americans were on boats, at fireworks stores, prepping for cookouts, and engaging in other holiday weekend activities. Nobody was paying attention. News shows were stuck with backups to the backup hosts covering gigantic election news for only a tiny slice of the people who would normally be paying attention.
Then, Comey announced two days later there would be no charges. They must have done a real deep analysis of the answers she gave.
Jump cut to last weekend where the FBI used another holiday as a human shield. This time it was Labor Day watering down the news from the FBI’s data dump. Even House Speaker Paul Ryan was floored by how political the move seemed, saying, “I can’t believe that they would do what is such a patently political move.”
Nothing is scarier than government institutions serving political agendas, but it seems to be a core principle of progressive leadership. Are #NeverTrump Republicans really so obsessed with philosophical purity that they’ll allow Hillary Clinton to become president and continue to the politicization of our bureaucracy? What if voting against Trump means an America where we can’t see where the FBI ends and the Clinton Foundation begins?
Read at:
http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/imagine-a-politically-weaponized-fbi-in-clintons-hands/
How the FBI Went Easy on Hillary Clinton
Published September 9, 2016
By Paul Sperry, The New York Post
It’s clear now the FBI conducted a sweetheart investigation into Hillary Clinton’s e-mail shenanigans that appears to have been fixed from the start to go nowhere.
Far from exonerating Clinton, the nearly 60 pages of documents expose both the systematic destruction of subpoenaed evidence by Clinton’s aides and the curious lack of interest by investigators in recovering it.
Agents also failed to resolve unanswered questions, reconcile contradictory testimony or sweat uncooperative witnesses.
Comey declared the investigation free of undue influence three days after his agents interviewed Clinton at FBI headquarters under special terms. Agents weren’t allowed to Mirandize Clinton or place her under oath, even though she was the subject of a criminal investigation possibly involving espionage. They weren’t even allowed to record her answers.
What’s more, Comey made the two FBI agents who interviewed Clinton — along with all agents and forensic analysts involved in the so-called investigation — sign non-disclosure agreements gagging them from talking about the case even with other employees.
Comey even let Clinton’s State Department aides Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson sit in on the interview with Clinton’s other lawyers, despite the glaring conflict of interest. FBI documents make clear Mills and Samuelson led the effort to search and destroy Clinton’s subpoenaed e-mails and should’ve been prime targets of the investigation.
Comey didn’t even attend her interview and, per his testimony, only read a “summary” of it.
The FBI failed to pursue even the most basic lines of questioning. When Clinton pleaded ignorance about basic classification symbols, agents could’ve produced the State documents she signed acknowledging she was briefed about how to ID and handle classified information at the highest levels.
Read at: http://nation.foxnews.com/2016/09/09/how-fbi-went-easy-hillary-clinton
Thanks for a scary look at Comey’s Failing Bureau of Inane!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.