It Took 19 Tortured Interpretations of the Law to Let Hillary Off the Hook

Hillary-ComeyFBI Director James Comey announced on Tuesday that he won’t recommend criminal charges against Hillary Clinton, despite detailing her wrongful behavior in a lengthy speech. He didn’t believe any of her actions rose to the level of crimes, he said — a claim he could only make by employing tortured interpretations of the law. Nineteen of them.

One of the most unbelievable interpretations of law was Comey’s statement that Clinton and her colleagues were “extremely careless” in how they handled highly classified information. The applicable felony she was facing requires that the subject show “gross negligence” in handling classified information. How is “extreme carelessness” different from “gross negligence?” They sound like the same thing. Comey didn’t explain.

Even if Comey didn’t think her conduct rose to the level of gross negligence in handling classified information, that is not the only charge he could have brought. In 2009, Clinton signed a non-disclosure agreement as secretary of state, agreeing not to reveal classified information. It included “unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention, or negligent handling.” If she was “extremely careless,” that would easily qualify as at least a basic standard of negligence, a much lower standard to prove than “gross negligence.” Comey could thus have recommended a low-level misdemeanor charge, like knowingly removing classified information from appropriate, secured storage. However, he didn’t offer a tortured interpretation of the law to explain why he didn’t do this — instead he didn’t mention it at all.

A “Reasonable Person” Should Be Prosecuted

19 Tortured Interpretations
1. “Extremely careless” is not “gross negligence”
2. Clinton not held to the “reasonable person” standard
3. Clinton said she didn’t know she was handling classified information (not true)
4. Clinton said there was no classified information (not true)
5. Release of Top Secret emails causes “serious harm” to national security
6. Clinton deleted emails improperly
7. Clinton removed classified information from a properly secured environment
8. Clinton did not request clearance to remove the classified information
9. Clinton not even slapped with a misdemeanor like General Petraeus
10. No evidence of hacking — yet Guccifer accessed her emails through her crony
11. Clinton failed to turn over all the emails
12. Clinton lied many times
13. Prosecutor Loretta Lynch met privately with Clinton’s husband
14. Clinton ordered a book on how to delete emails
15. State department and Clinton dodged subpoenas
16. Violated state department policy on email
17. Lied about preferring only one smartphone
18. Lied about deleting emails with her husband since he doesn’t use email
19. Clinton signed a non-disclosure agreement in 2009

Another tortured interpretation of the law  is Comey’s refusal to invoke the “reasonable person” standard, even though he showed clearly that any “reasonable person” would have known he or she was dealing with classified information. Incredibly, he defended his decision not to recommend charges to Congress, by saying that Clinton just did not realize the 110+ emails were classified.

Read the rest of the article at The Stream

Comments are closed.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner