Comey Didn't Botch, He Didn't Try Hard Enough to Call it Botched

He did the minimum necessary, and left the rest to fate. What a crazy election.

She deserved much worse than she got, there's no excuse for what she did.

http://nypost.com/2017/08/12/comey-botched-the-hillary-clinton-email-investigation/

Clinton = Farce

Hillary Clinton was resting, running out the clock, sitting on a supposed large lead, and hoping that the election was sooner than later. Now after the latest Weiner disclosures, she is crisscrossing the country, terrified of collapsing polls, and wishing that she had three more weeks rather than just one. With the Clintons, farce is the desert to scandal: the profiteering Clinton Foundation as a humanitarian treasure; Hillary the former corporate attorney as child and little-guy crusader; Bill Clinton, both sexual predator and feminist hero.
http://www.city-journal.org/html/clintons-farce-14823.html

A great read.

Changing Norms - Like Expecting To Get Away With Felonies

The rules in politics haven’t changed that much in recent years. What has changed is adherence to norms, in an increasingly destructive way.

I made that case, using examples different from the ones I’m about to present here, nearly two years ago. The shift in norms is also a central part of Thomas Mann’s and Norman Ornstein’s prescient It’s Even Worse Than It Looks and Mike Lofgren’s The Party Is Over, plus of course Jonathan Rauch’s “How American Politics Went Insane,” our very widely read cover story (subscribe!) this summer.
https://www.theatlantic.com/notes/2016/10/trump-time-capsule-james-comey/505904/

Funny write up wherein the author pretends not to notice the Clinonesqe assumption that scrutiny can be avoided by committing felony, but then isn't smart enough to know all email is going to be hacked. 

Immunity? We Know Why She Wanted It

Remember, FBI Director James Comey, who blessed Mills’ immunity deal before ever cracking open her laptop, assured us during congressional testimony that Mills was cooperating with the investigation. Was she?

In the FBI’s summary statement, Mills alleged she didn’t know anything about Hillary’s email server until after the secretary of State’s tenure was over. In leaked emails we learned that this was untrue. Now we have emails in which Mills explicitly discusses concealing illegal activity in an effort to protect the president. Did she tell the FBI about her attempts to “clean up” emails? If so, why was she given immunity?
http://thefederalist.com/2016/10/25/we-need-to-clean-this-up-new-e-mail-from-top-hillary-aide-proves-criminal-conspiracy/#.WBCiOSXayeY.twitter

Double Standards for All My (Political Insider) Friends

We know all too well what that kind of investigation looks like, as two of the lawyers who defended a recent target: former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell. That story had a happy ending for the governor and his wife. The Supreme Court unanimously ruled in their favor this summer and all charges were dropped in September. But their victory certainly wasn’t due to lack of investigatory zeal on the part of the FBI and Justice Department.

Below are only a few of the heavy-handed tactics federal investigators used to build their case against the McDonnells. See how they compare to how Mrs. Clinton was treated.

Conduct ambush interviews. The first contact between law enforcement and the McDonnells was an ambush interview of the governor’s wife. The agents lied to her about the topic of the meeting, forbade Gov. McDonnell’s staff from attending, and then grilled her on their suspicions about potential public corruption. Statements from that interview later took center stage in the trial of her and her husband.

In Mrs. Clinton’s case, no ambush interviews were conducted, and witnesses were generously accommodated. The FBI and Justice Department even allowed a fact witness and potential target— Cheryl Mills, formerly the State Department’s chief of staff—to simultaneously represent Mrs. Clinton as her counsel.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-fbi-treated-clinton-with-kid-gloves-1475709394

"Dead Fish" Stink

House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) said he learned only Friday that the Justice Department gave immunity deals to Clinton’s former chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, and two other aides. That brings to five the number of Clintonistas who got a pass in exchange for testimony and/or information.

But what makes it especially significant in Mills’ case is that she was allowed to sit in on Clinton’s FBI interview, asserting attorney-client privilege on Hillary’s behalf. This, even though Mills was herself a witness, even a potential subject of, the investigation.

Indeed, she was a key player in the process that deleted tens of thousands of Clinton e-mails — many later found to be classified — before the FBI could subpoena them.

Mills’ lawyers say her immunity deal was limited to the contents of her laptop, and was given because of ongoing debate over after-the-fact classification.

Prosecutors normally strike such deals only when they can’t get the information any other way. But if Mills refused to turn over the computer without any immunity, why couldn’t the FBI just subpoena the laptop?

After all, as Chaffetz notes, “immunity deals should not be a requirement for cooperation with the FBI.” Yet in the Clinton case, he noted, “the FBI was handing out immunity deals like candy. No wonder they couldn’t prosecute anyone.”
http://nypost.com/2016/09/23/fresh-proof-the-fbis-hillary-email-probe-was-a-joke/

What A Tangled Web

Among the many eye-openers from the Vincent-Klein review of internal Platte communications:

The server suffered at least one hacking attempt from a Russia-based computer in 2013, and three from China-based PCs in 2014.
 When news broke of Clinton’s mass deletions of old emails, Platte execs worried about being implicated in what they believed was her “covering up some shaddy [shady] s - - t.” One even called it “Hillary’s coverup operation.”
 The IT folks later sought to “cover our asses.” On Aug. 19, 2015, Platte IT consultant Bill Thornton wrote colleagues: “Any chance you found an old email with their directives to cut the backups back in Oct‐-Feb? . . . If we had that email, we are golden.”
 Thornton’s other damage-control idea: “Wondering how we can sneak an email in now after the fact asking them when they told us to cut the backups and have them confirm it for our records.”

Do You Believe in Bigfoot?

She lied repeatedly about her emails. She lied when she said she had “turned over everything I was obligated to turn over” (FBI Director James Comey said the FBI “discovered several thousand work-related e-mails that were not among the group of 30,000 e-mails returned by Secretary Clinton to state in 2014”). She lied when she said there was “no classified material” in her private emails . . . that there was nothing “classified at the time” . . . and that there was nothing “marked classified” in her private emails — all of which the FBI director said were untrue. And, to top it all off, she lied about her lies — declaring on national television that “Director Comey said my answers were truthful, and what I’ve said is consistent with what I have told the American people” — a claim The Post’s Fact Checker gave “Four Pinocchios.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/hillary-clinton-who-tells-dreadful-lies/2016/09/19/cd38412e-7e6a-11e6-9070-5c4905bf40dc_story.html?utm_term=.6bd398c74129

Today, the American people agree. A recent NBC News poll found that just 11 percent of Americans say Clinton is honest and trustworthy. To put that in perspective, 14 percent of American voters believe in Bigfoot. In other words, more Americans believe that a large, hairy, hominoid creature inhabits the forest of North America than believe that Hillary Clinton tells the truth.

What A Relief

Oh geez what a relief.  For a minute, I thought that Ms. Clinton directed the folks who ran her secret, illegal server to feloniously delete emails owned by the people of this nation, which she generated as a public servant.  Thankfully, as her statements and those of her legal team make clear, she did nothing criminal such as directing a company she employed to do anything - like perhaps wipe the server with a rag - that may have protected her from the Congressional subpoena.  

Then again, even if she did do additional felonious things over and above using the private server, it's clear none of her supporters would care.  Even a demon from hell is better than the devil.

According to the F.B.I. documents, Mr. Combetta told the bureau in February that he did not recall deleting the emails. But in May, he told a different story.

In the days after Mrs. Clinton’s staffers called Platte River Networks in March 2015, Mr. Combetta said realized that he had not followed a December 2014 order from Mrs. Clinton’s lawyers to have the emails deleted. Mr. Combetta then used a program called BleachBit to delete the messages, the bureau said.

In Mr. Combetta’s first interview with the F.B.I. in February, he said he did not recall seeing the preservation order from the Benghazi committee, which Mrs. Clinton’s lawyer, Cheryl D. Mills, had sent to Platte River. But in his May interview, he said that at the time he made the deletions “he was aware of the existence of the preservation request and the fact that it meant he should not disturb Clinton’s email data” on the Platte River server.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/09/us/politics/hillary-clinton-emails-investigation.html?_r=2

That's So Strange, What Could Have Been Going On?

The very curious timeline of Clinton’s document deletions: subpoena issued → her lawyers talk to Clinton’s IT team → e-mails destroyed 

Imagine a mafia don who wants to have some evidence destroyed, maybe even have a witness “disappear.” Does he have a sit-down with his trusted capos, who will then give the job to a reliable button-man? Not if he’s taken the Clinton Family course in advanced criminology — known around the campus as “(C).” If the don is a graduate, he knows the new way to get away with murder is to have all your orders communicated by your lawyers.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/439804/clintons-e-mail-scandal-stinkier-stinkier-documents-destroyed-after-subpoena

The closer we look at the FBI’s investigative file on Hillary Clinton’s emails, the more we wonder if Director James Comey always intended to let her off the hook. The calculated release before the long Labor Day weekend suggests political favoritism, and the report shows the FBI didn’t pursue evidence of potential false statements, obstruction of justice and destruction of evidence.

Mr. Comey’s concessions start with his decision not to interview Mrs. Clinton until the end of his investigation, a mere three days before he announced his conclusions. Regular FBI practice is to get a subject on the record early then see if his story meshes with what agents find. In this case they accepted Mrs. Clinton’s I-don’t-recall defenses after the fact.

The notes also show the G-men never did grill Mrs. Clinton on her “intent” in setting up her server. Instead they bought her explanation that it was for personal convenience. This helped Mr. Comey avoid concluding that her purpose was to evade statutes like the Federal Records Act. Mr. Comey also told Congress that indicting her without criminal intent would pose a constitutional problem. But Congress has written many laws that don’t require criminal intent, and negligent homicide (for example) has never been unconstitutional.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-fbis-blind-clinton-trust-1473289804

Comey Knew This

Of course, Comey knew this. He is the one who did not want these obvious questions and many others asked. He is the one who allowed Clinton to testify without being under oath. He is the one who de facto allowed her to assert she did not "recall" the most well known and common things like the circle "c"  insignia for classified email without being questioned, further allowing her to do this a staggering 37 times. Clinton didn't even have to take the Fifth.  (And this woman is running for president of the United States.)

What a coward Comey is. When Julian Assange starts to release his next round of emails, the director may have to commit hara-kiri. It will be the only honorable way to go, failing his resignation.
https://pjmedia.com/diaryofamadvoter/2016/09/07/james-comey-should-resign-now-for-the-good-of-the-country/2/

Deleted All the Emails Right After They Were Subpoena'ed? Crazy Coincidence

The chairman of the House Oversight Committee has sent a letter to the company that handled the technical side of Hillary Clinton's private email server. Rep. Jason Chaffetz wants to know why an employee of Platte River Networks (PRN), which was under contract with Clinton to handle the server, deleted large amounts of email after the Clinton team received a congressional subpoena for the material, and why a PRN technical employee, apparently the one who performed the actual deletions, asserted a legal privilege and refused to tell the FBI what was said on a conference call he took part in with Clinton's attorneys on March 25, 2015, around the time the deletions were performed.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/probe-targets-clinton-contractor-who-deleted-email/article/2601078

Gee, I hope someone can solve this puzzle.  Why in the world would the emails have been deleted then?

HC's Whoppers for Today

Hillary also claimed a lot of memory problems, leaving blogger Tamara Keel to write:  “I have an Ivy League lawyer, wife of a former governor and president, who lived in the White House for eight damned years, then went on to be a senator and Secretary of State telling me she didn't know about classified email and that work-related documents needed to be saved as part of the public record? Look, I don't mind you bullshitting me a little bit, Hillary, but don't you ever lie to me like I'm Montel Williams."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/09/06/emails-fbi-hillary-crooked-blackberry-lost-phones-laptop-server-classified-glenn-reynolds/89881664/

Forget the new dump of Hillary Clinton emails. Forget the phony claims that the missing communications were all about wedding plans and yoga routines. Forget, too, the many requests from Doug Band in which the Clinton Foundation honcho hoped his quos (hefty donations to the Clinton Foundation) would translate into quids (e.g., special access to the secretary).

Forget them all. The most disturbing aspect about the FBI dump may not be fresh evidence of another Clinton lie. The most disturbing thing about Mrs. Clinton’s continuing email drama may be where she’s telling the truth.

Or at least a half-truth. Mrs. Clinton told the FBI it was “common knowledge” at State that she used private email. Agents further quote her as saying she “could not recall anyone raising concerns with her regarding the sensitivity of the information she received at her email address.”
http://www.wsj.com/articles/even-worse-than-clintons-emails-1473116518

Some Pigs Are More Equal Than Others, Part 25

...a good amount of today’s release has been redacted. The original documents were classified at the Secret/Not Releasable to Foreign Nationals level, and to make it Unclassified about a third of the text has been cut out.


But what’s there is awful enough for Team Clinton. Although the FBI’s press release is terse, the documents themselves indelibly portray the Democratic presidential nominee as dishonest, entitled, and thoroughly incompetent.

Considering that Hillary has been accused of mishandling classified information on an almost industrial scale, what shines through is that Clinton is utterly clueless about classification matters, betraying an ignorance that is shocking when encountered in a former top official of our government—and one who wants to be our next commander-in-chief.

Our Federal classification system isn’t particularly complicated, the basics can be explained in a quarter-hour, and there are courses of instruction that exist precisely to explain how to identify classified information and properly handle it. In fact, they’re mandatory. Since Hillary blew off those courses, even though they are required for government workers at all levels, it’s not surprising that she has no idea what she’s talking about.
http://observer.com/2016/09/fbi-data-dump-shows-clinton-is-criminal-and-clueless/

If it weren't real you'd think it was a novel

For nearly two years, she maintained the servers through which her unauthorized, non-secure homebrew communication system had operated. As we now know, about 62,000 emails were stored on those servers, over 2,000 of which contained classified information, including some of the most sensitive national defense secrets — and the highly classified sources and methods for acquiring those secrets — maintained by our government.

The latest classified email disclosure is a joke. The document is so chockablock with classified information — meaning it is so thoroughly redacted — that the State Department might just as well have issued a blank page. This reminds us of how cynically the Democrats’ presidential nominee looked the American people in the eye and assured us, for over a year, that she never sent or received classified information.

http://nypost.com/2016/08/31/latest-email-disclosure-is-just-more-proof-that-clinton-lied/

We are also reminded that Clinton repeatedly vowed she’d surrendered every single government business-related email upon the State Department’s request.

This was an extraordinary lie: She hoarded and attempted to destroy thousands of emails which, like the one The Post describes, involved government business — some of it highly sensitive and significant (such as the 30 emails related to the Benghazi massacre that the FBI recovered but the State Department has yet to disclose). Converting government records to one’s own use and destroying them are serious crimes, even if no classified information is involved.

I Never Expected It Would Be This Damning

Clinton either sent or received 110 emails in 52 chains containing material that was classified at the time. Eight of these chains contained information that was top secret. A few of the classified emails were so marked, contrary to Clinton's assertion that there were none.

These were stored on a home server that was even less secure than a normal Gmail account. Her communications were quite possibly compromised by hostile powers, thus jeopardizing American national security.

"An unclassified system was no place for that conversation," said Comey of the classified emails. A rather kind euphemism, using the passive voice. In plainer, more direct language: It is imprudent, improper and indeed illegal to be conducting such business on an unsecured private server.

http://www.investors.com/politics/columnists/charles-krauthammer-why-comey-did-what-he-did/

What A Tangled Web ...

"For example, at 11:23 p.m. on the night of the attack, Hillary Clinton emailed her daughter, Chelsea, to say, “Two of our officers were killed in Benghazi by an Al Quedalike [sic] group.”

The next morning, she said, “We are working to determine the precise motivations and methods of those who carried out this assault.”

Sound familiar? Of course it does. After the attacks in San Bernardino and Orlando by home-grown terrorists, administration officials made a point of refusing to name the enemy publicly — in this case, ISIS, which had not yet come into existence at the time of Benghazi.

On the day following Orlando, the president himself said we had yet to discern “the precise motivations of the killer,” even though everyone knew by that point he had called 911 to swear his allegiance to ISIS while he was killing people."

"All these misdirections and prevarications have taken their toll.

An unambiguous response to a terrorist attack on an American facility in 2012 would have prevented the creation of the Benghazi committee in the first place.

Due to the Benghazi committee’s efforts to secure the facts of the case, the world came to learn about Hillary Clinton’s mishandling of public email — an irresponsible and reckless act that more than anything else jeopardizes her presidential ambitions."

http://nypost.com/2016/06/28/benghazi-lies-were-just-standard-procedure-under-obama/

Multi Felon for Thee, Not for Me

Mrs. Clinton was entrusted with national-defense information and knew that working with such classified intelligence was a substantial part of her duties as secretary of state. Despite this knowledge, she willfully, and against government rules, set up a private, non-secure e-mail communication system for all of her government-related correspondence — making it inevitable that classified matters would be discussed on the system. This was gross negligence at best. And the easily foreseeable result is that classified intelligence was removed from its secure government repository and transmitted to persons not entitled to have it — very likely including foreign intelligence services that almost certainly penetrated Mrs. Clinton’s non-secure system. The penalty for violating this penal statute is up to ten years’ imprisonment for each individual violation. Mind you, there are already 1,600 reported instances of classified information being transmitted via the Clinton server system, and the latest indications are that at least twelve, and as many as 30, private e-mail accounts are known to have trafficked in our nation’s defense secrets. Many of these account holders were certainly not cleared for access to the information — and none of them was permitted to access it in a non-secure setting.
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/431254/hillary-clinton-email-classified-criminal-democratic-nominee

Hillary - Treason?

Libby eventually was convicted of lying to the FBI and a couple of other things, but Bush commuted his sentence. Anyway, by then it had been learned that a State Department official, Richard Armitage, was the original source of the leak. He had "casually disclosed" Plame's identity at the end of an interview with Novak.

Nevertheless, rage continued to simmer over the disclosure. It was—as The New York Times put it—"a serious offense, which could have put (Plame) and all those who had worked with her in danger." Wilson and Plame called it treason.

hen he was asked if Karl Rove "is guilty of treason," Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) said, "Yes, I think so." Rachel Maddow and others agreed. The word got tossed around so much Plamegate was sometimes referred to as "Treasongate."

Which brings us to Hillary Clinton.

https://reason.com/archives/2016/02/08/none-dare-call-it-treason

It was an outrage, it is an outrage, and it looks like she'll more equal than the rest of us pigs.