So What’s The Difference Between ‘Gross Negligence’ And ‘Extreme Carelessness’ Again? Director Comey? Why Are You Leaving?

Well, this comes as a great big fat giant surprise from THE most corrupt and dishonest regime in American political history, bar none: Obama won’t indict Hillary Clinton.

FBI Director Comey, sweating like a pig in a steamroom, blathered his blathering and then promptly walked out as reporters shouted follow-up questions such as the one I feature in my title.  The reason is there was absolutely no answer to the reporters’ questions.

Contemplate the wording of 18 U.S. Code § 793(f) and see for yourself that the word “intent” or any synonym for “intent” is NEVER mentioned:

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, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

It has NOTHING to do with intent.  It specifically deals with incompetence and with gross negligence and with extreme carelessness.  Comey even said so himself:

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.

Do you see that word “or”???  I’m glad you do; because after laying out crystal clear proof that Hillary Clinton was guilty, GUILTY, GUILTY, he somehow managed to forget it was there and punted to an inability to find “intent” and so walked away from his job of following the damn LAW.

There are OTHER laws dealing with committing acts that DO deal with intent; but the framers of our legal system realized that if some stupid, incompetent, “extremely careless” fool blows up the world by some act of sheer depraved indifference or incompetence, THERE OUGHT TO BE CONSEQUENCES even if investigators aren’t able to prove that the person had the INTENT to be such a damn fool.

Hillary Clinton should have been charged with a crime.  She set this whole fiasco in motion BY HERSELF when she did something that NO cabinet-level government official had EVER done and installed a personal, private secret server to avoid any and all transparency and accountability so SHE could maintain control over documents and determine what she could delete and purge in a way that she could NOT have had by using a public company’s email system (Google, Yahoo, GMail) or by using the government system she was SUPPOSED to use but never even ONCE did.  I submit that that act alone was all the “intent” you need to go after her for even the harshest penalties under the other laws that DO involve intent.

There is NO QUESION now that Hillary Clinton put our sacred national security at risk.  There is NO QUESTION that the lives of our most heroic front-line warriors and spies were jeopardized because of what she did.  FBI Director Comey confirmed those facts today.

But the same FBI agents who followed orders to refuse to allow anyone to photograph, video or in any way record Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s secret meeting with Hillary Clinton’s husband Bill are the ones who are saying, “Trust us.  This is all completely above board.”

And they walked away from this investigation every bit as much as Sweaty Comey walked away from the podium after delivering his politically-driven verdict.

That has been the thing that has bothered me the most greatly ever since I found out about it.  Yes, Obama is corrupt; yes, Loretta Lynch is a political hack; yes, FBI Director Comey is at best a career government shill who will do his master’s bidding.  But when I found out that rank-and-file FBI agents would be acting like Nazis with people’s phones and cameras to cover up a secret meeting, well, I made a very big deal about that at the time: I even put it in boldface type at the time because it struck me as so important and so revealing.  And it matters because the same sort of FBI agents who were actively carrying out Lynch’s unlawful orders are the same sort of FBI agents who were doing this “investigation.”

No one should be surprised that this whole stinking mess – in which a paranoid, fascist Secretary of State who has a long and amply documented history of corruption would have a secret private server installed to bypass any transparency or accountability laws and then used her secret server to treat our country’s national security with abject contempt – would end up being whitewashed.

We know there are two sets of rules.  And that to be a Democrats is to be the worst form of hypocrite.

We know that Barack Obama endorsed Hillary Clinton’s candidacy prior to FBI Director Comey’s announcement of his “investigation.”  We know that Hillary’s husband Bill had a secret meeting days prior to that allegedly uncompromised and [Comey claimed] and not coordinated or reviewed announcement.  We know that Barack Obama – this very day – is publicly campaigning with Hillary Clinton, which he would NEVER have done unless he KNEW FOR CERTAIN what the results of the FBI investigation would be in advance.

We know this entire sham masquerading as “justice” is a giant crock.  Obama would not have endorsed Hillary if she was about to be indicted.  Liberal Democrat appointee Loretta Lynch – after getting busted having a secret meeting with Clinton that stinks to the highest heavens – would not have said she was going to accept whatever the FBI recommended unless she already knew in advance that the FBI wouldn’t recommend indicting the Democratic Party nominee.  And Obama without any question would not be flying around campaigning with Hillary on Air Force One – by amazing coincidence scheduled on the very day that Comey spoke his “no one knows what I’m about to say” speal – if he didn’t know in advance she was not going to be indicted.

We also know that Barack Obama, on April 10, said that on his own view, that what Hillary did was “careless.”  And lo and behold, that pre- and foreordained conclusion was exactly the one that was found.  Comey even used the exact same word that Obama had prompted him to use: “careless.”

I simply state as a categorical fact that FBI Director Comey lied when he claimed that his office had not coordinated with any other government department.  Of COURSE it was coordinated: Obama knew in advance, Loretta Lynch knew in advance, and Bill Clinton met with Loretta Lynch so the Clinton campaign could know in advance.  He might be a good man; but he is a man who was put under a terrible vice.  And he blinked.  And he didn’t take the stand for the truth and for justice that he should have taken.  Instead he played the game.  And it is the very same game that is causing this nation to go down the toilet bowl of history.

You’ve got this kabuki theater play going on.  There’s an “investigation” going on, but the president of the United States told us what the FBI would say, as if to say “Speak!” to a trained dog – and sure enough the trained dog spoke on que.  In the week leading up to this kabuki theater, the Attorney General has a secret meeting with the husband of the subject of the investigation during which FBI agents order people to take no pictures, no video, and use no cell phones around the secret meeting.  The same FBI that “investigated” Hillary protected husband Bill’s secret, outrageous meeting.  As a result of that meeting, the Attorney General said she would accept the finding of the FBI who had protected her secret, outrageous meeting with Bill Clinton.  And then the FBI told us that surprise, surprise, the whole investigation turned up exactly – down to the very word choice – what Obama had declared the FBI would find.

The whole thing is beyond outrageous on its face.

But the one thing that Comey DID do to his credit was expose the massive avalanche of lies that have characterized every single Hillary Clinton utterance:

Hillary Clinton looked the American people in the eye and initially told them that she pulled this stunt because she wanted to have the convenience of using only one device for email.  Boy did Director Comey ever blow that flat-out LIE out of the water.  How did Comey put that?

I have so far used the singular term, “e-mail server,” in describing the referral that began our investigation. It turns out to have been more complicated than that. Secretary Clinton used several 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. As new servers and equipment were employed, older servers were taken out of service, stored, and decommissioned in various ways. Piecing all of that back together—to gain as full an understanding as possible of the ways in which personal e-mail was used for government work—has been a painstaking undertaking, requiring thousands of hours of effort.

This lying shrew was using ALL KINDS of devices.  And we find that her early story about the server having been set up for husband Bill and kept in his office and guarded by the Secret Service was such a complete and outright lie it is beyond unreal.  Unless former president Bill Clinton’s office was in a bathroom closet in Denver.  I think she lied to the maximum possible threshold a liar can lie on that one.

Hillary Clinton looked the American people in the eye and claimed that what she did was allowed and was even common practice.  It didn’t matter what even the State Department Inspector General said to the outright contrary: that what Hillary did was NOT allowed and that there is no record that Hillary Clinton ever even TRIED to authorize it.  Hillary Clinton was a liar and she stuck with her lie through thick and through thin.  There was absolutely no way to stop the worst liar in the history of planet earth from lying.  So when FBI Director Comey came out and categorically stated that Hillary Clinton should have known this most basic and simple fact and that no reasonable person would have acted the way she did, you know that even THAT won’t put the kibosh on Hillary’s claim that what she did was “allowed” – presumably by the demon voices screaming in her head.

Hillary Clinton looked the American people in the eye and told them that she had turned over every single one of her work-related emails.  And then purged her server on or about December 5, 2014.  AFTER the House of Representatives lawfully subpoenaed that server.  She looked us all in the eye and said, “I responded right away and provided all my emails that could possibly be work related” to the State Department.  Only oh, no, you didn’t, you lying hag.  You lied about every single thing under the sun.  Comey said that when his forensic team examined Clinton’s server it found there were “several thousand work-related emails that were not in the group of 30,000” that had been returned by Clinton to the State Department.

