FBI Director James Comey delivered his much anticipated statement & recommendation about the case against Hillary Clinton this week. At about 9:00 minutes into his statement, Director Comey said “now let me tell you what we found” and proceeded to verbally indict Hillary Clinton for being “extremely careless” in handling of sensitive, confidential &, in some cases, top secret documents. He described her & her staff as “participants who knew or should have known” and added that they had failed the test of what “any responsible person should have known“.
Then, after this verbal indictment that lasted several minutes, Director Comey said that no reasonable prosecutor would prosecute the case & added that he was recommending no charges be brought against Hillary Clinton. As we heard this, we immediately thought of Chief Justice John Roberts and his action in upholding Obamacare by breaking the 4-4 tie. We had written at that time:
- “A real democracy is much much more than a system of electoral primacy. A functionally viable democracy needs Institutions; Institutions that are set up, maintained and obligated through out their existence to consider the nation’s good rather than the interests of a single political party, community or ideology. The heads of such institutions have the mandate to maintain, above all, the legitimacy of their institutions in the eyes of the people“.
- “In an absolute stunner of a decision, Chief Justice Roberts voted to uphold Obamacare. He didn’t just vote for it. He found a legal contrivance to justify upholding it. In doing so, he acted against his principles, the legal thinking that has dominated his career. Chief Justice Roberts did so in the interests of a far greater cause, the legitimacy of the Supreme Court, the institution that has been entrusted in his care”
That is exactly what FBI Director Comey did. He did not want the FBI to decide the next Presidential election. That is the job of the American people & not of any one institution that serves the Executive branch. We commend him for it.
In fact, Director Comey did more than just make a statement. much more. Listen to his statement and you will hear his discomfort & even disgust at the behavior he found in their investigation. His statement contains words about a presumptive nominee for President that have not been heard since President Nixon & Watergate in 1973-1974.
Director Comey did more. He stated reality so clearly that people can now decide whether Comey & FBI are lying or Hillary Clinton lied under oath to the US Congress. In doing so, he clearly demonstrated the truth of what he had said at the beginning of his statement:
- “I have not coordinated this statement or reviewed it in any way with Department of Justice or any other part of the government; they do not know what I am going to say”
We believe him 100%. Because there is no way Attorney General Lynch, President Obama or any of their staff would have allowed Director Comey to make the factual statements he made about what the FBI had found. Because his statements go towards directly accusing Hillary Clinton of perjury, at least in the lay meaning of the term, in her statements to the US Congress under oath. Hear Director Comey concurring with this in the first 2:15 minutes of the clip below:
So why didn’t the FBI investigate these “false” statements made under oath to the US Congress? Listen to minutes 1:30 – 2:16 of the clip below, especially the part from minute 1:50 onwards:
- Committee Chairman Chaffetz – Did the FBI investigate her statements made under oath on this topic?
- FBI Director Comey – Not to my knowledge; I don’t think there has been a referral from the Congress
- Chairman Chaffetz – Do you need a referral from Congress to investigate her statements under oath?
- Director Comey – Sure do.
- Chairman Chaffetz – you will have one; (laughingly) you will have one in the next few hours …
We have all heard the phrase, absolute power corrupts absolutely. But there is another path to absolute corruption, at least morally & arrogantly corrupt behavior – longevity in power. And that we see in Hillary Clinton, a wife who has been at or near the top of political power in America for the past 24 years.
She became the First Lady of America in 1992, as the wife of President Bill Clinton. From day one she maintained her own staff, a symbol of her own power in the White House. After leaving the White House in 2000, she entered the Legislative Seat of Power as the Senator from New York. Throughout her term as Senator, she received special treatment as Clinton’s wife & torch bearer of the Clinton legacy. Because of that legacy, she became the presumptive front runner in the 2008 Democratic primaries. Though she lost to President Obama, she had to be given special treatment as the leader of the Clinton wing of the Democratic party. So she became the Secretary of State in line for the Presidency after the Vice President. After the reelection of President Obama in 2012, a victory in which Bill Clinton performed as the MVP (per David Axelrod), Hillary Clinton became the presumptive front runner & the torchbearer of both the Clinton & Obama legacies in the 2016 campaign.
What does such an unprecedented 24-year tenure at or near the top of American political power do to someone? We see the answer in the description of Mrs. Clinton’s behavior by FBI Director Comey. And we see that in the behavior of all the political apparatchiks who have depended and continue to depend on the Clinton family owned business of politics. And a family-owned business it is.
For us, this is deja vu all over again. We have seen what a reign at or near the top of political power can do to a wife. Sonia, the wife of Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, has been near the top of the political hierarchy in India since 1984. This is the world’s purest case of a wife inheriting political power & the reins of a nationwide family-owned political business. Sonia’s power reached its zenith in 2009 and with that political & financial corruption in India reached its peak. That included corruption seeping into & finally dominating almost all of India’s institutions. The worst affected was India’s own FBI known as Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). In Sonia’s reign, India’s CBI became known as loyal to Sonia & Sonia alone. The political corruption became so obviously bad that even the poorest of the poor of India had enough. They threw her out in the 2014 election and elected Narendra Modi with a massive majority. Unfortunately that was after Sonia’s actions had almost wrecked the Indian economy.
We see Hillary Clinton as America’s Sonia. That petrifies us because the track record of wives who inherit political legacy & power is very bad.
That brings us back to America and the big question – whether the American people have lost their societal innocence since the days of Watergate. At that time in 1974, the mere evidence that the President of America had lied was enough for a wave of bipartisan disgust engulfing American society. President Nixon had no choice but to resign in the face of that disgust.
If memory serves us correctly, the actions of President Nixon’s staff in the Watergate episode did not involve national security. And President Nixon was not personally involved. In contrast, the Hillary Clinton email saga went on for a couple of years & included her specific decisions & actions besides her now demonstrated false statements under oath to Congress.
It is easy to see what the American people of the 1970s would do in the Hillary Clinton case. But the real question is what will today’s American people do? Has that moral innocence been lost forever? Has American society now become inured to the obvious sight & sounds of a nominee for President for America apparently lying under oath to the Congress of the United States? We will find out together in November 2016.
What we find truly astonishing is the behavior of President Obama. President Ford might have pardoned Ex-President Nixon but no one saw President Ford actively supporting or even condoning President Nixon’s behavior. Vice President Gore explicitly criticized President Clinton’s immoral behavior in the White House and kept him away in the 2000 campaign. We don’t see even a shred of this moral indignation in President Obama. He heard FBI Director Comey verbally indict Hillary Clinton for her actions & statements under oath. And he didn’t even flinch. Instead & during that very afternoon, President Obama went on to praise Hillary Clinton as the person most prepared to become President since Thomas Jefferson!
Can there be any more explicit & vivid sign of loss of moral & political innocence in America?
Note: We encourage all to watch & listen to the statement of FBI Director James Comey
Send your feedback to email@example.com Or @Macro Viewpoints on Twitter