by Scott Creighton
Yesterday I wrote about our glorious leader’s new clothes and how FBI Director James Comey said they were just fabulous. I also mentioned the fact that if Hillary Clinton were not named “Clinton” then she would have been prosecuted and Comey’s own speech made that perfectly clear.
What I didn’t cover was the fact that in spite of Comey’s statement that they didn’t have “clear” evidence of intent on Hillary’s part, that doesn’t mean she or anyone else shouldn’t be prosecuted for what Comey himself admits she did and that is behave in a way he called “extremely careless” which put lives in danger and potentially surrendered state secrets to our enemies.
In spite of his staged little presentation which was clearly designed to serve as the pre-show for Obama and Clinton’s little stump speech yesterday in North Carolina, the fact is, her “mistakes” as listed by Comey himself, do rise to the level of gross negligence and is therefore worthy of prosecution.
First I would like too say, I would love to see the actual evidence Comey says isn’t “clear” as to establishing intent. I think the fact that she set up the server in the first place and then lied repeatedly about why she used it goes to intent. Lying is often a good clue in that regard. I also think I would like to see all those emails the State Department is trying to shield from public disclosure for the next 27 months. Emails that she sent or received while Secretary of State which dealt with the Clinton Global(ist) Initiative. That goes to motive and motive goes to intent. Finally, the 30k+ emails she and her lawyers deleted also goes to intent and may in fact rise to the occasion of tampering with evidence.
All that said, I think it’s pretty easy to prove intent beyond a REASONABLE doubt. Now if you’re a Clintonite, then nothing is ever going to sway your belief in the rightness and goodness of Queen Hillary and everything she’s ever done is just a republican smear campaign.
But intent isn’t always necessary for prosecution when the offense is such that a person is supposed to behave in a reasonable manner. We all live with this behavioral expectation everyday. A person on Twitter makes it pretty easy to understand.
As citizens and members of our various communities, we are expected to behave responsibly. The same is true for the community of government agents tasked with handling sensitive national security material.
“There is no way of getting around this: According to Director James Comey (disclosure: a former colleague and longtime friend of mine), Hillary Clinton checked every box required for a felony violation of Section 793(f) of the federal penal code (Title 18): With lawful access to highly classified information she acted with gross negligence in removing and causing it to be removed it from its proper place of custody, and she transmitted it and caused it to be transmitted to others not authorized to have it, in patent violation of her trust. Director Comey even conceded that former Secretary Clinton was “extremely careless” and strongly suggested that her recklessness very likely led to communications (her own and those she corresponded with) being intercepted by foreign intelligence services.
Yet, Director Comey recommended against prosecution of the law violations he clearly found on the ground that there was no intent to harm the United States.” National Review
This statute exists and Comey certainly knows about it. He should have recommended the Justice Department prosecute Hillary Clinton on those grounds.
Take a minute to look back over the past week in the run-up to yesterday’s FBI announcement.
Eight days before this announcement, President Obama reiterated his claims that Hillary “made a mistake” but there was no harm done and no threat to national security which is a total lie, according to Comey’s statement yesterday. Obama played down the fact that secret material was being handled by Hillary on an unsecured server. Comey said not only was top secret material handled in such a careless way but also that it was LIKELY that security was breached by outside actors.
A few days later, you had Bill Clinton meeting with Loretta Lynch on her plane for half an hour as it sat on the tarmac at an airport. The reporters who travel with Bill were told not to take photos of him getting on her plane and not to report on it, but one did and the story got out. This is HIGHLY irregular for the husband of a political candidate who is under investigation to be meeting with the one person who will ultimately decide if his wife is indicted and her political career ended. It is important to note Bill Clinton appointed Loretta Lynch to a federal judgeship two decades ago, thus starting her political legal career.
Three days after that, someone in the Clinton campaign leaked information to the New York Times about how Hillary Clinton was considering keeping Loretta Lynch on as head of the Justice Department when and if she becomes president of the U.S. This is nothing short of a bribe put out there in the public domain for Loretta to see and consider while deciding Hillary’s fate.
Then the FBI holds their interview with Hillary Clinton on the Saturday of July 4th weekend, knowing full well it wont get much press coverage. Highly irregular.
Then several sources in the FBI leak the information that they will not indict her.
Then Comey holds this press conference which again, is highly unusual, declaring his recommendation to not indict Hillary Clinton just a few hours before President Obama and Hillary Clinton give their little pep-rally show in North Carolina, once again sucking up all the news coverage and putting the scathing review of Hillary’s behavior on the back burner behind Obama’s “preach” speech.
If you think all of this stuff is just a coincidence, you’re an idiot.
They weren’t mistakes, Bill getting on that plane, the Clinton campaign releasing info on Loretta’s retaining her job under a Clinton presidency and Comey’s little whitewash speech, glossing over the obvious crimes she has committed.
Those were no more “mistakes” than Hillary Clinton deliberately setting up an email server that she could use to hide various communications as Secretary of State and no more a “mistake” than her deleting something like 30,000 emails.
Her crimes were so extensive that even the best case reading of them results in her being guilty of “gross negligence” and yet, once again, the slicksters that are the Clintons skate away without so much as a slap on the wrist.
Yeah, we get it. She’s a warmongering servant to billionaires and if she’s gone, Bernie takes her place and beats Trump by a mile. So, yeah, we get it.
Filed under: Uncategorized