Elder Patriot – Back in July of 2016 we were left in stunned amazement after the-FBI Director James Comey spent fourteen minutes explaining how Hillary Clinton violated the Espionage Act and then finished his remarks by excusing her extreme negligence (the law’s threshold for criminality) by changing his wording to extreme carelessness in its place.
Comey then added that no intent could be determined on the part of Mrs. Clinton before telling us that no reasonable prosecutor would seek an indictment.
It was a curious determination considering that under USC § 793 – Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information of the Espionage Act: there is no threshold of intent to be in violation, the prosecution only has to meet the standard that the violator knew or should have known.
There is no question whether Mrs. Clinton knew what she was doing was illegal. Why else did she destroy the evidence?
On top of that, the FBI Director laid out a clear case of perjury against Mrs. Clinton for having lied under oath about everything from the existence of the personal server, to having turned over all of her emails upon order of the court – even though it is known that more than half are still unaccounted for, to lying about the confidential and classified nature of the content of her emails, to how many devices she had used for her emails during her tenure as Secretary of State.
Americans were shocked after Director Comey somehow concluded, “no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.”
Now we know why.
Comey was as guilty of many of the same crimes as Hillary Clinton was.
In an exclusive report the New York Post is reporting:
Fired FBI chief James Comey used his private Gmail account hundreds of times to conduct government business — and at least seven of those messages were deemed so sensitive by the Justice Department that they declined to release them.
Oh, and he lied about it.
The former top G-man repeatedly claimed he only used his private account for “incidental” purposes and never for anything that was classified.
But in releasing just 156 of the 1,200 pages requested under Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Justice refused to hand over seven emails because they would “disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions.”
Another 363 pages of emails were withheld because they discussed privileged agency communications or out of personal privacy concerns. Or, for whatever reasons they determined necessary in order to lessen the legal liability to the former Director.
The swamp protects their own.
Lisa Rosenberg, executive director of Open the Government, a nonpartisan coalition that advocates for government transparency, said Comey’s practice of using personal email while investigating Clinton reeks of a double standard.
“It’s just so transparently hypocritical to have one standard for a person you are investigating and an entirely different standard for yourself when you are the one who’s enforcing the law,” Rosenberg said.
“Either he used his personal email for things that were public or would be in the public domain, or he used it to discuss internal policies, investigations, etc. that might or might not be appropriately withheld under FOIA.”
“He can’t have it both ways,” Rosenberg said.
Given the situation perhaps Comey never planned to have it both ways. At this point, he’d likely be content with the same deal he gave to Hillary.