Posted on 07/05/2016 4:50:42 PM PDT by Kaslin
I may be alone in saying this, but when the proverbial dust settles, James Comey may have hurt Hillary Clinton more than he helped her in his statement Tuesday concerning the Grand Email Controversy. He may have let her off the hook legally, but personally he has left the putative Democratic candidate scarred almost beyond recognition.
By getting out in front of the Justice Department, the FBI director, speaking publicly in an admittedly unusual fashion, was able to frame the case in a manner that Attorney General Loretta Lynch in all probability never would have.
Read this portion of Comey's transcript and ask yourself how this person (Clinton) could ever serve successfully as president of the United States:
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.
To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.
Look at that last paragraph again, because, if the Republicans have any brains at all, they will be quoting it ad infinitum. "To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions." What Comey is clearly saying (and leaving for us to "decide now") is that--whether you agree with his decision not to indict or no (I don't)—in a normal, real-world situation Clinton would face consequences, quite probably be demoted or even fired, certainly not promoted to the presidency of the United States, for what she did.
Which brings me back to why Comey made this speech.
Yes, I suppose he owed it to the public, as he indicated. But I wonder if the greater motivation was fear that Clinton would be completely exonerated, that she would skate away free once he passed the FBI decision on to the Justice Department. It's hard to imagine Lynch speaking in public about how Clinton and her aides were "extremely careless" about national security, obvious though that was, or the high probability that the Clinton's server, not to mention her cell phone (!), was hacked by foreign powers. There were also several new revelations, such as the surprising fact that there were actually multiple personal servers, not just one. This was prevarication of a high and deliberate order. (Remember how Hillary claimed Powell and Rice did the same thing? What complete and utter horse hockey.) And that her lawyers never actually read her emails before deleting them, relying on the subject lines (how to keep yourself out of trouble).
The proximity of Comey's statement to the Bill Clinton/Loretta Lynch meeting on Lynch's plane should also be noted and is potential grist for the mill for historians in the years to come.
My purpose here is not to exonerate Comey. In all probability he was a more than a bit of a coward, looking for a way out. But that way out may prove to have powerful ramifications. A Hillary indictment, in all likelihood, would have meant a new and more scandal-free Democratic candidate, a Joe Biden perhaps, far more potent than the seriously wounded Clinton who now has even more explaining to do. It's an endless case of be-careful-what-you-wish-for. And if we are to believe Judicial Watch (and I do), it's only just begun:
FBI Director James Comey detailed Hillary Clinton’s massive destruction of government records and grossly negligent handling of classified information. Frankly, there’s a disconnect between Comey’s devastating findings and his weak recommendation not to prosecute Hillary Clinton. Federal prosecutors, independent of politics, need to consider whether to pursue the potential violations of law confirmed by the FBI.
Outstanding insights, rdcbn.
I was watching Comey's press conference of July 5, and I didn't so much see a "coward" as a very angry, frustrated man. He was clearly caught between a rock and a hard place. I think he realized that if he did recommend prosecution, AG Lynch would find some pretext to decline his recommendation; and then the case would be "over."
Instead, what Comey did was to keep the case simmering along at the political level, probably rightly assuming that Lynch would stop it at the legal level. So he gave up the goods on Hillary, detailing why she is guilty under the relevant federal statutes, and showing every instance of her lying through her teeth to escape culpability. It's all on the record, and plain for all to see. When he said no reasonable prosecutor would bring a case against Hillery, given existing legal precedents, I think that's very likely true. He said he could not "prove" intent. But the relevant statutes do not require intent to show the commission of a felony.
On a circumstantial basis, the fact that Hillary had a home-grown server in the first place clearly indicates intent to evade the Federal Records Act. But Comey gave her a "pass." As we walks off the stage, done with it and disgusted. (And he gets to keep his job.)
But then he goes to Congress tomorrow.... I'll be watching. I think he correctly judged that the Hillary e-mail/server scandal is, finally, a political, not a legal matter; and the people have to decide. This is, after all, a presidential election year....
I'm inclined to agree that, against the background of the Constitution, this is more of a political than a legal matter. The Framers created three separate but equal branches. Two of them -- Congress and the Executive -- are political branches. That is, they are constituted by people who are elected to office for a term of years. They are chosen by the people to be answerable to the people. If they aren't suitably "answerable," they can be voted out of office. (Or in Obama's case, be impeached and removed. But it seems nobody wants to take the trouble.)
The Article III Courts, however, were deliberately constructed to be non-political in their judgments and functions. Not that you'd know that from observation, these days....
Comey's FBI is part of the Executive Branch, a political branch (which currently is hostile to Congress generally). Comey will be deposed by another political branch tomorrow. Maybe between the two, certain concrete results can be achieved to exact a price on Hillary for her abject malfeasance and corruption. At the very least, she ought to be stripped of her security clearance....
Hopefully, Donald Trump will get more serious in his remarks about Hillary's misdeeds, and succeed in educating the public as to her abject unsuitability for the Office of the President. She is an outstandingly corrupt figure in a cabal of corrupt figures, i.e., the Progressive Left which is attempting to destroy American liberty and the constitutional rule of law. This PL has already taken over the Democrat Party. So it knows how to do "coups"....
Nah, low info voters don’t care what he said about her, they only compute “no charges”.
“They are bragging about how she has been found innocent...”
Yep, the average dummy who is stupid enough to vote for Hillary thinks he knows that Richard Nixon was impeached but Bill Clinton was not. These people live in a fantasy world by choice. They have little to no interest in reality.
“These folks are beyond help.”
You cannot help someone who thinks they are OK and YOU are the one who needs help.
“Hillary is not fit to be president.”
You win the understatement of the century award. Hillary is not fit to exist!
I hear you loud and clear! I have to admit that part of my worry on this was that she was going down too early and we’d have Plugs/Warren to replace her right at the end with no time to educate the LIVs.
Actually though, Comey did say it was a crime that anyone but a High&Mighty would go down for and then made it clear that she was being protected because she is a High&Mighty.
I think Trump can use snips from Comey’s statements in TV ads which the dipshits WILL actually see... Then when Trump is President, he can proceed with the Clinton Crime Family Foundation AND the email stuff.
I dont fear the current politics of it. I fear the precedent it sets to let off the nations elite for other crimes they commit. Once you lose the rule of law, you are just a nation of men and tyranny comes swiftly. We were already headed down that road and the elites routinely skate for crimes and abuses we the little people would go to jail for.
James Commie isnt close to the first guy to deminish the rule of law in America, but he gave it a hard shove further down that path.
I would much rather suffer through 4 years of a satanic Hitlery presidency spewing her evil witchcraft, than see the rule of law destroyed. I can survive another 4 years of evil Marxists, but I cant survive the continued outright shredding of our God given sacred Constitutional laws. Of course, that usually follows a 4 year reign of terror from evil communists like Hitlery, so it is really one and the same, we cant survive either case.
Man we are so screwed!!!
But I still think I was right to say that this matter was ultimately a political matter, not a legal one. Thanks to Vice Chairman Elijah Cummings and James Comey himself, today's event made that crystal clear. I mean really, Rep. Cummings put the Michael Brown case in his concluding statement. Give me a break.
But in the end, Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz nailed Comey to the wall regarding some hard truths about the FBI investigation that Hillary will find enormously difficult to evade and overcome. So stay tuned.
Never in my life did I ever expect to hear the top law enforcement official of the United States, actually act as Head Apologist in Chief and lame excuse maker for a group of felons whose (at best ) criminal negligence, has done serious harm to the country.
Under very simple questioning from Trey Gowdy, Comey could not even bring himself to answer a simple, direct “No” for several extremely damaging questions where Gowdy asked him if Clinton had told the truth on various statements she had made and on many he actually made excuses for her to minimize the impact.
Assuming there is the political will, it won’t be the email scandal but the entire so-called foundation at play.
We are so screwed! That’s why I feel like we have to walk a tightrope during these next 5 or 6 months with the hope that we can hold off the final take-over. If we make it to January with Trump elected and still alive, we’ll have a fighting chance.
He can turn around the policies and I do think he understands and will reestablish the rule of law.
The terrible shootings and resultant demonstrations today actually gave me some hope. Even with the snipers in Dallas, the citizens stayed civil. If this was supposed to be the tinder to spark a crack down, I THINK they failed.
Truly, this is totally disgusting, intolerable to law-biding Americans.
But Trey Gowdy and Jason Chaffetz made Comey look like an inept fool. He was so full of self-contradictions and outright evasions in his testimony it was laughable (almost).
For sure there is no justice in the FBI, or the Justice Department. Just a bunch of experts in legal parsing and hair-splitting to justify NOT following the law.
Comey has opened a can of worms. This is not over yet.
Comedy being a DemonCrap stooge from the get go, I never doubted that the fix was in.
Can Congress impeach a corrupt FBI director and a totally corrupt AG?
Jason Chaffetz missed a perfect chance to hit a ball out of the park
When he asked Comey if Hillary Clinton had done anything wrong Comey came back with “what do you mean by wrong?” And then went on to mumble about his various perspetives.
Chaffetz should have come back with , “ so you say answering the question “ did Hillary do anything wrong “ is just too complex a question to provide an answer. Well, OK, let me make it easier for you. Please tell me what Hillary DID RIGHT”
Comey would have been stumped , stunned and left without an adequate reply because Hillary did absolutely every wrong and nothing right in this e mail debacle
And that's a fact
Jason Chaffetz missed a perfect chance to hit a ball out of the park
When he asked Comey if Hillary Clinton had done anything wrong Comey came back with “what do you mean by wrong?” And then went on to mumble about his various perspetives.
Chaffetz should have come back with , “ so you say answering the question “ did Hillary do anything wrong “ is just too complex a question to provide an answer. Well, OK, let me make it easier for you. Please tell me what Hillary DID RIGHT”
Comey would have been stumped , stunned and left without an adequate reply because Hillary did absolutely every wrong and nothing right in this e mail debacle
And that's a fact
Letter by Comey authorizing special counsel versus Libby: "By the authority vested in the Attorney General by law, including 28 U. S .C. §§ 509,510, and 515, and in my capacity as Acting Attorney General pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 3 508, I hereby delegate to you all the authority of the Attorney General with respect to the Department's investigation into the alleged unauthorized disclosure of a CIA employee's identity, and I direct you to exercise that authority as Special Counsel independent of the supervision or control of any officer of the Department."
The death of Aghan president's brother, Ahmed Karzai, a reported CIA contact outed by Clinton's emails. This is an account of the impact of Hillary's disclosures versus those of Stewart Libby: (see http://legalinsurrection.com/2016/02/report-hillary-unsecured-email-had-info-on-cia-afghan-agent/
Now we are getting some insight. Catherine Herridge from Fox News reports, Clinton email chain discussed Afghan national’s CIA ties, official says:
One of the classified email chains discovered on Hillary Clinton’s personal unsecured server discussed an Afghan national’s ties to the CIA and a report that he was on the agency’s payroll, a U.S. government official with knowledge of the document told Fox News.
The discussion of a foreign national working with the U.S. government raises security implications – an executive order signed by President Obama said unauthorized disclosures are “presumed to cause damage to the national security.”
The U.S. government official said the Clinton email exchange, which referred to a New York Times report, was among 29 classified emails recently provided to congressional committees with specific clearances to review them. In that batch were 22 “top secret” exchanges deemed too damaging to national security to release.
It’s unclear that Hillary directly exposed the agent’s name, but such sloppy practices potentially exposed the information for foreign intelligence agencies:
Based on the timing and other details, the email chain likely refers to either an October 2009 Times story that identified Afghan national Ahmed Wali Karzai, the half-brother of then-Afghan president Hamid Karzai, as a person who received “regular payments from the Central Intelligence Agency” — or an August 2010 Times story that identified Karzai aide Mohammed Zia Salehi as being on the CIA payroll. Ahmed Wali Karzai was murdered during a 2011 shoot-out, a killing later claimed by the Taliban.
Fox News was told the email chain included then-Secretary of State Clinton and then-special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke and possibly others. The basic details of this email exchange were backed up to Fox News by a separate U.S. government source who was not authorized to speak on the record.
I didn't realize Coney was a "DemonCrap stooge." But his recent performance has removed all doubt. For some reason, I expected him to resist the "fix," to rise above it and faithfully execute his office. People widely claimed he had an upstanding reputation. That, of course, is now seen as the "urban myth" that it truly is.
yep
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.