Hillary And FBI Declare Official Independence
From The Rule Of Law

Why is Hillary Above the Law?

The Rule Of Law Doesn’t Mean A Thing,
If You Are Hillary Clinton

FBI CLEARS HILLARY!

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

It is hard to be proud to be an American today after watching FBI director James Comey magically clear Hillary Clinton of all wrongdoing.  Sadly, Comey is likely to go down in history as the man that struck the final death blow to the rule of law in America.  During his address to the media, Comey admitted that Clinton sent or received 110 emails in 52 email chains that contained classified material at the time they were sent.  But of course there were probably many more.  Comey told the press that it was “likely that there are other work-related emails that they did not produce … that are now gone because they deleted all emails they did not return to State, and the lawyers cleaned their devices.”  So basically Clinton turned over to the FBI whatever she felt like turning over, and then she destroyed the rest of the evidence.  As a former lawyer, this infuriates me, but it doesn’t surprise me.

In fact, it doesn’t surprise me at all that Hillary Clinton was allowed to skate.  I expected this all along.  If you search the thousands of articles that I have posted on The Economic Collapse Blog and End Of The American Dream, you will find many articles where I say that Hillary Clintonshould be in prison, but not a single one where I ever said that I thought she would be going to prison.

This is how politics in America works today.  People like Bill and Hillary Clinton could openly sacrifice children to Satan on the White House lawn and still probably not get into trouble.  Despite scandal after scandal going all the way back to Arkansas in the 1980s, nothing ever sticks to them, and nothing probably ever will.

In this case, FBI director James Comey essentially had to rewrite federal law in order to clear Clinton.  This is something that Andrew McCarthy explained very well in his article entitled “FBI Rewrites Federal Law to Let Hillary Off the Hook”…


There is no way of getting around this: According to Director James Comey (disclosure: a former colleague and longtime friend of mine), Hillary Clinton checked every box required for a felony violation of Section 793(f) of the federal penal code (Title 18): With lawful access to highly classified information she acted with gross negligence in removing and causing it to be removed it from its proper place of custody, and she transmitted it and caused it to be transmitted to others not authorized to have it, in patent violation of her trust. Director Comey even conceded that former Secretary Clinton was “extremely careless” and strongly suggested that her recklessness very likely led to communications (her own and those she corresponded with) being intercepted by foreign intelligence services.

—–

In essence, in order to give Mrs. Clinton a pass, the FBI rewrote the statute, inserting an intent element that Congress did not require. The added intent element, moreover, makes no sense: The point of having a statute that criminalizes gross negligence is to underscore that government officials have a special obligation to safeguard national defense secrets; when they fail to carry out that obligation due to gross negligence, they are guilty of serious wrongdoing. The lack of intent to harm our country is irrelevant. People never intend the bad things that happen due to gross negligence.


The amazing thing is that the FBI handled a highly similar case very, very differently less than a year ago.  Just check out what happened to Naval reservist Bryan Nishimura…


U.S. Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman immediately sentenced Nishimura to two years of probation, a $7,500 fine, and forfeiture of personal media containing classified materials. Nishimura was further ordered to surrender any currently held security clearance and to never again seek such a clearance.

According to court documents, Nishimura was a Naval reservist deployed in Afghanistan in 2007 and 2008. In his role as a Regional Engineer for the U.S. military in Afghanistan, Nishimura had access to classified briefings and digital records that could only be retained and viewed on authorized government computers. Nishimura, however, caused the materials to be downloaded and stored on his personal, unclassified electronic devices and storage media. He carried such classified materials on his unauthorized media when he traveled off-base in Afghanistan and, ultimately, carried those materials back to the United States at the end of his deployment. In the United States, Nishimura continued to maintain the information on unclassified systems in unauthorized locations, and copied the materials onto at least one additional unauthorized and unclassified system.

Nishimura’s actions came to light in early 2012, when he admitted to Naval personnel that he had handled classified materials inappropriately. Nishimura later admitted that, following his statement to Naval personnel, he destroyed a large quantity of classified materials he had maintained in his home. Despite that, when the Federal Bureau of Investigation searched Nishimura’s home in May 2012, agents recovered numerous classified materials in digital and hard copy forms. The investigation did not reveal evidence that Nishimura intended to distribute classified information to unauthorized personnel.


So what is the difference between Nishimura and Clinton?

Neither of them ever intended to do anything wrong.

So why were they treated so differently?

Needless to say, social media is exploding with outrage over this decision to let Clinton go free.  Many Americans are openly asking why they should continue to play by the rules if politicians like Hillary Clinton are not required to do so.

Unfortunately, this is what America has become.  Our politicians are a reflection of who we are as a society, and as I have stated before Hillary Clinton is going to be the overwhelming favorite if there is an election in November.  At this moment, she has solid leads in all of the “swing states”, and she only really needs to win one of them…


Perhaps you enjoy talk of battleground states. Well, there’s a scenario for you, too. First, pick the six “closest” swing states (VA, NH, IA, OH, FL, NC). Got it? Now understand that New Hampshire excepted, Clinton only has to win one of them in order to reach the requisite 270 electoral votes to win. (Optional third step for Republicans only: start shotgunning Pabst Blue Ribbon and don’t stop until November.)

