Former FBI director James Comey ignored blatant evidence of culpability. It was ridiculous for Hillary Clinton to claim she thought that (c) placed after paragraphs in her emails meant the material was in alphabetical order rather than meaning it was classified.
If she thought (c) indicated alphabetical order, where were (a) and (b) on the documents? This from the smartest person to run for president, according to then-president Obama. Her vast (or half vast) experience as U.S. Senator and Secretary of State positions required use of classified information and presumably common sense.
Yet neither experience nor common sense was evident in the use of private email server in handling classified materials. In addition, Comey and the FBI never questioned Clinton about her public statements that changed over time and were blatantly false.
“I did not email classified information to anyone” morphed into “I did not email anything marked “classified,'” which morphed into the claim that (c) did not mean what it clearly meant. False and changing statements are presented to juries routinely by prosecutors as evidence of guilt.
A reasonable prosecutor would have used a grand jury, issued subpoenas and search warrants, and followed standard DOJ procedures for federal prosecutions.
In short, Comey threw the case in an effort to protect himself from Clinton’s wrath should she become president. He should have been fired long before he was.
Romuald K. Andraka
Submitted by Virtual Nesroom