The FBI Investigation of EmailGate Was a Sham


#1

From the moment the EmailGate scandal went public more than a year ago, it was obvious that the Federal Bureau of Investigation never had much enthusiasm for prosecuting Hillary Clinton or her friends. Under President Obama, the FBI grew so politicized that it became impossible for the Bureau to do its job – at least where high-ranking Democrats are concerned

By now most agree with this assessment since the FBI did not put her under oath nor even recorded her answers if any at all. Under obama many department have abdicated their responsibilities to push politics over doing what they were tasked to.

This is not a new phenomenon but obama as pushed it far beyond what we have seen in the past. Usually new administration change a few things but in this case we have seen agency after agency devolve into partisan politics which have worked overtime to destroy the foundation of the nation.

Anything from the EPA,IRS, Land bureau, military, activists judges, and more have done their best to reshape the nation into something resembling a third world economy bent on anarchism


#2

I’ve said all of this before but I still don’t understand the logic behind the reason they gave not to prosecute her. They couldn’t prove intent? She was briefed on the rules & ignored them. To me, that’s intent. Besides that when did we skip to a legal system where your innocent because you didn’t know? I didn’t know that I was drunk when I swerved over the line & killed that person so I have to be found innocent. I didn’t know that firing a gun into a crowd might kill someone. I didn’t know MIGHT be a reason for a lesser charge but it’s not a reason for not prosecuting & in this case SHE DID KNOW.
.
Hillary was already in line to run for president & that plus her “power” put the fix in on this scandal. The funny thing is that she is an example of everything bad that BOTH parties yell about & yet gets a free pass. Now I don’t think that I would agree that if you have enough money you can get away with anything, but Hillary has certainly proved that if you have enough power you can.


#3

What we are facing now is what the Democrats said we would have faced had Richard Nixon not been brought down in 1974. Nixon and his cronies in the Justice Department were prepared to cover up for his crimes and use the power of the Federal Government to put themselves in power, perhaps permanently. It took investigations by Congress and an active, independent press to push Nixon out of office as he richly deserved.

The big difference was Nixon was a Republican who was roundly disliked by many in the Democratic Party. Therefore pulling him down, as difficult as it was, was possible because few people had any love lost for him, and the press was ready to skewer him if they could.

Today we have a lawless, dishonest Democrat, Hillary Clinton. Since the main stream press is overwhelmingly in the Democratic corner, they are going to do as much as they can to get her wrongdoing out of the way for her presidential campaign. The trouble she has broken the law so many times and lied about it so often that the story won’t go away.

On the Federal level we have the ultimate nightmare for democracy. The president and Justice Department, which includes the FBI, are all working to save Hillary Clinton from prosecution. The evidence points to holding Hillary accountable, but the politics does not.

This is why keeping her out of the White House is so important. There is no reason to believe that Hillary will reform herself once she is president. In fact it will be just the opposite. From there she will be able to hand out favors for bribes on a wholesale basis with no check or balance to oppose her. She might well become the Hugo Chavez of The United States with a far bigger pie to divvy up among her bribe payers. At the end of her first term, our democratic system could well be gone.

Some of you might think I’m overstating case, but the Federal Bureaucracy has become more powerful than Congress. The only check on it comes from the courts, and once Hillary has made just one Supreme Court appointment, that branch of government will fall in line with the president and the bureaucracy.

That’s why we have to vote for Trump, even if some of you find that distasteful. With Hillary there is a 100% chance that things will go down the shaft. She is totally dishonest and amoral. With Trump, at least it’s a throw of dice with the possibility that conservatives will have some to considerable say in what happens


#4

The FBI hadn’t even completed their investigation when they announced that they wouldn’t be recommending charges.


#5

This issue should be beyond partisan politics. It is a sad statement on the state of our society that it is not.


#6

I really wouldn’t want the FBI to bring charges. She was the Democratic nominee. Let the voters decide if they care enough to do something about it. If they proceed to elect her as president, you’ve had a jury of a hundred million Americans acquit her.

