Guilty as sin, free as a bird- there will be no indictment

By 46 Comments 1,922 views

guilty as hell, free as a bird


“Guilty as sin, free as a bird — what a country, America.”

Those are words of Obama mentor Bill Ayers. He went on:

”I don’t regret setting bombs,” Bill Ayers said. ”I feel we didn’t do enough.”

On September 11, 2001.


“Guilty as sin, free as a bird — what a country, America.”  They will also be the words of Hillary Clinton.

It is unlikely that Hillary Clinton will be indicted, but she sure deserves to be. That meeting between Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch? It was a courtesy call from Bill to thank Lynch for not indicting his wife. Bill Clinton is dishonest and corrupt, but he is not stupid. He knew exactly what he was doing when he boarded Lynch’s jet. Lynch’s excuse for allowing Clinton on her aircraft (it was too hot) is ridiculous. Even if true, she could have hidden herself in the head and allowed Clinton to cool off before having her detail shoo him away without actually meeting him, yet she did not do that. She’s the highest ranking goddam law official in the country and absolutely knew it was wrong and unethical.

I wager it’s because they all knew the outcome already. There are too many signs pointing that way.

Long ago, as if he knew the outcome of the investigation, Barack Obama already told us that Hillary’s private server did not jeopardize national security.

It is still really curious that Clinton and Lynch found themselves at Sky Harbor airport on adjacent aircraft not only on the same day but at exactly the same time on the same day. Bill Clinton knew exactly what he was doing.

Despite the ethical lapse, Lynch refused to recuse herself from the investigation (and that will prove thorny once this is done)

“The recommendations will be reviewed by career supervisors in the Department of Justice and in the FBI, and by the FBI director, and then, as is the common process, they present it to me and I fully expect to accept their recommendations,” Lynch said while speaking at the Aspen Ideas Festival.

Lynch obviously should have recused herself from the case, but she didn’t because she knew the die is cast. She “fully expects” to accept their recommendation? That’s no answer to anything. It is meaningless. I agree with Paul Mirengoff:

According to CNN, “sources” say the “expectation” is “there will be announcement of no charges in [the] Clinton email probe within [the] next two weeks or so.”

I don’t know how much stock to put in this report, but it’s consistent with what I’ve thought all along — that there probably won’t be an indictment. It’s also consistent with Loretta Lynch’s statement that she will accept the recommendation of the career prosecutors and investigators. As I discussed yesterday, if Lynch knows what that there almost certainly will be a recommendation not to prosecute, it makes sense for her to say she will accept the recommendation.

In another one of those interesting coincidences, did you notice that Lynch’s explanation

“I certainly would not do it again”

eerily echoes Hillary Clinton’s explanation of her private server?

“I certainly wouldn’t do it again”

Hmmm. Hillary Clinton was grilled by the FBI for three hours yesterday in what the Clinton campaign continues to call a “voluntary” meeting. When the FBI wants to talk to you, it isn’t a request.

The WaPo states that Clinton could possibly be charged with making false statements. She’s certainly made enough false public statements. Ben Shapiro:

1. Hillary said she set up the private server for convenience, not to shield her communications from public scrutiny.

2. Hillary told the public over and over again that her personal server was secure.

3. Hillary stated repeatedly that she had been helpful and transparent in this investigation.

4. Hillary stated that she had turned over all relevant emails.

5. Hillary said she used a Blackberry for convenience.

And my personal favorite:

6. Hillary said she was cleared by the State Department to use her personal server.

All lies. There’s more here and here. Her dishonesty is so overwhelming that it left her water boy George Stephanopoulos stunned:


There’s a lot of harrumphing going on consequent to Bill’s misadventure. At WaPo Dan Balz think it makes everyone look bad:

Bill Clinton has made a mess. It was either out of foolish indifference or plain foolishness, but it has created a terrible moment for his wife and the Democrats, and for President Obama and perceptions of the integrity of his administration.


For a politician long praised for his political smarts, it was a striking error of judgment on Clinton’s part to walk to Lynch’s plane for any kind of conversation. It was a similarly huge lapse on the part of the attorney general, who was appointed by Clinton as a U.S. attorney in 1999, to allow him to come aboard for any kind of conversation.

Wall St Journal:

Loretta Lynch did herself, the Department of Justice and Hillary Clinton no favors on Friday when she tried to repair the damage she had done by meeting privately with Bill Clinton this week.

In a televised interview from Aspen, Colorado, with the Washington Post’s Jonathan Capehart, the Attorney General struggled to defend her department’s ability to make an honest decision about whether to indict Mrs. Clinton over her handling of classified information on her personal email server. “I fully expect” to accept the recommendations of FBI investigators and career Justice officials, she said, in damage-control mode.

Ms. Lynch created this mess when she welcomed the former President onto her plane in Phoenix for a 30-minute private meeting—while her department is investigating his spouse. The public might not even have known about the meeting if someone hadn’t tipped off a reporter. When first asked about the propriety of the meeting earlier this week, Ms. Lynch explained it was “primarily” social.

Ruth Marcus:

 A man who was president for eight years knows — or should — about the exquisite sensitivity of contact with Justice Department officials when there are pending matters. And, by the way, if Clinton thought he was helping the cause: NOT! He created a firestorm that, if anything, poses a risk to his wife by effectively disabling a layer of adult supervision from youngish prosecutors and characteristically raring-to-go FBI agents.

More important, what was Lynch thinking? That it would have been rude to rebuff a former president? Did it somehow slip her mind that the hottest potato on her department’s plate is the email investigation? Appearances, anyone?

All these nice people are operating on a false premise- that either Lynch or the Clinton’s give a damn about the law, ethics, appearances or what you think.

They don’t. Marcus got closer to the target than the others:

The encounter was toxic. It adds to the already settled conviction among too many voters that the system is, to use the essential word of the 2016 campaign, rigged. In this view, the fix — political, financial and judicial — is in, the playing field irrevocably tilted in favor of the powerful, the rich and the well-connected.

It sure is. Dana Milbank had a brief grasp of it for a few seconds:

Appearing on “MSNBC Live,” host Tamron Hall asked Milbank about the “question of trust and whether the Clintons believe they live by their own rules.”

Milbank replied, “Well, certainly Bill Clinton walking over to the Attorney General does suggest that he believes at least that he’s above the typical rules and bounds of propriety.”

Bingo. They don’t give a damn about anything because they don’t just think they are above the law, they are above the law. They’re untouchable, going back to Whitewater and the Rose Law firm records and $100,000 cattle futures. And it’s most likely to continue. This deal is done. And that possible corruption probe of the Clinton Foundation? The Clinton/Lynch meeting means that one’s also in the can.

Clinton could still take a hit from those who actually believe there should such things as laws and ethics:

No matter how the FBI investigation into the handling of sensitive information on Hillary Clinton’s personal computer server ends, it likely will hurt her presidential bid.

If she is indicted, she will face further questions about her honesty and perhaps even calls for her to step aside. If she isn’t indicted, as many legal experts predict, critics will accuse the Obama administration of letting her escape charges merely because they want her to win the White House.

When the report is released and commotion settles down, there will be things to watch for. One, resignations and leaks from the FBI. Another is Loretta Lynch’s net worth.

I will be happy to have to eat these words, but like I said, the fix is in.

The only hope is that Clinton will be found guilty in the court of public opinion.




DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education. DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed. Except for liberals being foolish.

46 Responses to “Guilty as sin, free as a bird- there will be no indictment”

  1. 1


    Obama’s one hope of continuing the propaganda of his legacy is a liberal Democrat following him up. Right now, that hope is placed on Hillary, who is more interested in her OWN legacy (aka “money”) than anything else anywhere. So, how does Obama assure he can count on his legacy being protected?

    Perhaps by having the Attorney General transmit a deal to the husband of the presumptive next President that if she is receptive to recommendations from Obama, her legal problems will go away.

