Wednesday, July 06, 2016
So it turns out that while you can indict a ham sandwich, indicting our top diplomat for “extremely careless” handling of national secrets at a time of war against the most determined and diabolical enemy we have ever faced — well, that is just a waste of time. Inconvenient. Awkward.
The Democratic National Committee may not have publicly listed FBI Director James B. Comey on the schedule for its upcoming convention in Philadelphia, but the party gave him the highest-profile, prime-time speaking gig of the entire convention.
Heck, his speech Tuesday officially kicking off Hillary Clinton’s campaign for President Obama’s third term was the highest-profile convention speech for either party in modern political history.
What Mr. Comey delivered was stunning in its brassy disdain for justice and for the hard work of his dedicated agents, even as his stated logic behind the decision not to indict was utterly confounding.
Literally, as a dronelike Mr. Comey delivered his mystifying political haiku to reporters, Air Force One was being gassed up and prepared for liftoff, and a fleet of Marine helicopters began revving their rotors to pick up President Obama and ferry him and his hopeful successor — the unindicted Hillary Clinton — to their first joint event of the 2016 campaign.
By his own account, Mr. Comey’s investigation “looked at whether there is evidence classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on” Mrs. Clinton’s illegal bathroom server. Almost immediately, things got complicated when he explained that, in truth, it was “several” illegal servers the FBI had to scour, and most of them had been scuttled or somehow otherwise destroyed.
Still, they were able to determine over 100 emails contained “classified information at the time they were sent of received.” Eight were “Top Secret at the time they were sent.”
Some additional 2,000 were of such a sensitive nature that anyone with then-Secretary of State Clinton’s security clearance should have known that they should not have been sent over an unsecure email system.
“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 departments and agencies of the U.S. government — or even with a commercial service like Gmail,” Mr. Comey said.
The FBI uncovered even more messages that were clearly marked classified among emails that Mrs. Clinton did not turn over.
And this is where things start to get really strange with Mr. Comey.
The FBI director said there is “no evidence,” however, “that any of the additional work-related emails were intentionally deleted in an effort to conceal them.”
OK, so they were unintentionally deleted, or they were intentionally deleted, but not in an effort to conceal them? They were deleted in an effort to be transparent? Deleted in order to make them public? We are just having a hard time following here, Jimmy.
In addition, Mr. Comey said, there were even more emails that may have contained more secrets that were sent over the illegal bathroom server that FBI agents could not find. Those unseen emails “are now gone” because the Clintons deleted everything and their “lawyers cleaned their devices in such a way as to preclude complete forensic recovery.”
Again, all in an effort by the Clintons to be transparent. Or something.
As for “hostile actors” who spend every second of every day trying to gain access to America’s secrets, Mr. Comey said his agents found no “direct evidence” of a breach but also determined that they would not even be able to detect such a breach at this point. But given Mrs. Clinton’s reckless disregard for email security and flagrant use of unsecured servers even while traveling abroad, “it is possible that hostile actors gained access” to her classified emails.
Yet out of all of this, Mr. Comey found “reasonable confidence” that there was no effort to conceal emails from investigators and determined that “no reasonable prosecutor” would bring any charges against Mrs. Clinton.
I am starting to think that maybe Mr. Comey has a skewed idea of what is “reasonable.” I guess that depends on what the definition of “is” is.
• Charles Hurt can be reached at email@example.com; follow him on Twitter via @charleshurt.
See Other Political Commentary by Charles Hurt.
See Other Political Commentary.
Views expressed in this column are those of the author, not those of Rasmussen Reports. Comments about this content should be directed to the author or syndicate.
Rasmussen Reports is a media company specializing in the collection, publication and distribution of public opinion information.
We conduct public opinion polls on a variety of topics to inform our audience on events in the news and other topics of interest. To ensure editorial control and independence, we pay for the polls ourselves and generate revenue through the sale of subscriptions, sponsorships, and advertising. Nightly polling on politics, business and lifestyle topics provides the content to update the Rasmussen Reports web site many times each day. If it's in the news, it's in our polls. Additionally, the data drives a daily update newsletter and various media outlets across the country.
Some information, including the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll and commentaries are available for free to the general public. Subscriptions are available for $4.95 a month or 34.95 a year that provide subscribers with exclusive access to more than 20 stories per week on upcoming elections, consumer confidence, and issues that affect us all. For those who are really into the numbers, Platinum Members can review demographic crosstabs and a full history of our data.
To learn more about our methodology, click here.