And if she loses, Trump will probably investigate her(and Bill) over the Clinton Foundation. That one won’t get waived off for political reasons.


#7

If she loses, Obama will give her the same deal that Ford gave Nixon to protect her from the vast right wing conspiracy. I’ll make book on that.


#8

If Ford had accomplished anything he will be known for only pardoning Nixon and nothing more.


#9

A lot of people at the time thought that Ford did something really great when he pardoned Nixon. I strongly disagreed then, and I still disagree with it now. Nixon got off easy for what he did, and Watergate was not the only thing. He cheated on his income taxes in 1970 and 1971 when he back dated to deeds to some vice presidential papers that he donoted. He back dated them because the law had changed which disallowed the deduction he took on them. He evaded taxes as a result.

My father got nailed on taxes because his accountant did stuff he shouldn’t have. He had to pay; Nixon didn’t. It was one more example of how the rich and connected government officicals are treated one way, and the the average citizen is treated another.


#10

I really wouldn’t want the FBI to bring charges. She was the Democratic nominee. Let the voters decide if they care enough to do something about it. If they proceed to elect her as president, you’ve had a jury of a hundred million Americans acquit her.
.
Me, I don’t care what the voters think about our laws. If it’s a law then we should follow it. If we don’t like it, then we should change it. If I were to shoot an unpopular person should I go free just because “the people” thought it was good that they were killed?
.
A lot of people at the time thought that Ford did something really great when he pardoned Nixon. I strongly disagreed then, and I still disagree with it now.
.
You break the law, you get punished. To me that’s a simple concept.


#11

Just as I was displeased when Clinton got impeached which actually did nothing. Politicians tend to gloss over each other’s offenses and it takes outside sources to get anything done. I remember Nancy Pelosi claiming when they took over congress in 2006 that they would persecute politicians and then payed the game of “investigating” which led to doing nothing till they could safely drop it.


#12

Are you going to say that we should punish the little sisters of the poor for breaking the healthcare law?

What about the man in New York who was picked up as he had 9 rounds in his pistol, whereas the new law only allowed for 7? A gun he had owned lawfully since before the law changed?


#13

I’m saying that if it’s the law, we follow it or get arrested. If it’s an unjust law then we change or get rid of it. But we don’t just follow the laws that we agree with.


#14

A law that is unconstitutional is null and void.


#15

Exposed: FBI Director James Comey’s Clinton Foundation Connection

Exposed: FBI Director James Comey’s Clinton Foundation Connection

AP Photos

by Patrick Howley10 Sep 20164,784

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A review of FBI Director James Comey’s professional history and relationships shows that the Obama cabinet leader — now under fire for his handling of the investigation of Hillary Clinton — is deeply entrenched in the big-money cronyism culture of Washington, D.C. His personal and professional relationships — all undisclosed as he announced the Bureau would not prosecute Clinton — reinforce bipartisan concerns that he may have politicized the criminal probe.

These concerns focus on millions of dollars that Comey accepted from a Clinton Foundation defense contractor, Comey’s former membership on a Clinton Foundation corporate partner’s board, and his surprising financial relationship with his brother Peter Comey, who works at the law firm that does the Clinton Foundation’s taxes.

Lockheed Martin

When President Obama nominated Comey to become FBI director in 2013, Comey promised the United States Senate that he would recuse himself on all cases involving former employers.

But Comey earned $6 million in one year alone from Lockheed Martin. Lockheed Martin became a Clinton Foundation donor that very year.

Comey served as deputy attorney general under John Ashcroft for two years of the Bush administration. When he left the Bush administration, he went directly to Lockheed Martin and became vice president, acting as a general counsel.

How much money did James Comey make from Lockheed Martin in his last year with the company, which he left in 2010? More than $6 million in compensation.

Lockheed Martin is a Clinton Foundation donor. The company admitted to becoming a Clinton Global Initiative member in 2010.

