General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDid FBI director Comey exceed his authority?
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-campaign/286614-did-fbi-director-comey-exceed-his-authorityBI Director James Comey's statement recommending against prosecuting Hillary Clinton was unusual in several respects. First, it is not generally regarded as the job of the FBI to make judgment calls about whether or not to prosecute. Those judgment calls are supposed to be made by prosecutors. The job of the FBI is to investigate the facts and lay them out as objectively and completely as possible so that prosecutors can exercise their discretion and judgment.
Although technically the attorney general in this case could exercise independent judgment, she is unlikely to do so, having already said she would defer to the FBI's recommendation. So in this instance the FBI found the facts, applied the law and exercised prosecutorial discretion. A strange role for an investigative agency!
Second, it is unusual for an FBI director to express opinions such as the kind that Comey made in his statement. He said that Clinton had been "extremely careless" in her handling of sensitive material. That is not a legal concept, but to lay people it could sound very much like "gross negligence," which is one of the statutory criteria for bringing a prosecution.
Normally when a prosecutor declines prosecution, all that is said is that there will be no indictment. It is rare, though not unprecedented, for a prosecutor to then go on to excoriate the object of the investigation. The question should be asked: Is that a proper role for the director of the FBI?
Third, Comey used an unusual verbal formulation in discussing classified information. This is what he said:
"Only a small number of the emails containing classified information bore markings indicating the presence of classified information."
rest at the link.....
He is saying what caught my attention too. Pundits and some here on DU say Hillary lied when she said none of the emails she sent or received were MARKED classified. Comey makes it seem like there were a few.
If, you read the rest of the article ( I didn't post that part for copyright reasons) Dershowitz agrees with me that it is real fuzzy what Comey meant.
Response to OKNancy (Original post)
Post removed
MADem
(135,425 posts)You don't have to be a doctor to know that someone is dead.
You don't have to be a housekeeper to know that the house is dirty.
You don't have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.
When he said "no reasonable prosecutor" that is what he meant.
Look, the bottom line is this--a cadre of right wing lunatics went after Clinton. They FAILED to take her out because there was no "there" there.
Comey wasn't trying to be judge, jury and executioner. He was simply pointing out The Obvious. He ventured an opinion, and it was an opinion as evident as "The sky is blue today."
I am not an architect, yet, amazingly, I can tell you that this building is in very poor structural condition....now HOW could I possibly know this? Shouldn't I be an "expert" in order to comment? And of course, some structural engineers will come along and insist that my remarks were somehow "fuzzy" and it's not at all clear what the state of this edifice is...because, unnnh...Benghazi, or something?
CrowCityDem
(2,348 posts)when he explicitly said Hillary's private server was less secure than Gmail, because she didn't have round the clock security, and then didn't bat an eye when mentioning that it was the Gmail accounts of the people she communicated with that were hacked, and not her server.
Someone didn't proofread his remarks for pure idiocy.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)If he had said something like "I have instructed the DOJ not to prosecute", then yes. But expressing his opinion and sharing his recommendation is not exercising authority.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)This is the statement Comey made concerning that..
"Only a very small number of the e-mails containing classified information bore markings indicating the presence of classified information."
It does contradict somewhat Hillary's claim that she never sent "any" with marked classification but I suppose since there were "very few" the FBI considered that insignificant and just a minor lapse on Hillary's part in those few cases.
Hestia
(3,818 posts)the emails and then marked classified at that time, not at the time they were sent.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)The issue of not being marked at the time they were sent is what seems to be the key to Hillary's defense.
uponit7771
(90,364 posts)... the hood legally.
OK, she could've done better but who gives a shit what reThugs think these days about Clinton
DCBob
(24,689 posts)This fake scandal is now over. What a utter waste of time and effort.
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)It does not mean they were marked classified.
Also, one more thing... If she lied, that would mean she lied to the FBI and that WOULD be punishable. The fact that they never accused her of lying means she did not.
The only people accusing her of lying are right-wingers and some others who wish she wasn't the Dem. nominee.
pnwmom
(108,994 posts)they were marked classified, when they actually weren't.
Why didn't Comey specifically say they were marked classified, if that was true? I think AD is right.
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)uponit7771
(90,364 posts).. editorializing like he did
kentuck
(111,110 posts)I have heard that it is not possible??
pnwmom
(108,994 posts)and from non governmental accounts.
So if she were to be prosecuted, they'd have to prosecute hundreds of other people, too.
Here's an interesting article about how subjective the classification process is, how it varies between agencies, and the "turf war" between Intelligence (which referred the matter to the FBI) and State.
In short, Intelligence often thinks things should be classified that State doesn't think need the classification -- but it's up to each individual agency to decide.
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/08/1http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/250998-clinton-emails-reveal-murky-world-of-top-secret-documents8/the-turf-battle-getting-sidestepped-in-the-clin/204992
uponit7771
(90,364 posts)... stupid talking point for conservatives
pnwmom
(108,994 posts)uponit7771
(90,364 posts)... was obvious Todd didn't know wtf he was talking about.
The lawyer kept it plain, the emails weren't marked appropriately so there's no there there...
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)It likely means foreign government information.
If the DOJ decides to not prosecute, Obama can declassify all of these, no?
uponit7771
(90,364 posts)... the main reason why Comey could go no where.
There weren't any clear classified markings so there's no there there