Lest any Trump supporters seek solace in poll numbers, recent polls have Trump sliding further behind in all the relevant swing states. According to a Ballotpedia battleground poll released last week, Trump trails by 14% in Florida, 4% in Iowa, 10% in North Carolina, 9% in Ohio, and 7% in Virginia.


Hillary Clinton is a horrible, evil, miserable human being, and right now she is the odds-on favorite to become the next president of the United States.

But ultimately it is the American people that are to blame for blindly supporting corrupt politicians such as Clinton, and if they willingly pick her to be our next president then we will certainly deserve whatever consequences follow.

________________________________________________________

HILLARY EVADES INDICTMENT, 

PROSECUTION; TRUMP SAYS 

SYSTEM RIGGED

BY JIM KOURI

SEE: http://www.newswithviews.com/NWV-News/news521.htm;
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:


Democrats across the nation are celebrating what they believed all along: the Federal Bureau of Investigation's head honcho will formally report to Attorney General Loretta Lynch her allegedly politicized and corrupt Justice Department that there are no grounds for prosecution even its yearlong investigation into Democratic Party presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server while she was the secretary of state under President Barack Obama. Clinton's opponent, Republic Donald Trump initial reaction to the news accused those involved of rigging the system, something many law enforcement officers have believed since Obama first appointed Eric Holder as the nation's Top Cop.

While Democrats gloat over the failure to "get Hillary," cooler heads have noted that even in organized crime cases (RICO), criminal kingpins -- including La Cosa Nostra Genovese capo John Gotti -- have been able to walk out of federal courts free men. "The problem is that the entire federal justice system is corrupt. In fact, the nation's federal government is as corrupt as the city of Chicago in the days of Al Capone and Sam Giancana. And those who aren't corrupt are cowards," said political strategist and former attorney Mike Baker.

FBI Director James Comey announced on Tuesday that the investigation found there was evidence of extremely careless handling of emails by Clinton and that at least 110 emails contained classified information at the time they were sent. While the news media, a group many believe is in on the "fix," concentrated their attention on the emails, it's not known if Comey will also bring down the curtain on the probe of the Clinton Foundation, which has been accused of improper transactions with foreign governments, fraud and money laundering.

"If the federal government should overpass the just bounds of its authority and make a tyrannical use of its powers, the people, whose creature it is, must appeal to the standard they have formed, and take such measures to redress the injury done to the Constitution as the exigency may suggest and prudence justify." —Alexander Hamilton (1788)

"When I heard about [Attorney General] Lynch secretly meeting with Bill Clinton last week at a Phoenix airport, I knew in my gut the fix was in. The two of them were alone and only God knows what they said. I believe Bill made an offer Loretta couldn't refuse," said Martha Minnielli, a former police detective specializing in major crime cases. "The news media also help Clinton immensely by cherry-picking what they revealed to the public. Meanwhile the media would go ballistic over Trump calling a judge who is a member of a La Raza ('the Race') attorneys group a Mexican," the decorated officer added.



"By breaking laws, covering up scandals and flat out lying to the American people, Hillary Clinton has demonstrated time and time again that she cannot be trusted to make decisions that are in the best interest of our country. And her deadly track record spells disaster for a potential Commander-in-Chief," said Joel Arends, chairman of Vets for a Strong America. "The decision to not prosecute Hillary Clinton is another nail in the coffin of the American Republic," added Vernon Ronstadt, founded of Police for Constitutional Government.

But others believe that Hillary Clinton isn't getting away with anything: for example, the newspaper AzCentral's EJ Montini writes: "For Donald Trump and his followers the only thing better than Hillary Clinton being criminally charged for mishandling classified information was for Hillary Clinton NOT to be charged.

Now – as far as Trump is concerned – the story never dies."

In an email to the Conservative Base's editor, a federal law enforcement officer who requested anonymity listed the alleged "criminal resume" of Hillary Clinton:

"Here is a small sample of the alleged illegal and treasonous things Hillary did just while being the Secretary of State:


• Did not appoint an Inspector General for the State Department while she was in office.

• Illegally used her power to facilitate hundreds of millions of questionable/illegal dollars in donations to the Clinton Foundation.

• Also illegally used her power to facilitate hundreds of millions of questionable/illegal dollars going into Bill Clinton’s pockets for speaking fees and international business deals.



• Appointed an unqualified big donor to a sensitive committee.

• Refused to use State Department approved communication systems under any circumstances including using an unsecured private server in her home for all official communications.





Subscribe to NewsWithViews Daily Email Alerts

Email Address*

First Name





 *required field






• Everything she did was deliberate and coldly calculated to facilitate and cover up her illegal and treasonous activities regardless of the damage she did to America or how much she put America at risk.

• Clinton has done what may be un-repairable damage to America economically and put us at an extreme level of risk for more and bigger terrorist attacks here and abroad.

______________________________________________________________________




Ignoring Overwhelming Evidence, 

FBI Opposes Clinton Indictment

BY C. MITCHELL SHAW

SEE: http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/

crime/item/23559-ignoring-overwhelming-evidence

-fbi-opposes-clinton-indictment;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:





The FBI will not recommend that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton be indicted for her use of a private e-mail server — regardless of the fact that she certainly violated the law and risked national security. FBI Director James Comey said on Tuesday that the FBI was unable to find any evidence that Clinton intended to break the law and that “no reasonable prosecutor would bring” charges in this case. However, incredibly, in his same statement he actually acknowledged that Clinton did break the law.

Comey's statement was — in his own words — “an unusual statement in at least a couple ways.” He listed those ways as:

• The amount of information about the investigation itself — “First, I am going to include more detail about our process than I ordinarily would, because I think the American people deserve those details in a case of intense public interest.”

• The fact that everyone, inside and outside of the government, was hearing, for the first time, the FBI recommendation — “Second, I have not coordinated or reviewed this statement in any way with the Department of Justice or any other part of the government. They do not know what I am about to say.”

Comey then detailed “three things: what we did; what we found; and what we are recommending to the Department of Justice.”

Comey said the investigation looked at both “whether there is evidence classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on that personal system, in violation of a federal statute making it a felony to mishandle classified information either intentionally or in a grossly negligent way” and “a second statute making it a misdemeanor to knowingly remove classified information from appropriate systems or storage facilities.” He then spent the bulk of his statement excusing Clinton by focusing on the FBI's failure to prove that she had acted with any “intent” to break the law.

Let's just pause right here for a moment and unpack that. Comey admitted that — contrary to Clinton's claims to both the public and investigators — that she did, absolutely, without doubt, send and receive e-mails containing information that was classified when it was sent and received:

[One hundred and ten] 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.

Now, let's back up just a little and play that back more slowly while we remember something. Secretary Clinton signed two non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) as part of her appointment to that position. As this writer said when those NDAs came to light:

The NDA signed by Mrs. Clinton on her second day as secretary of state spells out — in language so clear that the meaning of the word "is" is quite unambiguous — her responsibility in handling the sensitive information to which she would have access in her new job. One part reads, "I have been advised that the unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention, or negligent handling of SCI [Sensitive Compartmented Information] by me could cause irreparable injury to the United States or be used to advantage by a foreign nation." The agreement goes on to address how Secretary Clinton could be sure she was abiding by the letter and the spirit of the agreement. "I understand that it is my responsibility to consult with appropriate management authorities in the Department ... in order to ensure that I know whether information or material within my knowledge or control ... might be SCI," the NDA says.

Set aside for a moment the insipid focus on whether Clinton “intended” to break the laws (since Comey says in the same statement that “to mishandle classified information either intentionally or in a grossly negligent way” is a “violation of a federal statute” and “a felony”). Since it is clear that Clinton did “mishandle classified information,” it is a foregone conclusion that she was in “violation of a federal statute” and committed “a felony” whether it was done out of malice or mere stupidity. But — just to put in the for-what-it's-worth column — Clinton did know the law and her responsibility under it. Her signature on the bottom of those two NDAs proves that.

So, when in one breath Comey admits that Clinton sent, received, and stored classified information in a way that violated the law, and then in the next breath says that the FBI is not recommending indictment because there is no evidence that she “intended” to break the law, he is clearly working under political motivation. After all, for everyday citizens, as the expression goes, "ignorance of the law is no excuse."

When former President Bill Clinton went out of his way to approach Attorney General Loretta Lynch last week and engage her in conversation and she willingly allowed that interaction, it was an obvious breach of protocol and signaled that — White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest's claims to the contrary duly noted — this case is all about politics.

When Hillary Clinton's crimes are detailed in the very statement in which Comey says there is no grounds for an indictment and that “no reasonable prosecutor” would charge her for her obvious crimes, it is clear that the fix is in at the top. Comey's statement was “unusual” in at least one way he did not mention: It missed the point entirely. Or perhaps that is not all that "unusual" after all.

As Judicial Watch President Tom Filton said in a statement regarding the FBI's decision:

FBI Director James Comey detailed Hillary Clinton’s massive destruction of government records and grossly negligent handling of classified information. Frankly, there’s a disconnect between Comey’s devastating findings and his weak recommendation not to prosecute Hillary Clinton. Federal prosecutors, independent of politics, need to consider whether to pursue the potential violations of law confirmed by the FBI.

Having gained the nomination and avoided criminal charges, Hillary is poised for the very real possibility of a Clinton 2.0 presidency. One need exercise little imagination to tremble at the thought of what a woman who handled state secrets with such casual disregard might do to damage national security once she is sitting in the Oval Office.

Considering the magnitude of her crimes and the fact that she has come away virtually unblemished, she may well be made of the same Teflon as her husband. And America may find itself the recipient of that (probably apocryphal) ancient Chinese curse, “May you live in interesting times.” The next few years may prove “interesting” indeed.