According to records, Lockheed Martin is also a member of the American Chamber of Commerce in Egypt, which paid Bill Clinton $250,000 to deliver a speech in 2010.

In 2010, Lockheed Martin won 17 approvals for private contracts from the Hillary Clinton State Department.

HSBC Holdings

In 2013, Comey became a board member, a director, and a Financial System Vulnerabilities Committee member of the London bank HSBC Holdings.

“Mr. Comey’s appointment will be for an initial three-year term which, subject to re-election by shareholders, will expire at the conclusion of the 2016 Annual General Meeting,” according to HSBC company records.

HSBC Holdings and its various philanthropic branches routinely partner with the Clinton Foundation. For instance, HSBC Holdings has partnered with Deutsche Bank through the Clinton Foundation to “retrofit 1,500 to 2,500 housing units, primarily in the low- to moderate-income sector” in “New York City.”

“Retrofitting” refers to a Green initiative to conserve energy in commercial housing units. Clinton Foundation records show that the Foundation projected “$1 billion in financing” for this Green initiative to conserve people’s energy in low-income housing units.

Who Is Peter Comey?

When our source called the Chinatown offices of D.C. law firm DLA Piper and asked for “Peter Comey,” a receptionist immediately put him through to Comey’s direct line. But Peter Comey is not featured on the DLA Piper website.

Peter Comey serves as “Senior Director of Real Estate Operations for the Americas” for DLA Piper. James Comey was not questioned about his relationship with Peter Comey in his confirmation hearing.

DLA Piper is the firm that performed the independent audit of the Clinton Foundation in November during Clinton-World’s first big push to put the email scandal behind them. DLA Piper’s employees taken as a whole represent a major Hillary Clinton 2016 campaign donation bloc and Clinton Foundation donation base.

DLA Piper ranks #5 on Hillary Clinton’s all-time career Top Contributors list, just ahead of Goldman Sachs.

And here is another thing: Peter Comey has a mortgage on his house that is owned by his brother James Comey, the FBI director.

Peter Comey’s financial records, obtained by Breitbart News, show that he bought a $950,000 house in Vienna, Virginia, in June 2008. He needed a $712,500 mortgage from First Savings Mortgage Corporation.

But on January 31, 2011, James Comey and his wife stepped in to become Private Party lenders. They granted a mortgage on the house for $711,000. Financial records suggest that Peter Comey took out two such mortgages from his brother that day.

This financial relationship between the Comey brothers began prior to James Comey’s nomination to become director of the FBI.

DLA Piper did not answer Breitbart News’ question as to whether James Comey and Peter Comey spoke at any point about this mortgage or anything else during the Clinton email investigation.

Peter Comey Re-Designed the FBI Building

FBI Director James Comey grew up in the New Jersey suburbs with his brother Peter. Both Comeys were briefly taken captive in 1977 by the “Ramsey rapist,” but the boys managed to escape through a window in their home, and neither boy was harmed.

James Comey became a prosecutor who worked on the Gambino crime family case. He went on to the Bush administration, a handful of private sector jobs, and then the Obama administration in 2013.

Peter Comey, meanwhile, went into construction.

After getting an MBA in real estate and urban development from George Washington University in 1998, Peter Comey became an executive at a company that re-designed George Washington University between 2004 and 2007 while his brother was in town working for the Bush administration.

In January 2009, at the beginning of the Obama administration, Peter Comey became “a real estate and construction consultant” for Procon Consulting.

Procon Consulting’s client list includes “FBI Headquarters Washington, DC.”

So what did Procon Consulting do for FBI Headquarters? Quite a bit, apparently. According to the firm’s records:

Procon provided strategic project management for the consolidation of over 11,000 FBI personnel into one, high security, facility.

Since 1972 the Federal Bureau of Investigation has had its headquarters in a purpose built 2.1 million square foot building on Pennsylvania Avenue. Having become functionally obsolete and in need of major repairs, GSA and the FBI were considering ways to meet the space needs required to maintain the Bureau’s mission and consolidate over 11,000 personnel.

