Trump Hammers FBI’s Comey For Not Jailing Clinton: ‘She Was Guilty of Every Charge’
President Donald Trump is not happy with FBI Director James Comey for not arresting former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
In an interview with Fox Business, host Maria Bartiromo claimed that many people don’t understand why there are still so many appointees or staff from President Barack Obama’s administration. She was specifically talking about Comey. Still, Trump expressed confidence in the embattled director.
“When Jim Comey came out, he saved Hillary Clinton. He saved her life,” referring to Comey’s declaration that he would not be charging Clinton with a crime.
“When he was reading those charges, she was guilty of every charge, and then he said she was essentially OK,” Trump continued.
Yet, when it comes to the investigation into the Trump campaign and Russia, Trump still has confidence in Comey.
He went on to complain about the obstruction in Congress and pesky things like “the law” that blocks him from doing what he’d like to do. “I wish they’d explain better the obstructionist nature,” he said.
When it comes to former Obama advisor Susan Rice, Trump continued to claim she ordered the unmasking of the name of the American being investigated. These unmaskings are part of the responsibilities of the national security advisor.
“Does anybody really believe that,” Trump said. “What they did is horrible.”
(h/t Raw Story)
Reality
Let’s revisit James Comey’s conclusion from July 2016:
Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past.
In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here.