    There are a number of possible scenarios, but none of them include the innocence of Hillary.

  2. 2

    Nanny G

    A memory stick with all the Q’s and ”right” A’s on it passed between them?
    A promise of a Supreme Court job?
    Who knows?
    One thing we do know, those agents of Bill’s and Loretta’s did NOT order the ”no photos,” just because ”it was hot.”
    It was mere chance that a LOCAL ABC reporter got the story and put it on air before the national ABC heads could spike it.
    Mere chance.

  3. 3

    James Raider

    Slick is not just chasing the White House re-entry, he’s struggling hard to save his whole Legacy, particularly his “pretend” foundation.

    The wheels are coming off that wagon, and they’ve spent so much money on themselves and their minions over the years with an astronomical burn-rate that has nothing to with starving children, . . . .they have to turn their ship around.

    This a ‘Hail Mary’.

  4. 4

    James Raider

    And you can’t make this stuff up, . . .

    Now, another official has found himself on the wrong end of the Clintons. That John Ashe was a former President of the United Nations General Assembly highlights the fact that no one is safe once in their sights.

    And as you might have guessed, there are major inconsistencies with Ashe’s death. It was not only conveniently timed because Ashe died just a few days before being set to testify against Clinton in a corruption case, but official reports indicated he died of a heart attack.

    The problem, however, is that police on the scene reported Ashe died when his throat was crushed during a work-out accident.

  5. 5


    I am taking a really cynical view of this whole ordeal. I need Greg to come give me the rational explanation. I’m sure there HAS to be one.

  6. 6

    Spurwing Plover

    Obama and Hillary and the New World Order why else do they want to merge america with mexico and canada into the North American(Soviet)Union bring in so called refugees confiscate our guns release crinimals and so the biding of satan

  7. 7


    @James Raider:
    James neither Hillary or Bill seems to enjoy living a decadent or lavish lifestyle. In the early years after 2001 they bought 2 homes one in DC and one in NY. The total they paid i believe was 4 million.
    If as many think Hillary is “guilty as hell” if she isn’t indicted shouldn’t we expect to see mass resignations in the FBI and the DOJ ? Shouldn’t we expect to see whistleblowers? If we do not see resignations and whistleblowing what might that indicate?

  8. 8

    Sgt. Rock

    @James Raider: And you can’t make this stuff up, . . .Apparently you can…Ashe was not “days” away from “testifying”, he was only scheduled to attend some standard pre-trial meetings in the days following his death. The U.S. District Attorney’s office that is prosecuting his case said “that no portion of Ashe’s court case pertained to Hillary Clinton”.

    Common guys, you can’t swing a dead cat without hitting a Clinton scandal, but linking BS crap like this just makes us look gullible. Check your sources.

  9. 9


    The only hope is that Clinton will be found guilty in the court of public opinion.

    That’s all any of this has ever been about from the beginning. It’s been nothing more than the endless repetition of the same lies, over and over like a broken record, no matter how many in-depth investigations conclude at the end that no evidence can be found to back any of them up.

    If you spent only one-hundredth part of that time honestly evaluating the qualifications and suitability of Donald Trump for the presidency, you might figure out something that’s totally obvious. It’s not going to happen, of course. Negativity is the only mode the GOP now operates in. With Trump, they’ve got to be so negative about their opponent that it keeps all attention off what they’re offering as an alternative. They’ve got to get a majority of voters to believe that a reality television construct is actual reality; that facts are what they’re told, not what evidence establishes: that Donald Trump is something other than what his own words suggest he is.

  10. 10



    Yeah, Greg. We know the leftist playbook. The same lies and sudden concern about “wasting taxpayer money on investigations” is what the Clintons did over Lewinsky…until Willie’s DNA turned up on her blue dress, and he was impeached and disbarred.

    Cattlegate. Whitewater. Rose Law Firm billing records. Loral. Multiple ‘bimbo eruptions’. Pardoning cuban terrorists and wealthy donors. Benghazi. The Clinton Foundation selling of SecState influence. Illegal private server.

