Connect with us

Published

on

James Comey’s irreparable reputation took another body blow this week after a memo emerged, written by the former FBI Director, appearing to exonerate Hillary Clinton of any wrongdoing in relation to her handling of classified information — prior to the investigation’s conclusion. With all the focus on Comey’s role in Hillary Clinton’s exoneration, it begs the question if the decision was made by a “higher power.”

No, not God.

But by a man who may think of himself as one — Barack Obama. National Review’s Andrew McCarthy believes Obama was the puppet master, so to speak, driving the narrative to insure Hillary was gotten off the hook, ensuring the Democrat Party continued its control over the White House.

National Review reports:

Let’s think about what else was going on in April 2016. I’ve written about it a number of times over the last year-plus, such as in a column a few months back: On April 10, 2016, President Obama publicly stated that Hillary Clinton had shown “carelessness” in using a private e-mail server to handle classified information, but he insisted that she had not intended to endanger national security (which is not an element of the [criminal statutes relevant to her e-mail scandal]). The president acknowledged that classified information had been transmitted via Secretary Clinton’s server, but he suggested that, in the greater scheme of things, its importance had been vastly overstated. This is precisely the reasoning that Comey relied on in ultimately absolving Clinton, as I recounted in the same column: On July 5, 2016, FBI director James Comey publicly stated that Clinton had been “extremely careless” in using a private email server to handle classified information, but he insisted that she had not intended to endanger national security (which is not an element of the relevant criminal statute).

The director acknowledged that classified information had been transmitted via Secretary Clinton’s server, but he suggested that, in the greater scheme of things, it was just a small percentage of the emails involved. Obama’s April statements are the significant ones. They told us how this was going to go. The rest is just details. In his April 10 comments, Obama made the obvious explicit: He did not want the certain Democratic nominee, the candidate he was backing to succeed him, to be indicted. Conveniently, his remarks (inevitably echoed by Comey) did not mention that an intent to endanger national security was not an element of the criminal offenses Clinton was suspected of committing – in classic Obama fashion, he was urging her innocence of a strawman crime while dodging any discussion of the crimes she had actually committed.

As we also now know – but as Obama knew at the time – the president himself had communicated with Clinton over her non-secure, private communications system, using an alias. The Obama administration refused to disclose these several e-mail exchanges because they undoubtedly involve classified conversations between the president and his secretary of state. It would not have been possible to prosecute Mrs. Clinton for mishandling classified information without its being clear that President Obama had engaged in the same conduct. The administration was never, ever going to allow that to happen.

As The Gateway Pundit reported on Friday, it looks like Comey has some explaining to do. The former FBI Director testified to Congress that he decided not to recommended charges in relation to handling of classified information, after the FBI interviewed Hillary Clinton on July 2, 2016. However, a new report reveals Comey penned a memo exonerating Clinton in the Spring.

On September 28th, 2016, Texas GOP Rep. John Ratcliffe asked Comey the following (simple) question:

“Director, did you make the decision not to recommend criminal charges relating to classified information before or after Hillary Clinton was interviewed by the FBI on July 2nd?”

Comey’s answer under oath?

“After”

Following the exchange, the Office of Rep. John Ratcliffe issued the following statement:

Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-Texas) exposed troubling new details today surrounding the Clinton email investigation during his questioning of FBI Director James Comey before the House Judiciary Committee. In the exchange, Ratcliffe focused on implications of the facts revealed by documents released by the FBI after Comey initially announced his recommendation not to press criminal charges against former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Ratcliffe’s exchange with Comey showed that:

  • In his multi-decade career as a prosecutor Comey could not recall a single instance in which two key witnesses of a criminal investigation were allowed to sit in on an interview with the principle target of that same investigation, as was the case in the Clinton email investigation.
  • The FBI appears to have focused on only two portions of criminal code related to the mishandling of sensitive information, specifically in regard to Clinton herself, while ignoring the possible destruction of evidence and obstruction of justice by other parties. In fact, Comey readily admitted that Paul Combetta, who destroyed emails records of Hillary Clinton with Bleach Bit despite a preservation request to retain them, lied to federal investigators before receiving immunity.

