22

Comey: Never Mind

 

FBI Director James Comey delivers a November surprise:

Dear Messrs. Chairmen: 

I write to supplement my October 28, 2016 letter that notified you the FBI would be taking additional investigative steps with respect to former Secretary of State Clinton’s use of a personal email server. Since my letter, the FBI investigative team has been working around the clock to process and review a large volume of emails from a device obtained in connection with an unrelated criminal investigation. During that process, we reviewed all of the communications that were to or from Hillary Clinton while she was Secretary of State.

Based on our review, we have not changed our conclusions that we expressed in July with respect to Secretary Clinton. 

I am very grateful to the professionals at the FBI for doing an extraordinary amount of high-quality work in a short period of time.

Sincerely yours, 
James B. Comey
Director

Impact?  Hard to say.  We are right on top of the election and normally a big event in an election needs a few days to seep into the public consciousness.  Most people will probably hear about it tomorrow, and the number of people who haven’t made up their minds by this time how they are going to vote, if they are going to vote, is probably small.  It is probably marginally good news for Clinton, but I doubt if will have much influence due to the lateness of this revelation and the fact that most people have probably reached a decision on Clinton, one way or another.  Whoever is elected, Comey needs to go.  Having Prince Hamlet as FBI Director is bad for the country.

 

Share With Friends
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Donald R. McClarey

Cradle Catholic. Active in the pro-life movement since 1973. Father of three and happily married for 35 years. Small town lawyer and amateur historian. Former president of the board of directors of the local crisis pregnancy center for a decade.

22 Comments

  1. “FBI Director James Comey delivers a November surprise:”

    Surprise? How is Hillary dodging justice a surprise at this juncture? Appalling yes, surprising, no.

  2. I still support the “he’s looking at what would happen if they did charge her” logic for why he says nobody responsible would do so– she’d get either pardoned or it would be flatly roundfiled. No charges, no pardon.

    Doesn’t matter as far as his legal requirement to tell Congress that there was more information, though.

  3. There was some gallows humor in Comey’s (second) non-decision juxtaposed with the front page of the New York Post explaining that even Hillary’s maid was handling and printing out classified information.

  4. “Makes it so that it’s possible to charge her in the future, though.”
    ..

    Don’t see that happening. If Trump becomes president, his charging her would have the appearance of a Banana Republic witch hunt. Well, at least the “witch” portion would be true in Hillary’s case, but I digress.

  5. “It will be telling about America even after all this Hillary still becomes President.” -FMShyanguya

    America has been “telling” since the early sixties as to the condition of it’s soul.

    I’m in Adoration this morning, 2 to 4, ( substituting for a friend who is in Wyoming)

    My humble take on this rotten mess…
    Love has always Triumphed. The love that surpasses all understanding is not weakened because of human shortcomings. This love conquers all in all times and has no equal that can even come close to overpowering the force that is love. Our struggle this week is to remain in love regardless of the outcome.
    To know deep within our being that our current fight is nothing new, nor soon to end, but a fight we are asked to engage in. Our prayers, rosaries and sacrifices are our endless supply of materials to combat this evil that is woefully confident in it’s final victory.

    Comey, Clinton or Caligula it doesn’t matter!

    We fight on.
    We remain in the trenches and never move backwards.
    Our gains might seem enormously miniscule compared to the liberal advances in this culture war, but it doesn’t matter as long as we dig in and never “cave in.”

    Tuesday, here in Michigan, I will pray first and cast my ballot. One small vote but one mammoth counter offensive aginist the forces who support the killings of children in the womb.

    Who will win?

    Love will!

  6. Foxfier wrote, “Makes it so that it’s possible to charge her in the future, though.”
    In British usage, which one assumes has been borrowed by American practice, a pardon can be granted before any charges are brought.
    The stock form of free, general pardon (it is actually a printed form) granted to Special Forces after a sensitive operation declares, “We, of our especially grace, certain knowledge and mere motion pardon, remise, remit and indemnify all treasons, murders, felonies and misdemeanours committed, wrought or done by our lovits [names and designations]..,. &c or by our through their aid, suggestion or instigation and the accessories of them… from the beginning of the world to the date hereof…”
    In Scotland, it contains a clause of registration in the Books of the Lords of Council and Session for preservation and execution. This means that, on production of an extract, the court will automatically grant a suspension of any warrant or citation.
    However, if the party is indicted, it must be pleaded at the first opportunity, or he or she is deemed to waive the benefit of it. They cannot go to trial, in an attempt to clear themselves, and then plead it in arrest of judgment.

