Tuesday, September 13, 2016

James Comey must decide what kind of man he is

In his column today at the New York Observer, Austin Bay employs the rhetoric device of addressing a particular person. The person is FBI director James Comey. He basically lets Comey know that he's looking at his last chance to demonstrate character and salvage his reputation. Bay says it's abundantly clear that Comey has, and has had, the goods on Madame BleachBit.

He comes right out and says that it's on Comey if a known criminal becomes president.

Bay's focus is on Part IV of the report issued by the House Select Committee on Benghazi:

Part IV is tedious reading. As a government worker, you ought to be able to handle that. Part IV provides the deep and documented background for the obstruction of justice charge.
For that matter, the entire report is a tedious read. That’s why I doubt the quick study artists in the mainstream media who already know everything didn’t bother to read the proposed report—much less the updated version.
Failure to slog through the brutal details didn’t stop the usual geniuses from immediately dismissing the  proposed report. We heard the lines, like “nothing new here” and “nothing interesting, move along.” Such dismissals slander a remarkably professional investigative effort led by Rep. Trey Gowdy. Gowdy knew the Benghazi massacre mattered and he wanted to produce a thorough report. We had an ambassador killed in an attack by a radical Islamist terror group sharing the same murderous goals as Al Qaeda and the Islamic State. Think about it, Jim. The Benghazi attack occurred on 9/11, an iconic date. That’s no coincidence.
15 years after 9/11 we are still at war with these religious totalitarians because they wage war on us. Your FBI Counter-intel guys are the domestic front line in the Global War on Terror. These agents—your Bureau’s outstanding line agents—know we’re at war. I’ve talked with several of them. So a thorough and responsible investigation of the Benghazi atrocity was justified… you do agree, don’t you, Jim?
I’ve read Part IV of the Committee’s report—the entire tedious all of it—even the footnotes. It has moments of drama, but Part IV is basically a lesson in fortitude. The Committee continued to hang tough despite the obnoxious bureaucratic foot-dragging, the calculated failure to provide requested documents and the ultimately illegal obstruction of justice.
I say the Committee. It’s really the majority, the Republicans, who faced the obstruction of justice. 
he Democrats on the Committee often appeared to act hand-in-glove with Team Hillary. They complained the Committee was wasting money, taking too long to investigate. You have to wonder if the Democrats on the Committee read Part IV.
My assertion of connivance isn’t too outlandish. Democrats did connive with Team Hillary when Ms. Clinton testified before the then Democrat-controlled Senate Benghazi committee in 2013.
Political obstruction. That’s bad when we’re investigating a war time massacre.
*  * *
Political obstruction segues into criminal obstruction and The BleachBit Timeline. March 2, 2015 is a critical BleachBit date. That’s when The New York Times reported Hillary had a private email system.
Sharyl Atkinson has kept a running Benghazi timeline that is quite thorough and admirable. I recommend her timeline as a reliable reference. (Atkinson has character and grit. She has the courage to take on powerful crooks. Between you and me, Jim, you’d do well to follow her example.)
However, Zerohedge’s September 3 timeline directly addresses the obstruction of justice. Here are some critical dates, courtesy Zerohedge. PRN means Platte River Networks, the outfit who Hillary hired to handle her rogue server system. The Apple MacBook mentioned in the timeline contained backup copies of Hillary’s emails.
  • Early 2014—Monica Hanley advises Undisclosed PRN Staff Member to wipe the Apple MacBook clean after uploading Hillary’s emails to the new PRN server but he forgets to do it
  • Early 2014—Undisclosed PRN Staff Member mails Apple MacBook back to Clinton and it is promptly lost
  • Dec 2014—Hillary delivers 55,000 emails to State Department
  • Dec 2014/Jan 2015—Heather Samuelson and Cheryl Mills request emails be deleted from their computer using BleachBit
  • Dec 2014/Jan 2015—“Unknown Clinton staff member” instructs PRN to remove archives of Clinton emails from PRN server
  • Mar 2, 2015—NYT releases an article showing that Hillary used a personal email server in violation of State Department rules
  • Mar 4, 2015—Hillary receives subpoena from House Select Committee on Benghazi instructing her to preserve and deliver all emails from her personal servers
  • Mar 25, 2015—Undisclosed PRN Staff Member has a conference call with “President Clinton’s Staff”
  • Mar 25-31, 2015—Undisclosed PRN Staff Member has “oh shit” moment and realizes he forgot to wipe Hillary’s email archive from the PRN server back in December…which he promptly does using BleachBit despite later admitting he “was aware of the existence of the preservation request and the fact that it meant he should not disturb Clinton’s e-mail data on the PRN server”
  • Jun 2016—FBI discovers that Undisclosed PRN Staff Member forgot to erase 940 emails from the gmail account he created to help with the PRN server upload
Zerohedge’s discussion of the March 4 subpoena includes a long quote from the House Select Committee’s report. March 4 is a particularly important date because that’s the date the committee requests the “preservation and retention of all documents and media” related to Hillary’s two rogue email addresses on her rogue email server operating (safely, she thought) beyond the reach of federal record retention regulations.
Then comes what Zerohedge calls a difficult “moment”:
“On March 25, 2015, the Undisclosed PRN Staff Member had a ‘conference call with President Clinton’s staff.’ Apparently, in the days following that call, the Undisclosed PRN Staff Member had an ‘oh shit moment’ when he realized he had forgotten to wipe the PRN server clean as he had been instructed to do back in December by Cheryl Mills.
Therefore, sometime within the 6 days after a call with ‘President Clinton’s Staff,’ that PRN server was wiped clean using BleachBit despite the subpoena from the House Select Committee on Benghazi received weeks earlier on March 4, 2016.”
BleachBit, Jim. Software for a thorough scrub of a server. To remove evidence.
Now tell me, Comey. Do you really think (as Zerohedge says, tongue in cheek) “Mills, Hillary, President Clinton’s Office were all blissfully unaware of the actions of their rogue IT guy”? You and your agency know Hillary failed to turn over work-related emails to the Committee. You think these curiouser and curiouser shenanigans were all accidental? Are you and Alice living happily together in Wonderland?
In a letter sent to Platte River Networks on September 6 (the day before your protesteth too much memo), Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), now head of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, gave the FBI credit for confirming that Hillary failed to turn over work related emails despite repeated requests and subpoenas to do so.
I employ italics, Jim, to get your attention, because, dammit, Chafetz is doing your job. He’s going after the little fish to get to the shark. That’s how you Feebs operate when you’re doing your job. How come you didn’t indict this anonymous Platte River Networks employee for knowingly destroying subpoenaed evidence? I’m not the first to ask this question. Jonathan Turley asked it on September 6.
Turley even quotes 2 U.S. Code § 192. He just didn’t put the question to you as personally as I have.
Jim, I see you as a man in a responsibility-heavy government security position who has acted irresponsibly. Obstruction of justice is an indictable crime—that’s the crime Richard Nixon and his aides committed in the Watergate Scandal. You remember Watergate, don’t you? The scandal that made The Washington Postfamous? Turns out the Deep Throat source on whom WaPo reporters relied was the FBI’s Number Two Boss. Back in 1974 our country couldn’t stomach a criminal in the White House. So, Comey, why the hell in 2016 should you help get a criminal elected?
Mr. Director, it’s time for you to admit you erred in early July. You’ve got the evidence. Call a press conference. Recommend Hillary Clinton be indicted and, this time, let Attorney General Loretta Lynch make the decision. She’s the prosecutor—not you.
Recommend indictment for three reasons, Mr. Director. First and foremost recommend she face legal consequences because her actions were criminal.   
This is a classic example of a basic lesson: When Democrats say it's time to move on from something regarding the Clinton machine, it's time to look at it more deeply.


  1. None of this has gone nor will gob where you want it to. Calling her a criminal doesn't make it true. So you really want that madman Trump at the helm huh?

  2. Known criminals by who? Your ilk? Scare me!

  3. Cry all you want, when it comes to.a jury there is no way you are going to get a conviction. But you may get us much much worse in the White House and I know you know it.

  4. You must not have actually read this post or any other post here about Hillary Clinton over at least the last year. They provide ample proof of her criminality.

    And no, I don't want Trump at the helm either.

  5. Your posts have 0 effect where it matters. And that is in a court of law before a jury of her peers.

  6. Stop and think how much Trump is behind the current witch hunt.

  7. Let's not put foolish assertions on public display - or maybe you don't give a flip, in which case, let 'er rip! The posts I cote in the comment above cite a number of distinguished legal scholars who are following this matter very closely.

  8. Madame BleachBit is a criminal, a liar, an enabler of a sexual predator, and generally known to be a very unpleasant person to deal with. She is also a hard-core Alinskyite. She is also in very poor health.