Is Comey a Politically Motivated Criminal?

Is Comey a Politically Motivated Criminal.  

There seems to be more and more email, or other documents turning up on this whole Scandal. 

Revealed: Multiple References to Potential Crimes Deleted From Early Drafts of Comey's Hillary Email Scandal Memo

Revealed: Multiple References to Potential Crimes Deleted From Early Drafts of Comey's Hillary Email Scandal Memo

First, a few thoughts on the DOJ's reported interest in taking another look at Hillary Clinton's protocol-violating and national security-compromising email server, a scandal about which she lied repeatedly(1) I'd be a bit surprised if DOJ ends up pursuing charges, as that ship likely sailed when James Comey (wrongly, in my view) chose not to recommendprosecution in July 2016.  (2) I'm somewhat uncomfortable seeing the supposedly-independent Justice Department clearly bowing to incessant political pressure from the president on this subject.  It's true that President Obama telegraphed his preferred outcome while the FBI was probing the matter during the election, and that Attorney General Lynch severely harmed the integrity of the process with her infamous tarmac meeting and subsequent actions.  But conservatives rightly decried undue partisan influence in those cases.  Would Justice be re-examining this case if Trump weren't pounding away at it on social media? (3) Nevertheless, there are multiple questions that still need to be adequately answered regarding how nobody in Mrs. Clinton's orbit was ever held responsible for the grossly negligent scheme she erected for the purposes of avoiding public scrutiny of work-related and exceedingly sensitive emails, some of which the permanently deleted under false pretenses.  One of those questions involves this memo:

Ex-FBI Director James Comey’s original statement closing out the probe into Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server was edited by subordinates to remove five separate references to terms like “grossly negligent” and to delete mention of evidence supporting felony and misdemeanor violations, according to copies of the full document. Comey also originally concluded that it was “reasonably likely” that Clinton’s nonsecure private server was accessed or hacked by hostile actors though there was no evidence to prove it. But that passage was also changed to the much weaker “possible,” the memos show...The full draft, with edits, leaves little doubt that Comey originally wrote on May 2, 2016 that there was evidence that Clinton and top aides may have violated both felony and misdemeanor statutes, though he did not believe he could prove intent before a jury..

“Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statute proscribing gross negligence in the handling of classified information and of the statute proscribing misdemeanor mishandling, my judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case,” Comey originally penned. That passage, however, was edited to remove the references to “gross negligence” and “misdemeanor mishandling,” leaving a much more generic reference to “potential violations of the statutes.” The FBI has told Congress the edits were made by subordinates to Comey and then accepted by the then-director before he made his final announcement July 5, 2016 that he would not pursue criminal charges against Clinton.

The "intent" excuse has always been a red herring, but what about this watered-down language?  

Congressional investigation finds ‘irregularities’ in FBI’s handling of Clinton case – corruption?

Congressional investigation finds ‘irregularities’ in FBI’s handling of Clinton case – corruption?

If there was any lingering doubt that Hillary Clinton was getting special treatment during the investigation into her infamous email scandal, that uncertainty has been quenched.

Republican lawmakers are reporting they have uncovered explicit evidence of irregularities in the FBI’s investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s email scandal.

According to one congressman, these irregularities appear to be part of an effort to “pre-bake the outcome” of the probe in Clinton’s favor.

Is anyone surprised?

Laws broken

Lawmakers on key congressional committees told The Hill that they received written evidence that indicates the FBI knew Clinton and her top aides may have broken some laws when transmitting classified information through her private, non-secure email server.

The Hill reported:

That evidence includes passages in FBI documents stating the “sheer volume” of classified information that flowed through Clinton’s insecure emails was proof of criminality as well as an admission of false statements by one key witness in the case, the investigators said.

The name of the witness has been reportedly been “redacted from the FBI documents,” but he has been identified as “an employee of a computer firm that helped maintain [Clinton’s] personal server after she left office as America’s top diplomat and who belatedly admitted he had permanently erased an archive of her messages in 2015 after they had been subpoenaed by Congress.”   

  .        ..          ....        .

Subscribe and Receive Posts