Procon assisted GSA in assessing the FBI’s space needs and options for fulfilling those needs. Services provided included project management related to site evaluations, budgeting, due diligence, and the development of procurement and funding strategies.

Those “funding strategies” included talking to “stakeholders”: “Worked with stakeholders and key leadership to identify strategic objectives, goals and long range plans for capital and real estate projects.”

Procon Consulting obtained its contract for FBI Headquarters prior to James Comey’s nomination to serve as director of the FBI.

In June 2011, Peter Comey left Procon Consulting to become “Senior Director of Real Estate Operations for the Americas” for DLA Piper.

Peter Comey has generated some controversy in that role. According to Law360 in May 2013 (the same month that James Comey was confirmed as someone being considered by Obama to become FBI director):

Two real estate services businesses filed a $10 million suit against the law firm Monday alleging it stiffed them on as much as $760,000 of work done at DLA Piper’s Chicago office and improperly gave proprietary information to a competitor.

….

The plaintiffs take particular aim at Peter Comey, DLA Piper’s senior director of real estate operations. Leasecorp and SpaceLogik include several emails in the complaint that are purportedly from DLA Piper senior real estate partners Jay Epstein and Rich Klawiter and are sharply critical of Comey’s handling of the matter. In one email, Epstein wrote that “it’s an embarrassment for the firm to be treating someone who we are working with like this.”

In another email allegedly from Klawiter on Feb. 20, the DLA Piper partner informed Leasecorp President Michael Walker, a principal for both plaintiffs, that Comey had sent him and Epstein an email claiming that the real estate services firms were behind on their contractual obligations.

“I just received an email from Peter (Jay was also a recipient) that is so inflammatory I can’t even send it or you’ll hit the roof,” Klawiter said in the email, according to the complaint. “This is not going to end well.”


#16

Comey has long history of cases ending favorable to Clintons

Comey has long history of cases ending favorable to Clintons

In Berger probe said ‘we take issues of classified information very seriously’

Published: 07/07/2016 at 8:54 PM
WND EXCLUSIVE

FBI Director James Comey
FBI Director James Comey

NEW YORK – FBI Director James Comey has a long history of involvement in Department of Justice actions that arguably ended up favorable to the Clintons.

In 2004, Comey, then serving as a deputy attorney general in the Justice Department, apparently limited the scope of the criminal investigation of Sandy Berger, which left out former Clinton administration officials who may have coordinated with Berger in his removal and destruction of classified records from the National Archives. The documents were relevant to accusations that the Clinton administration was negligent in the build-up to the 9/11 terrorist attack.

On Tuesday, Comey announced that despite evidence of “extreme negligence by Hillary Clinton and her top aides regarding the handling of classified information through a private email server, the FBI would not refer criminal charges to Attorney General Loretta Lynch and the Justice Department.

Curiously, Berger, Lynch and Cheryl Mills all worked as partners in the Washington law firm Hogan & Hartson, which prepared tax returns for the Clintons and did patent work for a software firm that played a role in the private email server Hillary Clinton used when she was secretary of state.

With Hillary making another run for president, don’t get caught up in the lies and spin! In “Hillary Unhinged: In Her Own Words,” find out who the true Hillary is with this raw and humorous collection of quotes that pitilessly underscores her hypocrisy

Lynch and Comey both served as U.S. attorney in New York, Lynch for the Eastern District of New York, and Comey for the Southern District of New York. They crossed paths in the investigation of HSBC bank, which avoided criminal charges in a massive money-laundering scandal for which the bank paid a $1.9 billion fine.

After Attorney General John Aschroft recused himself in the Valerie Plame affair in 2004, Comey appointed as special counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald, who ended up convicting “Scooter” Libby, a top aide to then Vice President Dick Cheney, of perjury and obstruction of justice. The charge was based on the accusations of Plame and her former ambassador husband, Joe Wilson – both partisan supporters of Bill and Hillary Clinton – that Libby outed her as a CIA agent.