For the record, that AP article linked to directly above is a treasure trove of Hillary lies revealed by the AP.  The sad news is that tomorrow they’ll forget they ever ran this story and never mention it again.  Unlike whatever Donald Trump did thirty years ago that they exploit again and again and again in a drum-beating continuous narrative.

And understand she is either an outright liar or she is not even up to the job of managing her damn EMAILS and is very clearly incompetent; EITHER WAY, SHE HAS NO BUSINESS BEING PRESIDENT.

Hillary Clinton looked the American people in the eye and said she didn’t send or receive any classified information.  She lied.  We all know that now.  Hillary Clinton then proceeded to alter her lie and manufacture a new story that she didn’t send or receive any information marked classified.  We all now officially know that Hillary Clinton lied again: we now have it an official part of the record that every single time Hillary Clinton said that she never sent or received any information marked classified, she was lying; she sent or received information marked classified at least 110 times.  We also know that she and her staff under her control were “extremely careless” in her handling of THE most secret information in the entire U.S. government; we know that those words “extremely careless” is the exact phrase that judges routinely use to define the phrase “gross negligence” that is the wording of the CRIMINAL CONDUCT defined by 18 USC 793-f.  We also know that Hillary Clinton lied about her “extremely careless” conduct resulting in our national secrets being stolen by hostile foreign governments.  And we know that Hillary Clinton lied when she falsely slandered and demonized Republicans when she claimed that this was just a purely political attack with no substance.

Hillary Clinton repeatedly said versions of, “I did not email any classified email.”  Well, now we know beyond a scintilla of a shadow of a doubt that she lied.  Oh, yes you DID.

Hillary Clinton repeatedly thereafter said versions of, “Nothing that I sent or receive has been marked classified.  And nothing has been demonstrated to contradict that.”  Oh, except you did.  And there was.  YOU LIAR.

And you amazingly find that FBI Director Comey said she was sending and receiving these classified emails even while she was in hostile foreign countries that had the sophistication to intercept her communications.  And as a result, the FBI is basically saying, “Assume our worst enemies have her emails.”

There is ONE reason and ONLY one reason that Hillary Clinton was not arrested for what she did: because she is a Democrat in a Democrat administration; and an incredibly CORRUPT AND DISHONEST Democratic administration at that.

But that said, given that it is now obvious that there was a whitewash brewing from the start, it is actually amazing what FBI Director Comey said: “there is evidence that [Hillary Clinton and her staff] were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.”

FBI Director Comey said: “seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There 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. In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later “up-classified” e-mails).”

We thus know that Hillary Clinton can NO LONGER CLAIM to be “a reasonable person.”  BECAUSE OH NO, SHE’S NOT A RESPONSIBLE PERSON.

We thus know that Hillary Clinton is an “extremely careless” woman who should not be trusted with any significant responsibility.  BECASE OH, YES SHE IS EXTREMELY CARELESS.

We know for a fact that yes it IS a “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 yes, we know that Hillary Clinton without any question mishandled classified information in a grossly negligent way, given that “extremely careless” is merely a synonym for “grossly negligent.”  We know that Hillary Clinton knowingly placed classified information – including THE highest level of classified information – on her secret personal private server and placed it on her own unauthorized storage facility.  Which is to say that she clearly and plainly violated two federal statutes.  And we know that “in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face CONSEQUENCES.”

Comey points out that Hillary Clinton almost without any question put America’s national security at risk:

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.

Which is to say that hostile actors most certainly DID gain access to Hillary’s secret personal private server which no reasonable person would ever have installed in the first place and which she was extremely careless in using and maintaining.  Comey points out that while they didn’t find direct evidence of foreign government hacking, they didn’t even EXPECT to find such evidence on a homebrewn server with few safeguards that a sophisticated government could easily penetrate without leaving behind any traces of such penetration.  But that the FBI was able to tell on other, superior systems that such hacking had occurred which directly involved Hillary Clinton’s secret server and which directly compromised her secret server which was a secret only to the American people.  And that therefore the American people may very well vote to have their leader compromised and blackmailed and sell America’s interests out to Russia, China and Lord only knows who else.  Not that Hillary wasn’t already doing that on her own for money to her crooked “foundation.”

