Personal Blogs

I have always been confused about Comey's indictment/exoneration news interview, where he laid out a compelling case to indict Clinton but then said, "Nope, not enough."

Prior to this presentation, the word was that Comey was facing a rebellion by FBI agents who knew that there was enough to indict Hillary and wouldn't put up with sweeping it under the rug. This article suggests that was the case.

So, probably, Comey's presentation was aimed at his FBI constituency and was intended to acknowledge what they knew but then "bafflegab" the presentation with "lawyerese" so that they might decide that he was acting in good faith and following the law.

If that's the case, Comey looks more corrupt.

//Republicans on key congressional committees say they have uncovered new irregularities and contradictions inside the FBI?s probe of Hillary Clinton?s email server.

For the first time, investigators say they have secured written evidence that the FBI believed there was evidence that some laws were broken when the former secretary of State and her top aides transmitted classified information through her insecure private email server, lawmakers and investigators told The Hill.

That evidence includes passages in FBI documents stating the ?sheer volume? of classified information that flowed through Clinton?s insecure emails was proof of criminality as well as an admission of false statements by one key witness in the case, the investigators said.//

There is a cancer in the FBI and Deep State that needs to be excised.

Full post as published by Lex Communis on January 07, 2018 (boomark / email).