    Hillary is a criminal with no actual accomplishments other than lining the Clinton pocketbook. She did nothing as a reverse carpetbagging senator from a state she never lived in until running for office to grasp a false poltical veneer for her run for president, and she accomplished nothing but failure as SecState.

    Your Soros-funded talking points against Trump are nothing but projections of Clinton’s worthless, corrupt and despicable essence.

  11. 11


    @Pete, #10:

    You still think diverting the nation’s attention from the growing threat of al Queda to a consensual sexual encounter between two adults was a smart move on the part of republicans, don’t you?

    But putting a lying, know-nothing, dangerously unqualified billionaire serial adulterer who won’t reveal his tax returns in the Oval Office somehow makes perfect sense…

  12. 12



    neither Hillary or Bill seems to enjoy living a decadent or lavish lifestyle.

    Hmmm…. Hillary hasn’t driven a car in about 30 years. They threw a $3 million wedding party for their daughter. Bubba just had HIS private jet rendezvous with Lynch’s private jet in Phoenix. They own a sprawling mansion in New York.

    But, the most decadent part of their life style is the Clinton Foundation ATM which allows them to pay their way through their political path.


    It’s been nothing more than the endless repetition of the same lies, over and over like a broken record,

    Yeah… from Hillary, Obama and the rest of the corrupt gang. Over and over and over they lie and stonewall, dragging this ordeal out. Their actions have made it impossible to accept a no-bill as anything but a travesty of justice. People to not lie to cover up innocence, Greg.

    no evidence can be found to back any of them up.

    There are trainloads of evidence. It takes a genuine fool to ignore it. Petraeus was convicted of much less.

    If you spent only one-hundredth part of that time honestly evaluating the qualifications and suitability of Donald Trump for the presidency

    What the F### does Trump have to do with Hillary’s guilt? Can you not SEE how weak your own case is when you have to constantly hark back to your fear of Trump? Hillary is guilty on her own right… Trump has nothing to do with it. But, since you mention it, what are HER qualifications and suitability? How has she demonstrated her capability to lead the nation?

    You still think diverting the nation’s attention from the growing threat of al Queda to a consensual sexual encounter between two adults was a smart move on the part of republicans, don’t you?

    That was Bubba’s call. No one forced him to skull-screw an intern, then lie about it. No one forced him to abuse multiple women, then lie about it. He had time to blow up abandoned tent camps in the desert and to personally call off efforts to kill or capture bin Laden… why didn’t he take the time to enact some of those “precautions” you leftists fault Bush for not putting in place in the 9 months he had to prevent 9/11? Excuses, excuses… so many required to cover for so many leftist lies and failure.

    Hillary is guilty of grossly mishandling national security (so she could illegally delete whatever she chose to without any government interference) and using the government to fill Clinton Foundation coffers. No amount of corruption is going to cover that up. Ignoring the facts and defending the corruption is stupid on a massive scale.

  13. 14


    @Bill, #12:

    There are trainloads of evidence.

    There’s not enough evidence that’s up to legal courtroom-standards to fill a thimble. Hence, there’s never been a conviction for anything.

    What we have are trainloads of speculative anti-Clinton books and articles that have been cranked out by hack writers and conspiracy theorists over the past two or three decades, exploiting a defined market consisting of Clinton haters and political opportunists. Their discovery of the internet has put the rumor mill on steroids.

  14. 15


    @DrJohn, #13:

    Newsflash: A relatively large number of adult human beings tend to engage in adult sexual behaviors. They don’t always do so in total compliance with the religious right’s Rules of Acceptable Behavior. Even the most upstanding and worth people have occasionally been known to demonstrate poor judgement in this particular area of human activity. That applies to notable past presidents, Founding Fathers, and also includes a number of glaringly hypocritical republicans who were directly involved in the public persecution of Bill Clinton.

