FBI recommends no charges to be filed against Clinton

[Teh One Who Knocks]

FOX News


http://i.imgur.com/8KSSJev.jpg

FBI Director James Comey announced Tuesday he will not recommend the Department of Justice seek criminal charges against Hillary Clinton for her personal email use while secretary of state.

The decision helps remove what was arguably the biggest threat to her presidential campaign going forward – a criminal referral that could have led to an indictment – just weeks before her party’s national convention in Philadelphia where she is set to seal her nomination as the Democrat standard bearer.

Clinton consistently had downplayed the FBI investigation, even calling it a “security review,” and as recently as June 3 said there was “absolutely no possibility” she’d be indicted. Weeks ago, a scathing State Department inspector general report directly countered her long-running claim that her personal email use was allowed, though her campaign continued to defend the candidate’s actions.

In the wake of that report, presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump stepped up his criticism of her email actions and said she belongs in “jail.”

The DOJ decision does not strip the email controversy as a campaign issue – Trump and the Republicans are sure to keep hammering it as the campaign lurches into full general election mode post-conventions – but shows the federal investigation did not determine the actions to be criminal, even if they were ill-advised and potentially damaging to national security.

The decision comes more than a year after knowledge of Clinton’s use of a personal email and server first became public. Clinton responded at the time with a point-by-point written explanation and a press conference in which she said she had opted to use her personal server for “convenience.”

But critics said she was clearly circumventing government systems in order to try to shield her communications from public records requests, potentially putting sensitive and highly classified government secrets at risk in the process.

During a subsequent review, more than 2,000 emails on the server were found to have contained information now deemed classified, though they apparently were not marked classified when sent.

[FBD]

Way to go Fox news, omit that relevant information about multiple servers and the acknowledgement that there were over 100 emails known to be accessed by unknown entities, ~8 of which were top secret.


ONE of these is enough to destroy anyone's career - that's not part of the oligarchy.

Clinton KNOWS she is above the law and that's why she's been flaunting it

[RBP]

http://i.imgur.com/ddc2Uu5.jpg

[Teh One Who Knocks]

http://i.imgur.com/5GSO6cT.png

[PorkChopSandwiches]

I'm glad they got this one right, for a minute I thought they would fuck it up

[Godfather]

http://i.imgur.com/ZXI9q1o.png

[Godfather]

So... according to the FBI she's not 'criminally negligent' (despite intentionally deleting a fuckton of stuff)... just regular negligent and stupid? Haven't like a LOT of people gone to jail for that very thing

[DemonGeminiX]

Comey's full statement:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghph_361wa0&ab_channel=C-SPAN

[DemonGeminiX]

So... according to the FBI she's not 'criminally negligent' (despite intentionally deleting a fuckton of stuff)... just regular negligent and stupid? Haven't like a LOT of people gone to jail for that very thing

Pretty much, yes. General Petraeus was convicted of a misdemeanor and his security clearance was revoked for something similar, and I know of at least 3 servicemen that were convicted of similar negligent behavior and they were sentenced to prison time, and basically their lives are now ruined.

Several things: the FBI doesn't indict people, they make a recommendation to the prosecutors at the Department of Justice based on the evidence they uncover. The prosecutors review the evidence and then make the decision whether or not to indict someone. Normally, the FBI doesn't give public statements as to what they recommend to the DOJ. It's still possible that the DOJ could hand down an indictment, although I think it's highly unlikely, given the political bias that dominates the Executive branch, which the DOJ is a part of.

Comey punted, and I think it's because he knows that the political bias within the DOJ won't allow an indictment to be handed down. Our best bet is to rely on the people to elect Trump in November, and let Trump go after her with all guns blazing.

In other news, Obama's joined Clinton on the campaign trail and they're using Air Force 1 to get from place to place now, courtesy of the US taxpayers. Go ahead and tell me what that looks like.

