In a story on Friday, the Washington Examiner reported that the House Judiciary Committee is preparing to question FBI ‘officials”, including Director James Comey about allegations of perjury against Hillary Clinton. The allegations involve statements Sec. Clinton made before Congress which apparently contradict statements she gave to the FBI as noted by Mr. Comey when he announced that, while Clinton was “careless” in handling confidential national security information, she would not be criminally charged. Mainly because, in Comey’s view, she didn’t really “intend” to do anything wrong.
An excerpt from the Examiner story includes details of “four of the Democratic nominee’s assertions that clashed with evidence Comey revealed to the oversight panel last month, including her insistence that “no material marked classified had passed through her network”:
“Comey testified that his agents had recovered at least three emails bearing classification markings from the multiple devices Clinton used to communicate while serving as secretary of state.”
“Three emails…”?
What about the 19 “Secret” ones that were widely reported to have been found early this year?
From the “Daily Caller” as reported last February:
“Nineteen of the approximately 1,700 emails released on Monday by the State Department contain information that has been classified as “Secret,” the second-highest classification category.
“That marks the largest number of “Secret” emails contained in any of 14 batches of Clinton emails that the State Department has released since last May. Forty-four emails out of the more than 52,000 pages of Clinton’s work-related emails have been found to have “Secret” information.”
Or how about the eight chains containing top secret information as reported in early July.
From Politafact.com — (not a known transmitter of conservative spin)
In total, the investigation found 110 emails in 52 email chains containing information that was classified at the time it was sent or received. Eight chains contained top secret information, the highest level of classification, 36 chains contained secret information, and the remaining eight contained confidential information. Most of these emails, however, did not contain markings clearly delineating their status.
Even so, Clinton and her team still should have known the information was not appropriate for an unclassified system, Comey said.
“There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position or in the position of those with whom she was corresponding about the matters should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation,” Comey said of some of the top secret chains.
To describe the FBI’s work over the last couple of years in its investigations of alleged corruption and wrongdoing by various agencies of the Obama administration as “shoddy” is an insult to shoddy workmanship. A roofing project that fails to prevent massive leakage is “shoddy”.
The FBI, in looking into the well-documented illegal abuses of the IRS, including destruction of evidence and deliberate lying, yet finding no evidence of wrongdoing isn’t “shoddy”. It’s deliberate malfeasance and rampant incompetence, or, corruption…in our opinion.
James Comey has been widely hailed as a real champion of justice, incorruptible, honest and committed to doing the right thing almost beyond belief. Seeing how Comey behaved while with the Bush administration, where he won his “bones” as a modern day “untouchable” Elliott Ness, we have always been skeptical of Mr. Comey’s universally acclaimed reputation.
His personal actions in the Clinton investigation, and his bureau’s performance in recent cases involving Obama administration scandals, has certainly and rightly damaged that perception.
(Oh, and just a quick word from another of our favorite “champions” of good government: Rep. Elijah Cummings, ranking Democrat on the Oversight Committee, called the perjury referral “frivolous.”)
DLH with R Mall
