July 5, 2016

"FBI recommends no charges against Clinton in email probe."

Politico reports that Comey said:
"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. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before deciding whether to bring charges."
Drudge presents it this way:
How do you feel about this? I'm relieved. I wouldn't have liked to see a criminal law proceeding skewing and meddling with the political process now that it's so far along.

483 comments:

1 – 200 of 483   Newer›   Newest»
Matthew Sablan said...

Can't say I'm surprised.

We don't just have evidence of potential violations. We have them on paper admitting to breaking the rules. The State Department's analysis says they broke the rules.

But, rich people get different rules than not rich people.

virgil xenophon said...

QUELLE surprise..

Matthew Sablan said...

The FBI knows she sent and received top secret information on her private server.

But, hey, there's not enough evidence to prove if she sent and received top secret information on her private server.

The Bergall said...

"Secretary Clinton broke the law, but committed no crime"............

Have I missed something?

Yancey Ward said...

Well, I guess Rush Limbaugh and Trump were right all along. Comey was craftily sold to the public for a reason. Mea Culpa- I believed our republic wasn't so far gone- I was wrong.

shiloh said...

Keep hope alive!

Matthew Sablan said...

Per Hot Air: "Update: 110 e-mails had classified information at the time the messages were sent — eight of which were top-secret or higher. The FBI also found “several thousand” work-related e-mails that Hillary had not turned over to State. Huge."

Any non-Clinton would be getting charged.

rhhardin said...

It's a family. As in mobs.

Brando said...

That's all very true about prosecutorial discretion, but good luck convincing people that the fact of who Hillary is didn't have some effect on tipping the scales against prosecution.

If this is their conclusion, though, so much for one of the GOP "hail marys" for this year. But if they can find some link between Lynch (or other Obama admin official) influence and the FBI recommendation, the GOP might have something to go on here.

Jim Gust said...

The fix was in from the beginning.

But this is not great news for Democrats.

Matthew Sablan said...

"Update: Comey says there were “several servers,” not just one."

-- First I heard of this.

TCom said...

Hillary used an insecure server with Top Secret and SAP information on it, and used that server even in foreign countries.

But Trump tweeted a six-sided star.

I think we all know who the worse person is.

Unknown said...

"who really cares" and "what difference does it make"

Nonapod said...

We're officially living in a fully corrupt and lawless society. I hope people stop paying their taxes.

Rusty said...

The fix is in.
Chicago politics on a national level.
You were warned.

virgil xenophon said...

Banana bana bo bana, bana fana bo fana, banana banana bo bana, BANANA REPUBLIC!

PB said...

He lays out a case for prosecution that would seem to be fairly strong against any other individual, but recommends no prosecution? Absurd.

Laws are for the little people.

Get ready for the onslaught of executive orders in a new Clinton administration. She's going to really take that out for a spin.

Carol said...

Well she did earn the modifier "extremely careless" so Trump ought to be able to run with that. Who wants an "extremely careless" president?

readering said...

Hopefully Sanders can now take a deep breath and endorse his opponent, who is campaigning with the POTUS.

Hagar said...

What Dir. Comey said, I think, was that if we insist on electing corrupt politicians to office, there is not much the police an do about it.

Fernandinande said...

Surprise, surprise surprise!

n.n said...

Perhaps they are trying to trigger someone in order to save the Clinton campaign from democratic losses.

As for "we are now..."... Well, there has been a State-established Pro-Choice (i.e. selective morality, ethics, law, inclusion, rights) Church for some time. The Democrats can literally get away with the [class] diversity, the "final solution", and channeling Mengele for votes and profit.

tim in vermont said...

Of course you are relieved, because she ran out the clock on justice. Whew!

David Begley said...

Extreme carelessness apparently doesn't equal gross negligence.

Rigged.

surfed said...

So. The election between Dumb and Dumber continues apace.

Mike Sylwester said...

A prosecution would re-victimize the people who went through this horror.

PB said...

Hillary used a non-secure server for classified, top-secret and SAP information and should have known better, but no prosecution? Absurd.

No violations of the Federal Records Act for not turning over government records when she departed? And were only found years later forcing her to turn them over?

Her authorizing others without security clearance to go through her email gets her off the hook?

All those people who were cashiered and prosecuted for lesser "violations" want to know where they can go to get their careers back.

shiloh said...

Althouse Hillary's in trouble ad nauseam obsession notwithstanding, on the bright side this thread should easily surpass 200 dare I say 300 posts.

Indeed, cons whining like there's no tomorrow. Pun intended.

Blog hit mania ...

PB said...

Extreme carelessness by people who should have known better, AND were brief regularly on proper handling of information is the definition of gross negligence.

John said...

Guilty as sin free as a bird

It's the Chicago way

tim in vermont said...

Shiloh the rump swab is ecstatic because Hillary only showed horrendous judgement!

She is only a careless fool! Yaay!

What about the theory that she was purposefully negligent to protect her other activities! No! Hillary is not like Nixon! No fucking way no sirree!

MadisonMan said...

I'm not surprised.

Rules are for little people.

cubanbob said...

Nixon is owed an apology and an exoneration. Silly me to think there was some level of integrity in the government; its obvious now the fix was in from the beginning. And it also looks that I was right, the FBI found it would have to refer most of the senior government officials including Obama. The Democrat Party now officially represents one of its core constituencies, criminals and traitors.

khesanh0802 said...

