The much awaited FBI decision on Hillary Clinton’s criminal investigation concerning her use of a private email server to receive, send and store classified documents ended with a puzzling, and to most, infuriating performance by FBI Director James Comey.  Comey provided a recitation of the evidence which was far from flattering to Ms. Hillary, and indeed, which sounded much like the prosecution Memo which precedes an indictment.
Comey said that “although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information;” “any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those with whom she was corresponding about those matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation;” “None of these emails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these emails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at agencies and departments of the United States government – or even with a commercial email service like (Google’s) Gmail; and that “even if information is not marked ‘classified’ in an email, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it.”  Comey added that Clinton’s system was generally lacking in the kind of care for classified information that is found elsewhere in the government.  He found that hostile actors gained access to private email accounts of people with whom Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account, and that Clinton’s use of a personal email domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent.
Even more disturbing, the FBI found that Clinton used her personal email extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related emails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries who could have gained access to the information.  As Secretary of State, Hillary made 2 trips to China, a country notorious for hacking into protected government and industrial computers.  The White House she served demanded that China provide better answers regarding a Chinese cyberattack against Google.  Since Hillary’s server had far less security than Google’s, what are the odds the Chinese didn’t steal everything she had? Yet, in the face of seemingly damning evidence, Comey concluded that no reasonable prosecutor would charge Hillary with a crime.  He said that cases that had prosecuted before involved a 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.”  Comey relied on his assessment that there was no evidence of intent to mishandle classified materials, while concluding that Clinton’s email practices put America’s secrets at risk and her actions constituted the “definition of carelessness.”  It is a crime to willfully, i.e., intentionally mishandle classified documents.  But the same law that criminalizes such conduct also makes it a crime to do so by means of “gross negligence.”  This is the puzzling and infuriating part of the statement.  One who is negligent, by definition, does not act intentionally. Now, gross negligence exists when a person exhibits willful and wanton misconduct, and implies that a person has acted with reckless disregard for the safety of others.  Where an ordinary reasonable person would understand that a situation poses dangerous risks and acts without regard for the potentially serious consequences, the law holds him, or her, legally responsible.  Members of the military have been prosecuted and convicted of gross negligence for keeping classified documents unsecured at home. An email is just as much a document as a piece of paper.  In 2010, State Department officials warned of the risk of Clinton’s private server.  They were ordered, by a supervisor in Clinton’s office “never to speak of the Secretary’s private email system again.”  Hillary was warned of a risk, and acted with reckless disregard for the consequences of her actions.  That sure sounds like gross negligence to me.  Even more disturbing, was Comey’s warning that other government employees better not follow Clinton’s example, as they could face sanctions.  But Hillary beat the rap – for now. She’s not out of the woods though.  Comey later testified before Congress that Hillary told a series of lies about her conduct, not to the FBI mind you, just to the unsuspecting public.  She claimed no classified material was received or emailed, and that was a lie.  She also claimed that she turned over all work-related emails.  That was a lie too, as the FBI found thousands of work-related emails that were not returned. Hillary’s next problem is that she told some of her lies in Congressional testimony, and lying to Congress also is a crime.  Do I think the Justice Department will act on this.  No.  Delegates at the Republican convention, and many Bernie supporters at the Dem convention chanted, “Lock her up.”  The Dem convention then made Hillary, a now documented chronic and habitual liar, its presidential candidate.  All the damning evidence aside, I really don’t care if she goes to prison.  At the same time, I’m more convinced than ever that she never should step foot in the White House ever again.  She should go away and play with her grandchildren.   Comey said that an FBI employee who did what Hillary did could be fired and “walked out” of the building.  In November, we can walk Hillary out once and for all.