The Department of Political Justice

Is it worth impairing the reputation of the FBI and the Department of Justice to save Hillary Clinton from a deserved criminal prosecution by playing word games?

What has become of the rule of law -- no one is beneath its protections or above its requirements -- when the American public can witness a game of political musical chairs orchestrated by Bill Clinton at an airport in a bizarre ruse to remove the criminal investigation of his wife from those legally responsible for making decisions about it?

How hairsplitting can the FBI be in acknowledging "extreme recklessness" while denying "gross negligence" about the same events, at the same time, and in the same respect?

These are questions that now beg for answers in light of what can only be the politically motivated FBI report delivered earlier this week on the likely criminal behavior of Hillary Clinton.

The espionage statute that criminalizes the knowing or grossly negligent failure to keep state secrets in a secure venue is the rare federal statute that can be violated and upon which a conviction may be based without the need of the government to prove intent.

Thus, in the past two years, the DOJ has prosecuted a young sailor for sending a single selfie to his girlfriend that inadvertently showed a submarine sonar screen in its background. It also prosecuted a Marine lieutenant who sent his military superiors a single email about the presence of al-Qaida operatives dressed as local police in a U.S. encampment in Afghanistan -- but who inadvertently used his Gmail account rather than his secure government account.

And it famously prosecuted Gen. David Petraeus for sharing paper copies of his daily calendar in his guarded home with a military colleague also in the home -- someone who had a secret security clearance herself -- because the calendar inadvertently included secret matters in the pages underneath the calendar.

Yet earlier this week, FBI Director James Comey -- knowing that his bosses in the DOJ would accept his legal conclusions about Clinton's failure to keep state secrets secure, because they had removed themselves from independently judging the FBI's work -- told the public that whereas the inadvertence of the above defendants was sufficient to justify their prosecutions, somehow Clinton's repeated extreme recklessness was not.

It is obvious that a different standard is being applied to Clinton than was applied to Petraeus and the others. It is also now painfully obvious that the game of musical chairs we all witnessed last week when Bill Clinton entered the private jet of Comey's boss -- Attorney General Loretta Lynch -- unannounced and spent 30 private minutes there with her at a time when both he and his wife were targets of FBI criminal probes was a trick to compromise Lynch and remove her and her aides from the DOJ chain of command regarding the decision as to whether to present evidence of crimes against either of the Clintons to a federal grand jury.

The criminal case against Mrs. Clinton would have been overwhelming. The FBI acknowledged that she sent or received more than 100 emails that contained state secrets via one of her four home servers. None of those servers was secure. Each secret email was secret when received, was secret when sent and is secret today. All were removed from their secure venues by Clinton, who knew what she was doing, instructed subordinates to white out "secret" markings, burned her own calendars, destroyed thousands of her emails and refuses to this day to recognize that she had a duty to preserve such secrets as satellite images of North Korean nuclear facilities, locations of drone strikes in Pakistan and names of American intelligence agents operating in the Middle East under cover.

Comey has argued that somehow there is such a legal chasm between extreme recklessness and gross negligence that the feds cannot bridge it. That is not an argument for him to make. That is for a jury to decide after a judge instructs the jury about what Comey fails to understand: There is not a dime's worth of difference between these two standards. Extreme recklessness is gross negligence.

Unless, of course, one is willing to pervert the rule of law yet again to insulate a Clinton yet again from the law enforcement machinery that everyone else who fails to secure state secrets should expect.

Here is a hilarious reply a reader gave

HILLARY CLINTON GIVES FBI DIRECTOR COMEY A PHONE CALL TO THANK HIM FOR THE NEW LOW HE SET IN HIS FIERCE BLOW TO NATIONAL LAW:

Hillary: “James?”

Comey: “Yes, Hillary, how may I help you?”

Hillary: “You certainly did a bang up job out there today. You have nothing to fear now.”