Whether you're a presidential candidate or a peon on the assembly line the law should be applied equally. This is an outrage, yet to be expected. Why are people fed up with the "establishment", you ask.

Ann in this case I can't agree that ignoring illegal acts is okay because it's politics.

Matthew Sablan said...

She deliberately withheld documents and lied to investigators about their existence.

If I withhold documents from the police and lie to them, that probably would be a crime.

Birkel said...

So Althouse thinks politics - this far along - should trump the rule of law?

It is only because we were a nation of laws that immigrants who came here succeeded beyond those who stayed home.

Althouse teaches law but she doesn't understand it's value, except that it protects her interests.

*spit*

Henry said...

no reasonable prosecutor

no true Scotsman

Big Mike said...

I'll vote for whomever promises to restore integrity to the federal government. (Except for Jill Stein)

David Begley said...

There goes Comey's reputation for integrity.

JoeBlow said...

"I wouldn't have liked to see criminal law proceeding skewing and meddling with the political process now that it's so far along."

I don't like to see criminality skewing and meddling with the political process. But I'm a purist.

Jersey Fled said...

Hillary is now officially OJ

rehajm said...

Unsurprising. Broke the law but committed no crime sums it up.

No similar prosecutions? Tell that to the junior officers bounced and prosecuted for accidentally zipping off an email on the wrong account...

Also, result won't be good for Hillary.

tim in vermont said...

Indeed, cons whining like there's no tomorrow. Pun intended

You are right again Shiloh, here we thought that the facts mattered, but he listed out all of the facts and then said they didn't matter, even as he declared that they did!

"You have a republic, if you can keep it!" - Ben Franklin.

Too bad we couldn't.

buwaya puti said...

Shiloh,
Your story?
We are waiting.
What is your secret sorrow?

Sydney said...

And yet your doctor can go to jail if he can't pay millions in fines for HIPAA violations. And other people can go to jail for any number of lesser violations. This nation is no longer a nation of laws, but a nation of men. Does there exist anywhere in this world a country of free men ruled by law equally applied to all? I'd like to know so I can move there.

David Docetad said...

"I wouldn't have liked to see a criminal law proceeding skewing and meddling with the political process now that it's so far along."

Nice and understandable sentiment. Of course a consequence of being too careful in criminalizing politics is that we get criminals as politicians.

Unknown said...

We've been hearing about the lack of intent and willfull violation, by Clinton, of the law for quite sometime now from many legal people. Intent was the crucial factor as many criminal law experts have said. Your dissapointment would not be so sharp today if you hadn't disregarded experts who said this is how it would go down. I guess keeping hope alive is a human trait. Now soon, today probably, we'll be hearing allegations against Comey.

TCom said...

Take careful note of shiloh's gleeful cackling, everyone.

If the Democrats manage to fully demographically change this country and establish one-party rule, that vile, grinning, shameless, gloating mug is your future. Forever.

But let's keep talking about a six sided star instead of the obvious fact that our nation is on the brink, and its semblance of trust and order disintegrates in front of our very eyes.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Ann Althouse said...I wouldn't have liked to see criminal law proceeding skewing and meddling with the political process now that it's so far along.

Ted Stevens, Rick Perry, Bob McDonnell, and Tom Delay would like to have a word with you, Professor.

tim in vermont said...

Also, result won't be good for Hillary

Bullshit. You could see the relief in Chuck Todd's face. Hillary skates, "what difference does it make at this point?"

Todd Galle said...

I believe I'd be in prison if I committed half of her offences. No, make that I'm certain I'd in a Federal Penitentiary. This will not end well. Lose the rule of law, and people will become lawless.

Tom said...

Intention!? The law doesn't require intention, merely negligence. Comey laid out the case in detail as to why Hillary broke the law multiple times, yet no charges. Today is the day America died, ironically on the day after we celebrated its independence.

TCom said...

Intent was the crucial factor as many criminal law experts have said.

'Intent' has absolutely nothing to do with the handling of SAP and Top Secret information, you absolute liar.

That's just the excuse concocted to avoid upsetting the corrupt apple cart.

tim in vermont said...

Ted Stevens, Rick Perry, Bob McDonnell, and Tom Delay would like to have a word with you, Professor.

You forgot Cap Weinberger. What do these people have in common?

It slipped my mind, but I am sure it will come back to me.

Matthew Sablan said...

"We've been hearing about the lack of intent and willfull violation, by Clinton, of the law for quite sometime now from many legal people."

-- And they're incompetents because the intent to break the law was clear, and the investigation even made it clear that they broke the law for convenience sake.

Tom said...

America is dead. This is the year we dropped pretense. Act accordingly.

Scott M said...

I wouldn't have liked to see a criminal law proceeding skewing and meddling with the political process now that it's so far along.

And that's exactly what Hillary! was counting on.

Birkel said...

Also, Althouse is worried about the politics instead of the STATE SECRETS that Hillary willingly made available to every state intelligence agency in the world.

*spit*

Scott M said...

The ultimate example of white privilege.

Darrell said...

You don't need intent to set up your own secret routers?
Somebody call garage mahall.

buwaya puti said...

