The results are in. The proverbial case is closed. We now know exactly what a politician can get away with these days: lying, keeping classified information on a private server and destroying evidence. While Americans aren’t unfamiliar with corruption, it did surprise many to hear FBI director James Comey defend a woman so crooked when the writing was on the wall. Not only did the decision set up a system of double standards, one for government officials- one for the American citizens, but it revealed a bigger problem. The FBI is willing to disregard the law and the safety of the country in order to defend Hillary Clinton.
The outcome of the investigation seemed promising at first. Comey even went so far as to say Hillary Clinton shouldn’t have had the classified information on private servers:
“None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.
Separately, it is important to say something about the marking of classified information. Only a very small number of the e-mails containing classified information bore markings indicating the presence of classified information. But even if information is not marked “classified” in an e-mail, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it.”
The downward spiral begins when Comey willfully ignores history and the facts of the case:
“In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: 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. We do not see those things here.
To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.”
Did you read that folks? Comey is within his rights to indict Clinton but is deciding not to at this time. It could be that this is only because he wasn’t actually there to interview Clinton (and no record of the interview exists). It could also be that Comey isn’t following the law and isn’t looking out for Americans.
After news like this, even Clinton constituents should be high tailing it from the DNC. National security is compromised, Hillary lied about the classification of the documents, her attorneys destroyed several emails and our own FBI won’t send the case to trial.
Americans should be outraged that justice isn’t being served simply because of the Clinton name and what it stands for. They should be outraged that there exists politicians “too big to jail“. They should be outraged that their own government has turned against them in order to protect a criminal.