Injustice: FBI Director James Comey told Americans Tuesday everything they feared about Hillary Clinton’s email scandal was true — from the 2,000 classified documents stored on her home-brew server, to the possibility that hostile powers could have gained access to U.S. secrets. The result? No charges. This will make a deeply cynical public even more cynical, if that’s possible.
“We are expressing to the Department of Justice our view that no charges are appropriate in this case,” said Comey, whose department questioned Clinton for 3-1/2 hours on Saturday. “We cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges based on these facts.”
“Clinton cleared,” and “Clinton not guilty,” were just a few of the media’s postings about Comey’s news conference Tuesday morning. But of course neither of those is true. Not bringing charges against someone isn’t the same as proclaiming them innocent.
In Hillary’s case, it’s clear that she was guilty at minimum of gross negligence in her duties. Comey himself said that Clinton and her aides were “extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.” And, he noted pointedly, “none of these emails should have been on any kind of unclassified system.”
In what appeared to be a thinly veiled reference to the intense political pressures on the FBI from the Democrats, Comey added what can only be called a damning statement suggesting that Clinton’s behavior was, indeed, criminal.
“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,” Comey said. “Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before deciding whether to bring charges.”
Yes, and almost certainly one of those “factors” is politics — as in, “You’ll never work in this town again if you screw up our chance to keep the White House.”
Lest you think that’s reading too much into it, Comey also said this: “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.”
In short, Hillary won’t be charged, but anyone else would. Clinton justice triumphs again.
The timing of Comey’s decision couldn’t be accidental.
Just a week ago, former President Bill Clinton met with Attorney General Loretta Lynch in her government jet on the tarmac at Phoenix’s Sky Harbor Airport. The two claimed to have merely had a friendly conversation, a lie so obvious that even Democrats and their left-wing allies in the mainstream media were outraged at its brazenness. A meeting between the top law enforcement official in the country and the husband of a woman under federal investigation doesn’t happen unless it was planned.
We’ll likely never know what precisely was said in that meeting, which took place out of reach of cameras and recorders, but it is significant that Lynch said she would follow the FBI’s recommendations in the matter, and that Comey should announce no charges against Hillary Clinton just days after. Highly suspicious.
For the record, Hillary’s protestations that she didn’t know that secrets were on her server doesn’t absolve her of guilt: The Espionage Act explicitly forbids transferring classified documents to an unsecured place, either knowingly or through “gross negligence.” Clinton is, at minimum, guilty of the latter.
Worst of all, as we noted, Comey confirmed a number of Hillary Clinton’s outright lies in recent months about her use of her home-brew servers.
- Despite Clinton’s repeated claims to have neither sent nor received any secret information on her open email server, Comey said 110 emails in 52 email chains contained classified information “at the time they were sent or received.“
- Contrary to Clinton’s assertion that she had turned over all her work-related emails, “several thousand work-related emails were not in the group of 30,000 that were returned.” Comey noted it’s also likely that there were other work-related emails that Clinton and the State Department did not produce and that weren’t found elsewhere.
- It’s possible that “hostile actors” — spies — hacked Clinton’s personal email account, leading to a breach of security. “Any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation.”
- Contrary to Clinton’s repeated protestations that none of the emails were designated classified, even if something is not marked “classified” in an email, “participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated by law to protect it.”
- There wasn’t just one server, but multiple, and “numerous mobile devices.” So her use of a home server had nothing to do with convenience, as Hillary Clinton insisted, but rather with a systematic effort to keep information out of reach of the Freedom of Information Act and Clinton’s potential political foes.
What message does this send to an already disgusted American public? That the law really doesn’t count for elites and politicians — one set of rules for them, another for us. Just one more travesty of law and justice. And perhaps, if current polls hold up, a new Clinton administration will begin where the old one left off.
Source: Investor’s Business Daily
Watch the video report by Reason Magazine: