Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Quick Thought on Comey
I think that Comey has now been wrong twice. First, he didn’t have the authority in the summer to decide whether to bring charges based on the evidence that the FBI had gathered on Hillary Clinton’s private e-mail server. That is up to the Justice Department’s prosecutors. He was also wrong on the reading of the criminal statute on misusing classified material, which is why that decision is up to the prosecutors, not the investigators.
Second, Comey is wrong to disclose the restart of the investigation over the weekend into the evidence — he has apparently violated DOJ internal guidelines and historical practice. The only similar example that I can think of was Lawrence Walsh, as independent prosecutor, naming Caspar Weinberger as a criminal suspect right before the 1992 elections — an example which shows why current guidelines are right.
Comey had to disclose the re-opening of the investigation to correct his first mistake over the summer and to make up for his unprecedented chest-beating in public and Congress about it. In other words, he had to make this second mistake to make up for the first mistake.
Published in Law
Even on Ricochet this is more about Comey than Hillary Clinton’s criminal acts. Dems win again, ugh.
Aren’t those the words of House Trump?
This is the item that eludes understanding. With so many clear instances of lying to everyone who has asks a question, it’s doubtful Hillary has failed to lie to the FBI. This is an illegal act and does not require the person be under oath (BTW, I also think this is very bad law). I don’t know the extent of this provision, for example, does lying to Congress during an investigation constitute a criminal act, but I’m betting there is something there regarding Hillary.
No. It was very political. It was entirely political, it was deeply corrupt.
Had Hillary been any other sentient being in the Universe, Mr Comey’s damning list of faults would have led to an indictment and likely to jail time.
The fact that her chief aide’s estranged husband has the contents of the SOS’s server on his perv-puter only deepens the certainty that this is no innocent act, but a deep and very serious criminal matter.
We need to stop cutting Leftists so many breaks. They are not just our mirror images; they are corrupt, power seeking authoritarians, and they do not mean us well. The old days of the Gipper and Tip having a beer after hours are history.
Which is further evidence that conservatives are propping up the media hate machine by continuing to watch and listen to it.
Both mistakes you say Comey made were made in investigation of a massive “mistake” (accidentally on purpose) when Hillary willfully and with malice aforethought set up her private server; and when even Obama emailed her on her system using a fake name. Not to mention those state department officials who stripped highly classified information off the State Dept in-house secure system in order to be able to send it to Hillary on her private system, with instructions from Hillary to take the classified headers off the documents when they sent them. Other mistakes were those of Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton in their runway tete a tete. Many more mistakes emanate from the FBI in having an agent (McCabe) with financial ties through his wife to the McAuliffe/Clinton machine heading the investigation. Further, the DOJ had good Podesta buddy Kadzik running interference on investigations of the Clintons right and left, up and down, inside and out. All with the approval of Obama; it is HIS Justice Department, after all. Former agent Kallstrom opines that Comey should step down. But Kallstrom himself headed a botched politicized and completely misleading investigation of TWA Flight 800 under—you guessed it, BILL CLINTON. One might say that at least he knows a politically driven bogus investigation when he sees one.
I keep reminding myself that this issue wouldn’t be here but for (in addition to the numerous decisions laid out by @kent Lyon ) that Clinton chose to obstruct the investigation at every point (including destroying evidence after receiving subpoenas), and when she decided she could no longer obstruct, to comply in the most unhelpful way possible (provided paper printouts of the emails instead of an electronic version). Any problems Clinton is having this close to the election are the consequences of her own decisions.
End of story.
Exactly. Thank you.
Comey should bring clarity to the current situation by announcing today that the FBI is recommending multiple indictments of the ham sandwich known as Hillary Clinton.
Fiat justitia ruat cælum.
That might be rushing things a bit, but then what was that quickie interview with Hillary just before he announced he wasn’t recommending to prosecute. First the investigation was slow-walked, then it was rushed.
Free,
Sure. Weiner can cut the mustard for the sandwich. Sorry, I just couldn’t help writing this comment.
Regards,
Jim
Prof. Yoo also has an expansive view of Executive power. Remember that Comey said he was obligated to make the disclosure because of representations made in his Congressional testimony; representations that became outmoded with the new email information and which he felt deserved disclosure to Congress.
The DOJ is part of the Executive Branch and the professor’s view, while he was in the Bush Administration and in his academic role, is that Executive trumps Legislative.
Early voting makes no more sense than allowing some members of a jury to decide their verdict before the final witnesses have testified and the closing arguments have been made. It astounds me that early voting exists.
Example #1,043,927 of Rodham’s sleaziness is her urging people to vote early and doing so at the very news conference where she responded to the revelations about the newly-discovered emails.
I agree with your logic, but I’m not aware of any specific instanced where HRC lied where she was under a legal obligation not to do so. We know that she’s lied in the public square and given different account there of info provided to the Bureau. And I could be wrong about instances of actual perjury (including before Congress), but I can’t think of any–nor can I recall any reported instances of such in the thousands of words written on the subject. She’s a lawyer and she’s cagey.
Yes, this is possible, since Comey obviously knows what she did with the server and classified documents, maybe she did not lie about that, but unexpected new evidence.
Yoo also didn’t address the fact that Obama was complicit, knowing about the server and sending emails to addresses on the server.
With the Obama Justice Department, once that fact came out Clinton was untouchable.
Hence Comey error #1.
Could be Huma, but I’m betting they’ll find a way to pin it on Weiner. Why not kick the dog when he’s down? Everybody dislikes him already.
So, in other words, you’d rather have a law breaker in office and initiate Congressional hearings once she’s in office (what a nightmare), than to try and correct his initial mistake. If it amounts to nothing, fine, she’s likely to win anyway. But I’ve frankly had it with sanctimonious intellectuals that would rather have Hillary as the commander in chief, than contemplate a boorish lout like Trump that doesn’t “measure up” to your sophisticated standards. I’ll take the lout any day! BTW, I have a graduate degree and live in California. Contrary to the polls, not everyone who regretfully votes for Trump is uneducated, poor, racist, or deplorable. Think Peter Thiel!