On July 4, 1776, the United States announced its independence from Great Britain based on the key principle of rule of law.
On July 5, 2016, the United States said, “F*** it. I’m With Hillary!”
Just days after the Attorney General of the United States Loretta Lynch held a secret meeting aboard a plane with former President Bill Clinton – whose wife was under FBI investigation; just the day after Hillary leaked that she’d want Lynch for her own administration; just hours after the President of the United States Barack Obama flew Hillary – still under FBI investigation – down to North Carolina on Air Force One; just two hours before Obama was to open his campaign on behalf of Hillary Clinton, FBI Director James Comey announced that while Hillary Clinton had clearly engaged in criminal activity worthy of prosecution, he had recommended that she not be prosecuted.
Because of course he did.
Here are Comey’s findings, which demonstrate full violation of multiple provisions of federal law:
- Hillary Clinton utilized multiple “different servers and administrators of those servers during her four years at the State Department, and used numerous mobile devices to view and send e-mail on that personal domain.” So she was lying when she said that she only set up the system so that she could use one handheld device.
- Hillary transmitted classified information. Here’s Comey: “From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 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.” So she lied that no classified information was received or sent.
- Hillary did not hand over all her work emails to the State Department. At least three of those emails were classified “at the time they were sent or received, one at the Secret level and two at the Confidential level.” Comey was kind here to Hillary – he said that there was no evidence that “any of the additional work-related emails were intentionally deleted in an effort to conceal them.” Except, of course, that deleting such emails would be the entire purpose of having a private server.
- Hillary’s lawyers didn’t read the emails they deleted – they just deleted stuff based on header information and search terms. “It is highly likely their search terms missed some work-related e-mails, and that we later found them, for example, in the mailboxes of other officials or in the slack space of a server,” Comey said. This would be destroying possibly classified material. And as Comey says, there may be a fair bit of data they never saw: “It is also likely that there are other work-related e-mails that they did not produce to State and that we did not find elsewhere, and that are now gone because they deleted all e-mails they did not return to State, and the lawyers cleaned their devices in such a way as to preclude complete forensic recovery.”
- Comey admitted openly that Hillary’s team was “extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information….None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.”
- Hillary knew that classified material was passing across her server; as Comey acknowledged, “even if information is not marked “classified” in an e-mail, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it.”
- Hillary’s server could have been hacked, and some of her emails were likely hacked in other people’s inboxes: “With respect to potential computer intrusion by hostile actors, we did not find direct evidence that Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail domain, in its various configurations since 2009, was successfully hacked. But, given the nature of the system and of the actors potentially involved, we assess that we would be unlikely to see such direct evidence. We do assess that hostile actors gained access to the private commercial e-mail accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account. We also assess that Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent. She also used her personal e-mail extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related e-mails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail account.”
So, Hillary lied. She lied that she never transmitted classified information. She lied that she only used a private server because she wanted one device. She lied that the State Department allowed her to jerry-rig this technological set-up. She lied that the emails were never breached.
But according to Comey, no biggie.
Now, Comey essentially admitted that Hillary violated federal law. As he said, “Our investigation looked at 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, or a second statute making it a misdemeanor to knowingly remove classified information from appropriate systems or storage facilities.” And Comey stated that the FBI had “investigated to determine whether there is evidence of computer intrusion in connection with the personal e-mail server by any foreign power, or other hostile actors.”
But no matter. The law doesn’t apply to Hillary Clinton. As Comey said, “To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.”
No, we’re dealing with the Clintons. There’s a different set of rules for high-profile Democrats.
And no, Comey’s excuse-making that similar cases aren’t prosecuted doesn’t cut it. Here’s what Comey said:
Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past. In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here. As a result, although the Department of Justice makes final decisions on matters like this, we are expressing to Justice our view that no charges are appropriate in this case.
Past cases have focused on willful transmission of classified information to outside actors. But that’s not what the rule of law is. The rule of law says that laws must be applied as they are written, and they must be applied equally. Here are just a few of the statutes Hillary clearly violated, according to Comey’s own statement:
18 USC §793. This statute explicitly states that whoever, “entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document…through gross negligence permits the same to removed from its proper place of custody…or having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody….shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.” Comey called her “extremely careless.” That was highly charitable. But even by that standard, Hillary was grossly negligent with classified material. Comey says Hillary had no intent to transmit information to foreign powers. But that’s not what the statute requires.
18 USC §1924. This statute states that any employee of the United States who “knowingly removes [classified] documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.” Hillary set up a private server explicitly to do this.
18 USC §798. This statute states that anyone who “uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States…any classified information…shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.” Hillary transmitted classified information in a manner that harmed the United States; Comey says she may have been hacked.
18 USC §2071. This statute says that anyone who has custody of classified material and “willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years.” Clearly, Hillary meant to remove classified materials from government control.
Yes, Hillary broke the law.
But the law no longer matters. The woman for whom the executive branch just manipulated the law will likely end up running that executive branch. God help us all.
John Adams wrote in the Massachusetts Constitution that the purpose of separation of powers was to ensure that we establish “a government of laws, and not of men.” So much for that idea. We now have a government by the Obamas, the Clintons, the elites. And thanks to the Divine Right of Kings, they are not subject to the laws of the merely mortal whom they govern.