Tags: Benghazi Scandal | Donald Trump | Hillary Clinton | Trump Administration | comey | mills | santos

Halfhearted Pursuit of Clinton Earned Comey Pink Slip

Halfhearted Pursuit of Clinton Earned Comey Pink Slip

Part of a Nov. 6, 2016 letter from FBI director James Comey to Congress photographed that day in Washington, D.C. Comey told Congress that a review of new Hillary Clinton emails has "not changed our conclusions" from earlier in 2016, that she should not face charges. (Jon Elswick/AP)

Thursday, 11 May 2017 03:43 PM Current | Bio | Archive

While President Donald J. Trump fired former FBI Director James Comey on May 9, Obama should have sacked him July 5. Comey’s behavior in the e-mailgate investigation suggests either staggering incompetence or a clumsy effort to whitewash Hillary Clinton’s crimes.

  • During Clinton’s July 2 interrogation at FBI headquarters, she was not under oath. How could the FBI possibly reach "The last step of a year-long investigation" — as Comey described it at a July 7 House Government Oversight Committee hearing — have the focus of that probe answer questions without a potential perjury conviction hanging over her head? Especially given Hillary’s peanut-allergy-like aversion to the truth, not swearing her in confirmed either the FBI’s grotesque ineptness or a deliberate loophole through which Hillary could slither free.

  • Former State Department chief of staff Cheryl Mills participated in this session as one of Hillary’s nine attorneys, even though she is deeply implicated in many of Hillary’s misdeeds. Thus, a potential witness or even co-conspirator in Hillary’s possible prosecution offered legal aid as the FBI quizzed her. None of Comey’s people considered this a problem?

  • Comey steered clear of Hillary’s three-and-a-half hour interview. Given the unusual and enormous stakes, he should have faced her or, at least, supervised nearby. From an adjacent room, he could have offered guidance, monitored Hillary for inconsistencies, and instructed his staffers to ask pointed follow-up questions, etc.

  • Hillary’s maid, Marina Santos, had regular access to Hillary’s classified documents, via secured communications equipment in her Washington, D.C. mansion. Santos reportedly printed records for the former secretary of state to read at home, apparently including Obama’s Presidential Daily Brief. Regardless, Paul Sperry reported in the New York Post, "It also appears the FBI did not formally interview Santos as a key witness in its investigation." How could Comey possibly have let Santos go uninterrogated?

  • The FBI agreed to destroy the laptops of Cheryl Mills, and Clinton campaign aide Heather Samuels. This extraordinary promise was part of Mills’ and Samuels’ immunity deals. Why on Earth would the FBI agree to junk evidence in this case —be it damning or exculpatory? Also, classified material appeared on Mills’ laptop, where it should not have been.

  • Despite this abundant skullduggery, Comey insisted that Hillary practiced no "clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information." This is utterly irrelevant to the Espionage Act, under which federal prosecutors still should lock her up.

As Comey should know, the Federal Espionage Act — 18 U.S. Code § 793 — merely requires evidence of "gross negligence" in order to secure convictions. "Black’s Law Dictionary" considers "negligence" and "carelessness" synonymous.

According to Comey’s July 7, 2016 testimony, Hillary and her colleagues "were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information."

Thus, Clinton and her associates were "extremely careless." Extremely careless means grossly negligent. Gross negligence is the black-letter standard for conviction under the Federal Espionage Act. James Comey is neither the Congress nor the Supreme Court. He did not have the authority to rewrite or reinterpret that legal standard. Yet he did so anyway and set Hillary free at his July 5 press conference.

Will anyone on Team Clinton pay any price whatsoever for Hillary’s abuse of America’s state secrets and the Clinton Foundation’s auction house for government favors? Alas, it seems, the Duchess of Chappaqua and her royal court enjoy the immunity flowing from her orb and scepter.

And, yet, where is the outrage? Where are the indictments? Why are Hillary and her shady pals not in handcuffs right now?

Crooked Hillary should have been jailed decades ago, and she still should be behind bars. Here is a key reason why she roams freely, shirks responsibility for her dreadful campaign, and — last week — launched Onward Together, yet another political slush fund: Comey blew it. His half-hearted probe let Hillary and her entire circle off the hook, state secrets and public integrity be damned. For this alone, James Comey earned his pink slip, fair and square.

Deroy Murdock is a Manhattan-based Fox News contributor and a contributing editor with National Review Online. He has been a media fellow with the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace at Stanford University. Read more opinions from Deroy Murdock — Click Here Now.

© 2020 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

1Like our page
Will anyone on Team Clinton pay any price whatsoever for Hillary’s abuse of America’s state secrets and the Clinton Foundation’s auction house for government favors? Alas, it seems, the Duchess of Chappaqua and her royal court enjoy the immunity flowing from her orb and scepter.
comey, mills, santos
Thursday, 11 May 2017 03:43 PM
Newsmax Media, Inc.

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

America's News Page
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved