Posted by Tina
The highly respected and reasonable Kevin McCArthy at National Review remarked on Director Comey’s decision today. Noting that Comey is a former colleague and friend, McCarthy said there was no way to get around what he was about to say about Comey’s determination. I’ll just let him say it:
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
In essence, in order to give Mrs. Clinton a pass, the FBI rewrote the statute, inserting an intent element that Congress did not require. The added intent element, moreover, makes no sense: The point of having a statute that criminalizes gross negligence is to underscore that government officials have a special obligation to safeguard national defense secrets; when they fail to carry out that obligation due to gross negligence, they are guilty of serious wrongdoing. The lack of intent to harm our country is irrelevant. People never intend the bad things that happen due to gross negligence. I would point out, moreover, that there are other statutes that criminalize unlawfully removing and transmitting highly classified information with intent to harm the United States. Being not guilty (and, indeed, not even accused) of Offense B does not absolve a person of guilt on Offense A, which she has committed. It is a common tactic of defense lawyers in criminal trials to set up a straw-man for the jury: a crime the defendant has not committed. The idea is that by knocking down a crime the prosecution does not allege and cannot prove, the defense may confuse the jury into believing the defendant is not guilty of the crime charged. Judges generally do not allow such sleight-of-hand because innocence on an uncharged crime is irrelevant to the consideration of the crimes that actually have been charged. It seems to me that this is what the FBI has done today. It has told the public that because Mrs. Clinton did not have intent to harm the United States we should not prosecute her on a felony that does not require proof of intent to harm the United States. Meanwhile, although there may have been profound harm to national security caused by her grossly negligent mishandling of classified information, we’ve decided she shouldn’t be prosecuted for grossly negligent mishandling of classified information
His opinion has been echoed by many “reasonable” prosecuters during the course of the day and evening. McCarthy concludes:
To my mind, a reasonable prosecutor would ask: Why did Congress criminalize the mishandling of classified information through gross negligence? The answer, obviously, is to prevent harm to national security. So then the reasonable prosecutor asks: Was the statute clearly violated, and if yes, is it likely that Mrs. Clinton’s conduct caused harm to national security? If those two questions are answered in the affirmative, I believe many, if not most, reasonable prosecutors would feel obliged to bring the case.
I believe Comey agrees with his friend and former associate. Nothing that happened today makes sense. Ambassador Bolton said he would characterize what Comey did as “Schizophrenic.”
Roger Kimbel at PJ Media who sent me to McCarthy’s opinion makes an interesting point via a friend in London:
What do you suppose Director Comey meant by “reasonable prosecutor”?
A friend from London just wrote me with what I think is the answer: “Maybe,” he wrote, “Mr. Comey was referring to the rain of abuse that showered down on Kenneth Starr, the last person who thought he had a Clinton dead to rights?” Would any reasonable person wish that upon himself?
If there was any doubt, James Comey made it abundantly clear today that henceforth — indeed, for some little while now — the laws of this country only apply to certain parts of the population. If you are John Deutch, David Petraeus, Sandy Berger, or countless others, the statute regarding Unauthorized Removal and Retention of Classified Documents or Material applies to you. Violate and you are penalized. If you are Hillary Clinton, however, it does not apply to you. It gives new meaning to that old Latin tag: Quod licet Jovi, non licet bovi: “What is permitted to the Clintons is not permitted to us peons.
If this stands the rule of law in America is destroyed. How can the people ever have faith in blind justice? How can we have faith that our nation stands upon the concept that we are a nation of laws rather than a nation of men?
“A nation of laws” means that laws, not people, rule. Everyone is to be governed by the same laws, regardless of their station; whether it is the most common American or Members of Congress, high-ranking bureaucrats or the President of the United States; all must be held to the just laws of America. No one is, or can be allowed to be, above the law.
This idea was paramount in the complex process of establishing the United States of America, a young nation whose brave leaders had put everything on the line to escape the tyranny and oppression of the British Crown, which at the time was a nation ruled by people, in the person of King George III.
The Founders wrote restrictions into the Constitution against bills or laws of attainder, which are laws that do not apply equally to everyone, but target specific persons or groups in their enforcement, and are also known as “bills of pains and penalties.” In the hands of corrupt officials, these laws could be used as a weapon that would give an incumbent politician a major advantage over anyone else.
Can there be a better way for a nation to deal with its citizens than treating all of them equally under the law? About the only people who would disagree with this concept are those who are in a position, or want to be, to abuse the law and use their official positions unfairly, or those who benefit from that abuse. – John Shott – Patriot Post
John Adams wrote in 1772: “There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty.”
In Letter to Jefferson, Adams wrote in 1815: “The fundamental article of my political creed is that despotism, or unlimited sovereignty, or absolute power, is the same in a majority of a popular assembly, an aristocratical council, an oligarchical junto, and a single emperor. Equally arbitrary, cruel, bloody, and in every respect diabolical.…
… And in 1816: “Power always sincerely, conscientiously, de très bon foi, believes itself right. Power always thinks it has a great soul and vast views, beyond the comprehension of the weak.”
