FBI Director James Comey on Hillary Clinton Emails: “no reasonable prosecutor would...

FBI Director James Comey on Hillary Clinton Emails: “no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case”

719
14
SHARE

This was always a ridiculous, overblown non-“scandal”, mostly ginned up by Republicans and kept alive by the corporate media — even as they spend far less time and energy on Donald Trump’s massive corruption and sleaze over many years. Of course, Trump and other right wingers will never accept this finding, as they see phony “scandals” as their main (only?) hope of defeating Hillary Clinton. Thus, we had the utter waste of time, money and energy that constituted the “Benghazi” non-“scandal.” We also had years of right-wing efforts to smear Bill Clinton (drug running! Vince Foster! rape! murder! god knows what else!) and Hillary Clinton. It really never ends, and it won’t end with this conclusion of the FBI’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s “damn emails.” Still, it’s good to see, and for any fair-minded, reasonable voters, perhaps this will help ameliorate or even put to rest the ridiculous notion that Hillary Clinton is somehow not trustworthy, a dedicated public servant, blah blah blah. We’ll see…

P.S. It’s also important to note that James Comey is “a registered Republican who donated to U.S. Senator John McCain’s campaign in the 2008 presidential election and to Governor Mitt Romney’s campaign in the 2012 presidential election.” He also served as United States Deputy Attorney General in President George W. Bush’s administration. So clearly, this guy’s no friend of the Clintons or the Democrats…

  • http://www.bluevirginia.us/ lowkell

    Trump’s 100% predictable tweets in response to FBI decision on Clinton emails

    https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7287/27492563354_1fa21b32cd_o.jpg

    • True Blue

      The real difference between the presumptive nominees is one learns from mistakes and takes ownership (Hillary) while the other never admits mistakes and just blames everyone else, esp. the media (Donald).

      re: “She’s only escaping prosecution because they can’t prove intent. . .” He should not escape prosecution because they should be able to prove intent, of fraudulent business practice and purposefully misleading “students” in TU case. He also refused to pay workers, knowing full well they couldn’t afford to hire lawyers to obtain the rest of their earned wages. Flimflam man!

  • http://www.bluevirginia.us/ lowkell

    Video: Republican reaction to Comey/FBI decision on Clinton emails

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cpGQ3zUuB0

  • http://www.bluevirginia.us/ lowkell

    Politico (http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/fbi-clinton-email-tim-kaine-225104): Tim Kaine “not surprised” at FBI decision on Clinton emails, “never believed this was going to be something in the criminal realm or even close to it”

  • Max Shapiro

    You know he also said no reasonable person would have ever done what Clinton did. The takeaway is that the FBI is not indicting Hillary because they found no evidence she was competent enough to intend to misuse classified information. They only found evidence to support she wasn’t competent enough to know how to handle it properly.

    “For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that 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. In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later “up-classified” e-mails).”

    • http://www.bluevirginia.us/ lowkell
      • Max Shapiro

        I added a quote from the transcript 10 seconds after I posted. If you are going to read between the lines and say what you said in your post, I think my conclusion is more than reasonable based on the quote I posted. No reasonable person should ever have done what Hillary did. Anyone in the military caught sending SAP information over unclassified emails would have their career ended. That stuff is no joke and she had 7 entire email chains about it on an unclassified system. She’s only escaping prosecution because they can’t prove intent. All the evidence shows her and the people around her were careless to the greatest extent possible before reaching gross negligence.

        • http://www.bluevirginia.us/ lowkell

          I’m much more interested in the real, ongoing (and longstanding) corruption, slime, bigotry and illegality by the presumptive Republican nominee than some stupid email non-“scandal.” How on earth is Trump not in jail???

          • Max Shapiro

            The reason Trump isn’t in jail is the same reason Hillary isn’t being indicted. Prosecutors don’t prosecute everyone they know is breaking the law. They only go after what they can prove. If you don’t realize Hillary violated numerous laws numerous times and that they are only declining to prosecute her because they are unsure they can prove the case in court, then you are incapable of understanding why Trump has yet to be convicted of anything.

          • http://www.bluevirginia.us/ lowkell

            The point is, Clinton’s silly email “scandal” is about 0.000001% the level of seriousness of the scams, fraud, tax cheating, etc. Trump has engaged in.

          • http://www.bluevirginia.us/ lowkell

            Love this quote in ThinkProgress (http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/07/05/3795414/hillary-clinton-isnt-getting-indicted-heres/)

            “Nevertheless, in part because calls for a Clinton indictment were amplified by Republicans at the highest levels, and in part because of what Josh Marshall described as the media-industrial complex’s quest for “wingnut page views,” the idea that Clinton may face criminal charges has lingered for months. Here’s what you need to know about why such charges were never a realistic possibility.”

  • http://www.bluevirginia.us/ lowkell

    Statement by Clinton spokesman: “We are pleased that the career officials handling this case have determined that no further action by the Department is appropriate…As the Secretary has long said, it was a mistake to use her personal email and she would not do it again. We are glad that this matter is now resolved.”

  • Quizzical

    Let he or she with no digital security breach in the past, throw the first stone.

    It seems to me that we don’t know any more, or less, than we knew before.

    I was surprised that Comey’s statement kind of inferred that a gmail account would have been more secure than these private servers. I suppose it would depend on what year you are talking about. We know that the Chinese hacked into Google email accounts of Google executives, right?

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/chinese-hackers-who-breached-google-gained-access-to-sensitive-data-us-officials-say/2013/05/20/51330428-be34-11e2-89c9-3be8095fe767_story.html

  • http://www.bluevirginia.us/ lowkell

    And of course crazy ol’ EW Jackson goes…well, crazy. Here’s a small sampling of his Twitter tirade…

    https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7305/28076702566_06eae95122_o.jpg