[Teh One Who Knocks]

http://i.imgur.com/dkrUpta.jpg

[FBD]

So... according to the FBI she's not 'criminally negligent' (despite intentionally deleting a fuckton of stuff)... just regular negligent and stupid? Haven't like a LOT of people gone to jail for that very thing

Basically, she's been intentionally extremely criminally negligent and sold state secrets in order to solicit "donations" for the Clinton slush fund...oh I mean "foundation."

But since we have two sets of laws in this country, one for the plebes and one for the connected, she dindu nuffin.

[FBD]

What is shocking is that the FBI director was clearly ignoring the US code itself, where in Section 793, subsection (f),"Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793)", it makes it quite clear that intent is not a key consideration in a case like this when deciding to press charges, to wit:




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.

What is even more shocking is that according to Comey, "we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts."

Well, we did. Here is the FBI itself, less than a year ago, charging one Bryan H. Nishimura, 50, of Folsom, who pleaded guilty (https://www.fbi.gov/sacramento/press-releases/2015/folsom-naval-reservist-is-sentenced-after-pleading-guilty-to-unauthorized-removal-and-retention-of-classified-materials)to "unauthorized removal and retention of classified materials" without malicious intent, in other words precisely what the FBI alleges Hillary did (h/t @DavidSirota (https://twitter.com/davidsirota/status/750355877920542721)):




U.S. Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman immediately sentenced Nishimura to two years of probation, a $7,500 fine, and forfeiture of personal media containing classified materials. Nishimura was further ordered to surrender any currently held security clearance and to never again seek such a clearance.

According to court documents, Nishimura was a Naval reservist deployed in Afghanistan in 2007 and 2008. In his role as a Regional Engineer for the U.S. military in Afghanistan, Nishimura had access to classified briefings and digital records that could only be retained and viewed on authorized government computers. Nishimura, however, caused the materials to be downloaded and stored on his personal, unclassified electronic devices and storage media. He carried such classified materials on his unauthorized media when he traveled off-base in Afghanistan and, ultimately, carried those materials back to the United States at the end of his deployment. In the United States, Nishimura continued to maintain the information on unclassified systems in unauthorized locations, and copied the materials onto at least one additional unauthorized and unclassified system.

Nishimura’s actions came to light in early 2012, when he admitted to Naval personnel that he had handled classified materials inappropriately. Nishimura later admitted that, following his statement to Naval personnel, he destroyed a large quantity of classified materials he had maintained in his home. Despite that, when the Federal Bureau of Investigation searched Nishimura’s home in May 2012, agents recovered numerous classified materials in digital and hard copy forms. The investigation did not reveal evidence that Nishimura intended to distribute classified information to unauthorized personnel.

This case was the product of an investigation by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Assistant United States Attorney Jean M. Hobler prosecuted the case.



And then there is Ian Bremmer who said that "it's very clear that in trying to make it go away they actually lied, repeatedly, about whether or not these materials were classified at the time. And it's the cover up frequently that gets people in trouble, it's not the actual misdeed. This was very badly mishandled by Hillary all the way through."

But then she got some much needed help from the FBI to complete the cover up.

In retrospect, perhaps former Attorney General Eric Holder said it best when he justified with the US DOJ simply refuses to bring up criminal cases against those it deems "too big to prosecute":

if you do bring a criminal charge it will have a negative impact on the national economy, perhaps world economy

And just like that, Hillary is "systemically important", if mostly for her countless Wall Street donors.

[DemonGeminiX]

We'll see what the prosecutors in the DOJ do. Maybe the case will land on the desk of somebody not bound by political affiliation.

[FBD]

:rofl: good one, I'll hold my breath for that

[RBP]

But those are some great soundbites for the election. She's not technically a criminal, just grossly negligent and irresponsible. :lol:

[FBD]

http://i.imgur.com/r9cSN4E.jpg

[DemonGeminiX]

But those are some great soundbites for the election. She's not technically a criminal, just grossly negligent and irresponsible. :lol:

He really did lay into her.

