FBI Wanted to Try Clinton

[This_person]

Link
At his now infamous July 5, 2016 press conference during which he exonerated Hillary Clinton, former FBI Director James Comey said that “no reasonable prosecutor” would bring a case against her for mishandling classified information. That is, except for the FBI’s top lawyer, James Baker.

Rumors were circling at the time that there was disagreement among FBI leadership about whether or not to charge Clinton.

Baker testified in October at a closed hearing before Congressional investigators. Although the transcripts from this hearing have not been made public, Fox News has confirmed the relevant portions. Fox also reported that “Baker’s testimony was considered thorough and highly credible by those in the room.”

Contrary to James Comey’s claim that the FBI’s decision not to charge Hillary Clinton was unanimous, Baker’s testimony tells us otherwise.

Baker: Pursuant to the statutes that we were considering at the time, it was the nature and scope of the classified information that, to me, initially, when I looked at it, I thought these folks should know that this stuff is classified, that it was alarming what they were talking about, especially some of the most highly classified stuff.
Unidentified lawmaker to Baker: I have reason to believe that you originally believed it was appropriate to charge Hillary Clinton with regard to violations of law — various laws with regard to the mishandling of classified information. Is that accurate?
Baker: Yes.
Lawmaker: And I understood that, that you had to be persuaded, and stated as a basis that ultimately you were persuaded there was a lack of evidence establishing knowledge or criminal intent, correct?
Baker: Yes.

Lawmaker pressed Baker on when exactly he changed his mind.

Baker: Sorry. Pretty late in the process, because we were arguing about it, I think, up until the end.

 

[Grumpy]

The only reason she wasn't charged is because they all were 100% confident she would be Prez and cared more about keeping their jobs than getting on her bad side.

 

[Monello]

If they charge her now, she will claim it some vast right wing conspiracy.

 

[Hijinx]

I don't care what she claims I want to see her telling it to a Judge.
The evidence is there let her lawyers defend her.
She should go to trial.

 

[This_person]

The only reason she wasn't charged is because they all were 100% confident she would be Prez and cared more about keeping their jobs than getting on her bad side.

I think it has to be a lot more than that, because if that were true it would have changed when she was NOT elected.

I think it has more to do with who was on the other side of those e-mails. Surely the Chair and Ranking Member of the Intelligence and Foreign Affairs committees in both houses as well as other senior Representatives and Senators, not to mention other Cabinet members, Deputies, and (we know for sure) the previous president were all people with whom she had e-mail contact. It's highly unlikely that she was sending and receiving classified information just to/from herself, so she will be taking down a large part of senior DC government officials (elected, appointed, and career-hired).

THAT is what they are trying to avoid, in my humble opinion.

 

[Kyle]

Just contemplating how much alcohol would be needed to convince someone to “try” Hillary.

 

[Grumpy]

THAT is what they are trying to avoid, in my humble opinion.

Good point, and that would have opened a huge can of worms. I still think their thinking she was going to be the next prez played a major role in their reluctance to do anything to her.

 

[Monello]

When I rub the lamp and the Genie pops out, guess what my first wish is going to be.

 

[This_person]

Good point, and that would have opened a huge can of worms. I still think their thinking she was going to be the next prez played a major role in their reluctance to do anything to her.

Comey said as much. I am just suggesting it was that plus my point.