Comey: “Nothing to fear? Several times out there today I had my a s s handed to me, as I was reduced from being the once respected director of the FBI, to a babbling 3rd grade psychopath nervously vomiting self-apparent lies at the American people and the nation; very few of whom believed what I had to say anyway, so how do you see this as a win for me in any way, shape or form when basically I am now viewed as being a worthless lying piece of s h i t just like you and your husband and all your aides and your staff and the DOJ and the AG and Obama and the Clinton Foundation are?”

Hillary: “Now wait a minute, James. The Clinton Foundation is a godsend to thousands of people around the world.”

Comey: “I know the name of a good psychiatrist if you’re interested, Hillary.”

Hillary: “That won’t be necessary, James, and I can understand why you’re upset. I just wanted to congratulate you on how smooth and calm you were today. You fulfilled your little end of the bargain perfectly. There’s no reason whatsoever for me to have to put out a contract on you via the Clinton Foundation now.”

Comey: “Ha, ha! Very funny, Hillary! No wonder they nicknamed you Killary.”

Hillary: “Alright then, look, James. As a token of my gratitude and affectations, after I’m shilled into office later this year, what would you like Santa-Hillary to bring you for Christmas?”

Comey: “Your indictment, of course.”

Hillary: “Wow. It’s like that, James?”

Comey: “Yes, Hillary. It’s like that!”

Hillary: “Oh, come on, James. We did it. We won. The American people were completely duped, I’m above the law, and you don’t have to worry about you or your family being bumped off.”

Comey: “Ha, ha! Very funny, Shitlary!”

Hillary: “Shitlary? Now don’t get saucy with me, James. After all, you and your family are safe now, so you didn’t come away from it empty handed.”

Comey: “Empty handed? Hillary, my reputation went up in flames today thanks to you. Plus, I really had to go to the bathroom. But instead, I was forced to sit there for 4 f _ c k i n g hours practicing my “sphincter contractions”, shifting and rocking back and forth and up and down, like a constipated demented "poo-poo" clock, in a miserable and desperate attempt to keep from pinching a serious loaf!!!”

Hillary: “Alright, James. That’s TMI!”

Comey: “Oh, yeah? Well you’re a POS!!! And I wish you were DOA!!!”

You’re welcome.

VOTE TRUMP IN 2016!!!

Saw a sign once . . . "One man, plus truth, is an army."

Is it not time for each American citizen/voter to require, at the very minimum, that the candidate to head their government does not have a proven public record of dissembling, shading, using semantics, and outright untruths in order to protect his/her personal interests over the rights and interests of the 350+ millions of other Creator-endowed individuals?

"Nothing is more essential to the establishment of manners in a State than that all persons employed in places of power and trust be men of unexceptionable characters. The public cannot be too curious concerning the character of public men." - Samuel Adams, Letter to James Warren, November 4, 1775

America's First President, George Washington's Farewell Address provided an ominous warning of the dangers which result from the combination of what he called "the Spirit of Party" and a "cunning," "ambitious," "unprincipled," "artful and enterprising" person:

“All obstructions to the execution of the Laws, all combinations and Associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the Constituted authorities are destructive of this fundamental principle and of fatal tendency. They serve to Organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force — to put in the place of the delegated will of the Nation, the will of a party; often a small but artful and enterprizing minority of the Community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public Administration the Mirror of the ill concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the Organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common councils and modified by mutual interests. However combinations or Associations of the above description may now & then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the Power of the People, & to usurp for themselves the reins of Government; destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.
====== “This Spirit, unfortunately, is inseperable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human Mind. It exists under different shapes in all Governments, more or less stifled, controuled, or repressed; but in those of the popular form it is seen in its greatest rankness and is truly their worst enemy.
====
"he disorders & miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security & repose in the absolute power of an Individual: and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty."

“It serves always to distract the Public Councils and enfeeble the Public Administration. It agitates the Community with ill founded Jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot & insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence & corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country, are subjected to the policy and will of another. - Excerpted portions of George Washington's "Farewell Address."

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.