Adams certainly sums up the conditions in which we now find ourselves.
There is nothing to say but, “God bless America.”
There is nothing to say but, “God bless America.” Well Tina, I ‘ll add vote for Trump if we want to do anything to break up this good ol’ boys club, right now that’s our best chance of a better leadership in government
The basic job of any form of Government is to protect the American public, clearly Clinton did not adhere to this, as authored by Mr.Comey own chastising words about Clinton’s self serving abandon of those basic guidelines, but she is a Clinton.
Also the words we may never hear are those spoken on the tarmac in Arizona between a very sociable Lynch, and the uniquely timely arrival of Bill Clinton.
Hillary lied and she defended Bill those times he screwed up in office (literally )and now it appears he just may have returned the favor. but give the woman a cigar, she wins.
She is a liar, and will always continue to lie!,
If nothing else, I do hope Trump takes her to hell and back in a debate,
There is nothing to say but that we are a nation ruled by criminals.
Laws are for little people.
Get back to work, tax surfs, so you can pay yer taxes so Nancy can buy more shoes…
Nancy Pelosi blows off traffic laws — to shop at shoe store!
Cuts off cars, parks in front of fire hydrant…
http://www.theamericanmirror.com/nancy-pelosi-driver-cuts-across-traffic/
Harold you’re right.
This morning questions arise about her receiving security briefings that both candidates will begin to get once they are officially selected in the conventions.
Congress has demanded to see Comey. They want him to explain himself…I don’t expect it to amount to anything. As long as the Democrats stand together nothing will happen. Elijah Cummings has already said the usual, “waste of money, nothing to see here,” boilerplate.
Hillary was out stumping with the President and he brought his podium so she could stand behind the presidential seal. They are all about symbolism.
Today Hillary will try to equalize her incredibly damaging record, as laid out by Comey, by yammering about Trump pulling out of Atlantic City…incredibly too many people will buy the ruse.
Finding specific intent in a crime is always hard to prove. Proving reckless endangerment does not require specific intent. Was it reckless? yes. Was it endangering America, our citizens and allies? yes. That’s it, that is all you need to prove a violation. The FBI did a little buck passing when they referred the case to the DOJ to see if they would have the guts to charge Hillary. They could have asked for a criminal complaint, but they left it up to the DOJ to determine the merits of the case, which is by no means over.
So you seriously think this DOJ is not going to dump this? You think Lynch will proceed??? This case is over as long as long as there is a Demonrat Administration.
No Bob, I do think DOJ will not prosecute, but the FBI gained a little CYA by sending it over to DOJ for evaluation and determination if there was grounds for a complaint. When they say no, FBI is off the hook.
What happened to all the FBI agents that were going to resign in protest?
https://www.lewrockwell.com/assets/2016/07/Capture11.jpg
This is why no one at the FBI is speaking out.
By now this should be recognized by everyone.
Bill was a Globalist Rhodes Scholar kicked out of Oxford for rape. No one should forget about the
growing, long list of dead people who oppose the Clintons. Notice Obama is flying her royal hind to her NC campaign speech in Air Force One & you get to pay for it.
Are you referring to this, “A 1969 charge by a Eileen Wellstone, 19-year-old English woman who said Clinton assaulted her after she met him at a pub near the Oxford University campus where the future President was a student. A retired State Department employee, who asked not to be identified, confirmed this week that he spoke with the family of the girl and filed a report with his superiors. Clinton admitted having sex with the girl, but claimed it was consensual.
In an interview with Capitol Hill Blue, the retired State Department employee said he believed the story Miss Wellstone, the young English woman who said Clinton raped her in 1969. ”There was no doubt in my mind that this young woman had suffered severe emotional trauma,” he said. ”But we were under tremendous pressure to avoid the embarrassment of having a Rhodes Scholar charged with rape. I filed a report with my superiors and that was the last I heard of it.” Miss Wellstone, who is now married and lives near London, confirmed the incident when contacted this week, but refused to discuss the matter further. She said she would not go public with further details of the attack. In his book, Unlimited Access, former FBI agent Gary Aldrich reported that Clinton left Oxford University for a “European Tour” in 1969 and was told by University officials that he was no longer welcome there. Aldrich said Clinton’s academic record at Oxford was lackluster.” Doug Thompson, 2002
Yes, well, Bill’s not running for President this time. And what I want to know is, if this is true, how come we did not hear about it when he WAS running for President. Would have saved us all no end of trouble.
You missed the subliminal Photo op? It was wrong to have Hillary speaking at a podium that had the Presidential Seal. She was the main act not the President.
it’s all Subliminal theatrics on both sides.
