Thread: FBI Director James Comey: No Criminal Charges for Hillary Clinton Based on Additional

They really think we are all that stupid?

We knew Obama/lynch would never shoot down their darling Hillary.

Seriously, we all had a better chance of having Sunday Brunch with Jesus Christ than Obama ever
charging Hillary

by PATRICK HOWLEY
6 Nov 2016

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Chuck Grassley of Iowa is pressing FBI director James Comey for details on the agency’s decision not to recommend charges against Hillary Clinton in its email investigation.

Grassley is making it clear that he still intends to get to the bottom of what happened during the FBI’s multiple investigations.

“For months now, I’ve been urging the FBI to provide details regarding the scope of its investigation. The American people deserve to know whether the FBI sought to determine if Secretary Clinton and her aides deliberately maneuvered around federal open records laws or congressional investigations. Another vague announcement by the FBI has again failed to provide this context,” Grassley said Sunday.

Grassley was the first major lawmaker to hold Clinton aide Huma Abedin accountable on her work for Teneo Holdings, a global consulting firm, while she was also working for Clinton’s State Department.

The FBI’s second investigation focused on Huma Abedin, particularly records of classified emails flagged during the underage sexting investigation into Abedin’s husband Anthony Weiner. The FBI focused on Weiner despite the fact that it had the authority to re-open Hillary Clinton backup devices that were not opened during the first investigation.

The Republican National Committee, through chairman Reince Priebus, pointed out that the FBI is still investigating the Clinton Foundation for public corruption. Chuck Grassley is making it clear that James Comey is probably going to be back before his committee at some point in the near future.

“The growing number of unanswered questions demand explanations: Is the FBI continuing to review the newly-revealed emails? Did the FBI limit its review to email from when Clinton was Secretary of State, leaving out emails that could shed light on possible obstruction of Congress?” Grassley said.

“Did the Justice Department authorize an application for a search warrant for this latest review, and if so, was it the first time such a tool was used in this investigation? Did the FBI seek compulsory process earlier in its review, and if not, why not? Answers to these questions would provide greater context of the FBI’s investigation and greater assurance to the American people of its thoroughness,” Grassley said.

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presid...nton-decision/

Jim Hoft Nov 6th, 2016 6:30 pm

SEAN HANNITY reacted to the latest James Comey press release today clearing Hillary of any wrongdoing for storing and passing top secret information on an unsecured server in a bathroom closet, for lying to the FBI, for deleting subpoenaed emails with BleachBit and for having the maid printout and distribute classified information… among other things.

If law enforcement or congress ever ask for e mails regarding an investigation, the FBI now says it's OK to delete them with "Bleach Bit"

— Sean Hannity (@seanhannity) November 6, 2016

Also the FBI says it's ok to put Classified "top secret" "special access program" information on an unsecured server in a bathroom closet!!

— Sean Hannity (@seanhannity) November 6, 2016

So true.

Follow
Bill MitchellVerified account
‏@mitchellvii
Thank you Director Comey! You just reminded America we need to #DRAINTHESWAMP two days before the election!
1:58 PM - 6 Nov 2016
— So true! - Sean Hannity (@seanhannity) November 6, 2016

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016...y-second-time/

It just doesn't make any sense at all. Everyone knows that using a private email server for government business, whether secret, classified, confidential or otherwise is wrong, wrong and more wrong. No government official at any level for any reason should use a private email server for government business emails. It's outrageous. I thought it was against the rule, regulations and even the law to do so. Therefore, I don't understand where Comey is coming from. It looks like he works for "the devil" to me instead of the people of the United States.

Why did he bother with the letter to reopen the case if he was just going to have the same conclusion? He knows there are damning evidence in those emails and now he has caved again to not prosecute. This is ridiculous and scary the leverage Hillary has over our government. Let us hope Trump wins or we are done for in this country.

Originally Posted by Jean

And announced on Sunday too. Corrupt through and through. Actually I think this will help Trump.

I pray you are right!!!!

Originally Posted by lsmith1338

Why did he bother with the letter to reopen the case if he was just going to have the same conclusion? He knows there are damning evidence in those emails and now he has caved again to not prosecute.

Lots of pressure from the Clintons and the the media.

FBI under fire from all sides

11/07/16 12:47 PM EST



FBI Director James Comey is facing a backlash in both parties for his handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation, casting a cloud over his future.

His decision on Sunday to once again not recommend charges related to Clinton’s use of a private email server while secretary of State puts him in the unenviable position of having little to show for an enormously controversial decision.

