"Comey’s full remarks ... " Washpost

"From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. 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

----------

What I heard was that Comey said that although Clinton and her staff broke the law in mishandling government secrets, there was not enough evidence of specific intent to recommend prosecution in a criminal case or cases.

He also said that given the unsecured nature of the Hillarygate system there was no reason to think that the system could not have been penetrated by just about anyone with a modicum of knowledge.

Soo, HC will be the Democratic Party candidate.

Just to be clear, when she is president/CinC  she will have unlimited access to ALL the secrets of the United States.  She will have that by virtue of her constitutional office.

IMO the GOP should start thinking of a convention revolt to find a candidate who can hold the senate against Hillary control of judicial appointments.  Forget the White House, think of the senate.  think!  pl 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/07/05/extremely-careless-and-7-other-comey-quotes-that-explain-the-fbis-clinton-email-findings/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/07/05/fbi-director-comeys-full-remarks-on-clinton-email-probe/?utm_term=.47894ff67c29

Comments

[John Minnerath]

She walks again. What a fearsome prospect.

[DC]

There is more than enough evidence in Comey's transcript to support impeachment votes from reasonable politicians.

[Harry]

Interesting. In the case of the Drake prosecution, there was sufficient evidence of intent but in this case there wasn't.

[JMGavin]

Hillary Clinton held a security clearance, as did her staff. Government employees with security clearances have a duty to safeguard classified material. Specific criminal intent is not a requirement of the statutes she violated. Negligence or carelessness is sufficient for a successful prosecution.

What was David Petraeus' specific criminal intent? He improperly stored classified material, and shared it with his girlfriend (who had an active security clearance as a Reservist).

Long live the Queen!

[jld]

Who needs a "Deep State" with a Borg like that?

[Equillus]

Is it that you are worried a different Supreme Court might decide that corporations are not people. Or possibly that money is not free speech? Quelle horreur.

[robt willmann]

James Comey knows full well that a legal case could have been brought in court against Hillary for the statutes she violated, that it would be reasonable to do so, and that such a court action could be made in good faith and in good conscience.

[raven]

Xin Loi!

[turcopolier]

Equillus

Laughable. I would like to see those decisions reversed. I do not want to see yet more levelling, and identity politics based decisions made by the federal courts. I do not want to see this country driven farther and farther to the left to feed her ego and desire for absolute power. pl

[Carl Lazlo]

“[Fifteen] years ago something terrible happened here. We did nothing about it, nothing. The whole [country] fell into a sort of settled melancholy and all the people in it closed their eyes, and held their tongues, and... failed the test with a whimper. And now something terrible's going to happen again -- and in a way we're lucky, because we've been given a second chance.”

FBI Director Comey: I have called this press conference to give the people and the press an update of our investigation into the bombing that happened in Oklahoma City. Because of the nature of the case, I have decided to provide more detail as to what has been done in our investigation than we would normally provide.

Our investigation has revealed that, along with others, Timothy McVeigh obtained a van and materials for making an explosive device. With the assistance of the others, Mr. McVeigh loaded the van with explosives, drove to Oklahoma City and parked the van next to the federal courthouse. Mr. McVeigh exited the van, and, as he was leaving the area, either carelessly or intentionally caused the bomb to explode, killing hundreds of Americans.

After a thorough and exhaustive investigation, we have found no evidence that those who assisted Mr. McVeigh in procuring the explosives and helped him assemble the bomb knew he was going to detonate the device in Oklahoma City. Furthermore, after a thorough search, we have been unable to find any other case where an American citizen and a veteran of our armed forces loaded a van with explosives, parked it in front of the federal courthouse in Oklahoma City and detonated it, resulting in the deaths of hundreds of Americans. Therefore, we do not believe that any prosecutor would file charges in such a case and we are recommending to the Justice Department that no charges be filed against Mr. McVeigh or his associates.

“Well, I know this much: the rule of law has left here and the gorillas have taken over.”

As we gathered to celebrate the country’s birth yesterday, let us gather to mourn its passing today. Shining city, my ass. It’s nothing but a steaming pile of dogshite on a hill.

Best of luck to all of you. You’re going to need it.

Carl Lazlo

[JMGavin]

Chiến tranh bị mất.

[Sam Peralta]

The law only applies to the little people as Leona Helmsley would say. The elites are above the law in the USA. While we play our little partisan games in the bread & circus ring, the Borg slowly but surely ensures the servitude of the little people with the coronation of the Queen in November.

[Nightsticker]

Col Lang,

I will preface my comments by saying I have no knowledge
of these cases other than what is available to all
in the newspapers or the other news media.
It was my impression, from reading public sources,
that there were 2 FBI investigations underway. One was
focused on the mishandling of classified documents.
The second was focused on public corruption related
to the Clinton Foundation. The 2 could be related in that
examination of emails in one investigation might provide
evidence or leads for the other.
It was also my impression that a Grand Jury had been called
and that they were the ones issuing "immunity" grants
to at least one witness. A Grand Jury would be almost
certainly be seated in a public corruption case.
If I were in the Press and writing about all this I
would seek on the record answers to the following questions:
Was a Grand Jury seated? Is it still seated? Are there any
other investigations related to Bill or Hillary Clinton
or the Clinton Foundation currently underway?

Nightsticker
USMC 65-72
FBI 72-96

[toto]

Again, a counterpoint:

https://www.lawfareblog.com/jim-comeys-statement-clinton-emails-quick-and-dirty-analysis

"People simply don't get indicted for accidental, non-malicious mishandling of classified material. [...] I have never seen a criminal matter proceed without even an allegation of something more than mere mishandling of senstive [sic] information."

"Comey's full statement is a peculiar document because it is simultaneously emphatic that Clinton and her staff behaved inappropriately and equally emphatic that no reasonable prosecutor would want to bring a case against them. [...] If she is to face accountability for her email server, that accountability will and should be in the political realm."

[HankP]

This is why I wait for official results before I start throwing around terms like "criminal" or "traitor".

[Alexandria]

If the elites try to take the nomination away from Trump, which probably wont happen in any event, there will a massive exodus from the GoP by Trump supporters, the replacement candidate will lose in a landslide of 1964 and 1984 proportions and there will be be no way for the Rs to hold the Senate.

However, there seems to be a backlash against the Comey intervention with fence sitters like Ryan shaking their heads in disbelief. IMHO, the Rs will come to their respective senses and realize that, since the Supreme Court is the only game in town, the only way that they will be able to hold the Senate is coming together behind Trump and doing a massive GOTV on behalf of Rs running for office in order to block D takeover of the Senate and the evisceration of the conservative wing on the Court. After all, DT only trails by 5 percentage points.

[ThePanzer]

So let me get this straight. She runs a boiler room server for the express purpose of avoiding oversight and subsequently routes a plethora of different levels of classified into into and through the boiler room server that she set up to avoid govt records keeping rules.

The FBI then determines that after she set up a boiler room server to avoid official scrutiny she had no criminal intent with the subsequent classified email flowing through it.

...how in god's green earth isn't the use of the boiler room server criminal intent in and of itself? I'm just beside myself. If someone other than a Clinton had pulled this stunt they'd be in jail forever and they'd throw away the key.

Obama is campaigning with her as of today, and shockingly, the FBI decided to announce she's all clear literally hours before the president campaigns with her. Do they think we're f-ing stupid?

I guess when Comey met with Bill on a plane that meeting wasn't leaked.

This is unbelievable. Even for the in-your-face corruption of the last few years this is egregious.

[ked]

In an election year, the wheels of Federal justice in national political matters tend towards leaving it up the political system (and even the voters!). I think that's what has been determined here - the Federal servants of the State will stand aside and let democracy take its course. We get the choices that our deep state industry (or Borg, whatever) generates. There's nothing new in all this ("... a Republic, if you can keep it"). Which reminds me;

"There's nothing you can know that isn't known.
Nothing you can see that isn't shown.
There's nowhere you can be that isn't where
You're meant to be
It's easy."

[ISL]

Dear Colonel,

Sad to see the FBI confirming that laws are for the little people only.

per:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-05/peak-fbi-corruption-meet-bryan-nishimura-found-guilty-removal-and-retention-classifi

From the article,

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 (h/t @DavidSirota):

Well, the Italian disease that has been slowly infecting our society, is now out in full daylight.

[turcopolier]

Alexandria

Well, I don't agree. IMO the masses reject Hillary and in the absence of Trumpian stupidity would sufficiently rally to their senators to hold the place. pl

[different clue]

ThePanzer,

I wonder if
someone put
a horse's head
in Comey's bed.

[Allen Thomson]

Comey said, "our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case."

Since the chain of events, AIUI, is that the FBI hands the results of its investigation, along with recommendations, to DOJ and its prosecutors for action, doesn't that statement potentially set up a bit of tension between FBI and DOJ? What if, on getting the FBI findings, the DOJ prosecutors nonetheless decide to seek an indictment? Is Comey going to say that they've acted unreasonably?

I'd have thought that, if anything, Comey might have said, "based on our investigation, we are not recommending that DOJ seek an indictment, but of course that's their call to make."

[BabelFish]

Interesting point and no sarcasm meant by me. What I think you are saying is that this is the political equivalent of NFL refs 'just letting them play'. Am I off base on that?

[Peter C]

What is the payoff, Lynch or Comey, Supreme Court nominations offered.
I'm a bit disappointed in Comey.

[kao_hsien_chih]

The notion that "accountability should be in the political realm" is usually used as a dodge when lawyers, judges, and prosecutors are dealt a hand that's too politically delicate to handle. So Comey doesn't want to deal with this hot potato would rather that the voters deal with the mess. What fine choice we have: an unindicted criminal vs. an overt rich a$$hole vs. protest vote.