[Godfather]

I like buddy's quote

"To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject of security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now"

That's just flat out criminal. In fact this man was charged for almost the same thing. (http://theantimedia.org/this-man-was-charged-after-committing-same-crimes-as-hillary-clinton/)

Ridiculous. Hillary is in less shit than the guy who deflated some footballs. Maybe this election will spawn a third party in the system :lol:

[RBP]

If she were to be sanctioned, she couldn't even get briefed.

[RBP]

And am I missing something or did Comey just ignore the entire corruption part of the investigation. This was also about her relationship with the Clinton Foundation, wasn't it?

[DemonGeminiX]

And am I missing something or did Comey just ignore the entire corruption part of the investigation. This was also about her relationship with the Clinton Foundation, wasn't it?

I'm not sure. I was wondering the same thing.

[RBP]

http://i.imgur.com/ncVzYQl.jpg

[DemonGeminiX]

It's funny how every quip about crime that comes out of her mouth seems to describe her perfectly.

[RBP]

It's funny how every quip about crime that comes out of her mouth seems to describe her perfectly.

:+1:

[RBP]

Best comment on this...

"So the government investigated the government, and found that the government did nothing wrong."

[RBP]

http://i.imgur.com/Qx1dmRH.png

[DemonGeminiX]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBqMcQvByIc&ab_channel=TheO%27ReillyFactor,TheKellyFileandHann ity-FOXNews

[DemonGeminiX]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvLDbXZEyFo&ab_channel=TheO%27ReillyFactor,TheKellyFileandHann ity-FOXNews

[DemonGeminiX]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8I58wN2FCAc&ab_channel=TheO%27ReillyFactor,TheKellyFileandHann ity-FOXNews

[DemonGeminiX]

I just keep getting angrier and angrier over this.

[RBP]

I just keep getting angrier and angrier over this.

I get that, anger fuels this cycle. Obama was a fucking idiot today, more self-aggrandizing horse shit. But man, the sequence of events was bizarre.

[redred]

I think you're all being a bit harsh on her :outtahere:

[RBP]

I think you're all being a bit harsh on her :outtahere:

I understand your disdain, given that the politics in your country is totally tidy.

[redred]

I just don't work myself up over it, they're all as bad as each other and all have things to hide

[RBP]

I just don't work myself up over it, they're all as bad as each other and all have things to hind

So we should give up and be subjugated? The queen might like that.

[redred]

We should start a war with someone :tup:

[RBP]

We should start a war with someone :tup:

You do like to start wars.

[redred]

We've taken to joining in the ones you guys start lately :lol:

[Godfather]

I just don't work myself up over it, they're all as bad as each other and all have things to hide

Bernie reminded people today 'never to lose your sense of outrage.' Like him or not, I think that's a great point. Cynicism is easy.

These numpties are hoping people roll over and let it get swept under the rug. Why should that work.

[redred]

so if trump gets in do you think he'll come out all clean at the end ?

[DemonGeminiX]

so if trump gets in do you think he'll come out all clean at the end ?

I guess it all depends on what kind of junk you consider "dirt".

I'll hypothesize that he'll be a lot cleaner than Obama and Clinton. Put them both together and divide by 100, and Trump will still come out cleaner.

[redred]

Do you not worry that this guys only aim in life was until now make as much money for himself as possible?

[Teh One Who Knocks]

http://i.imgur.com/ew4DJUR.jpg

[redred]

where are the hillary smilies :lol:

[Pony]

Do you not worry that this guys only aim in life was until now make as much money for himself as possible?

Sure, but at least he did it as a legit businessman and not by cutting shady back room deals with foreign governments.

[Teh One Who Knocks]

By Malia Zimmerman - FOX News


http://i.imgur.com/Gwoi8pz.jpg

Hours after FBI Director James Comey’s bombshell announcement Tuesday that he would not seek criminal charges against Hillary Clinton over her use of a private email system for government work, a key lawmaker wrote the lawman demanding answers.