Comey on Oct. 28 made the stunning announcement that the FBI was reviewing new emails tied to the investigation into Clinton's use of a private server, enraging Democrats who accused him of meddling in the presidential election. Then on Sunday afternoon, just two days before voters headed to the polls, Comey quickly ended the review without pressing charges, infuriating the GOP.

Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump had called for an indictment against Clinton, the Democratic nominee, for mishandling classified information, which has now been denied twice.Clinton, meanwhile, blasted Comey’s decision to make the matter public in the first place, arguing that there was not enough information to warrant the disclosure so close to Election Day.

Now both sides are left questioning the integrity of the bureau and a director who is supposed to continue on for another six years no matter who wins the White House on Tuesday.

Trump, who days ago was cheering the FBI’s “courage to right the horrible mistake they made” this summer, on Sunday cast doubt on whether FBI investigators would have been able to comb through the hundreds of thousands of newfound emails in just over a week.

“Right now she is being protected by a rigged system,” the GOP nominee said Sunday evening in a rally in Michigan. “You can’t review 650,000 new emails in eight days. You can’t do it, folks.”

“Hillary Clinton is guilty,” Trump added. “She knows it; the FBI knows it; the people know it. And now it is up to the American people to deliver justice at the ballot box on Nov. 8.”

Clinton’s campaign declined to trumpet Comey’s latest statement, simply saying it’s glad the matter is resolved. Clinton herself did not mention the development during her rallies on Sunday.

The Democratic nominee and her allies were far more outspoken one week ago, in the aftermath of Comey’s bombshell letter stating that the bureau had discovered hundreds of thousands of emails that “appear to be pertinent to the investigation” into possible mishandling of classified information.

The former secretary of State and her allies suggested Comey was willfully interfering in the presidential campaign by giving notice of the discovery before any conclusions had been reached.

Sen. Charles Schumer (N.Y.) and Rep. Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) — who next year are expected to be the top-ranking Democrats in Congress — each suggested they had lost faith in the FBI chief’s ability to perform his job.

Even President Obama scolded Comey, saying last week that criminal investigations “don’t operate on innuendo.”

Comey decamped to Capitol Hill multiple times over the summer to explain his decision not to recommend charges against Clinton, even though he described her email setup as “extremely careless.”

Even before Comey’s announcement on Sunday, speculation was rife that he or other senior officials would be called to testify before Congress again, this time to explain the unusual announcement about a new development in the case.

“I'm on the Judiciary Committee. I'm sure we will have hearings,” Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) said on CNN’s “State of the Union” Sunday morning.

“I'm sure that FBI Director Comey will be before us. And I think he should answer questions about this. And he should be able to control the FBI.”

A new hearing into the matter seems all but assured.

Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) criticized Comey’s “vague announcement” on Sunday, which he said failed to answer outstanding questions about the Clinton investigation.

"The growing number of unanswered questions demand explanations,” Grassley said, noting several details about the FBI’s probe that remain unknown, including its scope, whether search warrants were used and whether the new emails are still under review.

“Answers to these questions would provide greater context of the FBI’s investigation and greater assurance to the American people of its thoroughness.”

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), meanwhile, called for the Justice Department to launch an internal review into the saga “to prevent similar actions that could influence future elections.”

The last 10 days have been among the most publicly tumultuous for the FBI in recent memory.

Anonymous officials speaking to news outlets have described the Justice Department as a battleground split between warring factions. In the days following the FBI director’s initial letter, officials revealed internal debates in the bureau about how to handle Clinton Foundation’s connections to the State Department and apparent ties between Trump’s campaign and Russia.

Comey’s initial letter to the FBI in late October appeared to give Trump a boost in the polls, though it’s unclear precisely how big of an impact it had.

Trump’s campaign cut an ad explicitly referring to the renewed FBI investigation, which it said had “crippled” Clinton.

The renewed scrutiny on Clinton’s most prominent vulnerability likely had some amount of impact among the millions of Americans who cast their votes early.

“Unfortunately, a lot of people have already voted over the last week,” Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) said on CNN on Sunday. “And also, unfortunately, Donald Trump and his associates has blown this thing up like Director Comey should have known.”

It’s unclear what happens next for Comey.

The FBI chief is in his fourth year of a 10-year term, after having been confirmed on the strength of his reputation as an independent truth-teller. That reputation has been tarnished by the email investigation.

