Former public defender on FBI not prosecuting Hillary Clinton; 54% of Americans disagree

Jay B. Gaskill is an attorney; former Public Defender of Alameda County, CA (1989-1999); former Democrat and now a political Independent. He is also my friend and one of the smartest and fairest-minded men I know.

In the following essay, Gaskill employs his legal knowledge and experience to analyze FBI Director James Comey’s decision not to seek a criminal indictment against Hillary Clinton, notwithstanding the FBI’s findings that she is at fault by using a private, unsecured email server when she was secretary of state. (My comments are in italics, colored teal.)

hillary-innoculatedWHY DID THE FBI DIRECTOR CUT HILLARY A BREAK?

Analysis by Jay B Gaskill

Hillary Clinton has dodged a legal bullet. FBI Director James B. Comey is recommending “no prosecution” following Secretary Clinton’s email scandal investigation. By all accounts, Director Comey is a straight shooter. Yet for many, Tuesday’s no-prosecution announcement was a disappointment.

After a detailed recitation of the evidence of the Top Secret and other highly sensitive resident on Secretary Clinton’s private, unsecured email servers and devices, Comey’s “no-go” decision was a puzzle. In my opinion, the evidence that Director Comey summarized is probable cause that Secretary Clinton crossed the line into a criminal security breach. Yet not every probable cause case is charged. Reasonable prosecutors can and do differ on such charging decisions.

Why did Comey cut Hillary Clinton a break?

There were a large number of secret and top secret documents kept in hackable, non-secure private servers under her control. And, yes, Clinton and her staff were “extremely careless” in doing this – these are Director Comey’s words.

Comey revealed that “52 e-mail chains have been determined … to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information.”

And it was Director Comey’s judgement that “any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position … should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation.”

He put it bluntly: “None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system,

… these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.”

Was Secretary Clinton’s unsecured email system hacked?

Director Comey pointed out that “…we would be unlikely to see … direct evidence” of that. Then he added that “Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail domain was … 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.”

My translation: She visited more than 60 countries including Korea, China, Egypt, Iraq, Russia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, among other sensitive spots, all while using unsecured email to and from her wide-open private server.   Of course her emails were hacked. But the United States’ security community has obviously decided not to confirm that Hillary’s server was hacked, or even to publically talk about the issue. I can’t blame them. And I suspect that Director Comey was not read in on the full scope of the damage that Clinton’s security breaches may have caused.

Director Comey bluntly reminded everyone that “it is a felony to mishandle classified information either intentionally or in a grossly negligent way.”

So… Hillary was spared because of the difference between “extremely careless” and “grossly negligent?”

…A fine line indeed. That difference is in the eyes of the beholder. It might appear differently to a Grand Jury member, than to a trial juror.

Why did Director Comey gave Hillary Clinton a pass? Let me count the reasons:

A political trial of this magnitude would be messy and divisive. As a practical matter, it could not take place before the presidential inauguration in 2017. Remember O J Simpson? The word “circus” comes to mind. How difficult would it be to find twelve impartial jurors for Hillary’s case? Note that “grossly negligent” is essentially a subjective test, the application of which allows jurors very wide discretion.

Moreover, the prosecution would be complicated because of the shifting roles and responsibilities of Clinton’s staff. I can readily imagine the defense using the computer-challenged grandmother defense. …And I can readily imagine one more loyal staff members falling on their swords for Hillary.

In other words, Comey’s reasons were political/practical, instead of legal or in the interest of justice. -Dr. Eowyn

The bottom line: Secretary Clinton was not exonerated. Her security breach investigation was an authentic, full-on professional FBI investigation, not a political stunt. Had any lesser employee done the same thing, that employee would have lost his or her security clearance and would have been terminated.

The bottom line as I see it: Clinton was not punished, whereas “any lesser employee” who did what she did “would have been terminated” and prosecuted.

For that matter, less than a year ago, the FBI did exactly that to Bryan H. Nishimura, a Naval reservist deployed as a military engineer in Afghanistan (2007-2008). Nishimura had access to classified briefings and digital records that could only be retained and viewed on authorized government computers. But he downloaded and stored the classified materials on his personal, unclassified electronic devices and storage media. Nishimura pleaded guilty to precisely what the FBI concluded Hillary had done — “unauthorized removal and retention of classified materials” without malicious intent — and was sentenced to two years of probation, a $7,500 fine, the surrendering of any currently held security clearance and to never again seek such a clearance. -Dr. Eowyn

This is the moment where I and millions of other patriotic Americans devoutly wish that we had better choices this November. I think of Teddy Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, John Kennedy, and Ronald Reagan, among others. Neither party’s presumptive candidate is in the same league with American history’s solid, admirable presidents.

The settle-for election continues…

JBG

Hillary for Prison 2016

Meanwhile, most U.S. voters disagree with Comey not prosecuting Hillary.

A Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey conducted on the evening of July 5, 2016, found that:

  • A majority of “likely U.S. voters” — 54% — disagree with the FBI, and believe instead that Hillary should have been indicted.
  • Only 37% agree with the FBI’s decision not to indict; 10% are undecided.
  • Opinions on this are clearly partisan:
    • Among Democrats, 64% agree with the FBI decision; only 25% disagree.
    • In contrast, 79% of Republicans and 63% of Independents disagree.
  • 33% of all voters say if Hillary were indicted, a fair trial would not have been possible. 46% think it would have been possible for her to get a fair trial; 21% are not sure.

FBI Director James Comey has been summoned to Capitol Hill to explain why his agency is not recommending charges be filed against Hillary Clinton in the email scandal. Expect fireworks, but I predict that in the end, Congress will do nothing.

H/t FOTM‘s Ken Russell

~Eowyn

22 responses to “Former public defender on FBI not prosecuting Hillary Clinton; 54% of Americans disagree

  1. Nicely written article

    Doug Marvin

    Liked by 2 people

  2. Reblogged this on Exposing Modern Mugwumps and commented:
    Only 54%? That tells you about the American electorate and how they’ve been dumbed down, doesn’t it!!!!!!!

    Liked by 2 people

  3. What it all boils down to is, yes, she knew what she was doing, yes, she destroyed evidence, yes, she signed paperwork stating she understood what was allowable and not, yes, she knew it was illegal to have more than one server not secured, yes, she didn’t give a rat’s ass how dangerous it was, yes, she knew she would walk. Look at her pompous attitude during the whole investigation.
    Yes, deals were made and maybe even some money moving around.
    Quid pro quo, you bet ya.
    Will Lynch now get a nice position, probably. Was BO’s rear saved, of course, he was aware from day one.
    Justice was denied to America, a complete lowdown was stated on what she did wrong and illegal, but not a dang thing will touch her. The FBI head did wrong. He was negligent and should be called onto the carpet and explain why so many that do so much less lost everything. He needs to explain the two sets of rules and penalties.
    And Clinton, why she was rewarded by being able to continue her campaign. With absolutely no impact at all.
    And just to rub it in our faces, knowing ahead of time. BO and Clinton take off in OUR AF1 to campaign. And I bet, according to the law, the people are not reimbursed.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Glenn47 . . . you are spot on. Unfortunately, these folks feel entitled by virtue of “their status as Royals” to do whatsoever they feel is in their own interest . . . not in the interest of America.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Just today I read a few articles on Comey having less than stellar results when working the Watergate mess. Good grief.

        Liked by 2 people

        • interesting that he and clinton go back that far

          Liked by 2 people

          • MomOfIV . . . Very interesting indeed! On various radio shoes I listen to, Mr Comey was portrayed as being squeaky clean, a stand-up fellow, one who would do his duty regardless of the obstacles. Well, I guess all that praise was just so much hot air. I still think that some how, some way, the Clinton’s have some information from Mr Comey’s history and background that made him susceptible to persuasion (call that blackmail.) I am heartsick that once again, the American people have been hoodwinked, we got about as much justice as sand slipping thru ones fingers. If this old cow cannot handle the job of Secretary of State with this much integrity . . . how can she possibly handle being the POTUS?

            Liked by 2 people

            • I agree 110% Auntie…remember H Ross Perot?…I believe they used the same tactic on him. they convince people to engage in evil or get info on evil they participated in and blackmail them with that info…pretty slimy, pretty sleazy.

              Liked by 1 person

  4. Clearly, Comey is dishonest and arguably has committed an act of treason. The House should initiate impeachment proceedings against him and/or appointment a Special Prosecutor like Ken Starr to investigate him, including his love life if relevant.

    Liked by 2 people

  5. everything she touches she turns to sh*t. she’s incompetent, inept, evil, narcissist, a “grandma” who wants babies killed, a known prevaricator, and has morbid mental and physical health conditions…and people want her running the USA govt?
    people who vote for hillery are killing the usa.

    Liked by 3 people

    • And let’s not forget the fringes–the Dead Voters,the Multiple Voters,the Voting Pets,the Programmed Voters (the people bus’ed in from Senior Centers and Minimal Treatment Centers who are “programmed” to vote Democrat),the Illegal Alien Voters……

      Liked by 2 people

  6. “What difference does it make anyway?” Hilarious Clinton after Benghazi deaths of Americans and probably her normal answer for the crimes she commits.

    Liked by 3 people

  7. DC is nothing more than Kabuki theater these days. Just a disgrace.

    Liked by 3 people

  8. I just do not understand . . . what happened to the adage — “ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking the law.” I have no doubt that the Clinton Machine had “something on” both Comey and Lynch, which if drawn into the public arena would have wounded them for all time.

    I think that a whole lot of us Americans need to be on our knees earnestly beseeching Our God that He intercede on our behalf during the coming months, and that we are able to elect a President that will not wound us as deeply as the present resident of the White House. Perhaps if there are enough righteous people, He will take pity when viewing the horrible plight that may very well await us as a nation. No doubt we may well not deserve better, but we can at least take our pleas before Him.

    Liked by 3 people

  9. Pingback: Former public defender on FBI not prosecuting Hillary Clinton; 54% of Americans disagree — Fellowship of the Minds | kommonsentsjane

  10. She’s as guilty as Hell, but: Comey looked at the very long trail of dead behind the dynamic duo of deceit & evil, and decided he wasn’t going there.
    ‘Nuff said.

    Liked by 2 people

  11. I read an article today that explains EVERYTHING about Broom Hilda’s long-term business arrangements. Note that I did NOT say ‘conspiracy,’ as that’s an NSA trigger word for the ears & eyes built into every computer & cell phone, right goys & girls?

    Here is the one & only Dave Hodges [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZqeDNpGSbE#t=107] at his horrible truth-telling historian best:

    “FBI Director James Comey has absolutely no law enforcement background, and is not qualified to run the FBI. To add insult to injury, the FBI Director held an executive position at HSBC Bank, where he oversaw extreme money laundering by the Mexican Drug Cartel and their terrorist allies.”

    So, this creep is fully qualified to join Broom Hilda’s henchmen & cronies. BUT wait: there’s SO much more at Dave’s site.

    Go there and be devastated; it’s a puurgative, so all the shit you’ve internalised will be purged and you’ll feel better in 24 hours.

    Feeling better yet? OK, if not, try this on: http://www.wnd.com/2016/07/comey-has-long-history-of-clinton-related-cases/#! from WND, a reliable source of information –not news!– on topics of concern.

    Like

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s