Sen. Ron Jonson, R-Wisc., who chairs the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, fired off the letter asking Comey a series of questions, including how many agents worked on the case, how much taxpayer money was spent on it and, perhaps more significantly, how Comey arrived at his conclusion.

“If the evidence that the FBI collected about Secretary Clinton’s use of a private email account and server did not constitute gross negligence, what set of facts would cause the FBI to recommend criminal charges under the gross negligence standard?” Johnson wrote.

Johnson recounted Comey’s 13-minute statement, in which the FBI director detailed what he called “extremely careless” handling of sensitive government emails, said the bureau could not be sure Clinton’s server was not hacked and even added that government employees who behaved similarly could expect to be sanctioned. But Comey ended the statement by saying he would not recommend to the Attorney General the pursuit of charges.

“Our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case,” Comey said.

The stunning development appears to bring to an end a potential legal nightmare for Clinton, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. But Comey’s demining words could also provide plenty of fodder to her likely opponent, Donald Trump.

Comey said 110 emails in 52 email chains discovered on Clinton’s unauthorized server were classified at the time they were sent or received, including some that were “top secret.”

“Comey let Clinton off the hook,” Trump said in a statement.

In the House, Rep Jason Chaffetz, who chairs the Oversight Committee, also had harsh words for Comey.

"The job of the FBI is to provide the fact pattern to the Justice Department and not make the political calculation that this is what a reasonable prosecutor would do. That's not the job of the FBI," Chaffetz told Fox News host Bret Baier Tuesday night.

[FBD]

fuckin bitches, INVESTIGATE!

[Teh One Who Knocks]

By Alana Goodman - Washington Free Beacon


http://i.imgur.com/b0b5gsq.jpg

FBI director James Comey’s argument on Tuesday for declining to recommend criminal charges in the Hillary Clinton email server investigation was “absolutely bizarre,” according to former U.S. prosecutors.

Comey announced at a press conference on Tuesday that the he would not recommend criminal charges to the Department of Justice in the case, despite finding that Clinton and her aides were “extremely careless” by sending hundreds of classified messages over multiple, unsecured private email servers.

While investigators concluded that information was improperly transmitted, Comey said he would not recommend criminal charges because “no reasonable prosecutor” would take up the case.

Joseph diGenova, former U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, called Comey’s statements an “absurdity in light of the conclusions that [the FBI] reached.”

“How can he spend 15 minutes describing a series of crimes being committed … and then he says no reasonable prosecutor [would prosecute]?” said diGenova. “That is ridiculous. I consider myself a reasonable prosecutor and I would have brought charges based on the facts that he accumulated.”

According to Comey, FBI investigators found that over 110 emails sent or received over Clinton’s private email system contained classified information at the time they were sent. They also found that Clinton had set up multiple private unsecured servers—as opposed to the single server that was previously reported—and that it was “possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal email account.”

Comey said investigators “did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information,” but they did find evidence “that [Clinton and her aides] were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.”

“Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case,” said Comey.

Matthew Whitaker, a former U.S. attorney for Iowa who now runs the Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust, a watchdog group that has been critical of Clinton, said Comey’s argument against a criminal referral was highly unusual for a law enforcement official.

“He said no ‘reasonable prosecutor’ would file a case. That’s where he steps out of his role as FBI director,” said Whitaker. “It’s not his decision to make at all.”

“[FBI investigators] essentially just tell you here’s the facts and here’s the law, and the law has or hasn’t been violated—it’s a strange situation,” added Whitaker. “And I’ve never seen an FBI director or agent or anybody stand up in front of the media and go through their analysis of the case and the facts. The whole thing is unprecedented.”

DiGenova said the finding that Clinton and her aides were “extremely careless” in handling the classified information would meet the standard of “gross negligence” needed to prosecute.

