My commentary on Congress' questioning of Director James Comey on Hillary's email
I watched the live streaming of Congress’ oversight and government reform committee questioning FBI director James Comey, and I want to share some of what I heard and how I felt about that.
If the Congress’ oversight and government reform committee has half of it’s members sucking up, kissing butt to the point of needing chap stick, even brought up issues from the black community such as cops killing blacks...in a hearing that has nothing to do with that very important issue….they are not trying to get to the bottom of this Hillary Clinton abuse of emails and confidential information. How can they actually do their job on this committee with this kind of questioning? The Dems are calling this committee investigation into Hillary’s email and classified information abuse as “political” while at the same time being “political” themselves, kissing butt the entire time. Mr. Comey said he was not put on this case by Congress, nor the republican party, rather was asked by the Inspector General to look into this. By his own admission this is not a witch hunt or a political lynching. He said so himself. The Dems did not give any real proof or possible proof that Hillary did nothing wrong. Yet, the republican side showed many instances where Hillary lied and Comey admits she lied and was very irresponsible with her handling of the emails. He stated that anyone else would be seriously reprimanded yet he couldn’t say she should be reprimanded because that was outside his department.
Now, I want to say here, that I was very impressed with Comey’s conduct and I got the impression that he is a very honest man and I believe he did what he felt was right. However, it’s very difficult to see his point. This will be an instance of faith in Comey as an honest man doing his job to the best of his ability. He has shown he believes she lied, and was irresponsible but as he put it, the problem is he couldn’t find “intent”. I will say what I feel about that, but I’m not a lawyer and am not a Congressperson. However, I believe Hillary did wrong and I believe she had intent….but Comey could not prove it without a shadow of doubt. I get that. That doesn’t change the facts that she is a liar and if one lies, it’s because they are covering up something they did wrong. To me, THAT is the intent.
Mr. Comey says anyone who worked for him may not be prosecuted for doing this same thing, but they would be seriously reprimanded, no security clearance, no job, etc. So, if she isn’t being treated “special” because she is Hillary Clinton, I’d like to find out if she will be allowed to run for president since she is a liar, and extremely irresponsible with classified information? Will her top secret clearance be revoked or down graded? If nothing changes, then we will know for sure she is above the law.
When Comey said the system isn’t fixed against the people, I lost a lot of confidence in him!! I was sold on him up to that point. We all know the system is fixed!! We know no government agency can be trusted. Not even the FBI. I was impressed with Director Comey’s honesty but is he not aware that there is a second set of rules for us “useless eaters”? Is he unaware that there are a lot of evil things going on in DC government?
Immunity for Hillary’s IT advisor, Brian Pagliano!! This fellow was the one who set up her personal server. So, my question is why would the FBI give immunity to someone when nothing was done wrong? Mr. Comey said it was for getting info that they may not have gotten without the immunity. My question is, if nothing was done illegally, why would that person withhold info? You mean they offered this fellow immunity for nothing done wrong? Really? So, how does one give immunity to legal things? See what I mean?
The chairman of this committee as well as Trey Gowdy asked great questions and brought up a very important point, in my book. He asked about the lawyers and the IT guy who were not cleared for top secret info, got her emails or at least access to these emails of a classified nature, which is against the law. So, they asked what will be done about her giving classified information to people without clearances? That seemed to stump him for a moment, in my opinion. That shows she broke that one law doing that.
Dems making a big deal that only 3 emails out of 30,000 were classified as tho this is ridiculous low number and we shouldn’t be bothered with that. I’m sorry, but even if only one paragraph of one classified email is found, would be very concerning to me. This same Congressman states they just found out ( really, they JUST found out ) those 3 emails were not even classified. So, seems the FBI thought they were classified but today, they are saying, without the FBI knowing about it, that they are now calling them NOT classified. That’s very interesting. Seems some how over night these emails were deemed “unclassified”. Hummm, very interesting.
Ms. Clinton rejected efforts to give her a state.gov account, kept the private emails for almost two years and only turned them over to Congress because we found out she had a private email account. To me, the average person with common sense, would think this looks like someone who is trying to keep info from not only the government for whom she works, but also from the freedom of information act, for later access. That to me sounds like she has something to hide....INTENT. I know law has to go on evidence....I'm ok with that. I just know that this person, Hillary Clinton, is extremely cagey and knew what she was doing, knew how to get around the law, after all she is a lawyer, and had a plan and implemented it.
Hillary has been proven to be a liar, irresponsible, very bad judgement. Even if she walks on this matter, do we really want another liar as president? Do we really want another irresponsible president? Do we really want another president with very bad judgement? Perhaps these are the only things with which we will have control. We can make our answers plain when we vote.
WGON op ed Linda Kirby 7/7/16