There was plenty of time for the Democrats to nominate and campaign for a less compromised candidate.
Not that that will do anything about the actual state of corruption.
I don't see why a prosecution referral followed by her withdrawal would be worse for public confidence in government and elections than this.

TCom said...

"I wouldn't have liked to see criminal law proceeding skewing and meddling with the political process now that it's so far along."

Delete your law degree, professor. You clearly have no use for it. You're just as subjective as any Joe Six Pack off the street.

In fact, I think I'd trust him over you.

Yancey Ward said...

We've been hearing about the lack of intent and willfull violation, by Clinton

Tell me this- did the unsecured server get set up by accident? That is intent all by itself.

Scott M said...

Whether Trump wins the election, who knows. But I bet he's going to beat her like a drum for this. She's toast in the debates.

Roughcoat said...

How do I feel about this?

I'm saddened. It's depressing, dispiriting. I'm ordering my St. Benedict medallion today. Seriously.

"Lord, why do the wicked prosper?"

Sometimes a body just wants to lay down.

AprilApple said...

The Clinton Crime Family will be shoved down our throats. Trump more than likely agreed to help. Just look at his stumbles. yeah - no one should care about a star of David star, (that means nothing) but all it took to destroy Romney was a binder full of women. After 2 years on Clinton back in the White House, Trump will be pals again.

The media will now turn on Trump like never before and pimp Hillary like never before.

Unknown said...

"I wouldn't have liked to see a criminal law proceeding skewing and meddling with the political process now that it's so far along" is sort of like hockey or basketball referees letting all penalties or fouls go near the end of games so as not to "interfere with the outcome." Letting the penalties/fouls go DOES interfere with the outcome.

Darrell said...

Prisons are overcrowded and they don't issue diapers.

AprilApple said...

What about all the Clinton Foundation sales she made during her time at State?

Lauderdale Vet said...

I'm not relieved. I'm outraged.

When you can selectively enforce the law, why bother having laws?

What kind of behavior are we promoting and rewarding here?

HoodlumDoodlum said...

8 Top Secret or SAP documents transferred over an unsecured system, by high-ranking officials whose job it is to know better...but that doesn't meet a standard for reckless conduct.

Amadeus 48 said...

As with Obamacare, small government types can't expect the legal system to bail them out of political problems. We have to win arguments and win elections. The record is clear as to what Clinton did. It should disqualify her from holding a high office of trust and contidence. The problem is not that what she did was illegal. The problem is that what she did is totally irresponsible. Time to win an election.

AprilApple said...

"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. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before deciding whether to bring charges."


potential?

She broke the law or she didn't. Something smells.

Darrell said...

Every court from coast-to-coast should throw out every pending case today, except for felony murder.

Roughcoat said...

Nixon is owed an apology and an exoneration.

Same goes for Gen. Petraeus.

PackerBronco said...

I wouldn't have liked to see a criminal law proceeding skewing and meddling with the political process now that it's so far along.

Anne, I have generally liked your blog and your posts; but anyone who writes that sentence has no business teaching law to anyone. IMHO.

JCC said...

Originally, there was an issue over the secure system, and the totally separate home brew system, and how someone could get top secret emails from one system into the other, since the secure system was closed. In other words, some person had to actually take a secure message, strip out the classification headers, and then re-enter than email manually into the home-based email system in order to send it on HRC's Frankenstein server. So, that person deliberately and obvious broke the law, despite what Comey said, in an intentional act. Accordng to what we have been told so far, the secure system has no links to any other outside system, and there is no way to send data from the secure system without transcribing it manually or perhaps, scanning a printed piece of paper.

So, why not charge that person even if there is insufficient weight of classified material to justify charging HRC?

This was ignored in Comey's speech.

But we all knew the fix was in I think, unless they actually had a video of HRC committing some act of violence on Carlos Danger, and the video got leaked to Fox News.

The Drill SGT said...

I'm sickened by the result. But parse carefully what Comey said:

our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before deciding whether to bring charges."

Translation: No way in hell, I could get a conviction in a Federal Court in DC.

But yeah, as I said yesterday, Clinton ranks up there with Walker/Pollard/Snowdon/Hansen in the FBI Crime Museum. Her crimes are significantly larger than those of Nixon or Clinton (pere)

Birkel said...

Many people will choose to act as if the laws no longer matter.

There are not enough prisons.

I predict mass graves in two generations.

I will go with my boots on.

Michael Fitzgerald said...

Sharpening my pitchfork right now...

Laslo Spatula said...

Seppuku, Director Comey: seppuku.

I am Laslo.

Birkel said...

If I am called for jury duty, I may exercise my sacrosanct right to vote against the state.

tim in vermont said...

She had intent, without doubt:

Clinton’s reply to Abedin’s get-a-State-account email was to offer to get a “separate address or device but I don’t want any risk of the personal being accessible.”

Clinton has admitted to destroying “private personal emails” as secretary of state. But Abedin’s admission that she used so-called “burn bags” — a container that material is placed in before it is destroyed — for some of her schedules is the first time anyone close to her has disclosed destroying public records.

Whew! That was close, I almost thought she broke the below law!

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.


Now that she got off, I am voting for her! She is certified honest!

Howard said...

It's over. Get used to Madam President

Darrell said...

James Comey would be found hanging later today, if there was such a thing as justice.

traditionalguy said...

It is good to know that lazy incompetence is still a winning affirmative defense.

Trump says he will bring competence to the office, but so what. Nobody remembers what that is anymore.

The Drill SGT said...

Beyond Clinton, there are 10 others in her circle that committed major felonies, and every F'ing one of them is going to keep their clearances and get promotions to positions of higher trust in the next administration. Because they are faithful to the Clinton Crime Family rather than to there Oath and the Constitution.

Althouse, regardless of where this sits in the political cycle, it is hugely and permanently destructive of the rule of law as we used to know it.

Roughcoat said...

I wouldn't have liked to see criminal law proceeding skewing and meddling with the political process now that it's so far along.

That might be the most appalling statement Althouse has ever made in this blog.

Yancey Ward said...

I read the transcript of Comey's announcement, and it is damning to Clinton even without a referral for indictment, but it won't matter- her non-indictment will be sung as a clean bill of ethics and judgment by every new outlet except Drudge and FoxNews.

Had a civil service employee of State deliberately employed a private server with these lapses, he would be in jail right now offering to cop a plea for leniency.

Unknown said...

Comey himself said there was no evidence of intent to break the law.

Hagar said...

Comey said it was all true and even added some particulars we had not heard about before, but it is not enough to file criminal charges against the Democrat candidate for president, currently out on the trail campaigning with the sitting President.

But it is not over until it is over.
It is a political problem that needs to be taken care of at the ballot box.

Eric the Fruit Bat said...

There's evidence of potential violations?

Bill said...

I'm with you, Roughcoat.

Vade retro Hillaria.

Darrell said...

Doesn't destroying evidence count as intent?

Roughcoat said...

Well, at least the Cubs are going to win the World Series this year. Right?

tim in vermont said...

t is a political problem that needs to be taken care of at the ballot box.

Will not happen. It's too late. She is in like Flynn. Bill is probably already sending out letters to colleges offering internships. Photo required, of course.

Chuck said...

I side with conservative critics of Mrs. Clinton, like former Assistant U.S. attorney Andy McCarthy.

What I do not understand is Trump's bumbling and inane criticism; that "the system is rigged." What does that even mean? That FBI Director Comey has been corrupted? That the Bureau was bribed or influenced? What is the problem with "the system"? Which "system"?

tim in vermont said...

Hah! Chuck makes it about Trump!

TCom said...

So if you steal SAP information, put it on an insecure server, and access said server from foreign countries, it's perfectly okay as long as they can't prove you MEANT to, Unknown?

That's not how intelligence law is written. At all. Try using that defense as a Corporal.

You people are clown shoes. There is no depth of idiocy, sycophancy, and lack of integrity you will not stoop to.

David said...

"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."

So a Republican might have been prosecuted, if the prosecutor were a politically motivated Democrat. Why, that would never happen, right?

The left has insinuated itself deeply into the federal bureaucracy, so the definition of "reasonable" is likely to be different depending on the target. Not much Comey can do about this but it's true.

On to the election.

shiloh said...

100 comments in 36 minutes. Respectable, but try to pick up the pace ...

Let the Hillary hatred flow freely through your body!

tim in vermont said...

Paid Moby. Change the subject!

Why not. It's over. The press will report only snippets of what was said and carry her across the finish line.

If I were Trump, I would slice up that "exoneration" into a bunch of attack ads. There is certainly enough material.

coupe said...

The prosecutors usually give great leeway to criminals who are retarded.

Since we no longer have insane asylums, the best thing for these people is not prison, but re-integration into society, and pity.

Lots of pity.

Give them a cardboard sign and put them in intersections.

Personally I don't give a shit. The corrupt Democrats know how to print money, and all the Republicans do is bitch like 5 year old's not getting candy at the store.

Hagar said...

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."
H.L. Mencken

Unknown said...

Maybe Trump will start calling Comey "Corrupt Comey". Everyone makes mistakes, Trump makes them on an hourly basis.

Darrell said...

Democrats helping Democrats.
It's the Democratic way!

lgv said...

The moment Biden decided not to run, the situation was already decided. There was no way an indictment was ever going to happen. We are living in a new political environment, where regulatory agencies can be used against the party not in power and those in the administration are above any accountability.

The lies, the shakedowns, there is nothing that will ever stick to Hillary. The fourth estate is now complicit in protecting their candidate. It's like a lesser version of Chavez and Erdogan. Get elected and slowly scratch away at opposition rights.

And only thing I am left to do is vote for a buffoon.

Original Mike said...

Althouse said..."I wouldn't have liked to see a criminal law proceeding skewing and meddling with the political process now that it's so far along."

Scott M replied..."And that's exactly what Hillary! was counting on."


You've been played, Althouse.

TCom said...

Yes Chuck, it's rigged. Hillary and the Foundation is so corrupt, so entertwined with so many parts of Govt, that breaking it open would be the biggest crisis DC has ever seen.

The fact that you're willfully blind to how close this country is to disaster just lowers your clout even further. You really have no idea how bad it is. I'm sure they're letting her off the hook for an insecure server with Top Secret and SAP programs on it because she didn't really do anything.

There's no corruption in Govt at all. It doesn't get worse over time as Empires corrode and fail, as history teaches us. Bless your little heart, Chuck.

Unknown said...

"No emails were intentionally deleted"- Comey.

Birkel said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Unknown said...

Packer Bronco - take a bow. I'm appalled that any law prof could write such a sentence. Still let's look on the bright side, this means we can all go and shoot up the places where NTY and WaPo readers gather, and although we might be reprimanded for being a little careless with our handling of weapons, after a little Netjet based plea bargainng, nothing will come of it.

Eleanor said...

So if she did all of this "unintentionally", then she is too stupid to be president.

AprilApple said...

Was Comey threatened? The timing here is really suspect.

Matthew Sablan said...

Man! If Petreaus had just decided to run for president, they'd never have prosecuted him, right?

Johnny Sokko said...

We have low standards for our elected officials. 'Tis a pity.

Darrell said...

Why waster all that paper on a 30,000 count indictment?

Conserve our precious resources!

tim in vermont said...

Let the Hillary hatred flow freely through your body!

I know shiloh, old pal. It's inexplicable, isn't it? Why don't people love Hillary the way you and I do? What is it about them that they can't see her obvious wonderful qualities?

Birkel said...

Abandon all faith, ye who enter here.

There is no rule of law.

Unknown said...

Not as stupid as someone who retweets stuff from white supremacists.

Big Mike said...

@Althouse, you asked how I felt about this. I feel that your profession is null and void, Professor, because we have ceased to be a nation where no person is above the law. Why would you bother to teach law when who you are is more important than what you did?

Larry J said...

How do you feel about this? I'm relieved. I wouldn't have liked to see a criminal law proceeding skewing and meddling with the political process now that it's so far along.

So much for "equal justice under the law". It has always been a pretty lie that the powerful as held to the same legal standards as the rest of us. I've worked with classified information for decades. Why should I obey the law when it's obvious she didn't? I'll obey the law because I know I would lose my clearance, my job, and probably my freedom should I don't.

It's bullshit, of course, but fully expected. In case there ever was any doubt, we're now officially a banana republic.

mockturtle said...

I listened to Comey's entire address. By his own criteria, she is guilty. So the recommendation is a total non sequitur.

David Begley said...

We'll just have to win it now.

Darrell said...

Only the really damaging emails were deleted--James Comey.

tim in vermont said...

Yeah, because that's worse that repeating the mistake of the Iraq war twice over as Secretary of State.

Not being up to date on the latest doings among the white supremecists.

TCom said...

"Everyone makes mistakes, Trump makes them on an hourly basis."

Hillary sells our Uranium, our secrets, to foreign powers, she puts our most sensitive intelligence on insecure servers outside the aegis of Government, then accesses the server from foreign countries, practically inviting them to hack it.

But Trump tweeted an MS Paint Six-Sided Star. Decisions, decisions.

Matthew Sablan said...

I feel like, combined with the IRS targeting the right and various other political shakedowns, that it is actually stupid to openly declare one to be a Republican. We get different rules, and the people who would act against us are given different rules.

If I hadn't been using my own name to write things for years, I'd just tell people I'm a Democrat so I can benefit from the way the rules work now.

Some animals are more equal than others.

tim in vermont said...

feel that your profession is null and void,

There will never be a slack in demand for persiflage as long as this crew is in power.

Unknown said...

Not as stupid as someone who believes that immunizations cause autism.

Clayton Hennesey said...

Kurt Schlichter pointed out how wonderfully freeing slipping off the yoke of law can be.

Only the timid and the foolish will obey the law from now on.

Hagar said...

The FBI will do what it thinks is good for the FBI, which reasonably enough does not include filing criminal charges against a candidate they think will be elected the next President of the United States even if out on bail at election time.

Rick said...

Original Mike said...
Althouse said..."I wouldn't have liked to see a criminal law proceeding skewing and meddling with the political process now that it's so far along."

Scott M replied..."And that's exactly what Hillary! was counting on."

You've been played, Althouse.


Doesn't the idea of "being played" include some element the outcome is against interest or principle? It's hardly surprising a law professor isn't concerned about legal double standards: that's a middle class concern.

Brando said...

"I wouldn't have liked to see a criminal law proceeding skewing and meddling with the political process now that it's so far along."

I don't really see how you go from Trump cheerleader to this--particularly since this statement is so completely indefensible. There is NEVER a bad time to see justice served--should we decide simply that prosecution should never be brought against someone who is running for high office? Or when they win high office? If that's a problem, then it's a problem for the candidate who broke the law and the supporters who decided to support that candidate anyway. Why should our justice system be perverted because it's too tricky to go after the powerful?

If DOJ has a good reason to not prosecute (e.g., the likelihood of getting a conviction, the nature of the crime) then that's one thing. But the very idea that some people should be free from prosecution simply because of who they are is so un-American I can't believe you wrote that.

Matthew Sablan said...

One of the worst part of this decision?

The Trump/Clinton election is now one where if I don't vote for Trump, I'm voting to allow the further erosion of the rule of law.

I really, really don't like Trump. But, I also find using the state as a political tool incredibly immoral, and we'll get more of that since it works for Democrats.

There are no good choices.

tim in vermont said...

Oops, I forget. Hillary is certified blameless now in all things. I am voting for her! This is the thing that changed my mind. I have put away childish things like three cornered hats, equality before the law, etc, etc. Grownups like, me, shiloh, and Unknown only care about will to power.

Unknown said...

Not as stupid as someone who believed Obama was a Kenyan.

Unknown said...

Not as stupid as someone who believes Senator Cruz's daddy was involved in the assassination of JFK.

Jason said...

"A banana, if you can keep it."

shiloh said...

I know shiloh, old pal. It's inexplicable, isn't it? Why don't people love Hillary the way you and I do? What is it about them that they can't see her obvious wonderful qualities?

Indeed, accentuate the positive old pal!

Let the Sunshine in ...

Darrell said...

Not as stupid as Unknown.

buster said...

I think what Comey said, at least implicitly, is that there is enough evidence to bring charges, but no charges should be brought because prosecutors consider other things, in addition to the state of the evidence in deciding whether to proceed. He didn't say what those other consideration are in this case.

Real American said...

not surprised. the fix was in from the beginning. There is no rule of law in this country anymore. What laws do exist are for the peons of this country, not elites, not Democrats and especially not Clintons.

Unknown said...

Not nearly as stupid as Darrell and his brother Darrell.

tim in vermont said...

Not as stupid as someone who believes that immunizations cause autism

I know, right? Trump could never be smart enough to unleash a wave of refugees on Europe and cause the EU crisis that lead to the Brexit! No. Trump would have said. "OK, Iraq didn't work, so let's stop doing it!"

But Hillary is very smart. She figured out that overthrowing the closest thing we had to a friend in the ME, Qaddaffy and exacerbating the civil war in Syria were brilliant strategic moves. I know it is hard to believe, but that very difficulty is what proves her strength of mind. She can overcome stuff like that through sheer willpower!

Matthew Sablan said...

If you folks want the Unknowns to go away, stop responding to their trollish attempts to change the topic.

tim in vermont said...

Not nearly as stupid as Darrell and his brother Darrell

Now she is rightly dumping on Bernie Sanders, who, before he went into politics, was in the same "anything for a buck" business as Larry, Daryl, and Daryl.

Hillary! Stronger together!

tim in vermont said...

I want the topic changed. None if this intellectual discussion matters anyhoo. Power matters. Hillary has it, why discuss it. I better write her a check today.

TCom said...

Endorsed by the sitting President.

Secret meetings with the Attorney General you yourself appointed as President.

No charges.

Nothing to see here, folks. We wouldn't have wanted law proceedings meddling with the political process, after all.

cubanbob said...

Chuck said...
I side with conservative critics of Mrs. Clinton, like former Assistant U.S. attorney Andy McCarthy.

What I do not understand is Trump's bumbling and inane criticism; that "the system is rigged." What does that even mean? That FBI Director Comey has been corrupted? That the Bureau was bribed or influenced? What is the problem with "the system"? Which "system"?

7/5/16, 10:59 AM"

What brand of willful fool pills do you take at breakfast?

Darrell said...

Or Unknown that can't spell "Darryl" in the Bob Newhart Show.

Matthew Sablan said...

"The FBI also discovered several thousand work-related e-mails that were not in the group of 30,000 that were returned by Secretary Clinton to State in 2014. We found those additional e-mails in a variety of ways. Some had been deleted over the years and we found traces of them on devices that supported or were connected to the private e-mail domain. Others we found by reviewing the archived government e-mail accounts of people who had been government employees at the same time as Secretary Clinton, including high-ranking officials at other agencies, people with whom a Secretary of State might naturally correspond."

-- Hiding documents from the government is no longer a crime if they can find it in other ways. Normally, that would be proof you did something wrong. Guess not any more.

tim in vermont said...

Until today, I thought some of you were overly cynical. Not anymore, me and my old pal shiloh are on the side of power! Might makes right! Trial by political combat! Into the lists everyone! Let's drag the hag across the finish line!

AJ Lynch said...

To all you people who don't like Trump, consider this - for the most part, Trump, for the most part, will leave us the hell alone. A Dem president typically will be in our faces and in our lives 247/ 365.

Hagar said...

OK, so if the FBI recommended charges be filed, the DoJ duly did, and Hillary! is arrested, fingerprinted, and released on bail.
Then she gets elected President of the United States in November and inaugurated in January.

So, now what do we do?

Paul said...

This hurts her. There is a wave of populist rage that will only be further inflamed by this obvious example that the fix is in. Bill and Loretta in a secret meeting? Hussein and Hillary together in solidarity? Followed by this?

Unknown said...

Comey said decisions on whether or not to bring charges are partly based on "how similar situations have been handled in the past.

This is interesting, what similar situations is he referring to? I wish he would've elaborated.

cubanbob said...

shiloh said...
100 comments in 36 minutes. Respectable, but try to pick up the pace ...

Let the Hillary hatred flow freely through your body!

7/5/16, 11:01 AM"

All decent law abiding and non treasonous Americans hate Hillary Clinton. Obviously you aren't one of them.

bwebster said...

I have held a Secret clearance myself (though it's been years), and I have close friends and relatives who hold or who have held top secret clearances. Comey's statement was just silly -- criminal charges have been brought and successfully prosecuted for far less 'recklessness' than this. The damage of this decision is going to be enormous.

Darrell said...

Hillary can serve from Genpop.
State dinners will be a little tacky, but so what.

Matthew Sablan said...

"The lawyers doing the sorting for Secretary Clinton in 2014 did not individually read the content of all of her e-mails, as we did for those available to us; instead, they relied on header information and used search terms to try to find all work-related e-mails among the reportedly more than 60,000 total e-mails remaining on Secretary Clinton’s personal system in 2014. It is highly likely their search terms missed some work-related e-mails, and that we later found them, for example, in the mailboxes of other officials or in the slack space of a server."

-- Remember when this started and they said that they made no mistakes? Great, huh?

TCom said...

Hillary can't be indicted because the Federal Govt is Democrat and is totally embedded and complicit in her corruption.

Voting for the Dems is voting for your own enslavement. You saw the undeniable proof today. It's that bloody simple. All of the fear-mongering against Trump is horseshit. He'll have the whole Democrat Govt against him. He'll have a Hell of a time doing anything.

Are we going to attempt to expose and cut out the rot, or are we going to bend the knee and allow the chains to be fastened on our necks?

It's time to choose.

buster said...

Comey said that Hillary was "extremely careless" in handling classified information. "Extremely careless" is not a legal term of art, but it's an ordinary language equivalent of gross negligence. So Hillary committed a crime.

Darrell said...

Take back the country.
Vote Trump.



Preach it Sister!

tim in vermont said...

This is interesting, what similar situations is he referring to? I wish he would've elaborated.

Ted Stevens, for example. You see, the relevant factor is that every time a decision is made like this, it is made to get the Democrat elected. Was that too hard for you!

Hillary Clinton. Why doesn't she wear skirts? Her balls would show! That's what we need, a POTUS with the balls to drag us into war after war!

Matthew Sablan said...

"These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same [Secret/Top Secret] matters."

-- Any non-Clinton would, at least, lose their security clearance and job.

But hey, let's make her president.

Big Mike said...

@Althouse, please clarify something for me. Do you grasp the meaning of the word "integrity"? Do you personally know any woman who does?

Matthew Sablan said...

"Only a very small number of the e-mails containing classified information bore markings indicating the presence of classified information. But even if information is not marked “classified” in an e-mail, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it."

-- How did they lose their markings?

buwaya said...

"What I do not understand is Trump's bumbling and inane criticism; that "the system is rigged." What does that even mean? That FBI Director Comey has been corrupted? That the Bureau was bribed or influenced? What is the problem with "the system"? Which "system"?"

All of it. Every Federal department at every level in any matter of policy whatsoever. That should be simple enough. The US has one of the most corrupt governing structures on Earth, if not the most, if seen in terms of monetary value.

Of course Comey is corrupted. Of course the FBI is influenced. They are bureaucrats in a bureaucracy, with careers, at least, to consider. Then there is post-career employment and family benefit considerations, employment of children and relatives, etc.

Matthew Sablan said...

"Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail account."

-- That, alone, means she should not be president.

tim in vermont said...

I am celebrating our new one party state. Now all that remains is to get the courts to change the state laws to get rid of the red state Republicans. They seriously have to go before we can finish our project!

I am sure the IRS will come in handy for this.

readering said...

Something tells me Judicial Watch now won't get their Clinton deposition. But looking forward to the leaks from DOJ.

Chuck said...

To tim in vermont:

What you suggest is also what I agree with; turn the Comey statement into a series of attack ads. Hammering the specifics. I like the idea. It might be very effective. It ought to be effective.

But Trump will need to spend a lot of his money on that. Or else raise a bunch of money from Republican Donors.

Matthew Sablan said...

How can he say there was no evidence to obstruct justice when he goes into such detail the efforts they had to go through to pierce the lies given to investigators?

dreams said...

"I feel like, combined with the IRS targeting the right and various other political shakedowns, that it is actually stupid to openly declare one to be a Republican. We get different rules, and the people who would act against us are given different rules.

If I hadn't been using my own name to write things for years, I'd just tell people I'm a Democrat so I can benefit from the way the rules work now.

Some animals are more equal than others."

Except when they become victims of terrorists and an increasingly likely future nuclear attack in the US.

Nonapod said...

For the first time in my life, I'm genuinely scared about what's going to happen over the next few years. With the expansion of executive power, the complete subversion of the law, the submission of the media, and the submission of any real opposition in Congress and the Senate (I expect that the GOP will at least lose the Senate majority in November), we'll effectively have an autocrat in Hillary Clinton. The economic destruction she'll be able to reap could be astronomical, not to mention the insane level of bribery and graft and the selling off of our military to the highest bidder, the complete and shameless persecution of any opposition by the IRS... this is going to get bad.

David Begley said...

Hillary now has sovereign immunity. Unchecked power if she wins.

Tobias said...

My first thought, is that Comey tried to split the baby. Keep his integrity, and let Clinton off the hook.

Darrell said...

Every security violation prohibits the offender from holding public office.

I wonder why they included that in the regulations?

Matthew Sablan said...

"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 to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now."

-- Here's the deciding factor: Is this person powerful? If yes, then no sanctions. If no, then yes sanctions.

TCom said...

Let's just make a new volume of 'Political Law'. It would easily be small enough to be pamphlet-sized.

It can simply say: Will the fallout hurt the Democrat?

If yes, there is no criminal wrongdoing. We can't have criminal law meddling with getting Democrats elected.

buwaya said...

See below re the coal plant in Mississippi.

Everything, every last thing, touched by the Federal Government has strong aspects of that.
And by many if not most State governments also.

DKWalser said...

Althouse -- I wouldn't have liked seeing a criminal proceeding in the midst of a campaign, but it's far worse that such obvious and serious criminal behavior will go unpunished. The public has less trust in our justice system than at any time in living memory. We shouldn't add to the (earned) perception that the well-connected live by different rules than the rest of us. The Clinton's are the poster-children of the attitude that laws are for the little people. This was a chance to change that narrative by doing the right thing -- neutrally enforce the law.

Clinton forced the potential for criminal proceedings in the midst of a campaign onto the country. Had she been honest and forthcoming when her email server came to light, it's likely she wouldn't be the nominee. Instead, she lied to the public and destroyed public records (and likely destroyed evidence of her criminal behavior). Her lies shouldn't now be rewarded by making her off limits for prosecution because we're too close to an election!

Darrell said...

The Democrats finally make me regret that The Bomb didn't go off.

Unknown said...

"@Althouse, please clarify something for me. Do you grasp the meaning of the word "integrity"? Do you personally know any woman who does?"

Oh so now all women are to blame? Eve did eat that apple...

cubanbob said...

A little over forty years ago the FBI had sufficient enough integrity to bring down Nixon through its mouth pieces at the WaPo. Who would've thought back then there was more integrity in government back then than there is today in and that now this Administration is indisputably the most corrupt Administration in the last hundred years?

Tyrone Slothrop said...

I can't for the life of me see why any American must owe allegiance to the American legal system. It is constantly being used against me by people who are not subject to it. Fuck 'em. I quit.

bagoh20 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
mccullough said...

Nation of rulers not laws. Adjust your behavior accordingly

tim in vermont said...

Of course there is a sanction in the law, but it doesn't apply to Hillary losers!

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.

Just like you probably thought that sexual harassment laws, or laws against rape, for example, applied to powerful Democrats!

Losers! We are marching to victory! You guys will never understand the power and the glory of being a Democrat! Plus we go straight to heaven, no waiting! Just like the first class lines at the airport!

readering said...

Wonder if Trump will now campaign on promise to appoint a Supreme Court that will prosecute Clinton for her damn emails.

holdfast said...

"I wouldn't have liked to see a criminal law proceeding skewing and meddling with the political process now that it's so far along."

Well then politicians seeking high office should avoid flagrantly breaking the law. It's that goddamn simple. Of course, the Clintons are masters are delaying and distracting - deleting emails, hiding records - until things are "too far along" - and then "what difference does it make anyway?". I wish I could say I am surprised, but I am nonetheless furious. I had a security clearance (not nearly as high as HRC's) so I could see NATO battle plans for the use of nuclear demolition munitions in Europe. I was proud to be entrusted with that clearance and I never took it lightly, even though I was just a 23 year old NCO.

Never mind the message it sends to every NCO and junior officer (or even four star general) who has lost a career, or freedom, over much less egregious mishandling of classified information. Either HRC is too criminal to be POTUS or she's too damned senile. There is no third choice.

I guess Kurt Schlichter, former Army Colonel and current litigator, called it. Check out his latest column:

You Owe Them Nothing - Not Respect, Not Loyalty, Not Obedience

Sometimes in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another. It is high time to declare our personal independence from any remnant of obligation to those who have spit upon the rule of law. We owe them nothing - not respect, not loyalty, not obedience.

http://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2016/07/04/you-owe-them-nothing--not-respect-not-loyalty-not-obedience-n2186865

mccullough said...

As long as Trump weakens any faith Americans have in government, he will have done well.

shiloh said...

All decent Americans hate Hillary Clinton.

Hate keeps a man alive ...

buwaya said...

" Or else raise a bunch of money from Republican Donors.'

He won't. Because the rot is there too. See my previous post about the law permitting the re-stating of private pension liabilities/funding. That was bi-partisan. That's just a small example. Dig, and you will find. I did, and its just me, an amateur, in an hour.

Bob Boyd said...

from Comey's speech:
"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 to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now."

What would those be? Loss of security clearance seems one likely sanction.
Would never again be considered for promotion?
Fired?

Hillary will face no consequences from anyone with the possible exception of the voters.

Rich Horton said...

"I'm relieved. I wouldn't have liked to see a criminal law proceeding skewing and meddling with the political process now that it's so far along."

Fabulous. Now Trump can go on that murder spree he always wanted. Can't allow mere criminal law proceedings meddling with the political process now.

Presumably that isn't really what you meant professor.... but can you tell us exactly where you would draw the line?

tim in vermont said...

I have decided to become a pro Hillary troll. It's more fun to be on the winning side of this stuff! Keep hope alive losers! It's over! FBI, Justice, IRS, everybody says so. If you are still stupid enough to register as a Republican, or fail to send a donation to the Democratic Party, shame on you.

Only a hillbilly cares about childish things like the bourgeois concepts of "rule of law." I have read Also Spracth Zarathustra, I know how this works. Will to power! Hillary is Superman, we are just men, and we better join!

robother said...

"I wouldn't have liked to see a criminal law proceeding skewing and meddling with the political process now that it's so far along."
Love that cruel neutrality.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Honest question: what would Hillary have had to do to meet a standard of "gross negligence" here? I mean, apparently her actual actions don't meet that standard...but what would have?

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 483   Newer› Newest»