It amazes me how 9 out of 10 media outlets are praising Clinton even tho she has been broadsided by Comey's rebuke of all her now proven lies, statements and deceptions around her email fiasco, and being shown to be the one with all the attributes and everything she states makes Trump unelectable.

Meanwhile what do they attack Trump with?

Well, there's his poor business practices which have made him a MULTI-BILLIONAIRE, his bigotry even though his wife is an immigrant, his daughter converted to Judism after her marriage to her husband, and he employs thousands of blacks and hispanics (of course Clinton is such a great jobs creator..... just ask the coal miners and companies she wants to put out of business), and of course the latest attack.... his "made in America" hats from imported textiles (but of course they won't blame NAFTA which her husband signed destroying US manufacturing for that need).

Liberal logic can be explained in the dictionary under idiocy and stupidity!

http://www.wnd.com/2016/07/comey-has-long-history-of-clinton-related-cases/

Comey has long history of cases ending favorable to Clintons


NEW YORK – FBI Director James Comey has a long history of involvement in Department of Justice actions that arguably ended up favorable to the Clintons.

In 2004, Comey, then serving as a deputy attorney general in the Justice Department, apparently limited the scope of the criminal investigation of Sandy Berger, which left out former Clinton administration officials who may have coordinated with Berger in his removal and destruction of classified records from the National Archives. The documents were relevant to accusations that the Clinton administration was negligent in the build-up to the 9/11 terrorist attack.

On Tuesday, Comey announced that despite evidence of “extreme negligence by Hillary Clinton and her top aides regarding the handling of classified information through a private email server, the FBI would not refer criminal charges to Attorney General Loretta Lynch and the Justice Department.

Curiously, Berger, Lynch and Cheryl Mills all worked as partners in the Washington law firm Hogan & Hartson, which prepared tax returns for the Clintons and did patent work for a software firm that played a role in the private email server Hillary Clinton used when she was secretary of state.

With Hillary making another run for president, don’t get caught up in the lies and spin! In “Hillary Unhinged: In Her Own Words,” find out who the true Hillary is with this raw and humorous collection of quotes that pitilessly underscores her hypocrisy

Lynch and Comey both served as U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York. They crossed paths in the investigation of HSBC bank, which avoided criminal charges in a massive money-laundering scandal for which the bank paid a $1.9 billion fine.

After Attorney General John Aschroft recused himself in the Valerie Plame affair in 2004, Comey appointed as special counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald, who ended up convicting “Scooter” Libby, a top aide to then Vice President Dick Cheney, of perjury and obstruction of justice. The charge affirmed the accusations of Plame and her former ambassador husband, Joe Wilson – both partisan supporters of Bill and Hillary Clinton – that Libby outed her as a CIA agent.

New York Times reporter Judith Miller’s 2015 memoir strongly suggests Fitzgerald improperly manipulated testimony and withheld crucial evidence in obtaining a conviction against Libby in his 2007 trial.

Prosecutor in Berger case

As deputy attorney general, Comey was involved in the investigation of Berger, as Fox News reported in 2004

Berger at that time was under criminal investigation by the Justice Department for removing from the National Archives various classified documents that should have been turned over to the independent commission investigating the 9/11 terror attacks and for removing handwritten notes he made while reviewing the documents.

The New York Times reported in 2005 that Republican leaders speculated Berger removed the documents from the National Archives because he was trying to conceal material that could be damaging to the Clinton administration.

There is no evidence Comey’s investigation for the Justice Department made any attempt to determine if anyone affiliated with the Clinton White House prompted Berger or coordinated with him in the decision to remove the classified documents.
Sandy Berger

Sandy Berger

Various statements Comey made about Berger’s mishandling of classified documents bear comparison to his comments regarding Hillary Clinton’s email server.

In 2004, Fox News noted Comey told reporters he could not comment on the Berger investigation but did address the general issue of mishandling classified documents.

“As a general matter, we take issues of classified information very seriously,” Comey said in response to a reporter’s question.

He added that the department had prosecuted and sought administrative sanctions against people for mishandling classified information.

“It’s our lifeblood, those secrets,” Comey continued. “It’s against the law for anyone to intentionally mishandle classified documents either by taking it to give to somebody else or by mishandling it in a way that is outside the government regulations.”

On April 1, 2005, Berger pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of intentionally removing documents from the National Archives and destroying some of them. He was fined $50,000, sentenced to 100 hours of community service and two years probation. Also, his national security license was stripped for two years.

Messages found stored on Clinton’s private email server show that Berger – a convicted thief of classified documents – had been advising Clinton while she served as secretary of state and had access to emails containing classified information.

For example, in an email dated Sept. 22, 2009, Berger advised Clinton advised how she could leverage information to make Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu more cooperative in discussions with the Obama administration over a settlement freeze.

(more at the link,plenty more)

Guess she will cry again?

I certainly agree with the last one...
" You are not off the hook. I am sure you are delighted in this media distraction "

Trey Gowdy GRILLS James Comey On Hillary Clinton Emails
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bC1Mc6-RDyQ


Trey Gowdy GRILLS James Comey On Hillary Clinton Emails. Hillary Clinton Email Investigation FBI Director James Comey testified at a hearing on the FBI’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of private email servers while serving as secretary of state, as well as the decision to not recommend criminal charges against her. Rep. Gowdy Q&A - Oversight of the State Department. At a congressional hearing Thursday, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) grilled FBI director James Comey about several of Hillary Clinton‘s statements to the public, which the FBI investigation revealed to be untrue. For instance, Clinton had previously claimed that she had never received or sent classified information to or from her private email server; Comey conceded to Rep. Gowdy that that was not true. Another claim of Clinton’s, which the investigation revealed to be untrue, was that she had retained all work-related emails. Comey noted that they had uncovered “thousands” of work-related emails not returned to the State Department. “In the interest of time and because I have a plane to catch tomorrow afternoon,” Gowdy concluded after running through a catalogue of Clinton’s claims, “I’m not going to go through any more of the false statements.” But Gowdy determined that “false exculpatory statements” can be used to determine intention and consciousness of guilt.

The hearing also saw Rep. Trey Gowdy unleash a blistering critique alleging that the FBI's decision will create a two-track justice system.
*

*
FULL VIDEO : FBI Director James Comey Testifies On Hillary Clinton Emails at House Oversight
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLsn-SVd8jo
Published on Jul 7, 2016
FBI Director James Comey is sworn-in before a House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, on July 7, 2016.


*
FBI director Comey was not present during HRC's FBI interview, he did not talk to all of the agents that interviewed her, she did not testify under oath and her testimony was not recorded.
https://m.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/4rv4xx/fbi_director_comey_was_not_present_during_hrcs/
*

FBI Director Refusing To Answer Questions About Possible Clinton Foundation Probe - Cavuto
Wake Up America
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPVX3-b7YGE
*


COMEY'S PECULIAR EXPLANATIONS
Congress grills the FBI chief on why he let Hillary off the hook.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJ070KKgZdA
http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/263438/comeys-peculiar-explanations-joseph-klein
*
Sloan Weekly Sloan Weekly
American Royalty: The Case Against Hillary Clinton
I’m a Marine Corps Veteran. When I served I was tasked...
J. Miles Wells
http://www.sloanweekly.com/american-royalty-the-case-against-hillary-clinton/


Rep. Hurd Destroys Dem Partisanship at Comey Hearing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45uwTO25-Ig
*


“I’m shocked because James Comey clearly found a direct violation of 18 United
States Code section 793, which does not require intent. It requires only
“gross negligence” in the handling of anything relating to the national
defense. When he determined that she was extremely “careless.” The
definition of gross negligence under the law is extreme carelessness.
It’s the first definition that comes up in the law dictionary. It’s the
definition the judges give to juries when they charge injuries on gross
negligence. Negligence equals carelessness. Gross negligence equals
extreme carelessness. So that is a clear absolutely unassailable
violation of 18 United States Code, section 793, which is not a minor statute,it carries ten years in prison.”
Rudy Giuliani

"Comey-Tose" Finds HILLARY CLINTON, "Guilty As Not Charged!"
Hillary:"Not Quilty By Reason Of Stupidity."
Gutfeld: Clinton exonerated by her own incompetence?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSXo9yCutTQ



Lankford demands suspension of Clintons security clearance
Lawmaker makes his case
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cR9l2_Q3a_A

FBI Director - Hillary Clinton gave people without security clearance access to classified information.
https://m.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/4rq2rc/fbi_director_hillary_clinton_gave_people_without/

*


*

Hildebeast had another "I'm no ways tah-ed" moment over the weekend. What a pandering bltch.....




Try these verses Hillary....Exodus 20: 13-16 for starters...

13. You shall not murder.
14. You shall not commit adultery.
15. You shall not steal.
16. You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor.

Comey has long history of cases ending favorable to Clintons




""James Brien Comey, Jr. (52), former United States Deputy Attorney General, has been appointed a Director of HSBC Holdings plc with effect from 4 March 2013. He will be an independent non-executive Director and a member of the Financial System Vulnerabilities Committee.''
http://www.hsbc.com/news-and-insight/2013/former-us-deputy-attorney-general-joins-hsbc-board

""The charitable foundation run by
Hillary Clinton and her family has received as much as $81m from wealthy international donors who were clients of HSBC’s controversial Swiss bank.
Leaked files from HSBC’s Swiss banking division reveal the identities of seven donors to the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation with accounts in Geneva.""
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/feb/10/hillary-clinton-foundation-donors-hsbc-swiss-bank

Well, but really, that's all only because he's NEVER HAD A JOB IN GOVERNMENT BEFORE. He hasn't done those things, but he was never in a position TO do them, either. Not proof of competence on his part.

As for the many accusations against Hillary, the thing is that they are identical to what all sorts of government people have been accused of, regardless of party, and almost none of them have been found guilty of anything either.

Remember it was a REPUBLICAN administration that was in charge before and during the 9-11 attacks, it was a REPUBLICAN President who did nothing at all during them in response (except continue reading to small children), and then it was a REPUBLICAN administration and President afterwards, who insisted that there should be NO INVESTIGATION WHATSOEVER INTO WHAT HAPPENED THAT DAY.

None of them were repeatedly hauled before tribunals, investigated by the FBI, and then repeatedly accused by the people here who are repeatedly insisting that Clinton be so pursued, of having "gotten away with crimes" because of that. So that proves that this is all about political bias, and not at all about the accusers actually having any PRINCIPLES.

As for stamping your feet and repeating that Clinton did commit a Federal crime, THE FBI HAS SAID SHE DID NOT. And that was their job to decide. So you can continue to say that YOU PERSONALLY THINK WHAT SHE DID SHOULD HAVE BEEN SEEN AS ILLEGAL, but it's just your opinion, and is not a fact, by definition.

Read the Statute before applying your "LOGIC"!

18 U.S.C. 793(f), which states:

Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed . . . Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both."

https://fee.org/articles/the-shoddy-legal-reasoning-used-to-clear-clinton/
<<<<
Both of the Clintons need to be prosecuted under the RICO-Statutes and imprisoned!
They actually sold out the Nation,and the threadbare excuses about the GWB-Administration did......,doesn't cut it!
And you had better read again what the FBI actually said!

Hillary signed on the dotted line — and then broke the law

The non-disclosure agreement (NDA) is executed by all who have access to classified and sensitive information. It is beyond doubt that Hillary Clinton executed one of these while secretary of State. It is also beyond doubt that she violated her NDA, the “special confidence and trust” that such access confers, and the law.

According to the U.S. Attorney’s Manual, Section 9-27.220, “Grounds for Commencing or Declining Prosecution,” Section A states:

"The attorney for the government should commence or recommend Federal prosecution if he/she believes that the person's conduct constitutes a Federal offense and that the admissible evidence will probably be sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction, unless, in his/her judgment, prosecution should be declined because:

No substantial Federal interest would be served by prosecution;
The person is subject to effective prosecution in another jurisdiction; or
There exists an adequate non-criminal alternative to prosecution."

However, Section B further states:

“The potential that — despite the law and the facts that create a sound, prosecutable case — the fact finder is likely to acquit the defendant because of the unpopularity of some factor involved in the prosecution or because of the overwhelming popularity of the defendant or his/her cause, is not a factor prohibiting prosecution.

For example, in a civil rights case or a case involving an extremely popular political figure, it might be clear that the evidence of guilt — viewed objectively by an unbiased fact finder — would be sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction, yet the prosecutor might reasonably doubt whether the jury would convict.

In such a case, despite his/her negative assessment of the likelihood of a guilty verdict (based on factors extraneous to an objective view of the law and the facts), the prosecutor may properly conclude that it is necessary and desirable to commence or recommend prosecution and allow the criminal process to operate in accordance with its principles.”

Doesn’t this seems to conflict with the assessment by the director of the FBI that no U.S. attorney would prosecute this case? Doesn’t this conflict with the assessment of the attorney general in her testimony before Congress?

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/the-administration/287652-hillary-signed-on-the-dotted-line-and-then-broke-the