New York Times reporter Judith Miller’s 2015 memoir strongly suggests Fitzgerald improperly manipulated testimony and withheld crucial evidence in obtaining a conviction against Libby in his 2007 trial.

Prosecutor in Berger case

As deputy attorney general, Comey was involved in the investigation of Berger, as Fox News reported in 2004

Berger at that time was under criminal investigation by the Justice Department for removing from the National Archives various classified documents that should have been turned over to the independent commission investigating the 9/11 terror attacks and for removing handwritten notes he made while reviewing the documents.

The New York Times reported in 2005 that Republican leaders speculated Berger removed the documents from the National Archives because he was trying to conceal material that could be damaging to the Clinton administration.

There is no evidence Comey’s investigation for the Justice Department made any attempt to determine if anyone affiliated with the Clinton White House prompted Berger or coordinated with him in the decision to remove the classified documents.

Sandy Berger
Various statements Comey made about Berger’s mishandling of classified documents bear comparison to his comments regarding Hillary Clinton’s email server.

In 2004, Fox News noted Comey told reporters he could not comment on the Berger investigation but did address the general issue of mishandling classified documents.

“As a general matter, we take issues of classified information very seriously,” Comey said in response to a reporter’s question.

Video: Attorney general to accept FBI findings in Clinton email probe

He added that the department had prosecuted and sought administrative sanctions against people for mishandling classified information.

“It’s our lifeblood, those secrets,” Comey continued. “It’s against the law for anyone to intentionally mishandle classified documents either by taking it to give to somebody else or by mishandling it in a way that is outside the government regulations.”

On April 1, 2005, Berger pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of intentionally removing documents from the National Archives and destroying some of them. He was fined $50,000, sentenced to 100 hours of community service and two years probation. Also, his national security license was stripped for two years.

Messages found stored on Clinton’s private email server show that Berger – a convicted thief of classified documents – had been advising Clinton while she served as secretary of state and had access to emails containing classified information.

For example, in an email dated Sept. 22, 2009, Berger advised Clinton advised how she could leverage information to make Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu more cooperative in discussions with the Obama administration over a settlement freeze.

Related stories (Story continues below):

Top 30 things ‘more trusted than Hillary’

Comey: FBI didn’t put Hillary under oath

Above the law? Hillary’s HUGE scandal list explodes to 25

‘No individual too powerful to jail’ – not even Hillary

Allen West ‘delighted’ FBI won’t prosecute Clinton

Trump and Cruz bury the hatchet

Trump points out 6-sided Disney ‘Frozen’ star to ‘dishonest media’

Law firm ties Berger, Lynch, Mills

Berger worked as a partner in the Washington law firm Hogan & Hartson from 1973 to 1977, before taking a position as the deputy director of policy planning at the State Department in the Carter administration.

When Carter lost his re-election bid, Berger returned to Hogan & Hartson, where he worked until he took leave in 1988 to act as foreign policy adviser in Gov. Michael Dukakis’ presidential campaign.

When Dukakis was defeated, Berger returned to Hogan & Hartson until he became foreign policy adviser for Bill Clinton’s presidential campaign in 1992.

On March 28, WND reported Lynch was a litigation partner for eight years at Hogan & Hartson, from March 2002 through April 2010.

read the rest, too long to put it here


#17

^ tl;dr

The concept of jury nullification is also a simple concept.

And laws are made to serve people, not the other way around.


#18

The fact that emails revealed that Hillary was looking for ways to delete emails and even bought software to doing so was not a hint she was trying to skirt the law? No the fix was in since the FBI did everything to not follow through.


#19

Any normal person that mishandles classified info gets nailed hard. Even the smallest of compromise of classified information launches an investigation to determine the extent and severity of the leak. What Clinton did was far beyond anything done before except maybe Snowden. She should have been indicted, tried, and thrown in jail.