Clinton has declined to say whether she would keep Comey on if she won the White House.

“The future of Director Comey remains so murky that fortune tellers would probably give people their money back rather than try to predict what will occur at this point,” Bradley Moss, a national security lawyer, said in an email to The Hill.

Still, Moss predicted that despite the tensions with either a President Clinton or Trump, Comey would stay in office for the next six years.

“He likely would view advising either possible president as a worthy challenge in the aftermath of EmailGate,” Moss said.

http://thehill.com/policy/national-s...from-all-sides

Whitewash#2 for comey. The maid - no security clearance handles ALL sensitive classified info. Yet hillary is cleared 3 days before the election w/o the fbi talking to the maid or acknowledging that weiner did not have clearance either, yet all State Dept emails were on his computer.

Clinton directed her maid to print out classified materials

By Paul Sperry

November 6, 2016 | 4:53am
As secretary of state, Hillary Clinton routinely asked her maid to print out sensitive government emails and documents — including ones containing classified information — from her house in Washington, DC, emails and FBI memos show. But the housekeeper lacked the security clearance to handle such material.
In fact, Marina Santos was called on so frequently to receive emails that she may hold the secrets to emailgate — if only the FBI and Congress would subpoena her and the equipment she used.
Clinton entrusted far more than the care of her DC residence, known as Whitehaven, to Santos. She expected the Filipino immigrant to handle state secrets, further opening the Democratic presidential nominee to criticism that she played fast and loose with national security.
Clinton would first receive highly sensitive emails from top aides at the State Department and then request that they, in turn, forward the messages and any attached documents to Santos to print out for her at the home.
Among other things, Clinton requested that Santos print out drafts of her speeches, confidential memos and “call sheets” — background information and talking points prepared for the secretary of state in advance of a phone call with a foreign head of state.
Modal TriggerMarina SantosPhoto: Ron Sachs
“Pls ask Marina to print for me in am,” Clinton emailed top aide Huma Abedin regarding a redacted 2011 message marked sensitive but unclassified.
In a classified 2012 email dealing with the new president of Malawi, another Clinton aide, Monica Hanley, advised Clinton, “We can ask Marina to print this.”
“Revisions to the Iran points” was the subject line of a classified April 2012 email to Clinton from Hanley. In it, the text reads, “Marina is trying to print for you.”
Both classified emails were marked “confidential,” the tier below “secret” or “top secret.”
Santos also had access to a highly secure room called an SCIF (sensitive compartmented information facility) that diplomatic security agents set up at Whitehaven, according to FBI notes from an interview with Abedin.
From within the SCIF, Santos — who had no clearance — “collected documents from the secure facsimile machine for Clinton,” the FBI notes revealed.
Just how sensitive were the papers Santos presumably handled? The FBI noted Clinton periodically received the Presidential Daily Brief — a top-secret document prepared by the CIA and other US intelligence agencies — via the secure fax.
A 2012 “sensitive” but unclassified email from Hanley to Clinton refers to a fax the staff wanted Clinton “to see before your Netanyahu mtg. Marina will grab for you.” Yet it appears Clinton was never asked by the FBI in its yearlong investigation to turn over the iMac that Santos used to receive the emails, or the printer she used to print out the documents, or the printouts themselves.
As the Post first reported, copies of Clinton’s 33,000 allegedly destroyed emails still exist in other locations and could be recovered if investigators were turned loose to seize them. Higher-ups at the Justice Department reportedly have blocked them from obtaining search warrants to obtain the evidence.
It also appears the FBI did not formally interview Santos as a key witness in its investigation.
This is a major oversight: Santos may know the whereabouts of a missing Apple MacBook laptop and USB flash drive that contain all of Clinton’s emails archived over her four years in office.
In 2013, Hanley downloaded Clinton’s emails from her private server to the MacBook and flash drive.
“The two copies of the Clinton email archive (one on the archive laptop and one on the thumb drive) were intended to be stored in Clinton’s Chappaqua and Whitehaven residences,” the FBI said in its case summary.
But Hanley says the devices were “lost,” and the FBI says it “does not have either item in its possession.”
In addition to Abedin, Santos worked closely with Hanley at Whitehaven and could shed light on the mystery — if only she were asked about it.
When a Post reporter confronted Santos at her DC apartment Friday, she would say only, “I don’t speak to reporters.”
According to a 2010 profile in The Philippine Star, close Clinton friend Vernon Jordan recommended Santos to the Clintons after she worked part-time for him.
Bill Clinton gave a speech in Manila as part of his foundation and took time to visit with the family of the “mayordoma [housekeeper] of his Washington, DC, home — Marina Santos.”
He was quoted as describing Santos as the “wonderful woman who runs our home in Washington, without whom Hillary will not be able to serve as secretary of state.” The article ended remarking, without a hint of irony: “Marina now runs his house so that he and his wife can better serve interests higher than their own.”
Santos could turn out to be the Betty Currie of the Clinton email scandal. Currie was the secretary for President Clinton. She also came recommended by Jordan, and became famous as a central witness in the Monica Lewinsky scandal for her handling of gifts given to Clinton’s mistress.
Investigators had sought the gifts, allegedly hidden under Currie’s bed on orders from Clinton, as evidence.
The State Department and Clinton campaign did not respond to requests for comment.


