Earlier this month FBI Director James Comey, who once had a reputation for extreme fairness and was thought to be well above partisan politics, took to a podium in Washington, D.C., to tell a waiting nation something incredible: That despite all the evidence that Hillary Clinton, as secretary of state, had broken a number of federal statutes and rules governing the handling of classified materials, his agency would not recommend she be indicted by the Justice Department.
In laying out the case, Comey said:
— Scores of emails Clinton turned over contained classified information at the time they were sent or received;
— Clinton failed to turn over all her emails, as she claimed to have done, because the FBI found some of them;
— Clinton used more than one device and one server;
— Her system was not protected well or by any government software;
— It was likely that devices of associates with whom Clinton communicated had their devices hacked by foreign governments.
But despite all of that, his recommendation was not to prosecute.
“Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case,” Comey said July 5.
TRANSLATION: She’s guilty but we won’t recommend prosecution.
“To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences.”
TRANSLATION: If you did this, you would be in prison.
In fact, others are in prison or where handed legal sentences for mishandling classified information.
Mind you, this was all preceded by a pair of highly unusual events:
— Attorney General Loretta Lynch just happened to be at the same Arizona airport as Bill Clinton the Saturday before Comey made his announcement, where they met in private for about 25 minutes (long enough to tell the former president why the Justice Dept. would – or, as we found out later – would not indict his wife).
— Clinton herself met on a weekend for about three hours with the FBI – highly unusual in its context and amount of time. After a year’s worth of investigation, the FBI only had about three hours’ worth of questions for Clinton? On a Saturday?
Apparently the fix was in from the outset – and Clinton herself told us so. The previous month, in an interview with Fox News, Clinton was asked by host Bret Baier if she was worried about a possible indictment. “That’s not going to happen,” she responded. “There is no basis for it, and I’m looking forward to this being wrapped up as soon as possible.”
Well, there was a basis for it – but she obviously knew more than the rest of us did as far as the final outcome was concerned, and that’s all that matters to her.
So once again, another Clinton escapes justice. Another Clinton who is running for president gets a pass for doing something that not only endangered national security, but that would have landed an ordinary American in jail for a very, very long time.
It’s hard to know exactly what the Clintons “have on everybody” in D.C., being able to slither away from obvious and serious violations of our laws. But it isn’t hard to figure out what to call a president who is far above the law: A dictator.
When the system of “justice” that is in place is so thoroughly corrupt that travesties like this can occur, we really don’t have a system anymore. We have a racket, and it’s being run by highly organized criminals posing as government officials and elected representatives.