The scandal surrounding ex – Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email server is getting deeper and ex – FBI Director James Comey appears to be near the bottom.
Based on The Washington Times, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) thinks Mr. Comey was originally going to say that Mrs. Clinton was “grossly negligent” in handling classified information, but later altered the statement to steer clear of utilizing that phrase.
In a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray, Sen. Grassley explained, “Although Director Comey’s original version of his statement acknowledged that Secretary Clinton had violated the statute prohibiting gross negligence in the handling of classified information, he nonetheless exonerated her in that early, May 2nd draft statement anyway, arguing that this part of the statute should not be enforced.”
The investigation surrounding Mrs. Clinton’s usage of a private email server and the severe mishandling of classified information is full of suspicious behavior and questionable acts, all part of an attempt that seems to protect Mrs. Clinton at any cost.
Hundreds of classified emails, many top secret, were funneled to Mrs. Clinton’s secret account, a gross violation of her office as Secretary of State. Although the FBI determined the matter to be a serious security breach they would ultimately exonerate her on the grounds that it couldn’t be confirmed there was any intent at criminal activity, that she was purely “clueless” as to the security risks concerned.
What’s fascinating is that while the investigation was still underway, with 17 witnesses prearranged to supply their statements, Mr. Comey was already drafting a statement that Mrs. Clinton while “grossly negligent” was not liable of any wrongdoing.
Initially he said that he did so after Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch met with ex – President Bill Clinton in June on an airport tarmac. As if to propose that the very questionable meeting in some way led to Mr. Comey being directed to let the matter drop, in spite of the investigation’s findings.
While the meeting was troubling, it’s been exposed that Mr. Comey had meant to cover for Mrs. Clinton as early as May, when he drafted the first public statement relating to the findings of an investigation months from being finalized.
Sen. Grassley states the first draft was May 2 which explained there was “evidence to support a conclusion that Secretary Clinton, and others, used the private email server in a manner that was grossly negligent with respect to the handling of classified material.”
He went on to point out “the sheer volume of information that was properly classified as Secret at the time it was discussed on email (that is, excluding the ‘up classified’ emails) supports an inference that the participants were grossly negligent in their handling of that information.”
But in June, after the tarmac meeting, Mr. Comey had eradicated that original statement and published “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.”
This modification from “grossly negligent” to “clueless” is concerning given that a finding of “grossly negligent” could’ve lead to criminal charges being pursued against Clinton, in contrast to “clueless” bore no further action.
Sen. Grassley makes this point by stating that the laws relating to the mishandling of classified information makes use of a gross negligence standard. Thinking about this standard, an FBI statement that Mrs. Clinton was “grossly negligent” would’ve born legal implications.
It raises the severe query of why Mr. Comey rephrased his statement to steer clear of saying that Clinton was “grossly negligent” in her usage of classified information. It appears probable, though totally speculative, that the change was made to prevent any further action or investigation against her.
While the rewording of a public statement might not appear like much, the reasons behind the modification could prove disturbing.
Got a tip or a rumor? Contact me here.
The Establishment continue to push forward in their attempt to shut down the alternative press that is rapidly growing and pushing out the faltering mainstream media. As the EU demands social media sites censor fake news and Reddit, Facebook and other sites begin blocking Fusion Laced Illusions and other alternative media it is now alarmingly evident that their truly is a war on free speech.
Copyright Disclaimer: Citation of articles and authors in this report does not imply ownership. Works and images presented here fall under Fair Use Section 107 and are used for commentary on globally significant newsworthy events. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for fair use for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.
Spread the word! LIKE and SHARE this article or leave a comment to help direct attention to the stories that matter. And SUBSCRIBE to stay connected with Fusion Laced Illusions content!
REQUEST REPRINT OR SUBMIT CORRECTION to email@example.com
Contact Fusion Laced Illusions by email.
You can reach us at JWilliams7497@gmail.com Letters may be published. Want to see other people talking about Fusion Laced Illusions? Check out our letters to the editor.