Category Archives: Law
Integrity Beyond Question
Attorney General Loretta Lynch was caught red handed discussing grandkids with Bill Clinton. Bill’s wife, Hillary, was under investigation at the time for her secret email server. So the AG turned over her decision making authority in the caper to FBI Director James Comey.
When Comey decided not to prosecute, a Greek Chorus of Democrats sang his praises. But when he reopened the case, due to emails found on Carlos Danger’s laptop, they changed their tune.
Integrity Beyond Question
Harry Reid, having pronounced Comey’s integrity beyond question, questioned it by accusing him of violating the Hatch Act. At least he hasn’t accused Comey of not paying his taxes. Yet.
Tarmac Talk Could Influence Election Outcome
Jane Mayer, in the New Yorker, points out that FBI Director Comey broke with Justice Department tradition:
Attorney General Loretta Lynch expressed her preference that Comey follow the department’s longstanding practice of not commenting on ongoing investigations, and not taking any action that could influence the outcome of an election, but he said that he felt compelled to do otherwise.
Tarmac Talk
He might have felt compelled to do otherwise because the AG turned her authority in the case over to him:
Comey’s supporters argue that he had to act independently, and publicly, because Lynch had compromised herself by having an impromptu visit with Bill Clinton late in the investigation.”
Here’s Andrew McCarthy in NR on Comey’s tradition breaking behavior:
In effect, it became The Decision because Attorney General Loretta Lynch had disgraced herself by furtively meeting with Mrs. Clinton’s husband a few days before Comey announced his recommendation. Comey, therefore, gave Mrs. Clinton a twofer: an unheard-of public proclamation that she should not be indicted by the head of the investigative agency; and a means of taking Lynch off the hook, which allowed the decision against prosecution to be portrayed as a careful weighing of evidence rather than a corrupt deal cooked up in the back of a plane parked on a remote tarmac.
Taking Action
McCarthy says not taking action would also have influenced the election:
But of course, not taking action one would take but for the political timing is as political as it gets. To my mind, it is more political because the negatively affected candidate is denied any opportunity to rebut the law-enforcement action publicly.
Anyway Hillary created the mess so it’s her fault. At least that’s the way Rich Lowry, A. B. Stoddard, Trey Gowdy, Andrew McCarthy, and Piers Morgan’s see it.
Election Day Shower Forecast
Hillary’s under FBI investigation again thanks to Anthony Weiner. And now The Donald is really yuge. Time for a shower.
Hillary’s Supreme Court
Hillary wants to appoint Justices to the Supreme Court who will overturn the Citizens United ruling.
In the third debate she said she wants a court that will stand on the side of the people rather than wealthy donors. Citizens United is a corporation that bankrolled a movie critical of her. Wrong side of the people.
Supreme Court
Justice Alito asked the government if Citizens United had published a book about a political figure instead of a movie could it be banned too? The answer was probably so.
Innocence of Muslims was the movie Hillary and the White House blamed for the Benghazi attack. The filmmaker was thrown in jail for a parole violation.
Clinton Foundation
In late September the New York State Attorney General ordered the Trump Foundation to stop accepting donations because it failed to file audits with the State of New York. The foundation had raised $25,000 from outside donors.
Clinton Foundation
John Kass says, “all the Clintons had to sell was influence. And they used the federal government to leverage it.”
Andrew McCarthy at NR online thinks the Clinton Foundation is a criminal Ricco operation:
Ostensibly a charity, the foundation was a de facto fraud scheme to monetize Hillary’s power as secretary of state (among other aspects of the Clintons’ political influence). The scheme involved (a) the exchange of political favors, access, and influence for millions of dollars in donations; (b) the circumvention of campaign-finance laws that prohibit political donations by foreign sources; (c) a vehicle for Mrs. Clinton to shield her State Department e-mail communications from public and congressional scrutiny while she and her husband exploited the fundraising potential of her position; and (d) a means for Clinton insiders to receive private-sector compensation and explore lucrative employment opportunities while drawing taxpayer-funded government salaries. While the foundation did perform some charitable work, this camouflaged the fact that contributions were substantially diverted to pay lavish salaries and underwrite luxury travel for Clinton insiders. Contributions skyrocketed to $126 million in 2009, the year Mrs. Clinton arrived at Foggy Bottom. Breathtaking sums were “donated” by high-rollers and foreign governments that had crucial business before the State Department. Along with those staggering donations came a spike in speaking opportunities and fees for Bill Clinton. Of course, disproportionate payments and gifts to a spouse are common ways of bribing public officials — which is why, for example, high-ranking government officeholders must reveal their spouses’ income and other asset information on their financial-disclosure forms.
McCarthy is a former assistant U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York. He prosecuted the Blind Sheik in connection with the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
