FBI Refuses to Indict Hillary Clinton for Email Scandal: REALLY?

By Jonathan W. Penn

By now most of us have heard FBI Director James Comey has given Hillary Clinton a get out of jail pass for the email scandal. Is this further proof there is something wrong in politics today? Is there a two-tier system of justice for the haves and have-nots? For the rich and powerful, the Clintons and the rest of us?

Perhaps we should be calling the slippery Clintons 'the Teflon Dons of Washington'; let me explain. It was baffling to listen to the FBI Director justify giving Hillary a pass because he apparently could not find proof the law was intentionally breached or that the emails fell into the wrong hands. Despite, however, admitting the likelihood of it happening was very real - given that Wikileaks had recently published over 1,200 of Clinton’s hacked emails.
"There is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information. (..) All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of clearly intentional and wilful mishandling of classified information or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct. We do not see those things here." - James Comey, FBI Director
So, according to Comey because there is no previous precedent, hundreds of classified emails is not enough evidence, and because it was merely 'carelessness' he decided not to prosecute. Well, with all due respect sir that is just ridiculous. Earth to law enforcement. It is cases like this that create precedents, and this has all the making of a precedent-setting case with national security hanging in the balance.

In his own words, Comey laid out a prima facie case that was more than enough to recommend the matter for prosecution. But instead he opted to spare Clinton. The question is why?

Perhaps Comey was reminded that his job is at the mercy of the president's favour? Perhaps he knew that Lynch wouldn't proceed with the indictment and a deal had already been made. Which draws into question Lynch's secret meeting with BJ Clinton all the more. As Sherlock Holmes would say...'there's something afoot here, Watson'.

Given the fact that Hillary Clinton knew the rules beforehand, it has been demonstrated there was "intentional and wilful mishandling" of classified information on her part. Notwithstanding all of her lies and deceit to deny, and attempt to sweep it under the rug, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

If that is not "intentional misconduct" then what is? (Rhetorical). Nor is it contingent on whether or not there is proof that classified information fell into the wrong hands.

Reality Check: If a black man is caught with dope, the state would spare no expense pressing charges and throwing him in jail, regardless of proof of "intent".

Stupidity or ignorance of the law is never a defence. It is only a consideration at sentencing after a verdict of guilt is found. So again, with all due respect Director Comey you have made a huge mistake. Given also that Clinton is a lawyer and knows better, the fact remains the law was broken and she should have been prosecuted.

There was a serious breach of national security, and the evidence is overwhelming. Obama was aware at the time and would have had to be subpoenaed as a court witness, but apparently the FBI did not want to open that pandora's box. No wonder Obama was so stoked at Hillary's victory party right after the announcement. You could see the relief all over his face.

Therefore, we have to ask ourselves:
  • Are we to believe it was only a coincidence that BJ met with Lynch just before Hillary visited the FBI for tea and crumpets? 
  • Or the fact that the announcement was made the day after the 4th of July - when the nation would be in a better mood? 
  • Or that Obama was campaigning for Hillary moments after the announcement, and after previously stating that he had no insider knowledge of the FBI's investigation?
All coincidence...REALLY?

No more tap dancing around this. Clinton lied under oath. It was not just an accident. It was not just recklessness. These are the facts. It was gross negligence, intentional or not, and under U.S. law it was sufficient for felony charges. Accept it folks. The FBI decision was a sham, plain and simple. Hillary got a get out of jail pass. It stinks of collusion and corruption right up to the highest level.

Apparently the weight of the law is unequally applied for the elite than for the rest of us common folk. There is a two-tier system of justice...and it's rigged in their favour. This is a case study in everything that is wrong in politics. Any way you look at it, Hillary should be watching the election from a jail cell. Not in a position to possibly become the next President of the United States.

The slippery Clintons are the Teflon Dons of Washington indeed.

(Image [Ed.]: Hillary Clinton - Breitbart)

[The views expressed in this publication are solely those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Dissecting Society]


  1. It's great to see new blood here.
    Hillary Clinton is shameless but the FBI director's decision not to indict this woman is bullshit and smacks corruption. The simple fact that she used a personal server, placed carefully in a bathroom, to send emails as a state secretary shows intent and premeditation. As for motive, it's not hard to prove it once the Clinton foundation's finances are crossed checked with her decisions as a state secretary. And this video? Enough said!

  2. Oh great! The FBI says there's no evidence of crime and now you want to convince us there's something wrong with Hillary Clinton? How low can this blog even get? Zionists and anti-Women! Besides, it doesn't matter if Hillary lied or not that is beside the point, what matters is that she will be a great president and bring America back to glory!

    1. Oh shut up, Celia! Why do even keep coming back here? This blog is way too advanced for you, so just enroll in a beginners class and learn from scratch. This site is too much for your little pea brain! How can you support a corrupt woman for president, huh? Grow up!

    2. Ana, Celia does typify the Hillary/Obama supporter and a big chunk of the USSA and EUSS voters. They voted in Obama in order to bring about a final healing of the black/white racial animosity, which he has so ably done so that now we have nothing but peace, harmony and love between the races. Now the only thing that remains is economic healing between rich and poor. Hillary is committed to following the path of other great heroes who have succeeded at this, especially Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro. And especially Maximilien Robespierre and Joseph Stalin. So we should really look forward to a Hillary presidency, because she will accomplish all this and bring an end to the maltreatment of the sexes too.

    3. Looney, EUSS: correctly put! Obama is the biggest disappointment of my political life! Hillary must NOT be the next US President, period!
      "we should really look forward to a Hillary presidency, because she will accomplish all this and bring an end to the maltreatment of the sexes too." Hahahaha right!!! I'm linking your sense of humor, Looney.

  3. Jonathan, your writing is refreshing, so welcome! Now, I agree with you this whole affair reeks. The Clintons are a couple of lies, deceit and shamelessness, how can anyone with the minimum of intelligence even consider voting for them? Jake is right: the intent to commit a crime has already been proven, and plus what happened to the guy who installed her server in her toilet and made a deal with the FBI? This Comey dude should be investigated, I'm just saying! Damn, corruption has taken over America.

  4. Hello Jonathan, welcome to DS! My, my, my and what a way to start your journey among us.
    Regarding this case, I agree that Mrs Clinton should've been indicted and prosecuted. As a lawyer, she must have known the ramifications of what she was doing; as a State Secretary, she was informed about the rules of communication and yet she broke all of them by using a personal server to exchange classified information that may have fallen into the enemy's hands.
    Then we have the dubious people with whom Mrs Clinton keeps society: who are they? What do they get in return once they contribute to her foundation? What is the exact role of that foundation? Where did the monies come from? etc etc and it was the FBI's job to get the answers to those questions and suggest an indictment.
    I hope to see more pieces of yours here. Perfect addition to the team.

  5. This woman is a liar. What I don't get it is those American voters willing to vote for a woman who jeopardized the US National Security! In the past National Security meant something and nothing was above it but since Obama sat his ass in the oval room everything is up side down.

  6. I have read that only two of the emails were classified, and that they were actually improperly labeled as such. One doesn't know what to believe....

    1. Lynda, even if it was true two classified emails can put people's lives in danger depending on what issue those emails discussed, don't you think? Imagine we are talking about the Benghazi issue. 'Because she didn’t use the government system, the department didn’t have her emails on hand when the House Select Committee on Benghazi asked to see them.' and for facts' sake 113 emails were considered classified by the FBI though only three had classification markers. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/jul/19/politifact-sheet-hillary-clintons-email-controvers/

  7. Regardless on which side we are we have to admit there's something fishy about Hillary Clinton, we have to. I'd like to see a woman as US president for a change, America is far behind other countries on this, but not this woman! Maybe it's easier for us foreigners to see it but it's clear she has a corruption problem, she's no better than our African leaders, so why would Americans want to vote for her? I watched the convention last week and I pitied those women crying as if a corrupt woman is the ultimate role model for our children! Donald Trump is no better candidate but at least he's not corrupt, so what's the lesser evil of two? The non-corrupt and you can correct me if I'm wrong.


Post a Comment

Dissecting Society welcomes all sorts of comments, as we are strong advocates of freedom of speech; however, we reserve the right to delete Troll Activity; libellous and offensive comments (e.g. racist and anti-Semitic) plus those with excessive foul language. This blog does not view vulgarity as being protected by the right to free speech. Cheers