Paul Sperry, a former DC bureau chief for Investor’s Business Daily and a Hoover Institution media fellow, is the author of “Infiltration.”

http://nypost.com/2016/11/06/clinton...ied-materials/

×
FBI Director James Comey's new letter to Congress two days before Election standing by no charges against Hillary Clinton in the personal email server case has ignited a new firestorm of allegations about the probe. (AP Photo/Bebeto Matthews)

Comey's latest letter ignites new powder keg of charges


By Susan Crabtree (@susancrabtree) • 11/7/16 5:07 AM




FBI Director James Comey's new letter to Congress two days before the election standing by no charges against Hillary Clinton in the personal email server case has ignited a new firestorm of allegations about the probe.
While Democrats cited Comey's letter to Congress as new evidence that she should be exonerated of any wrongdoing, Republicans were equally adamant that the FBI's leadership, along with top Justice Department officials, cannot be trusted and that other evidence remains that will still ensnare Clinton in criminal activity.
The Republican National Committee Sunday afternoon issued a statement arguing that the FBI's findings that she and her staff had been "extremely careless" with classified material on her private email server is proof enough that she broke the law even though Comey is standing by his earlier decision not to recommend an indictment after reviewing new emails that could be relevant to the case.
The federal statute governing the handling of classified material has a standard of "gross negligence" to be met for criminal charges.
Subscribe today to get intelligence and analysis on defense and national security issues in your Inbox each weekday morning from veteran journalists Jamie McIntyre and Jacqueline Klimas.
"The FBI's findings from its criminal investigation of Hillary Clinton's secret email server were a damning and unprecedented indictment of her judgment," RNC Chairman Reince Priebus said in a statement. "The FBI found evidence that Clinton broke the law, that she placed classified national security information at risk and repeatedly lied to the American people about her reckless conduct."
Priebus also highlighted an ongoing FBI investigation into pay-to-play allegations involving the Clintons' charitable organizations and her work as secretary of state.
"None of this changes the fact that the FBI continues to investigate the Clinton Foundation for corruption involving her tenure as secretary of state," he said. "Hillary Clinton should never be president."
Democrats, meanwhile, cited the new Comey letter as more proof that she did nothing criminal in operating a private email server throughout her time as the nation's top diplomat and that it is finally time to move on.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., the ranking member of the Senate Intelligence Committee and one of Clinton's top supporters on Capitol Hill, said the latest Comey letter reaffirms his earlier decision to recommend against further action by the Justice Department.

"This should end the email saga once and for all," Feinstein said. "Now that this matter is concluded, I hope that the final days of the campaign allow the American people an opportunity to consider the important issues facing our country‎."
Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., echoed Feinstein's sentiments, arguing that the FBI's latest conclusion should put an end to the "Republican sideshow" of the Clinton email investigation, while Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, slammed the letter as yet another "vague announcement" from the FBI that raises more questions than it answers.
Meanwhile, House Oversight Chairman Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, vowed during a Sunday night interview on Fox News to continue investigating all of the allegations surrounding Clinton no matter who wins the election.
An attorney who was part of a high-profile group of conservative former Justice Department officials and legal scholars who recently ripped into FBI Director James Comey in a private meeting now says Comey's latest move is an erratic attempt to "overcorrect" his previous actions and defies new evidence in the case.
Sean Bigley, a lawyer who specializes in defending security clearance holders accused of mishandling classified material, compared Comey's Sunday letter that said Clinton wouldn't face charges in the email investigation to a driver skidding in one direction and then another on an icy, rainy road
"My guess is that he started to see some of the blowback from conservative legal scholars and thought maybe I took it a little too far … I didn't have to do it that way," Bigley told the Washington Examiner in an interview Sunday. He was referring to Comey's July conclusion that "no reasonable prosecutor" who indict Clinton based on the evidence the FBI had gathered thus far even though he found that she and her staff had been "extremely careless" with the handling of classified material on her private server.
"So it was almost like driving the car in the rain and you start to skid and then you overcorrect and then you start to skid the other way and you overcorrect the other way…it's just very odd, very odd," he said.
Comey, Bigley acknowledged, was in a "tight spot either way."
"But frankly, he put himself in that position – I think the blowback he was getting from issuing this most recent letter [to Congress in late October] was probably more than what he was expecting – it seemed like maybe he felt he had to do something to put this to bed for his own political future if you will," Bigley added.
Bigley also said a report over the weekend that Clinton directed her maid, who lacked a security clearance, in her house in Washington to print out materials that may have been classified at the time raises undeniable criminal liability for her.
"If one of my clients had done that, they would be looking at a guaranteed security clearance revocation along with a high likelihood of prosecution," he told the Examiner. "The arrogance and disregard for security rules is breathtaking."
The story about the maid's access to State Department emails and other material is based on released State Department emails and FBI notes from an interview with Human Abedin, a top Clinton aide. According to the emails and the notes, the maid had access to a highly secure room called a SCIF (sensitive compartmented information facility) that diplomatic security agents set up at Clinton's D.C. residence.
"The printer was inside Clinton's home SCIF…to which only people with Top Secret / SCI clearance are supposed to have access to un-escorted," Bigley said. "Given that the emails the FBI reviewed would ostensibly have been the same as those the State Department just released, I am hard-pressed to understand the FBI's conclusion…that no reasonable prosecutor would bring a case against her."
"Provision of classified information to someone unauthorized to receive it is a clear and unambiguous federal crime," he said.
Prominent Democrats, including President Obama and Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, had suggested in recent days that Comey had erred in alerting Congress less than two weeks before Election Day of new emails the FBI was reviewing that might be relevant to the Clinton email case.
Pelosi even began to undermine Comey's authority at the FBI.
"Maybe he's not in the right job," she told CNN. "I think that we have to just get through this election and just see what the casualties are along the way."
Bigley was part of a group of former Republican Justice Department officials, including ex-Attorney General Michael Mukasey, who lambasted Comey's July decision to essentially exonerate Clinton in a private meeting in late October eight days before Comey appeared to renew the Clinton email investigation with his first letter to Congress alerting them of the new emails the FBI was reviewing.
The event, billed as a discussion on "The Law after Comey's decision," featured several speakers including Mukasey, who served in the George W. Bush administration, hammering Comey over the legal precedent he set in concluding the email probe three months ago without charging Clinton with a crime.
"The damage that was done to the concept of one aspect of the rule of law — that the same rules apply to everybody ... is something that we'll be dealing with for decades," Mukasey argued before an audience of 100 lawyers and interested parties.

"When he said no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case, I couldn't believe my ears," Mukasey remarked.

Mukasey and other conservatives have made some of the same points in op-eds and public remarks. But the forum, held at the D.C. offices of the prestigious Covington & Burling law firm, had the added punch of impugning Comey's prior reputation as a rare, trusted, non-partisan actor.
At one point during the forum, Mukasey questioned Comey's "carefully cultivated," "straight arrow" image by accusing him of coordinating his account before Congress of a famous hospital showdown during the Bush years. According to Comey's account of the incident, he rushed to the side of ailing then-Attorney General John Ashcroft to prevent him from reauthorizing Bush's domestic surveillance program.
Mukasey accused Comey of consulting with Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., on the sickbed story before his vivid testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2007.
"Great drama — turned out that was all staged," Mukasey said. "... He apparently consulted with Sen. Schumer the weekend before he gave the testimony... so when the question was asked, he could hang his head and say, 'I knew that I would be called to account for this some day' and proceeded to have the story pulled up."


Bigley, during the meeting, told the story of a Navy SEAL he represented more than a year ago who lost his military career and had his security clearance revoked over his decision to take a cell phone photo of a page of his training manual so he could study it later.

"This is how seriously the government takes some of these cases," Bigley said. "Many times when one mistake is made, that's forgiven – there needs to be a pattern of 1, 2, 3 or 4 [mistakes]. But in this particular case, one mistake was it, and he was out. It was a really stark contrast to the Clinton case."

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/co...rticle/2606653