Giuliani: 'This Is the Special Exemption for the Clintons'

[mystery-ak]

http://www.newsmax.com/PrintTemplate.aspx/?nodeid=737163


Newsmax
Giuliani: 'This Is the Special Exemption for the Clintons'
Tuesday, July 5, 2016 03:21 PM

By: Todd Beamon

Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani Tuesday blasted FBI Director James Comey for his decision to not indict Hillary Clinton in the email scandal, saying "this is the special exemption for the Clintons."

"It would be unreasonable for a prosecutor not to go forward with it and almost an abdication of duty," Giuliani, who was in office during the 9/11 attacks, told Gretchen Carlson on Fox News. "What was just laid out is what we would call a no-brainer in the attorney's office that Jim Comey worked at, he was one of my assistants.

"A reasonable prosecutor would have brought this case no doubt," he added. "I don't know how he ever, ever is going to be able to charge anybody in the CIA or the FBI who is extremely careless with top secret information, if he isn't charging Hillary Clinton.

"This is the special exception for the Clintons."

Comey announced that while the Democratic presidential nominee and her staff were "reckless" and "extremely careless" in the use of a private email server during her four years as secretary of state, the FBI found no basis to file criminal charges against Clinton.

"Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before deciding whether to bring charges," Comey said in a news conference.

"They also consider the context of a person's actions and how similar situations have been handled in the past," he added. "In looking back at our investigations, into the mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts."

In a news conference after Comey's announcement, the State Department said that the agency would await how the Justice Department would proceed before taking any further action.

Both the FBI and the Justice Department are headed by Attorney General Loretta Lynch, who came under fire last week for a meeting with former President Bill Clinton aboard her private plane on the tarmac at Phoenix airport.

The meeting, which lasted about a half-hour, came the night before the special House Benghazi Committee released its report on the 2012 attacks that killed four Americans, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens and two former Navy SEALs.

Giuliani, a former federal prosecutor, pounced on Comey's finding that Clinton was "extremely careless" in using the private server in her home in Chappaqua, N.Y.

"The minute you say someone is extremely careless, you are saying they're grossly negligent," he told Fox. "That is what a judge will charge a jury. The judge will charge a jury: Has the government proven that she was?

"What do we mean by gross negligence? We mean extremely careless. Regular carelessness is not using the proper degree of care under the circumstances. Gross negligence is being extremely careless in exercising your responsibilities of this.

"That's what Jim Comey found," he said. "He then just didn't come to the conclusion that it's a violation of the statute."

He was just as virulent in an earlier interview with CNBC.

"Gross negligence is the first definition in Black's Law Dictionary," Giuliani told Brian Sullivan on CNBC. "Gross negligence includes the words 'extreme carelessness.'

"Carelessness equals negligence. Extreme carelessness equals gross negligence, under the law. He knows that."

Giuliani, appearing somewhat stunned at the FBI director's announcement, told Fox that he was "so disappointed in this."

"I brought cases against the Teamsters Union during the 1988 election when it did serious damage to the Republican Party.

"Gosh almighty. You just put that out of your mind, you put all that stuff out of your mind.

"She violated [the law]," he said.

[SirLinksALot]

SOURCE: HOTAIR

URL: http://hotair.com/archives/2016/07/05/rudy-giuliani-by-jim-comeys-own-description-hillary-is-guilty-of-a-federal-crime/

by: AllahPundit


Via the Free Beacon, he’s making the same point here that Andy McCarthy made in an NRO piece this morning. In order to believe that Hillary committed no crime, you have to rewrite 18 U.S.C. 793(f):

(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer— Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

You don’t need to intentionally mishandle classified information to be guilty. Gross negligence in your handling of it is enough. And here’s the important part: Comey himself signaled, quite overtly, that he believes Hillary was grossly negligent. If you tried to come up with another way of saying “gross negligence,” you could scarcely do better than “extremely careless,” the term Comey used this morning.

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.

For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation.

The phrase “extremely careless” is a wink at the gross-negligence standard in Section 793(f). The phrase “any reasonable person” is another. That’s how courts typically define negligence, as a failure to exhibit the same duty of care that a hypothetical “reasonable person” would exhibit. He’s telling you flat out here that she was negligent and then leaving you to infer from the rest of his remarks that her actions were so shockingly careless under the circumstances as to rise to the level of gross negligence — which means she’s guilty of violating 793(f). His blather about intent at the end of his remarks, insisting that prosecutors traditionally haven’t prosecuted crimes related to classified information unless the information was mishandled intentionally, is extraneous nonsense designed to take the heat off of Loretta Lynch and the DOJ in deciding whether to break with tradition or not. That’s a matter of prosecutorial discretion and, eventually, grand-jury discretion. Comey’s job was simply to decide whether a crime has been committed. It has, by his own admission. So why wasn’t that fact noted and the rest left to the DOJ?

I’m treating this as further evidence for my theory that Comey, for whatever reason, felt that he couldn’t recommend charges for political reasons (in which case, why didn’t he resign on principle?) but wanted to make sure that Hillary was punished at least insofar as she suffered political damage. He didn’t need to note how “extremely careless” she was or what “any reasonable person” would have done if all he wanted to do was say “we’re not recommending charges.” That was added, I assume, because Comey knew what people like Giuliani and McCarthy who are familiar with 793(f) would do with it. They’d tout the fact that Comey’s all but accusing of her committing a crime and would use that against her politically. Comey and his agency would take a hit in the process for not recommending charges but they were always destined to take a hit for that. The least Comey could do amid this foreordained travesty of justice is let the world know that he agrees with them that a crime was committed. And that’s exactly what he did. She won’t be charged, but she certainly wasn’t “cleared.”

I’ll leave you with short summary from Lachlan Markay of various Hillary lies about Emailgate that Comey has now debunked. It’s not exhaustive either. Add the fact that her spokesman once claimed that her lawyers had read every single e-mail on the server in the course of deciding what should be deleted, another untruth exposed this morning.

No classified info: lie
Allowed by State: lie
Turned over all work emails: lie
Wanted a single device: lie
Never breached: lie

— Lachlan Markay (@lachlan) July 5, 2016

[geronl]

"Republican" James Comey was confirmed by the US Senate 93-1, 2 senators voted present on July 29, 2013

He will be FBI Director until 2023-4...

suckers.