This is a “Controlled opposition” Election
Jack, what news do you listen to? My news says the FBI concluded and recommended that there is no basis for a charge.
Sheesh Libby, you only see what you want to see.
Libby just listen to Comey himself.
Bottom Line He said he could not find another case.
The prob is SHe broke the Law they all do.
But Treason was not the Intent.
But in fact Both sides are preforming treason. Their charities, superpacs, and slush funds sell political favors, arms deals ect for CASH
Jack, Stop and think…..
This is a huge cover up and anyone who donated to the foundation will go down right or wrong. We have them at their core. Both Parties run like this. DC is a whole different world. We are not included.
Think About it and stop worrying about this case……. It is bigger than the server, the server had the BIG evidence to a bigger case… it was all in the cloud…. Foreign Govs have it heck Trump prob even purchased some files
The underworld is profitable and yes it was hacked By many…
See her or FBI denying any of the leaks?
No you do not!
#WikiLeaks Rocks!
LOL get rid of this Red/Blue They are both corrupt….. Cheney/Bush same story but no Republican is willing to take their own down, I will take them all down given the chance
I am so tired of this generalization I could scream. Please provide evidence that Bush and/or Cheney are or were doing anything similar to what Hillary and Bill and their little circle of dons have done or kindly shut up.
“no Republican is willing to take their own down”
It was Republicans that asked Nixon to step down and he did.
Provide evidence!
“I will take them all down given the chance”
Sure!
Tina Generalization? What you have no clue how to find the stuff? It is common knowledge. 1st the torture in Gitmo is a crime and the Letter informing GW was published. It all got leaked.
Second you are clueless on Halliburton? Cheney? Or Pappy Bush the CIA op? The Carlyle group? Booz Allen? NSA?
It is all Pure Hubris
The Iraq war was preplanned and a phase strategy of many wars …
How about PBO release the redacted white copies ya know the ones that the Saudi King threatened him over? SAUDI $ – 911
Nothing is as we were told.
Try doing research using classified docs and stop relying on propaganda media
media is the enemy
Classified docs do not
Sure would like to see a list of the rules the Clintons get to play by so the rest of us could use them . . . .
Just ask john Boehner and gang they play by the same rules
Look At the Darn Foundation folks…… Yes some in FBI are pissed…….
WikiLeaks released more emails IMMEDIATELY after decision
I think we all need to research and not let Media dictate our thoughts
This is huge! This was dictated by those who fear the reactions of the Citizens of the USA, The World, Foreign Governments ect… The real corruption could cause immediate civil and world war
YES she was indictable… That is clear but this case is not the real fear it is all about the massive money laundering!
And just saying that makes one sound like a conspiracy theorist….
Take a minute and look at the Billions that went through that foundation and the donors
Mind Boggling
And No Trump will not be some Boy Scout
We have looked at connections to the foundation and the possible money laundering…where have you been?
“And No Trump will not be some Boy Scout”
So, he’ll be a brownie or a cub scout…who cares…he won’t be another politician.
Trump is a Con man Tina you can not be this clueless..
You do not know who trump really is? Jeeze you need to get out of Chico you live in a Media bubble
We can not have either one of them, they are only in it for personal gain
All you do is make stuff up and throw out nasty accusations. You offer no proof that he’s a con man you just believe it…cause you think profit is a dirty word.
” We can not have either one of them”
Nifty…what are you gonna do about it?
We once were a nation of laws, now we are a nation of lawlessness, betrayed by a thoroughly corrupt Democratic party machine and the people they appoint.
Thanks for bringing us back on point, Pie.
We need to be reminded about our founding…a nation where no man, or cabal, is above the law. It’s an amazing concept given the feudal world from whence they came. America is unique in all the world, the one constitution that recognized individual equality and rights. Powerful stuff and it’s thoroughly missed by our progressive friends who find it “to restricting” to all of their meddling.
Spot on Tina, but I have no progressive friends. They are unfriendly people.
— Inside every progressive is a totalitarian screaming to get out.
Wrong the Banksters, Big Money corporations, politicians, and Elite are above the law. Laws are written to keep the sheeple in line and out of the way of profits.
Progressives? Yea they are in the way of killing Humans for profit. Live with it
You come here and act like you are smarter than anyone else. You talk about how big money is running everything and we better wake up and do something, although you never say what. You accuse us of being like sheep…and then you tell us to “live with it?”
You are one confused guy.
What do you stand for Dewey? Anything?
LOL Keep closing your eyes to the same corruption done by GOP, Look at Hillary’s campaign staff….
Lol She hired republicans for a reason…. They are all the same
Please Dewey…name those republicans!
Politico has an extensive list of advisors and staff. I don;t see a Republican among them.
Your list must come from one of those “official documents” you found on a server in someones basement.
The demented LOL progressive lunatic is on a roll again. *Sigh*