Why Comey Would Not Present the Case against Hillary to a Grand Jury

QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong; Why did Comey not present this matter to the grand jury? Isn’t it the role of the grand jury to decide to indict or not?

ANSWER:The rules for a grand jury have been altered to the point that they have been reduced to a rubber stamp. Nevertheless, FBI Director James Comey had to punt and take one for the government in light of the Inspector General’s report on Hillary. The Inspector General was independent under Roman law and was supposed to indict government officials, but under US law, that position has been stripped of such power. Today, effectively, the grand jury has been stripped of all safeguards and this demonstrates that we live in a system where all the protections created by the American Revolution have been wiped out.

Still, Comey could not risk allowing this matter to go to the people to decide because the grand jury comes under the judiciary and not the executive branch. A wildcard remains, as he cannot control such a high profile case where the jurors will know who Hillary is and what this is about. The prosecutor cannot control 100% of the outcome in this type of case. Hence, there is no way Comey would allow a real investigation to take place, and nobody in the mainstream media would dare to explain the truth in this matter.

The idea of a grand jury was to PREVENT political legal persecution. The Supreme Court, over the years, has virtually destroyed the grand jury system by claiming that you have the petit jury in a public trial to hear both sides. The prosecutor can even KNOW of evidence that proves someone is innocent and it is routine now that he is under NO OBLIGATION to present any evidence whatsoever to show he might be wrong.

The Second Circuit Court of Appeals in NYC wrote: “Despite recent movements for revision of grand jury procedure, a prosecutor is not presently obligated to search for and submit to a grand jury evidence favorable to the defense or negating guilt…” (US v Ciambrone, 1001 F2d 616, 622-623 (2d Cir 1979)). This allows the Justice Department to engage in legal persecution and, as Comey has just done, allows them not to conduct any investigation to prove guilt or innocence.

Now, that said, the U.S. Attorney’s Manual states that prosecutors must recognize that the grand jury is an independent body, whose functions include not only the investigation of crime and the initiation of criminal prosecution but also the protection of the citizenry from unfounded criminal charges.” It also states that targets of investigations have the right to, and can, “request or demand the opportunity to tell the grand jury their side of the story.” This pretend right is rarely afforded to anyone who is a target. However, in the case of Hillary, she would have demanded it. On top of that, she is too well-known, so the grand jury may have subpoenaed others without restriction to testify.

Comey would NEVER present the case to a grand jury, yet some may have been politically motivated to investigate Hillary. The grand jury comes under the judiciary and not the executive branch of justice. Normally, they just rubber stamp whatever the prosecutor recommends, but in this case, they know the controversy and might really investigate and call witnesses.

The Supreme Court has chipped away at the grand jury to remove any barrier to government who wants to engage in political, legal persecution. They can destroy anyone at any time. They can throw you in prison, deny bail, and postpone a trial indefinitely while stripping you of any lawyer and imposing on you a court-appointed lawyer who routinely loses 99% of all cases to get the job of working for the court.

In John Stuart Mills’ (1806-1873) classic work, “On Liberty,” he wrote, “Let us not flatter ourselves that we are yet free from the stain of legal persecution.” (Mills 1998, 34.) Yet, the grand jury can investigate on its own. That is the risk that Comey would not take.

Most people do not know this, but since there are so many laws, the average person commits three felonies every day. There are people in federal prison for paying off one credit card with another (money laundering), withdrawing cash from your account three times at $9,900 each (structuring), shooting a moose out of season, or driving without a license in your immediate possession on federal property. The statute Comey was using for Hillary was just one of many under which she could have been charged. He tried to use only one that requires “intent” so he could excuse the matter.

People have been prosecuted for far less under the following three statutes: 44 U.S.C. Chapter 31 § 3101. Records management by agency heads; general duties

The head of each Federal agency shall make and preserve records containing adequate and proper documentation of the organization, functions, policies, decisions, procedures, and essential transactions of the agency and designed to furnish the information necessary to protect the legal and financial rights of the Government and of persons directly affected by the agency’s activities. Then we have 18 U.S. Code § 2071 – Concealment, removal, or mutilation of records, which Hillary violated, carries a three-year term of imprisonment and/or fine. Section B also states that anyone found guilty “shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States.” This wording is very clear. She should not be allowed to even run for president.

Then we have yet another; 18 USC §793 reads: 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.

Here are just three statutes and you will find people prosecuted under them who have done far less than Hillary has. There is no doubt Hillary SHOULD BE charged. There is also no question that Hillary WILL NEVER BE CHARGED. As I have stated, it is not the Department of Justice — it is the Department of “Just Us”. Once upon a time, the grand jury was a fundamental part of our liberty, but those days are gone.

“In the secrecy of the investigations by grand juries, the weak and helpless-proscribed, perhaps, because of their race, or pursued by an unreasoning public clamor – have found, and will continue to find, security against official oppression, the cruelty of mobs, the machinations of falsehood, and the malevolence of private persons who would use the machinery of the law to bring run upon their personal enemies.” Hurtado v California, 110 US 516, 554-555 (1884)(dissent of Justice Harlan)

With all the legal machinations, Comey could not risk a grand jury (people) to fulfill their constitutional duty to investigate Hillary. This was the design of “We the People” to run our government rather than be the “subject” of a monarch (his property). If Comey actually allowed the grand jury to investigate as the Constitution intended, they might have indicted her. OMG! What then? It does not matter if Comey was appointed by Bush, Clinton, or Ronald McDonald; he is a career official and his job is always to vindicate government against “We the People.” When Cade belted out in Shakespeare’s Henry VI, “The first thing we do is kill all the lawyers,” he was NOT talking about private lawyers since you were not allowed a lawyer. The “lawyers” were the king’s prosecutors.

Obama might take that as a dare and pardon Hillary. Then what would the Dummies think? If she’s not guilty, why would she need a pardon?

I'd find that delicious if I were Trump or his AG — then we can question if that pardon was really legitimate and use that to really investigate Obama's eligibility issues, and if he isn't then several interesting times things happen:

The Senate that certified him for office becomes vulnerable to investigation on the matter.
The DNC that nominated him also becomes vulnerable to the same.
All the Judges that threw out eligibility cases on lack of standing wind up with a lot of mud on their faces; and arguably party to this conspiracy.
All the high-level law-enforcement officers are also vulnerable to being co-conspirators, having sworn their fidelity to the Constitution and allowing it to be subverted.
All the policies Obama has enacted from Executive Orders to signing laws are illegitimate.

And do you think that would be all? We could cut deeper with our investigations and charge these people with Treason. After all, they think they are above the law and can play us like fools.

“Because he is a gutless coward, no more complicated than that”

Well and because if indicted, discovery leads to the White house. Hillery knew it and would have gone there. Comey couldn't stomach taking down Odunga and the State Dept. whom were in on her illegal Server.

I change my opinion about FBI Director James Comey. I said, he “should be indicted on charges” for letting politics affect the performance of his duties. However a FReeper had a good take on what he did. From catnipman:

“The FBI doesn’t indict, the DoJ does or at least convenes a grand jury. All the FBI can do is recommend an indictment, and then the DoJ sits on it forever with “we’re reviewing the case”, meanwhile eveyone in the the FedGov claiming no further information can be given out because the case is being “actively reviewed”.

Comey got out in front of Lynch and short-circuited the cover up. He had only one shot at saying his peace, and then he would have had to shut up; now he has the opportunity to go before Congress and divulge even more information “under questioning”, something that wouldn’t have been possible if the whole thing had been handed over to Lynch “for further review”.”

I expect the questioning today of Comey (Thursday, July 9, 2016) before Congress will give devastating testimony that will torpedo the Clinton candidacy. At least, I hope it will.

I expect the questioning today of Comey (Thursday, July 9, 2016) before Congress will give devastating testimony that will torpedo the Clinton candidacy. At least, I hope it wil

To her supporters and the media, it does not matter what she does.They will support her, vote for her, and defend her regardless of what she does. The media will make sure that the great unwashed masses of "independent voters" that the Republican "experts" worship will never hear of her misdeeds. If that is what you are hanging your star on, you can forget that one early.

The MSM has lost its control over their information monopoly because of the internet. The great unwashed masses of independent voters will be getting the information about the Clintons. It should be enough to turn them off from voting for her.

As I said and showed,Armstrong wrote this in the link,Some of McCarty’s very comments were what Armstrong wrote, “ rolled their eyes “

Comey told the chairman how to get public lies by Hillary to his desk today

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.