Suddenly Wise (Again)
> Well, it seems FBI director James Comey has suddenly become wise again! You’ll recall that he was deemed (by the DNC and liberal media) “wise” in July when he announced that Hillary Clinton would NOT face criminal charges related to her emails. In fact, he was deemed wise AND fair!
>However, he was subsequently deemed “foolish” (and biased) last week when he reopened the Clinton investigation, and was demonized roundly, again by the DNC and the liberal media. In fact earlier today Tim Kaine denounced him as “working with the GOP” to foil Hillary’s candidacy, accusing him of conspiracy!
>Now, with his latest reversal, he has, suddenly become wise again! (It’s amazing how much this man’s IQ can fluctuate in just the course of one day!). And not just wise, but fair. And not just fair, but unbiased to boot!
>In truth, Mr. Comey is neither wise nor foolish nor biased nor fair. What he REALLY is, ladies and gentlemen, is a weasel! Yes, a weasel! A very slippery weasel, at that! And his first priority, and perhaps his only priority is, and has always been, his own career. Period.
>Dear readers, if you’ll recall my post from November 1 (The Silent Centurions) I predicted that tremendous pressure would be brought to bear on Mr. Comey to “wrap up” the investigation and affirm his original conclusion that “no reasonable prosecutor would bring charges on Mrs. Clinton.”
>I had hoped that he would have had the integrity to stand up to the pressure, but I was skeptical that he would. Alas, my skepticism appears to have been warranted and Mr. Comey has “caved.” Not that it would have been easy to persevere. Undoubtably, he was threatened by Attorney General Loretta Lynch with charges of violating the Hatch Act (for supposedly trying to influence an election) which would result in a criminal indictment which would, of necessity, result in his dismissal from the FBI. Indeed it would take the courage of a modern Saint Thomas More to stand on principal facing all of the above. Unfortunately, Thomas More he was not, and cave he did.
>Not that this should come as a surprise to anyone. It was obvious right from the start he had absolutely no interest in the pursuit of justice. His only interest was keeping his boss, Attorney General Loretta Lynch happy and going through the motions of an investigation to keep our rather dim media satisfied and to keep true critics at bay.
>In my opinion, the FBI “investigation” was a sham early on. The investigation probably began as a pro forma process mandated when it became known that Hillary was using an unsecured private server for secret government communications. This triggered the initial investigation. So far, so good. However, during the early phases of that investigation, it came to light that Hillary had deleted 33,000 emails UNDER SUBPOENA. At that point, Ms. Lynch SHOULD have stepped in and charged Hillary, right then and there, with obstruction of justice, a felony. This action on Ms. Lynch’s part, as you know, did not occur. In politically motivated dereliction of duty, Mrs. Lynch brought no charges. Instead, Ms. Lynch, concerned about how her flagrant omission would appear, must have asked Director Comey to create an investigational smokescreen “looking into” the private server. This would, it was hoped, keep America’s attention diverted from the more clear cut charges of obstruction of justice. Dutifully Mr. Comey complied and carried out, what amounts to a sham investigation, which culminated in in his disgraceful press conference in July absolving Mrs. Clinton of any criminality (By the way, have you EVER seen a more guilty looking guy than he was while delivering that speech? I certainly haven’t!).
>Now, if the FBI was really interested in the pursuit of justice, they would have STARTED the investigation by taking testimony from Hillary, not ENDED it that way. And, then, there’s the little known issue of Mrs. Clinton’s “testimony” itself. Dear reader, were you aware that the FBI did NOT require Mrs. Clinton to testify UNDER OATH? Can you BELIEVE that the FBI allowed Mrs. Clinton to testify without being under oath? Were you also aware, dear reader, that the FBI did NOT record Mrs. Clinton’s testimony? Can you BELIEVE that the FBI didn’t record Mrs. Clinton’s testimony? (Source: Jullian Hatten writing in The Hill, July 7, 2016). So, believe it or not, NO oath was taken, and NO recording was made! Apparently, they took notes! How quaint! How absolutely charming! It boggles the mind! Who ever heard of such a thing? What is going on here? What kind of investigation is this? You might expect this kind of thing in Venezuela, or a banana republic, but not in the USA! Yet here it IS, and here we ARE!
>It is my suspicion that Mr. Comey was aware that his actions were so questionable that he became concerned that his roll in the investigation might result, later, in HIM being investigated for his actions and, perhaps, subsequently charged with felonies himself! That’s when, I believe, he decided to send the letter to Congress “reopening” the investigation. While this clever maneuver would bolster his personal defense (if it became necessary), it drew the immediate wrath of Ms. Lynch, who must have responded with threats that she would charge Mr. Comey with violation of the Hatch Act, resulting in his dismissal and prosecution. Under this pressure Mr. Comey “caved” and fraudulently “wrapped up” his investigation with no prosecutorial recommendation, as he had been instructed to do. How do we know it was fraudulently wrapped up? Simple: there is NO way that they could have properly read and evaluated the 650,000 emails recently in question in the time allotted.
>So, with Comey’s “cave in” and Lynch’s politicaly motivated dereliction of duty, it looks like Hillary may, once again, laugh in the face of justice. (Laws are meant for “little people”, certainly not for HER). Hopefully this type of forced “exoneration” will not be enough to fool the electorate, and they’ll see this masquerade for what it is, and vote accordingly. One can HOPE, anyway.
>Going forward, the Hatch Act will have to be amended so that it does not effectively “gag” criminal investigators in similar circumstances in the future. And a Congressional investigation into both Comey and Lynch’s actions MUST be carried out, under, most likely, the auspices of a special prosecutor. Political subterfuge as carried out by Hillary, Lynch and Comey, can not be tolerated in any nation of laws and due process. And it certainly can not be tolerated in our great nation.
>Lastly, it’s my fervent hope, that, somewhere out there in cyber space, someone HAS the relevant emails, and will release them, and soon!
>We KNOW that there is incriminating evidence in those emails! We can be ABSOLUTELY sure of it! How? Simple: because Hillary DELETED them! We KNOW that she is a very CALCULATING individual. We know that she does NOTHING with out a good reason. We know that it would not have escaped her attention that deleting emails UNDER SUBPOENA would place her in legal jeopardy. We know that she would have been aware of this. We know, therefore, that the fact that she DID DELETE the emails anyway tells us that there MUST have been evidence on those emails that was so incriminating, and so damaging, that she would risk tremendous legal jeopardy to delete them. It’s that simple! We can be SURE of it. And we can PROVE it, if those emails can be found. If the emails are found, I believe it would be “game over” for Mrs. Clinton.
>So, if you are reading this Mr. Assange, Mr. Anonymous, Mr. Guccifer, or anyone else, if you have those emails, NOW is the time to post them! NOW, before it’s too late. NOW!