Comey the Clown: Lock him up!!

1. hillary being too blase about breaking national security laws is like saying bill clinton was too blase about his marriage vows.

hillary was as much a cheater as bill however, she broke national security laws so she could take millions into her foundation. For instance she sold our uranium to Russia as her foundation was taking in millions from the players involved. see the NYT article I have linked to on this site.

2. Comey has been a deceptive son of bitch since the beginning. Just because he proffered a reason for taking notes does not mean he did not have ulterior motives.

3. The legislature creates criminal laws to protect the country. When they create a law without an intent element it is done so on purpose.

So while Clinton intentionally broke multiple laws with her putting classified info on a home brew server.

lets focus on a non intent crime since you tried to focus on intent. . Non intent crimes are rare. When the legislature writes an non intent crime it does so with very good reason. In this case it is to protect national security.

(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.

===

"In essence, in order to give Mrs. Clinton a pass, the FBI rewrote the statute, inserting an intent element that Congress did not require. The added intent element, moreover, makes no sense: The point of having a statute that criminalizes gross negligence is to underscore that government officials have a special obligation to safeguard national defense secrets; when they fail to carry out that obligation due to gross negligence, they are guilty of serious wrongdoing. The lack of intent to harm our country is irrelevant. People never intend the bad things that happen due to gross negligence. I would point out, moreover, that there are other statutes that criminalize unlawfully removing and transmitting highly classified information with intent to harm the United States. Being not guilty (and, indeed, not even accused) of Offense B does not absolve a person of guilt on Offense A, which she has committed. It is a common tactic of defense lawyers in criminal trials to set up a straw-man for the jury: a crime the defendant has not committed. The idea is that by knocking down a crime the prosecution does not allege and cannot prove, the defense may confuse the jury into believing the defendant is not guilty of the crime charged. Judges generally do not allow such sleight-of-hand because innocence on an uncharged crime is irrelevant to the consideration of the crimes that actually have been charged."

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/437479/fbi-rewrites-federal-law-let-hillary-hook





(You really don't have the experience to lecture us on jurisprudence. You always seem to slant it far off base. )
I need someone that is such a clear thinker as you, Jem, to be on my Jury. Someone highly resistant to crazy conspiracy theories; someone who won't fall for the prosecutor's dastardly tricks. Will you agree to serve on my jury, Jem? :D
 
Last edited:
If I become a legislator and I need need a creative writer to cover up for bad policy or criminal misdeeds... I will send you a message.

I need someone that is such a clear thinker as you, Jem, to be on my Jury. Someone highly resistant to crazy conspiracy theories; someone who won't fall for the prosecutor's dastardly tricks. Will you agree to serve on my jury, Jem? :D
 
The agreement signed by Comey states plainly: “all information acquired by me in connection with my official duties with the FBI and all official material to which I have access remain the property of the United States of America.”

This means (1) he stole government documents obstructing any investigation of him, and (2) he then leaked classified information to the New York Times. Let’s see; they say Snowden should be indicted for the same thing. Curious!

This is why Comey never recorded Hillary’s “interview” before the FBI to ensure she could never be charged as Martha Stewart was for “lying to the FBI” in such an interview and sent to prison. Comey wrote private memos when talking to Trump, but not Hillary, and then leaked classified information to the New York Times releasing his memos. Legally, he should be prosecuted as they prosecuted Lewis “Scooter” Libby who was Dick Cheney’s chief of staff for leaking information.

In United States v. Libby, he was put on trial for interfering with special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald’s criminal investigation of the Plame affair by lying in an interview with the FBI for which he was indicted by a federal grand jury on five felony counts of making false statements to federal investigators. This is what Comey protected Hillary from by not recording the “interview” which is standard operational procedure. Libby served as assistant to the President under George W. Bush and Chief of Staff to Dick Cheney from 2001 to 2005. Bush denied giving Libby even a pardon.

Then Comey granted immunity to Hillary Clinton’s lawyer Cheryl Mills to protect her against prosecution. In fact, Comey strikingly gave wholesale immunity deals to virtually every person who had intimate knowledge of Hillary Clinton’s illegal private server and emails. This protected Hillary beacause nobody would testify against her under threat of imprisonment. Comey abused his discretion and made sure that Hillary could not be prosecuted nor any of her staff.

There is now more than enough information to hand to a Grand Jury for Comey to be indicted the same as Libby.

-martin armstrong
 
  • Like
Reactions: jem
“all information acquired by me in connection with my official duties with the FBI and all official material to which I have access remain the property of the United States of America.”
Having dinner with the President is not going to be viewed by reasonable people as one of his duties as FBI director. In fact it is a questionable activity that could be viewed as improper, and that is precisely why Comey made those notes, i.e., to protect himself and the FBI. It's highly unlikely that the personal notes of the kind and type he made during that dinner are going to be viewed as Official FBI material , but they may be admitted as evidence during an impeachment hearing..
 
leaked classified information to the New York Times releasing his memos.
He very specifically did not do that! Where do you come up with this stuff. Back this up with factual information please, if you want this to be believed.
 
The fbi said comey memos contained classified info.

Comey's stooge that leaked the info to the nytimes said the one he leaked did not have classified info in it.

Then he changed his tune and said it did not have a 'classified' marking on it.

OOPS

The reasonable people you speak of, piezoe, might conclude something from that new characterization.
 
Back
Top