  7. The President doesn’t have the authority to charge or not charge.
    That’s why Obama’s justice department being so obviously political in their direct involvement is such a bad thing.

  8. Michael Paterson-Seymour
    if he did do the broadest pardon of any president, ever, not only would he be sacrificing his legacy to it but she would have to stop committing crimes.
    And if she makes president, she’s still open to impeachment.

  9. Gotta be a “if you want to see your family alive again” communique somewhere behind the scenes ….. a Frank and Claire Underwood move I’d say.

  10. not only would he be sacrificing his legacy

    See the Marc Rich etc imbroglio (congruent with the sticky fingers the Clintons displayed while leaving the White House.). Hugh Rodham got a six-figure finder’s fee for at least one of those midnight pardons (which also included Roger Clinton’s peeps). It hasn’t harmed Bill Clinton’s speaking fees. The social stratum which makes use of the Democratic Party as its electoral vehicle (and which includes higher education) does not engage in moral reasoning, at least not of the sort that a registered Democrat born in 1920 would recognize. That’s what makes our times so appalling. These sorts of people are in charge of the media, of higher education, of BigLaw, of the casino banks, of the appellate judiciary. And, of course, they have their vulgarian analogues among the most partisan rank and file Democrats.

  11. Art-
    I remember it, and have talked with people about it and the other pardons.
    They were of people who were simply not that commonly known.
    For a closer fit, look at the Nixon pardon, which was nowhere near as broad as would be required and was after punishment in some form had happened. (Nixon wasn’t president anymore.)

  12. Now, if they REALLY wanted to try for the back fence, Obama would do a blanket pardon of all people his admin has appointed and make a big deal about how it was to keep the horrible icky nasty Republicans from going all banana republic.
    that’s outrageous enough it might even work…..

  13. For a closer fit, look at the Nixon pardon, which was nowhere near as broad as would be required and was after punishment in some form had happened. (Nixon wasn’t president anymore.)

    1. Nixon’s wasn’t a pet of the media or higher education. Those types went out of their way to attribute to Nixon shortcomings he did not have. (All the witless psychoanalysis, articles by Judith Viorst trashing his marriage, &c).

    2. The elites were different, then. Barber Conable announced his intention to vote to impeach Nixon thus: “I do not favor leaders who mislead”. Elliot Richardson and William Ruckelshaus departed office rather than execute an order from the President that had them going back on their word, and Robert Bork only remained with the Justice Department because Richardson told him two resignations were enough to get the point across and if Nixon appointed a White House lawyer to run the department ad interim, there would be a mass exodus of personnel.

    3. Lawfare only works on Republicans, because Democrats demand and get changes to the law when one of their own is gored. Compensating the unindicted for legal expenses was enacted when Hamilton Jordan faced a $70,000 legal bill in 1979 over bogus allegations of cocaine use. The special prosecutor law was allowed to expire after Bill Clinton was hurt by it, the string of convictions Mr. Starr secured notwithstanding.

  14. that’s outrageous enough it might even work…..

    It would work. He won’t need to do it unless she loses and Trump appoints some real terriers. Still, Democratic operatives in the federal judiciary would frustrate them every chance they’d get. The political culture of the opposition is utterly rancid. That’s a big part of our problem. And rank-and-file Democrats give assent to the essential criminality. The real problem is, when you have no legitimate referees and no immunity for the core interests of contending parties, what do you have? You can look at Spain in 1936 and see the results, or Argentina over a 40 year period and see the results.

  15. @FMShyanguya.

    ..and the peace of Christ live in you kind man.

    Let us storm Heaven with prayers these final hours. Let us invoke all of the celestial court to help America in her great time of need.
    Let us take comfort in Him who we serve!

Comments are closed.