FBI recommends no charges against Clinton..elite privilege on show!



Hillary Clinton was called “extremely careless” in handling classified information by the director of the FBI, who recommended no charges be brought against her – an easy ride compared to what Edward Snowden and even David Petraeus faced.

FBI Director James Comey, a Republican, announced on Tuesday morning the agency’s recommendation to bring no charges against Hillary Clinton for her improper use of a private email server for sensitive communications, adding that“no reasonable prosecutor” would file such a case against her.

However, Comey went on to say that the FBI found that Clinton and her colleagues were “extremely careless” in their handling of classified information – and “gross negligence” with such information is considered to be a felony under the Espionage Act.

“For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received.” Comey said in a statement.“These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation.”

Hillary is not the first government official to have “carelessly” handled secret information, but others have not had the same the special treatment.

Donald Trump, who is expected to be the Republican nominee for the 2016 race, used the FBI’s move as another example that the American political system is “rigged” to favor politically connected establishment figures.

Though he was a well-respected four-star general who was rumored to be eyeing a presidential bid, Petraeus’ career came to an abrupt end with his 2012 resignation after it was made clear that he passed sensitive information to Paula Broadwell, his mistress and biographer.

Petraeus lied during the investigation, which itself is a felony, but the Department of Justice accepted his plea of the lesser charge of mishandling classified information. He was sentenced to probation and was fined $100,000.

Another Director of the CIA, John M. Deutch, found himself in a similar debacle less than two decades earlier. Deutch, who had been appointed by President Bill Clinton in 1995, resigned from his high post in 1996 after it was discovered that he stored classified documents on his personal computer.

Deutch agreed to plead guilty to misdemeanor mishandling of classified information and pay $5,000 dollars, but he was saved by a pardon by President Clinton in January 2001, during the president’s last day in office.

But perhaps the strongest parallels can be seen with someone lower on the government totem pole. Bryan H. Nishimura, was sentenced to two years’ probation and $7,500 fine last year for holding classified materials on personal devices – without malicious intent, just like Hillary Clinton.

“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,” the FBI’s website says. “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.”

The similarity of such case to the Clinton controversy doesn’t seem to be lost on Comey. The FBI chief strongly stated that others who behaved as Clinton did wouldn’t necessarily get off the hook like the former secretary did.


Though the FBI found that Hillary Clinton and her staff were “extremely careless” with State Department emails hosted on a private server, no criminal charges will be brought against the former secretary and current presidential candidate.

“No reasonable prosecutor” would bring criminal charges in this case, FBI Director James Comey told reporters Tuesday morning, after going into the details of the bureau’s two-year investigation, which he described as a “painstaking undertaking requiring thousands of hours of effort.”

“Three of those were classified at the time,” he added.

Clinton used “several different serversand numerous mobile devices” to send and read emails on her personal domain during her tenure as secretary of state from 2009 to 2013, Comey explained. The FBI set out to investigate any intentional or grossly negligent handling of classified information, as well as whether any hostile actors gained access to the files, after the intelligence community Inspector-General requested a probe.

Of the 30,000 emails turned over to the State Department, the FBI found that 110 messages in 52 chains contained information that was classified at the time, of which eight were Top Secret, 36 were Secret and eight were Confidential. Another 2,000 messages were later deemed to have contained classified information based on their subject matter, in a process called “up-classification.”



If I had treated classified information the way Hillary Clinton did, I would be going to jail. She may get out of this, despite what is clear evidence of wrongdoing to an objective observer, says Jim Jatras, former US diplomat and GOP Senate policy adviser.

US presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton was interviewed by the FBI over her use of a private e-mail server for government affairs.

The former Secretary of State’s attitude towards security has been branded careless and even ridiculed. But while Hillary Clinton tried to laugh off the scandal, it has been gaining more and more serious attention ahead of the presidential election.

RT: Why do you think former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was interviewed just before July 4 by the FBI?

Jim Jatras: I think she had really no choice. She did it voluntarily only in the sense that if she had not talked to FBI, she would have been subpoenaed and been required to talk to the FBI. So, she was coming in with really very little choice except to have this discussion with them. And by all accounts this is happening near the end of the investigation when they have all the information they need and can compare her answers with what they already know.

RT: What is your stance on Bill Clinton’s meeting with US Attorney General Loretta Lynch at Phoenix, Arizona’s Sky Harbor Airport? Was it related to the FBI email probe?

JJ: I don’t think there is a human being on the planet who believes that Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch spent a half hour talking about grandchildren and golf. The accounts we’ve seen are that Clinton delayed his departure from the airport so he could be there when her plane was available. If she had any sense, she would have said: ‘Sorry, Mr. President, I cannot talk with you.’ Instead she allows him to come onto her plane and to have this discussion for an extended period. She tried to do some damage control by saying ‘I will accept the FBI’s findings’… which gives her some wiggle room. It doesn’t necessarily say she will follow those findings. This has been read radically different by different people. Some people read this that Obama and Lynch are going to throw Hillary under the bus. Other people read this that the fix is already in, that they would not have indicated they would follow the FBI recommendations if they did not have reason to believe this would come back in a way that does not destroy Hillary Clinton.


disgraceful..there are no other words..elite privilege..

“I don’t think there is a human being on the planet who believes that Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch spent a half hour talking about grandchildren and golf. The accounts we’ve seen are that Clinton delayed his departure from the airport so he could be there when her plane was available. If she had any sense, she would have said: ‘Sorry, Mr. President, I cannot talk with you.’ Instead she allows him to come onto her plane and to have this discussion for an extended period. She tried to do some damage control by saying ‘I will accept the FBI’s findings’… which gives her some wiggle room.”


“If I had treated classified information the way Hillary Clinton did, I would be going to jail.”

comey looked he had seen a ghost..his own possibly..


~ by seeker401 on July 7, 2016.

48 Responses to “FBI recommends no charges against Clinton..elite privilege on show!”

  1. https://nworeport.me/2016/07/06/teen-created-a-robot-lawyer-app-that-just-overturned-160000-parking-tickets/

  2. http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2014/jul/17/facebook-posts/are-george-w-bush-dick-cheney-unable-visit-europe-/ … THEY can’t visit @GRTVnews do the same to #WarmongerHillary

    #warmongerHillary your #Chilcot awaits warCrimes don’tGoUnpunished http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/02/outrage-as-war-crimes-prosecutors-say-tony-blair-will-not-be-inv/http://static.politifact.com.s3.amazonaws.com/politifact%2Fphotos%2FBush-Cheney_meme.jpg

  3. they tried to buy her!


  4. Why Comey Would Not Present the Case against Hillary to a Grand Jury


  5. James B. Comey: Inside Man for the Bush-Clinton Crime Family


  6. wapo=bezosAmazon
    were click & $ = vote
    we can change THEY game don’t read or shop on THEY
    see how fast will happen
    start just change your search-engine http://duckduckgo.com/
    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3782838/?ref_=nv_sr_5 was done bfore in really bad conditions with not resources

  7. Hilary makes Jezebel look motherly and Bill makes Ahab look not so bad .

  8. Hopefully, President Trump will revisit this investigation & have Hillary arrested.
    But the REAL story of money-laundering, selling favors, bribery, & treason will be the investigation into the Clinton Foundation.
    Reports from inside sources are saying they’ve found enough dirt to indict about 90% of Washington D.C.
    It is also being siad by these sources that revealing this information & bringing charges based on it would be equivalent to declaring war on the federal government, as there are so many officials involved. For that reason they may not make any moves at all.
    But the FBI is rife with real patriots that got into the Justice Department to actually uphold the law…leaks are inevitable.

  9. ignore HRC best-medicine
    & focus who are behind last Comment
    “It isCriminal how THEY who are less than 2% of the population hold 80% of the top appointed governmentPositions”RichardE
    probably is old-news but never old for spead it tday

  10. at little more probably post it bfore

  11. US State Department to review new Clinton emails


    popcorn time..

  12. yoyo politics..

    Hillary Clinton emails: No change to FBI’s advice not to lay charges
    Read more at http://www.9news.com.au/world/2016/11/07/07/59/hillary-clinton-emails-no-change-to-fbi-advice-not-to-charge#lJbjGD0QyZqBYTww.99

  13. https://sputniknews.com/columnists/201610311046920348-clinton-fbi-november-surprise/

  14. haha just like i expected – no charge.. all actors

    the polls & analysis will show Trump ahead of clinttoon by 1 or 2 pips.
    Then next week.. the weiner = clintoon

    all scripted so – if obola don’t unleash something to cancel it

    • looks like it..343 to 195 seems to be the meme..

      • http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/putin-appears-with-trump-in-flurry-of-swing-state-rallies

        • It’s satirical..

          • So is this one…


            • they are everywhere..

            • This is no joke….

              If Hillary Is Indicted, President Clinton Could Pardon Herself and Congress Might be Helpless
              by Chris White | 2:01 pm, October 28th, 2016

              It is Friday, January 20, 2017 and Hillary Clinton has just been sworn in as the 45th President of the United States after narrowly defeating Donald Trump in November. Republicans managed to hold both the House of Representatives and the Senate. A few weeks after winning the election, however, the Department of Justice handed down a multi-count indictment against Clinton over her handling of classified information and her involvement in an alleged pay for play scandal with the Clinton Foundation during her time as Secretary of State. It is a scenario that several of our commentators, and twitter followers have asked us to analyze.

              As I am sure you can imagine, such a situation would cause a political firestorm of epic proportions. But before dismissing this scenario as some sort of wild fantasy, be reminded that we are talking about the Clintons who are no strangers to bizarre scandals (bringing nearly all of them upon themselves). In fact, a delayed announcement would be similar to what happened with David Petraeus in 2012 when DOJ sat on announcing that investigation until three days after the election.

              Now, back to January 20, 2017. Could a future President Hillary Clinton pardon herself?

              The short answer is she could certainly try, and may very well get away with it. What’s more, there is likely little Congress could do about it — even with a Republican controlled House of Representatives and Senate. Here is why.

              The president’s pardon power comes from Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution that provides, “The President … shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.”

              Based on the language of Article II, Section 2, the only limits placed on the power are that pardons may only be issued for federal offenses (not civil or state crimes), and a pardon cannot override the Congress’ impeachment power. Presidents have used this power to issue pardons in a wide range of matters throughout the country’s history. However, no president has ever attempted to pardon himself.

              As a result, the legality of the self-pardon remains an open question. There are persuasive arguments on both sides. For the sake of brevity, the two arguments can be boiled down to this: (1) those that argue a self-pardon violates longstanding legal principals that a person should not act as their own judge and that no person is above the law; and (2) those, including Richard Nixon’s attorneys in the aftermath of Watergate, that argue that power to pardon is broad and unlimited, except for the two specific limitations mentioned in the Constitution.

              So, assuming Clinton follows the latter approach and issues the self-pardon, where does that leave Congress? Could the House of Representatives start impeachment proceedings based on the criminal indictments?

              That answer to that question is a resounding “no.”

              Under Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution, “The President… shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

              The Constitution further provides that impeachment proceedings are to begin in the House of Representatives and if approved by a simple majority vote, the matter proceeds to the Senate for trial. When the president is tried, the Chief Justice presides over the Senate trial. A conviction requires a 2/3-majority vote and the Senate may impose punishment including barring the individual from holding future office. Although, the Senate is required to take an additional vote if it wishes to impose a ban on holding future office.

              In Clinton’s case, however, the conduct underlying this hypothetical indictment occurred prior to her taking office. The House of Representatives, as far back as 1873, has determined that a person cannot be impeached based on conduct prior to them holding office. In other words, House precedent says a President Hillary Clinton could not be impeached as president for crimes related to the e-mail server or the Clinton Foundation.

              In 1873, the House of Representatives considered impeaching the Vice President for crimes committed before he took office. After considering the matter, the House determined impeachment was only proper for crimes committed while in office.


              • Keep in mind…Comey was not elected but appointed and to a ten year term. Unless he resigns and he wont..job security will take precedence….if jezebel is elected, I imagine her sins will be covered and it will be yet another moot point.

              • either way she needs to see jail bars somewhere somehow..

                • Absolutely, the woman is a sociopathic at the very least. One must empathize with those whose lost of a loved one to begin to grasp what this mobster has done.

  15. we always knew all these – not news..but to some it’s hard to crunch

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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: