Someone got to James Comey. He is no longer “untouchable.” Under the Obama administration the following departments have demonstrated their corruptness with impunity:
- The Justice Department under Eric Holder, who holds the distinction of being the only cabinet secretary to be censured by Congress;
- The EPA under Gina McCarthy, who was subject to Congressional disciplinary measures for committing perjury and making false statements in testimony before Congress;
- The Department of Education under Arne Duncan by violating federal law (Public Law 103-33, General Education Provisions Act, Section 432) in attempting to implement Common Core;
- The Department of Energy under Steven Chu, who was the subject of Congressional inquiry into questionable loans to experimental solar companies;
- The Bureau of Land Management under Neil Kornze, who totally bungled the Bundy Ranch standoff;
- The Internal Revenue Service under Lois Lerner and John A. Koskinen, the latter having been the focus of potential impeachment proceedings;
- The Justice Department under Loretta Lynch, who was caught in a secret meeting with Bill Clinton, in all probability giving Clinton a “heads-up” two days prior to Comey’s announcement.
And now, the Federal Bureau of Investigation under Director James Comey, who interpreted the law to whitewash the Hillary Clinton investigation.
Mr. Comey specifically stated that the FBI did not find clear evidence that Hillary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate the laws governing the handling of of classified information . . .but “intent” is not an element of the statute. Comey goes on to conclude that Hillary and company were “extremely careless” in their handling of highly classified information.
This begs the question of what is “extremely careless” and “gross negligence?” West’s Encyclopedia of American Law (ed. 2, 2008), defines “gross negligence “ as “an indifference to, and a blatant violation of, a legal duty with respect to the rights of others.”
The definition further clarifies, “Gross negligence is a conscious and voluntary disregard of the need to use reasonable care, which is likely to cause foreseeable grave injury or harm to persons, property, or both.” Lawyers have said the “extremely careless” and “gross negligence” are essentially the same. So why is Comey making a distinction?
Director Comey stated that some of the classified information was marked or labeled as classified when Hillary and company handled the emails. Why doesn’t this blatant disregard for national security meet the definition of “gross negligence?”
Director Comey also stated that, “There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation.” Is this not the very definition of gross negligence? Director Comey, how does your statement square with your non-prosecution recommendation?
“In looking back into our investigations into the mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts,” Comey said. But in 2015, the Justice Department successfully prosecuted a naval reservist, Brian Nishimura, in a similar case. Like Clinton, Nishimura was “extremely careless” in handling, storing and destroying classified material. Nishimura was convicted. Clinton was given a “Get Out of Jail Free” card.
Comey then blatantly concluded that, “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.” There it is. This amounts to a classic case where the government comes down on ordinary people but the political elite can ignore the law.
Trump and Sanders are right: the game is rigged. It is time to engage in civil resistance to the ongoing government corruption.