    Basically, I don’t care in the least about the consensual sexual behavior of other adults. I’m far more offended by having the Clinton/Lewinsky story pushed into my face than by the details of the story itself, which I’d prefer not to have heard in the first place.

    If you think adultery disqualifies someone from holding the office of president, maybe you’d better think a bit more closely about Donald Trump. The fact of his serial adultery is the least of my own concerns about him.

  15. 16



    There’s not enough evidence that’s up to legal courtroom-standards to fill a thimble. Hence, there’s never been a conviction for anything.

    Well, Greg, there are two documents, signed by Hillary, that state what the law is regarding the handling of classified information. Then, there are 2200 violations of those documents she signed.

    Now, I sincerely doubt Hillary intended for classified information unsecured on her private, secret personal server to fall into unauthorized hands. However, this is exactly what she did and, intentional or not, she violated the law. What she DID intend was to violate the law which says that ALL her documentation is to be turned over to the State Department. We now know she violated that law approximately 30,000 times.

    Now, when it comes to the Clinton Foundation, true that when she and/or Bill accept a multi-hundred thousand dollar “speaking fee” or a million dollars in donations to the Clinton Foundation, then those very same people get an irrationally favorable decision from the State Department, the pro quid pro is speculated. However, it is not a reach or illogical to see the vast impropriety on display.

    Then, Bill visits Loretta, in private, in secret (but for one reporter that stumbled across it), while Hillary (and, to a certain extent, Bubba himself) are under FBI investigation. Move along, nothing to see here… right Greg?

    Bill and Hillary are two of THE most corrupt people alive. Everyone they encounter somehow become corrupt as well. Imagine the nation-wide corruption if Hillary had her way with the country.

    A relatively large number of adult human beings tend to engage in adult sexual behaviors

    Sometimes you surprise me when I really should not be surprised. I hold the President of the United States to a different standard. But, then again, I am not a liberal Democrat that is used to having to settle for a lying, corrupt, scandalous incompetents as your candidates. I don’t expect the President, while he is supposed to, say, be addressing a terror threat, to be wasting his time on the clock getting his knob polished by an intern. An intern, by the way, that could have been someone that would have blackmailed the President and cause a lot MORE trouble than he caused himself.

    I don’t have to settle for scum as President. You should raise your standards a bit.

  16. 17


    @Bill, #16:

    Well, Greg, there are two documents, signed by Hillary, that state what the law is regarding the handling of classified information. Then, there are 2200 violations of those documents she signed.

    If that were so, it could be easily demonstrated. An indictment would not only be inevitable—it would have already happened.

    You simply refuse to acknowledge the fact that classifying a document in the present for presently existing reasons DOES NOT magically transform it into a classified document in the past. New circumstances can arise after a document was created that cause what was irrelevant in the past to become a matter of concern in the present.

    Part of that circumstance should be obvious: The court’s action on the Citizen’s United F.O.I.A. petition mandated public release of thousands of high level State Department communications that were originally intended to remain non-public. That places every document into a larger context that could reveal far more to an intelligence analyst than any one particular document in isolation ever could. Suddenly you have can have a lot of dots to connect. So, you classify documents containing certain dots to keep the picture from emerging.

    There’s also the fact that circumstances can change. Perhaps you privately said something about a foreign public figure who was formerly marginal, but is now in a position of importance. Perhaps it isn’t in our own interest for his or her political enemies to know what was said. It didn’t matter then, but now it might matter a great deal. The only way to prevent it from becoming public is to classify now what didn’t warrant classification previously.

  17. 19


    @Randy, #18:

    If you take emails that were only recently classified out of the mix, there’s nothing left but a lot of hot air. It’s just another phony scandal. So, you’ve got that problem.

    Your other problem is that you’ve presently got a presumptive nominee who only belongs in the White House on a guided tour. The only way this guy might be mistaken for a remotely qualified candidate is by keeping his mouth shut—and his Twitter posts subject to pre-tweet review and approval by his PR people. Being totally clueless and highly impulsive are a very bad combination on Twitter. They’re even worse when you have access to the nuclear launch button.

    I’ve noticed that any news discussion concerning Trump now requires a pro-Trump “Trump translator” to explain what any questionable thing he said or did actually meant.

  18. 20



    Diverting the nation’s attention is what the left DOES, and the Clintons, along with a syncophant media ( like the female writer who wrote she would fellate Bill Clinton because of his abortion support), are masters at doing so.

    Bill Clinton LIED under oath, and wagged his finger on national TV as he forcefully lied to every American. There is no trusting someone who is so pathologically dishonest. Upon what basis can you believe ANYTHING that either of the Clintons say about anything, knowing how much effort both Clintons put into lying? Clinton settled out of court for just under a million over his Paula Jones stunt. If he and Hillary so blatantly lied about his acts with “that woman…Miss Lewinsky”, what fool would believe they aren’t lying just as blatantly about Benghazi, her illegal server, the illegal influence peddling nature of the Clinton Foundation, and the egregiously unethical “coincidental” meeting of Lynch and Bill in Phoenix? The Clintons are the very definition of corrupt.

    Again, am I happy with having to choose Trump? Not at all. But there is NOTHING in Trump’s character or history that compares to the dishonesty, greed or vileness of the Clintons.

    The Sandy Berger document stealing fiasco is just one of the instances of the Clintons hiding and destroying evidence of their malfeasance. Hillary destroying parts of her SecState schedule, the entire private server fiasco, arguing under oath about the definition of “is” – the Clintons have no business serving in any capacity within government.

    Nixon was forced to resign over 18 minutes of erased audio. Hillary is responsible for deleting far more than 18 minutes of audio, and is married to a piece of filth who was impeached and disbarred for lying. The idea that such a rotten, foul individual is the DNC nominee for the Oval Office says volumes about the fetid and festering sewer the DNC and those who would support her have become.

  19. 21

    Spurwing Plover

    Like Bills last act of treason before leaving the whitehouse signing america onto the ICC John Kerrys act of treason signing the Small Arms Control Treaty with the Useless Nations

  20. 23


    @Greg: Have you not yet realized that if information, that is classified information at its creation, goes directly to Hillary’s hacker’s buffet secret, private, unsecured server, it never gets the opportunity to be marked by the State Department? Apparently not.

    Satellite photos of N. Korea’s nuclear facilities, names of intelligence agents and daily schedules of officials is ALWAYS classified and if a Secretary of State is confused about that, he/she is unqualified to be President.

  21. 24


    @Sgt. Rock: The Ashe corruption was his own he was not testifing against crooked Hllary, his mistake was not to have his own “charitible fund” and pay himself and take all travel expenses from that fund, silly silly man.

  22. 25


    No indictment ? Gee another disappointment to the haters
    And so soon after the flop of Benghazi!!!

    “When you wish on a falling star
    Makes no difference who you are
    Your wish probably will not come true
    Unless it is death by meteor”

  23. 26


    Putin is supporting Trump so at least you will have him for company
    Trump will be blamed when/if the GOP loses the Senate which is looking likelier than not

  24. 28


    @Bill, #27:

    Justice would have been harmed if charges had been brought to serve someone’s political agenda when there was little or no real evidence to support them.

    The recommendation that there be no charges came from the investigative level, not the prosecutorial level. James Comey Jr, Director of the FBI, is a well-respected public servant. He’s also a republican. He was a U.S. District Attorney and Deputy U.S. Attorney General under George W. Bush.

  25. 31


    @Greg: The only political agenda served was Hillary’s where she has been allowed to hide away and delete whatever documents she pleased (serving her agenda) and suffer no consequences for jeapordizing classified information. But, at least the liberal agenda is preserved. That is, after all, more important than lives, national security or justice.

    @John: A Republican? You think Republicans don’t succumb to threats and intimidation?

