|The fix was in.|
AT THE TIME ... CROOKED HILLARY ... IN HER OWN WORDS ... AT THE TIME
Tuesday, FBI Director James Comey painted a devastating picture of Hillary Clinton’s reckless lawbreaking with her emails and the damage it likely caused — but then recommended no charges against her.
Sure enough, his agents found plenty: 110 emails “in 52 email chains” were considered classified “at the time they were sent or received.”
That included eight “Top Secret” chains, 36 with “Secret” information and eight more that were “Confidential.” Another 2,000 were classified “Confidential” later.
There may have been more, but Comey said his agents couldn’t examine all of Hillary’s emails because some that were deleted may never be found.
The evidence showed Clinton and her colleagues were “extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information” — even if they may not have “intended” to break the law. And, as he said earlier, proving intent isn’t necessary to find her guilty of a felony. Comey made one other point: Some emails “bore markings indicating the presence of classified information” — contrary to what Hillary repeatedly claims. But even with emails that didn’t contain such markings, Clinton still had an obligation “to protect it.”
All of which seems enough to convict (never mind indict) her — based on Comey’s own criteria.
Nor was all this just a case of harmless sloppiness, as Hillary claims. Comey said the bureau “assessed that hostile actors” (read: foreign enemies) “gained access” to email accounts of people she had contact with and possibly even to Clinton’s own personal email account itself. WHAT ABOUT SECURITY CLEARANCES FOR HER AND THOSE INVOLVED?
So why on earth would Comey let her off the hook? Especially when the agency had recommended charges against others, like Gen. David Petraeus, who had similarly failed to protect classified information.
The answer: The Clintons enjoy a different standard. They are above the law.
Indeed, the sheer number of scandals for which Bill and Hillary Clinton have escaped punishment is simply astonishing. There’s always some “technicality” or “lack of evidence” or other pathetic excuse.
Here’s how Comey himself put it: “Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statute . . . our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.”
Huh? Why not?
Besides, shouldn’t the FBI let the prosecutor decide that without tainting their judgment?
Comey just dealt a powerful blow to the public’s faith in the concept of equal justice. Hillary will now claim falsely she’s been exonerated — even though the FBI found her in violation of the law.
Is there any wonder so many voters this year are outraged by the “rigged” system?