James Comey’s Testimony: The most important aspect of determining “intent” and the neglect of FBI prosecution

Watching the special session of congressional investigation into the James Comey FBI ruling on the Hillary Clinton email problems the essence is this—Comey felt that the Attorney General history over 99 years of patterned behavior that a case of this nature would not have been taken under the presumption of “intent.”  Everything else said is irrelevant.  It was obvious that Comey felt that Clinton had done a bad job of protecting her secure emails as Secretary of State and that she seriously jeopardized her credibility. Yet he did not advance the recommendation of prosecution because he felt the case was too flimsy for an AG at a Department of Justice to proceed with.

Here’s the problem with Comey’s statement—attorney generals are extremely political so their prosecution ratios if the charges are leveled toward characters on their political side of the aisle are of course extremely poor.  It is no surprise that Comey made the political calculation that his case was not strong enough to by-pass the politics of the AG, Loretta Lynch.  Yet, on Friday, July 1st Loretta Lynch under pressure from the disgrace of her meeting with Bill Clinton—Hillary’s husband—she stated clearly that she would accept any recommendation that the FBI proposed.  So it goes on July 5th 2016 James Comey held a press conference stating that the FBI would not bring charges against Hillary Clinton because they could not prove that she “intended” to break the law.  (Because all that evidence had been destroyed by Hillary’s team of lawyers)

When pressed by the congressional investigation specially held under an emergency session on July 7th 2016 however, Comey fell on the historical tendency of prosecution under the DOJ over a long period of time as the reason he did not recommend prosecution—even though Loretta Lynch already stated that she would proceed.  So there was no question that the Department of Justice would proceed with the case which is contrary to Comey’s statements defending his position.  That is the key to this case.  Comey in spite of all his declarations about the importance of his integrity lied about his reasons for not moving forward with the prosecution.  The DOJ would have had no choice but to pursue the case because Bill and Loretta Lynch got caught together in an inappropriate way.

Hey, how do I know these things you ask?  Well, I recently stayed at a Holiday Inn Express.  I’ve read a little law and I deal with lawyers more than I’d care to.  Gotta’ watch how they twist the meanings of words.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707  Use my name to get added benefits.

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s