“The standard under the statute is gross negligence. [Comey] described the conduct as ‘extremely careless,’” said diGenova. “To me that is worse. His conclusion that no reasonable prosecutor would bring charges is completely inconsistent with his recitation of the facts and the law.”

Comey took no questions after the press conference, which came on the heels of a private meeting between Bill Clinton and Attorney General Loretta Lynch in Arizona last week. Although Lynch said they mainly discussed personal matters, the meeting was widely criticized due to the ongoing FBI investigation.

DiGenova said Comey’s decision set a damaging precedent for efforts to enforce classified information laws. He added that the press conference on Tuesday failed to put the email issue to rest and only raises news questions.

“As a result of what he did today this will never die,” said diGenova. “The public will have more to say about this even if the Bureau and the Justice Department and the president and Mrs. Clinton don’t. This is not going to go away especially after this bizarre performance.”

[FBD]

Authored by Eric Zuesse,

When the Obama Administration, on July 5th, ruled that in regard to Hillary Clinton’s privatized email system while she was Secretary of State, "Our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case” to a grand jury, because “We cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges,” they ignored the following six U.S. criminal laws, each of which undeniably describes very well what she did:

18 U.S. Code § 2232 — Destruction or removal of property to prevent seizure


(a) Destruction or Removal of Property To Prevent Seizure

Whoever, before, during, or after any search for or seizure of property by any person authorized to make such search or seizure, knowingly destroys, damages, wastes, disposes of, transfers, or otherwise takes any action, or knowingly attempts to destroy, damage, waste, dispose of, transfer, or otherwise take any action, for the purpose of preventing or impairing the Government’s lawful authority to take such property into its custody or control or to continue holding such property under its lawful custody and control, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.

(b) Impairment of In Rem Jurisdiction

Whoever, knowing that property is subject to the in rem jurisdiction of a United States court for purposes of civil forfeiture under Federal law, knowingly and without authority from that court, destroys, damages, wastes, disposes of, transfers, or otherwise takes any action, or knowingly attempts to destroy, damage, waste, dispose of, transfer, or otherwise take any action, for the purpose of impairing or defeating the court’s continuing in rem jurisdiction over the property, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.

18 U.S. Code § 1512 — Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant


(c) Whoever corruptly

(1) alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding; or

(2) otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so,

shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.



18 U.S. Code § 1519 — Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in Federal investigations and bankruptcy


Whoever knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States or any case filed under title 11, or in relation to or contemplation of any such matter or case, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.



18 U.S. Code § 2071 — Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally


(a) Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.



18 U.S. Code § 641 — Public money, property or records


Whoever embezzles, steals, purloins, or knowingly converts to his use, or the use of another, or without authority, sells, conveys or disposes of any record, voucher, money, or thing of value of the United States or of any department or agency thereof, or any property made or being made under contract for the United States or any department or agency thereof, …

Shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than ten years or both. …



18 U.S. Code § 793 — Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information …


(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 not more than $10, 000 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both. (g) If two or more persons conspire to violate any of the foregoing provisions of this section, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy, shall be subject to the punishment provided for the offense which is the object of such conspiracy.

[DemonGeminiX]

Do you not worry that this guys only aim in life was until now make as much money for himself as possible?

No. To make as much money for yourself as possible is the American way. He's a success story. Kudos to him.

[FBD]

Do you not worry that this guys only aim in life was until now make as much money for himself as possible?

his old playboy interview was good

he always maintained that he didnt want to get into politics, unless things got so fkd up that he felt he was the only man for the job :lol:

[Teh One Who Knocks]

By Erica Werner, AP Congressional Correspondent


http://i.imgur.com/VWJ35Cu.jpg

Angry House Republicans are announcing plans to investigate FBI Director James Comey's decision against pressing criminal charges for Hillary Clinton over her handling of classified emails.

House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., said Comey's decision defies explanation and leaves many questions unanswered. The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee called Comey to testify on Thursday, and the Judiciary panel announced that Attorney General Loretta Lynch would appear next week.

"The FBI should give us all of their findings," Ryan told Fox News Channel's "The Kelly File" on Tuesday. Ryan said Clinton is "competing for commander in chief here, so I think there's a whole accounting that needs to happen."

Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, chairman of the committee, said Comey would testify before his panel on Thursday.

"The FBI's recommendation is surprising and confusing," Chaffetz said. "The fact pattern presented by Director Comey makes clear Secretary Clinton violated the law. Individuals who intentionally skirt the law must be held accountable."

Democrats on the committee attacked the decision as political.

"Republican after Republican praised Director Comey's impeccable record of independence—right up until the moment he issued his conclusion," said the committee's top Democrat, Rep. Elijah Cummings of Maryland. "The only emergency here is that yet another Republican conspiracy theory is slipping away."

The FBI is supposed to be insulated from partisanship, with directors appointed to serve 10-year terms under legislation passed in 1976 following J. Edgar Hoover's extraordinary 48-year tenure. Comey is a Republican first nominated to a senior Justice Department post by George W. Bush and tapped to lead the FBI in 2013 by President Barack Obama.

But Comey's declaration that "no charges are appropriate" against Clinton is drawing a deluge of GOP criticism, even though Comey prefaced it by calling Clinton "extremely careless" in her handling of highly sensitive information. He also suggested she sent emails with information that was classified at the time, contrary to her previous claims.

"What really just mystifies me is the case he makes and then the conclusion he draws, and what bothers me about this is the Clintons really are living above the law. They're being held by different set of standards. That is clearly what this looks like," Ryan said. "And this is why we're going to have hearings, and this is why I think that Comey should give us all the publicly available information to see how and why they reached these conclusions."

Ryan also said the government's director of national intelligence should block the presumed Democratic presidential nominee's access to classified information.

The chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., also criticized Comey's conclusions and released a lengthy letter to the director demanding answers to a series of questions about how he reached them.

Rep. Mike Turner, R-Ohio, charged that "the investigation by the FBI is steeped in political bias" and called for appointment of an independent counsel in the case.

Another House Republican, Paul Gosar of Arizona, tweeted a cartoon of a Monopoly "Get out of jail free" card showing a winged Clinton flying out of a cage labeled "FBI."

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, voiced "serious concerns about the integrity of Director Comey's decision," arguing that Comey "has rewritten a clearly worded federal criminal statute."

Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., a former attorney general in her state who is in a tough re-election race, complained, "The lives of Americans depend on the protection of classified information, and failing to enforce the law in this case sets a dangerous precedent for our national security."

Donald Trump, the presumptive GOP presidential candidate who looks certain to face Democrat Clinton for president, complained that the system is "rigged," and that "it was no accident that charges were not recommended against Hillary the exact same day as President Obama campaigns with her for the first time."

Yet Comey's approach also drew scattered complaints from Democrats who objected to his lengthy criticism of Clinton if he wasn't going to recommend an indictment. "Once again, Clinton gets worse treatment than anyone else would. I can't remember an FBI press conference like that when charges declined," Matthew Miller, a former Justice Department spokesman and Democratic operative and congressional aide, said over Twitter.

Comey, who served as deputy attorney general in the Bush Justice Department, seemed to anticipate his critics, offering something of a pre-buttal at the end of his statement Tuesday.

"I know there will be intense public debate in the wake of this recommendation, as there was throughout the investigation," Comey said. "What I can assure the American people is that this investigation was done honestly, confidently and independently. No outside influence of any kind was brought to bear."

[FBD]

Really? Giving an order to set up a parallel email server to keep all of your communications away from FOIA requests is just a conspiracy? :lol:


Well....

:-k

Yeah, it is a conspiracy, and Cankles & Bubba are conspirators.

Now fucking prosecute them.