  26. 32


    Its not the FBIs job to make a prosecution, it is DOJs job they are the legal arm of the government. The director called her actions “extremely careless” behavior by Clinton and her staff in their handling of sensitive information, the FBI had concluded that “no charges are appropriate.” He said the agency believed that “no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.” I think General Petraus should immediately ask for retrial as he seemed less inept and careless by far than Hillary. There are plenty of laws broken by Ms Clinton the laws state the actions do not have to be intentional.
    She must have someone very very powerful by the short hairs to skate on this. Or a trial will bring out highly embarassing information the administration would rather be kept under lock and key.

  27. 33


    Bill I don’t see any way to intimidate the Director of the FBI

    I also believe that he is an honorable man apparently you do not
    Great claims ( he was intimidated) demand great proof, got any at all?

  28. 34


    So you think that the Obama administration somehow finagled the entire FBI from top to bottom to go along with a cover up and that no one has resigned to write a million dollar book about it
    Wow!! That Obama must be such a great POTUS to inspire such loyalty

  29. 35


    @kitt, #32:

    If the FBI presents the results of their investigation with an opinion that there’s not sufficient evidence to warrant charges, the DOJ isn’t very likely to say, “OK. We’re going to prosecute anyway.” Sufficient evidence is required for a prosecutor to convince a Grand Jury that charges are supported by facts and that a trial is in order.

    Most investigations don’t result in prosecution.

  30. 36



    Called it.



    There was easily sufficient evidence. They chose not to pursue because it was a Clinton. And a woman.

    “Extremely careless” meets “Gross misconduct” as far the the threshold for prosecution is concerned.

  31. 39



    Bill I don’t see any way to intimidate the Director of the FBI

    You don’t. You don’t think an administration that already uses the DOJ and IRS to attack citizens has the means to intimidate? You don’t think a guy might get concerned with his career when going against the political wishes of Obama, Hillary, Lynch and the corrupt media? Really?

    I take it you haven’t read or heard Comey’s comments. He lays out the case that Hillary is guilty… 110 times guilty. He also lays out the case that Hillary lied before Congress (something I’m sure doesn’t keep her awake at night). Comey makes the case that Hillary violated all the rules, regulations and laws that have been speculated… though he says he found no “criminal intent”. Well, when you break the law, you intent is not necessarily the issue. The issue is that you broke the law.

    So, Comey SAYS Hillary is guilty… then says it can’t be successfully prosecuted. Add this to the list of Clinton corruptions.

  32. 40


    @Greg: Liar that is not not not what was said. There was plenty of evidence of mishandling government records gross negligence.
    They for some reason are just not recommending charges. If they could bring down a general, they if they wanted to, could jail her for the rest of her pathetic life.
    She has something on them, somewhere is proof that could ruin the legacy of this corrupt administration.

  33. 41


    @John: #34
    What cover up? Hillary has admitted to everything needed to bring charges.
    1. Mishandling Classified Information

    Executive Order 13526 and 18 U.S.C Sec. 793(f) of the federal code make it unlawful to send of store classified information on personal email.

    Section 1236.22 of the 2009 National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) requirements

    3. Violation of the Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA)

    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. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent.

    So Patraus got it for a G-mail account
    You tell me why she is getting a free pass?

  34. 42


    The FBI has lost about 1000 laptops all containing classified material. Since there was no intent to lose them the mishandling statue does not apply
    No Petraeus got it for giving highly classified info to his girl friend. He was lucky he also didn’t get nailed for adultery under the military code of justice.
    However at that time did YOU think he should have been convicted?

  35. 44


    Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document. . .relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer, Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

  36. 45


    @john: So, you are satisfied with a candidate that is not only “extremely careless” with national security, but also lies about it extensively as well as trying to delete it out of existence? You certainly don’t set very high standards.

  37. 46



    Again, am I happy with having to choose Trump? Not at all.

    Please help me out here — Who on the national scene would you like in place of Trump? — AND WHY? please be very specific as to why your chosen one is better on THE issues! Please quit fueling the olde whiney “lesser of two evils” cop out CRAP! — who do you say isn’t one of the “Evils”?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *