— Trump says Hillary was “guilty of every charge”-

— Trump says Hillary was “guilty of every charge”-

Less than three months into his term, President Donald Trump has had some wins — Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch — and some losses — the failure of Obamacare’s repeal — but one thing has remained steady: His belief that his 2016 election opponent, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, was guilty as sin.

“Don’t forget, when (FBI Director) Jim Comey came out, he saved Hillary Clinton, referring to the stunning moment last year when Comey read off a list of Clinton’s proven crimes, then announced he would not be recommending charges against her.

“When he was reading those charges, she was guilty on very charge,” Trump added, according to a transcript from The Washington Post. “And then he said, she was essentially OK. But he — she wasn’t OK, because she was guilty on every charge.”

 And she was a liar who had twisted the truth numerous times, all in a bid to act as if she was innocent, when in fact she was not: Unfortunately, it appeared unlikely that either Trump or Attorney General Jeff Sessions would reopen investigations into Clinton, due to both political and personal reasons.

She has begun trying to pin the blame for her election loss on everybody but herself — including the American people. Considering her nasty attitude, it would kind of be nice to see her brought to justice. Speaking of which, in a series of tweets published late last month, the president indicated that he believed Clinton should be investigated for her ties to Russia.

Saying that the FBI’s investigation was handled “honestly, competently and independently,” he excoriated Clinton for being “careless” with information and left open the possibility that foreign actors may have hacked into her email. However, he announced that “no reasonable prosecutor” would go forward with charges against Clinton.

Comey’s recommendation will go to the Department of Justice, who will ultimately decide whether she should be charged.

“(A)ny 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” those emails, Comey said during the press conference, during which he took no questions.

Comey said that he did not find evidence that Clinton’s team at the State Department sought to delete emails deliberately to prevent them from being found. However, he did say that certain devices were wiped “as to preclude complete forensic recovery,” which sounds like a pleasant euphemism for chicanery.

Comey confirmed that, contrary to what Clinton has said all along, many of her emails had been classified at the time they were sent. Hillary had previously argued that the emails had been classified after the fact, something that the FBI refuted.

“From the group of 30,000 emails returned to the State Department, 110 emails in 52 email chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received,” Comey said.

“Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification. Separate from those, about 2,000 additional e-mails were “up-classified” to make them Confidential; the information in those had not been classified at the time the e-mails were sent.

Comey also said that “they were extremely careless in their handling of” the information on Clinton’s servers. While he found no direct evidence that foreign governments or individuals had hacked into her email, he noted that she “also used her email extensively outside the United States,” raising the possibility that foreign actors were able to do so while Clinton traveled.

He added that such cases would usually involve “clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice.” While I don’t wish to impugn Comey, one wonders just what his definitions of “efforts to obstruct justice” or “vast quantities of materials exposed” are. They’re probably different than yours. So, just so we’re clear: Hillary Clinton broke the law, she apparently meant to break the law, but that isn’t enough to bring charges.

source-conservative tribune, v. saxena, fox, wash post, fbi, wilmot proviso,



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s