“As a former federal prosecutor, I can tell you that it’s unheard of for a potential key witness to be present when the target of an investigation is being interviewed. In fact, I’ve never seen it. And Comey admitted he’s never seen it. The American people have every right to wonder why this occurred in Clinton’s case – this isn’t the treatment anyone else in our country would have received, and it frankly appears that the outcome of this investigation was predetermined from the start,” Ratcliffe said.

Documents released on Thursday show former FBI head James Comey exonerated Hillary Clinton before the investigation into her email conduct had concluded. Even more concerning is “Mr. Comey even circulated an early draft statement to select members of senior FBI leadership,” reports Townhall.

According to new transcripts released by the Senate Judiciary Thursday afternoon, former FBI Director James Comey made the decision not to refer then Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton for prosecution long before ever interviewing key witnesses. Members of the Committee allege Comey made the decision months before FBI agents were finished with the criminal investigation of her mishandling classified information during her time as Secretary of State.

The transcripts were revealed in a letter sent to current FBI Director Christopher Wray, in which lawmakers are demanding an explanation and more documents surrounding the case.

“According to the unredacted portions of the transcripts, it appears that in April or early May of 2016, Mr. Comey had already decided he would issue a statement exonerating Secretary Clinton.  That was long before FBI agents finished their work.  Mr. Comey even circulated an early draft statement to select members of senior FBI leadership.  The outcome of an investigation should not be prejudged while FBI agents are still hard at work trying to gather the facts,” the letter, signed by Chairman Chuck Grassley and Committee member Lindsey Graham states. “Conclusion first, fact-gathering second—that’s no way to run an investigation.  The FBI should be held to a higher standard than that, especially in a matter of such great public interest and controversy.”

Former Congressman Jason Chaffetz believes Comey may have committed perjury.

Jason Chaffetz said former FBI Director James Comey has a lot of “explaining to do” in light of new reports that he began drafting a statement exonerating Hillary Clinton even before interviewing key witnesses, including the former secretary of state.

“He’s certainly got a lot of explaining to do. He could have perjured himself,” the former House oversight committee chairman said on “Fox & Friends.”

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley and fellow GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham wrote a letter to the FBI this week, expressing concern over whether Comey made up his mind about the email investigation months before his public news conference.

“Conclusion first, fact-gathering second—that’s no way to run an investigation,” the senators wrote. “The FBI should be held to a higher standard than that, especially in a matter of such great public interest and controversy.”

Advertisement
5 Comments
  • cecelia Gepp says:

    the truth of all this needs to be uncovered and told to the American people

  • Larry says:

    Why is there only one camera man in the room

  • Dr. Johnny Ashburn says:

    To the Author/Authors

    You are a journalist and use the language of English to present your point of view.
    PLEASE: Do you know the purpose of the phrase “IT BEGS THE QUESTION ?” This is such a common mistake used by many , but shamefully used be journalists and radio and tv presenters. It is a philosophical method of Argumentation which in essence means The answer is in the Question asked.

    Please do your best to look up this method and begin using it properly.

  • Jim Self says:

    The investigating agents, with a work in progress, finding out that the director had already decided not to charge the target, Hillary Clinton… what the heck were they to do? It is subtle corruption to demand agents to follow their chain of command even when their superiors are obviously covering up crimes. The DOJ’s Lynch was obviously involved. The tarmac meeting with Bill Clinton sent that message to everyone loud and clear. Maybe that is why he did it. To let all of the FBI agents working in the Hillary investigation know that the fix was in and they would only hurt themselves by pushing the case. If you object you lose your job or get downgraded or sent to a slow division where no one wants to go. There may not be much that can be done about it now, but those of us who have working brains know what happened and we should never forget, because it will happen again. It was a heck of a smart thing for Bill to do. He is a master.

  • Dori says:

    Gee, really? Whoever would have guessers Obama would a done DAT?

  • CF

    News

    Nikki Haley Breaks with Trump: ‘We Shouldn’t Have Followed Him, and We Shouldn’t Have Listened to Him’

    Published

    on

    Nikki Haley, former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, believes that former President Donald Trump “let us down.”

    Haley’s remarks come as the former president’s legal team prepares to present its defense of Trump during his second impeachment trial in the Senate.

    In a Politico interview published Friday, Haley, former South Carolina governor, said that “we shouldn’t have followed” Trump.

    “We need to acknowledge he let us down,” she said in an extensive profile. “He went down a path he shouldn’t have, and we shouldn’t have followed him, and we shouldn’t have listened to him. And we can’t let that ever happen again.”

    She also told the outlet that she has not spoken to Trump since the Jan. 6 riots at the U.S. Capitol, and takes issue with his remarks condemning former Vice President Mike Pence’s refusal to reject the Electoral College vote.

    “When I tell you I’m angry, it’s an understatement,” she expressed. “I am so disappointed in the fact that [despite] the loyalty and friendship he had with Mike Pence, that he would do that to him. Like, I’m disgusted by it.”

    The former ambassador, who many people are speculating may run for the White House in 2024, also added that Trump will never accept the results of the 2020 presidential election.

    “There’s nothing that you’re ever going to do that’s going to make him feel like he legitimately lost the election,” she explained. “He’s got a big bully pulpit. He should be responsible with it.”

    Haley also warned that many people still love the former president and will not stop supporting him just because he is out of office.

    “I know how much people love Donald Trump,” she admitted. “I know it. I feel it. Whether it’s an RNC room or social media or talking to donors, I can tell you that the love they have for him is still very strong. That’s not going to just fall to the wayside. Nor do I think the Republican Party is going to go back to the way it was before Donald Trump. I don’t think it should.”

    Haley added that people, instead, should “take the good that he built, leave the bad that he did, and get back to a place where we can be a good, valuable, effective party.”

    “[I]t’s bigger than the party,” she insisted. “I hope our country can come together and figure out how we pull this back.”

    Referring to Haley’s possible 2024 ambitions, Politico’s Tim Alberta wrote, “Since last fall, I’ve spent nearly six hours talking with Haley on-the-record. I’ve also spoken with nearly 70 people who know her: friends, associates, donors, staffers, former colleagues. From those conversations, two things are clear. First, Nikki Haley is going to run for president in 2024. Second, she doesn’t know which Nikki Haley will be on the ballot.”

    Haley also said that she didn’t believe Trump had a chance of winning in a 2024 election scenario.

    “I don’t think he can,” she admitted. “He’s fallen so far.”

    “I think his business is suffering at this point,” she added. “I think he’s lost any sort of political viability he was going to have. I think he’s lost his social media, which meant the world to him. I mean, I think he’s lost the things that really could have kept him moving.”

    Continue Reading

    News

    WATCH: Trump’s Defense Team Absolutely Ruins Democrats With 13 Minute Montage of “Fight” Word Like Trump Did

    Published

    on

    The Democrats demonized President Trump for using the word ‘fight’. Trump’s attorneys responded today with a collage of clips from each of the Democrats in the room using the word ‘fight’.

    This portion of today’s events on Capitol Hill was excellent. The Democrats claim that because President Trump used the word ‘fight’ in his speech on January 6th in Washington D.C. However, what every Democrat in that room forgot was that they too had used the word previously in political speech.

    The montage went on for 13 minutes. (The video montage starts at 7:10 timeframe.)

    Continue Reading

    News

    WATCH: Trump Attorneys Destroy House Managers on Lying to American Public and Using Manipulated Tweet as Evidence

    Published

    on

    President Trump’s defense team took the floor of the US Senate on Friday in defense of President Trump in the Senate impeachment trial.

    Trump Attorney David Schoen absolutely destroyed the House Managers when he took to the floor of the US Senate.

    At one point Schoen played video of the Democrat lawmakers lying about a Trump tweet.

    House Impeachment Manager Eric Swalwell gave a riveting performance on Wednesday reading off Trump’s tweets with emotional appeal.

    During this theatrical performance, Swalwell read off a Trump retweet by Jennifer Lynn Lawrence.

    But there was one problem with the tweet. It was photoshopped.

    Jennifer Lynn Lawrence has never been verified by Twitter. Democrats faked that to make it look more important.

    On Friday Trump Attorney David Schoen destroyed Democrats for lying about this to the American public.

    WATCH:

    Continue Reading

    News

    White House Suspends Deputy Press Secretary For Allegedly Sexually Harassing, Threatening Reporter

    Published

    on

    The White House announced on Friday that it was suspending Deputy Press Secretary TJ Ducklo after a report surfaced alleging that he sexually harassed and threatened a female reporter who was getting ready to publish a report revealing that he was dating a reporter who had previously been tasked with covering Democrat Joe Biden.

    “The confrontation began on Inauguration Day, January 20, after [Politico reporter Tara] Palmeri, a coauthor of Politico’s Playbook, contacted [Axios political reporter Alexi] McCammond for comment while one of her male colleagues left a message for Ducklo,” Vanity Fair reported. “Ducklo subsequently called a Playbook editor to object to the story, but was told to call the Playbook reporters with his concerns. But instead of calling the male reporter who initially contacted him, Ducklo tried to intimidate Palmeri by phone in an effort to kill the story. ‘I will destroy you,’ Ducklo told her, according to the sources, adding that he would ruin her reputation if she published it.”

    “During the off-the-record call, Ducklo made derogatory and misogynistic comments, accusing Palmeri of only reporting on his relationship—which, due to the ethics questions that factor into the relationship between a journalist and White House official, falls under the purview of her reporting beat—because she was ‘jealous’ that an unidentified man in the past had ‘wanted to f***’ McCammond ‘and not you,’” the report added. “Ducklo also accused Palmeri of being ‘jealous’ of his relationship with McCammond.”

    White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said following the report that Ducklo has been suspended for a week over the incident.

    “TJ Ducklo has apologized to the reporter, with whom he had a heated conversation about his personal life,” Psaki wrote on Twitter. “He is the first to acknowledge this is not the standard of behavior set out by the President.”

    “In addition to his initial apology, he has sent the reporter a personal note expressing his profound regret,” she continued. “With the approval of the White House Chief of Staff, he has been placed on a one-week suspension without pay. In addition, when he returns, he will no longer be assigned to work with any reporters at Politico.”

    Reporters called out the administration over the incident, highlighting how the Trump administration did not treat reporters that way as well as issues with the timeline of events with regard to the White House taking action to address the incident.

    “The Vanity Fair piece indicates that Politico editors reached to the WH after the incident first occurred and the WH acknowledged it was inappropriate,” Spectator editor Amber Athey wrote on Twitter. “But they clearly didn’t have any interest in disciplining Ducklo until his behavior was made public.”

    New York Magazine reporter Olivia Nuzzi wrote on Twitter: “I covered Donald Trump for 6 years. It is saying something that this behavior — from a Biden official — shocks me.”

    Grabien founder Tom Elliott highlighted the following remarks that Biden made a few weeks ago: “If you’re ever working with me and I hear you treat another colleague with disrespect, talk down to someone, I promise you I will fire you on the spot, on the spot. No if, ands, or buts. Everybody — everybody is entitled to be treated with decency & dignity.”

    CNN anchor Jake Tapper responded to the quote, writing: “Standards that are not upheld are not standards. They’re lies.”

    Continue Reading

    Trending Today

    >