She didn’t care.  She didn’t give one flying damn.  All she cared about was her own personal convenience, and let the rest of the American people eat shit and die.  I think that would be the updated form of Marie Antionette’s “let them eat cake” remark if she said it today.  Hillary Clinton is so far removed from the rest of the country it is unreal.

This becomes highly relevant: The Government Has Prosecuted Nearly Every Violator of Secrecy Rules Before Hillary Clinton.”

Ultimately, there is a different standard when Democrats run things.  There’s what applies to other people and there’s what applies to them.  And these two standards shall never, ever meet.

Comey states that “there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information.”  And then basically says that Obama doesn’t care and his boss Lynch doesn’t care and so what can he really do but go along lest he too be covered with gallons of white paint???

FBI Director Comey had Hillary Clinton dead to rights.  He laid out a crystal clear case that Hillary Clinton committed the “gross negligence” that was all that was necessary for him to prove according to the statute.  The he proceeded to claim that no reasonable prosecutor would prosecute this case when HUNDREDS of prosecutors have surfaced to say, “I sure as hell would prosecute her for what she did.”  Which is to say that what Comey meant to say was, “that no LIBERAL prosecutor would bring such a case” rather than “no reasonable prosecutor.”

Comey also misrepresented the facts when he said “we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts” when OH YES HE COULD HAVE.  There ARE people who have been prosecuted for FAR LESS than what Hillary did.  And the ONLY difference was that they at least had the honesty to acknowledge that understood what they were doing whereas Hillary the lawyer surrounded by battalions of lawyers never admitted even that tiny shred of truth.

Hillary behind closed doors to the FBI basically said, “I’m incompetent.  I didn’t know what I was doing.  How could I?  I’m just a stupid woman.  And I’m neither qualified or fit to make any kind of complicated decision.”

That again is the sort of massive double standard that Hillary flies under.  Because any man would have faced the guillotine if he’d done what Hillary had done.  Just ask David Petraeus who had the head of a magnificent career axed for a FRACTION of what Hillary got caught red-handed doing.

How can you look at me with a straight face and tell me that Hillary is competent if she truly didn’t know that all of these thousands of emails were classified???  When it was THE most basic part of her job to know that???

We’ve got to fight for the truth.  We’ve got to fight WITH the truth.

We need to tie Hillary Clinton’s lies together.  The way she stood over the coffins of the four dead Americans who came home in those coffins because of Hillary Clinton’s incompetence and indifference.  And she outright lied right in the faces of the family members and blamed a Youtube video for the “spontaneous uprising” that she knew was a lie even as she was blathering that lie because she was at the same time telling her daughter and telling the Egyptian Foreign Minister that “We know the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack – not a protest.”  Let the American people finally understand that this woman has been the worst liar imaginable over the course of her entire life.

I submit that Hillary Clinton is either utterly a criminal, or so utterly incompetent that she not only shouldn’t be president but shouldn’t ever even be allowed to set foot inside the White House lest the fungus that rotted her brain be transmitted to someone who could conceivably touch a president.  Or both.  And I submit that she is both.

But at this point it couldn’t be more obvious that Hillary Clinton is unfit to serve as president of the United States of America unless you want this nation to perish.

You know what I want?  I want Director Comey to come before the House and answer one question: did Hillary Clinton tell your FBI the same stories she told the American people or did she tell your FBI the truth?  Because if she told the same stories to the FBI that she told the American people, she LIED and she should be prosecuted for lying to the FBI.  And if she told the FBI the truth when she lied to the American people, the House should then demand the transcript or better yet the video so the American people can see her telling the FBI the truth that was so totally different from the lies she has been telling us for over a year now.  And every single American ought to go into this election knowing that the Democratic Party candidate for president is a pathological liar who will look them in the eye and tell them an avalanche of pure lies every single time she opens her mouth.  That’s what I want.  And if you don’t want that too, Democrat, it’s only because you know full damn well what a pathological dishonest liar your candidate is and you don’t care because your just that vile and there is nothing true in you at all.

Anyone who votes for Hillary should be required to sign a form categorically saying that he or she is utterly without any honesty, any decency, any integrity, any virtue or any decency whatsoever.


Tags: , , , , , , ,

20 Responses to “So What’s The Difference Between ‘Gross Negligence’ And ‘Extreme Carelessness’ Again? Director Comey? Why Are You Leaving?”

  1. Invisible Mikey Says:

    If you really want to know the difference between “Gross Negligence” and extreme carelessness, it’s provable evidence of criminal intent. One’s a crime, the other indicates incompetence.

    James Comey was previously the DA in Manhattan, and the Deputy AG under John Ashcroft. He’s better qualified than most to know exactly what will or won’t fly in court, and he has been directing high-profile investigations for decades.

  2. FMC Says:

    Invisible Mikey,

    It should be obvious to any person with an IQ above 75 that Hillary should have been indicted. But let’s assume, like you suggest, that it was extreme carelessness that this crook committed. Is this someone that is fit for the highest office in the land? I know, I know…. “what difference does it make.”

    VIsisble Michael,

    We are so screwed…. I have this awful feeling that Hillary is going to be POTUS. If so, the end is very near. I want to puke.

  3. dakwolf55 Says:

    18 USC 793-f does not mention the need for criminal intent. Bryan Nishimura was prosecuted for essentially the same violation.

  4. The Grey Enigma Says:

    Reblogged this on The Grey Enigma.

  5. The Grey Enigma Says:

  6. Invisible Mikey Says:

    I didn’t mean to suggest HRC’s lying isn’t still a moral/campaign issue. I was just focusing on the legal bar, which is very high. Since Comey actually was a prosecutor, he’s qualified to judge what will or won’t fly in court better than I am.

    Incompetence, bad judgment and lying are good issues to run against Hillary with. But at this point it would be smart to drop “criminal”, since we still live under “innocent until proven guilty”.

  7. FMC Says:

    Invisible Mikey,

    In this case, Comey wasn’t judging. He was told by the Obama administration what to do. This is purely political corruption at its finest.

    “innocent until proven guilty”

    There was an investigation that clearly shows she broke the law. So far, she has been given due process. At the very least, this evidence should be brought before a grand jury.

    Did you hear Comey say that not to suggest that others could get away with the same thing in the future? Why is she held to a different standard? She clearly mishandled classified information, which is a clear violation of law. The woman had her own freaking servers. She did this because she wanted to conceal and she wanted to be free from the Freedom of Information Act.

  8. FMC Says:

    The Grey Enigma,

    Stefan Molyneux, despite being an atheist, puts out some good stuff. I caught that video yesterday and it is excellent, especially for the low-information people.

  9. Michael Eden Says:

    Invisible Mikey,

    All you have to do is show me where “intent” is a relevant factor in 18 USC 793(f):

    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, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—

    Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

    This was political. What Comey did was a naked political act. And Comey blinked under the most intense political pressure ever faced by an FBI Director.

    He SHOULD have referred this to prosecution. He built a powerful case that she should have been so prosecuted and even acknowledged that it was “intent OR gross negligence” and then proceeded to ignore the gross negligence and focus on the allegation that they couldn’t prove intent.

  10. Invisible Mikey Says:

    @Michael Eden,

    I’m not a lawyer, so it’s a bit unfair for you to ask me to explain the nuances of statutes when I have no relevant training or credential. I’m trusting that Comey was qualified to make the decisions, having been both DA in Manhattan and Deputy AG of the U.S. His past actions are really all anyone can go by as far as his personal integrity goes. However, here is a cut/pasted one paragraph definition of what “gross negligence” means, taken from

    (Gross negligence is) “carelessness which is in reckless disregard for the safety or lives of others, and is so great it appears to be a conscious violation of other people’s rights to safety. It is more than simple inadvertence, but it is just shy of being intentionally evil. If one has borrowed or contracted to take care of another’s property, then gross negligence is the failure to actively take the care one would of his/her own property.”

    “Conscious violation” indicates intent, and the “failure to actively take the care one would of his/her own property” isn’t there either, because she DID put her own property (personal event plans etc.) on those same servers. So she walks on #1, by my limited understanding.

    Relevant to #2 of the statute, Comey said there’s no evidence she understood her servers were vulnerable to being hacked, nor that she intentionally destroyed data, or knew of others who had stolen or destroyed it. He complained that the servers COULD have been hacked by “hostiles”, but you can’t charge over a possible negative result you can’t prove ever happened.

    I realize it’s your opinion this was a political act on Comey’s part. I choose to believe he was making a judgment call based on having been a prosecutor himself for much longer than having been FBI Director. Since Loretta Lynch stated, just before Comey’s announcement, she would follow whatever he recommended, he was free to advise charging Mrs. Clinton if he thought it was a winnable case.

  11. 27chaos Says:

    It would be nice if you had written up the same major points of this article in a kinder, more neutral tone. As it is, I can’t link this to anyone who’s undecided on the issue, although you make some good points. They would not find it persuasive because there is too much informal ranting. Personally, I love informal rants, but they are not really the best tool for persuading people to change their minds.

  12. 27chaos Says:

    @dakwolf55 Drake was prosecuted without intent also. Maybe under a different statute, though? But even if so, that other statute would apply to Clinton as well.

  13. Michael Eden Says:


    All I can say is you cannot prove my intent to rant and so if you were as fair as Dir. Comey you would not indict me the way you did. Like Hillary Clinton, maybe I was ignorant of the trivial fact that I was ranting the way she was allegedly ignorant of sending and receiving classified information. Maybe I simply did not have the sophistication to know that ranting was a bad thing the way that Hillary lacked the sophistication to know that installing a secret, private server in her basement and then not protecting it with security was a bad thing.

    I mean, you know, in the same identical manner that Hillary thought she somehow wasn’t sending and receiving classified emails, I actually thought that I WAS being “kinder” and maintaining a “neutral tone.” And since you can’t prove that I didn’t knowingly pursue any other kind of tone…

    Given that it is absolutely impossible to judge these kinds of things, well, I’ll simply have to conclude that you are biased and engaged in a political witch hunt.

  14. Michael Eden Says:

    Invisible Mikey,

    You know, it comes down to this: on the one hand, Hillary Clinton, a lawyer armed with lawyers, stated over and over again that she just had no freaking clue what she was doing. In spite of the fact that she was a former first lady who spend eight years in the White House, in spite of her term as a US Senator, in spite of the fact that she served as the Secretary of State and had required training on handling and identification of classified information, it was her testimony that she had no idea whatsoever that there was anything wrong with installing an unauthorized server in her basement and later on in basements of bathrooms in Denver. She had no freaking clue that there was anything wrong with failing to protect that server. She had no idea that she was sending and receiving classified information in spite of the fact that it was the ONLY email system that she had and in spite of the fact that she actually wrote to her staff and ordered them to strip off classification headers and send information nonsecure on at least one occasion.

    OK, you want to believe all that, that as long as you have enough lawyers whispering in your ear no matter how qualified you are or at least no matter how qualified you told the American people over and over and over that you are, you can literally plead a level of stupidity on such a monumental scale that you look like a blithering idiot in comparison to any monkey.

    But please at least agree with me that if she was actually as incompetent as she said she was, as incapable of understanding or comprehending what she was doing – all to avoid “intent” – that there is no possible way on EARTH that she is in any way, any shape or any form FIT to even be allowed to RUN for president, let alone actually ever be elected president.

    Comey said that none of those thousands of classified emails should have ever been on ANY private server, let alone an unauthorized private server. He pointed out that had Hillary used an email service like GMail, it would have been far more secure. I’m hearing the going rate to hack into a GMail account is $129. But Hillary was supposedly just not competent to have a damn clue about any of this.

    Don’t play this stupid game where on the one hand you don’t think she was up to the job of being able to have “intent” on the one hand and that she’s still qualified to ever be president on the other.

  15. Michael Eden Says:


    You know, that’s actually very interesting. I hadn’t come across that. I saw “Drake” and I was even thinking you were talking about the singer guy. That’s how out of the loop I was on this.

    But I like to know what people are talking about, so I googled a portion of your remark, and found this article:

    The Government Has Prosecuted Nearly Every Violator of Secrecy Rules Before Hillary Clinton

    Thank you for providing me with even more reason to yank handfuls of hair out of my head.

    I’d just get a damn lobotomy and have all the thinking portions of my brain removed or cauterized, but I’m afraid I would end up Secretary of State in a Democrat administration and have a secret server installed in a bathroom closet…

  16. Invisible Mikey Says:

    @Michael Eden,

    For (please let it be) the last time, I never advocated voting for HRC, nor that she had not made serious errors, ONLY that it made sense to me, after having heard and read Comey’s entire statement, that he was an honest, experienced man qualified to estimate that there was no winnable CRIMINAL case.

    As to my vote, based on where I live (WA), it doesn’t matter if I vote Clinton, Trump, “Donald Duck”, or stay home. This isn’t a swing state. Clinton (or any other Dem. nominee) WILL get our 12 Electoral College votes. Since BOTH candidates are so unqualified, I’m likely to concentrate on the state/local contests and skip the top box entirely.

  17. Michael Eden Says:

    One of the people who commented to this article – and didn’t care much for my tone, fwiw – provided an interesting fact that ought to give a little less credibility to Comey’s “no prosecutor would ever prosecute this” remark:

    The Government Has Prosecuted Nearly Every Violator of Secrecy Rules Before Hillary Clinton

    I add to that that Comey is himself admitting that ALL KINDS of prosecutors are coming forward – HE SAYS MANY OF THEM ARE HIS OWN FRIENDS – who are lambasting his “no reasonable prosecutor” line and saying oh, hell YES they would prosecute.

    I fail to understand how you cannot recognize what a non-objective statement that was given Comey’s own admission that even many of his own prosecutor friends disagree with that remark. It is incredibly subjective. Just like his whole damn verdict. Comey rewrote the law to let Hillary off the hook:

    So again, I am mystified why you have so much faith in Comey given that some of this stuff is just bizarre.

    But all that said, Hillary and other Democrats point to other Secretaries of State. Notwithstanding that NONE of them ever installed a secret damn server in a Denver bathroom, I’ll simply say this: if she acknowledged that her conduct was beyond despicable and then dropped out of the race, I wouldn’t be screaming for her head.

    But you have to comprehend the game that she was playing and the game that Comey bought hook, line and sinker: on the one hand, on her battalions of lawyers’ advice, she says she was not competent to form intent; on the other hand, she is competent to be president of the United States.

    And there is absolutely no way in hell that both can be true.

  18. Invisible Mikey Says:

    @ Michael Eden,
    (See, I knew it wasn’t the last time.) What the linked article made clear to me was that in each of the cases cited, they had the evidence. Comey said in THIS case, they don’t. He went out of his way to illustrate her mistakes and lies. It’s a judgment call he was asked to make, whether or not he thought there was a winnable CRIMINAL case.

    Available evidence is supposed to determine whether or not charges are made and cases brought. That is not a double standard. People walk at all levels for that reason, for felonies and for misdemeanors. Prosecutors also lose cases every day for over-charging when enough evidence isn’t there. That’s what’s been happening in the Freddie Gray related trials. Strong suspicion, even a relevant history of related behavior, is not enough to prove criminality. The deprivation of liberty requires meeting a high bar of justification and proof.

  19. Michael Eden Says:

    Invisible Mikey,

    You believe ignorance of the law is an excuse to commit crimes and then declare you didn’t know. That’s what this boils down to.

    Hillary Clinton committed terribly wrong acts. She ought to be punished for what she did.

    To whatever extent there is any “difference” between Hillary and others who DID face justice is that those people made some kind of acknowledgment that they shouldn’t have done what they did. Which apparently means the more virtuous who admit their wrong should face justice while the most corrupt and dishonest who don’t should not.

    Hillary Clinton is a lawyer who surrounded herself with a battalion of lawyers. And her defense is that she had no idea that what she was doing was wrong no matter how craven it was or how much harm it caused.

    I’ll try that as I drive down the freeway at 140mph and then tell the officer that no matter what it looks like, it wasn’t my “intent” to speed.

  20. Anonymous Says:

    More than one private server lied to the American people congress sending and receiving emails did she receive a training for the position as a secretary of state and more

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your 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: