“On Tuesday, July 5, 2016, Mr. Comey conducted a fifteen-minute press briefing detailing the elements of the crime of mishandling national defense information, specifically Title 18 U.S.C. §793(f) and the FBI’s investigation of former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s use of an outlaw email server,” the op-ed published on Wednesday by The Hill states.
The article then goes through the numerous examples of Clinton’s conduct that Director Comey addressed on Tuesday. Included in this list were the revelations that Clinton sent and received classified emails and the Bureau’s assessment that her server was almost certainly compromised by foreign adversaries.
Like former U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey, Judicial Watch then takes issue with Director Comey’s conclusion, considering he had just laid out a strong case for why charges were appropriate.
Unbelievably, having defined the elements of a national security crime and given specific examples of Mrs. Clinton’s reckless, dangerous conduct in each case, Mr. Comey concluded that ‘no charges are appropriate in this case’ and that ‘no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.’ Mr. Comey did not tell the truth. Many people, in and out of government, know Mr. Comey’s blatant falsehood.
The op-ed then addresses the issue of the appearance of impropriety surrounding the entire investigation that was heightened after former President Bill Clinton’s private airport meeting with Attorney General Loretta Lynch. It also takes issue with Hillary Clinton’s meeting with the FBI on the Saturday of a holiday weekend, calling the sit down a “sweetheart” interview.
The remainder of the piece unmercifully lambasts Director Comey:
Then just over 48 hours [after the ’sweetheart’ meeting] (no doubt Mr. Comey spent the weekend carefully examining a year’s worth of interview transcripts), the proverbial stake was driven through the heart of any remaining faith and confidence in the public’s concept of “equal justice under law” or in Mr. Comey’s professional integrity by his nonsensical, contradictory, and insulting decision to let Mrs. Clinton “walk” on her national security crimes. No other federal government employee would have received the extraordinary, exceptional treatment Mr. Comey conferred on Mrs. Clinton.Government employees with security clearances and access to classified information – especially in law enforcement, the intelligence community, and the armed forces – are shaking their heads in disgust, disappointment, and disbelief. They now know the truth. No other cabinet secretary has ever broken the law so flagrantly or endangered national security so gravely. Mr. Comey is now complicit in Mrs. Clinton’s reckless conduct. Mr. Comey knowingly gave Mrs. Clinton a “pass.” He is compromised.Should Mr. Comey continue as Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation? No.
LawNewz.com reached out to Judicial Watch for comment to clarify whether the group was formally calling for Director Comey’s resignation. We will update this article when we receive a response.