In case you have not heard, the FBI Director has said “No Reasonable Prosecutor Would Bring Case Against Clinton.” This statement proves he is irrational, and here is the evidence:
First, here is the story:
Now, please follow me for a minute. Before Comey said they will not charge Hillary, he said this:
Comey said it was determined that 110 emails in the Clinton probe included classified information “at the time” they were sent or received and eight contained “top secret” information.
Dear reader, this was a statement of fact. The FBI director said they have evidence that these 110 emails contained classified information. What he did not say, but is also fact is that these 110 emails were found in the emails Clinton deleted. You must understand what this means!
It is illegal to keep classified material on a private server. Heck, it is illegal to have such material outside of approved governmental, period!
It is illegal to send unsecured emails containing classified information.
It is illegal to destroy (i.e. delete) government documents.
It is illegal to conduct official government business without documenting your actions and preserving those documents.
All of this is a matter of law. This means they have 440 counts they can prove against Hillary, and this is according to Comey’s own words!
First, intent is irrelevant. You can break a law and go to jail without even knowing the law existed. There are many people currently in prison who prove this is the case. So dismiss Comey’s claim they need intent. That is a lie.
All that should matter to a prosecutor is the evidence. If you have evidence that 110 emails were involved, that is 110 charges there. Then you have 3 other laws that were broken in the process, which generate another 330 individual charges (you get charged for each count, people). Evidence means you can pursue a conviction. What’s more, this is just the case for these 110 emails. Comey actually said they have evidence that Hillary broke other laws, as well. Now, with all of this available to them, how does one then say that no ‘reasonable’ prosecutor would charge Hillary? The answer is simple: either Obama told Comey to give Hillary a pass, therby giving Obama cover, or Comey is irrational (because, clearly, he does not know what rational means).
Now, we all know that Bill was just talking about grand kids with the Attorney general, and that Obama is as clean as the driven snow — the media says so all the time. Therefore, we are only left with one alternative: Comey is irrational.
Now, when will the Congress remove him?
BTW: in case you have ever wondered what it looks like to live in a country ruled by a corrupt, one-Party dictatorship, you are looking at it right now! If this were not the case, the Republicans would be impeaching people, de-funding the Executive branch, removing judges, holding real hearings, and taking all sorts of other legal action aimed at preserving the Constitution — but they aren’t. They just put on a good show while voting for the Democrat agenda. That, dear reader, is one Party rule!
It may be that FBI Director, Comey, is as truthfully-challenged as the rest of this administration:
What is shocking is that the FBI director was clearly ignoring the US code itself, where in Section 793, subsection (f),”Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information“, it makes it quite clear that intent is not a key consideration in a case like this when deciding to press charges, to wit:
Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer— Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
What is even more shocking is that according to Comey, “we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts.”
Well, we did. Here is the FBI itself, less than a year ago, charging one Bryan H. Nishimura, 50, of Folsom, who pleaded guilty to “unauthorized removal and retention of classified materials” without malicious intent, in other words precisely what the FBI alleges Hillary did
This video details a string of people who were prosecuted for doing exactly the same thing the FBI has said they can show Hillary did
And it’s not like this guy knows anything about prosecuting this sort of crime. I mean, he only did it for a living:
A criminal defense lawyer says she should have been charged:
[NOTE: I no longer think of my voice as anything special. There was a time when I believed I had something important to say, but not so much these days. I write now because I feel driven to do so. Something inside me will not let me rest until I post the pages you just read. I’d just as soon not bother anymore. It all seems like no one is listening and I do more harm than good. So I have come to trust that whatever it is driving me has all this under control. Personally, I believe it is God, but others may not. All I ask is that, if anything I write helps you, or you think it might help others in any way, please, share this page. Re-blog it, share it on FB or send the link to your friends. So long as you feel it will do more good than harm, then please, use this page however you wish. Thank you.]