Thursday, July 7, 2016

TESTIMONY OF FBI DIRECTOR COMPROMISED BY HRC SULLIED INVESTIGATION

SPECIAL Report

_________
TESTIMONY OF FBI DIRECTOR COMPROMISED BY HRC SULLIED INVESTIGATION
_________

After watching the four plus hour Hearing held by the House Committee on Government Oversight and Reform chaired by UT. R. Representative Jason Chaffetz with FBI Director James Comey under sworn testimony, it is my Review that the Director has not conducted the Investigation in a thorough consideration of the interest of the Public, in consideration of the Standard of the Laws, by subscribing to the interest of the Facts, presented in the Case, held to the Standard of Laws of the United States of America, any Reasonable Director of an Investigation would Report Publically so as to conclude the matter rather than prolong the matter.

This "self-appreciated" grand-standing held by the Director as "Transparency" is a dis-service to the Public and has acted in a couched way of denying evidence that  existed, any reasonable prosecutor would prosecute the case with the Facts, he has become familiar with under a tiny scope of the Laws least likely to succeed, while ignoring the broader scope of Laws most likely to succeed under the exact same Facts or circumstances as Evidence.

If I may parlance the varying Sets, or Standards of Laws, under the parameters of the Investigation as Victims of a Predator. One victim was acknowledged alive and well, though carelessly victimized but without any real physical injury. The other victim was repeatedly stabbed over thirty thousand times and suffered an anagonizing death.

The Laws that suffered a death were the Felony Charges of: Obstruction of Justice by destruction of evidence and Obstruction of Justice to avoid FOIA in the usurpation of the Office of the Secretary of State.

The Director James Comey in his investigation as I understand it held [two] types of depositions under the circumstances surrounding the Events described as the conduct of officials and aids surrounding Hillary Clinton's Private Server in the duties and obligations of the Office of Secretary of State she held under the nomination of Barack Obama from approximately 2009 to 2013. One set of depositions placed lower aids and professionals associated under oath during the FBI questioning and another set placed an Official under no oath- Hillary Clinton.

If two sets of styles exist in even taking depositions by the FBI as evidense, if the collecting of evidence seen as testimony has two different criteria depending upon Position,  under an FBI Investigation, clearly the Investigation has one set of Rules for common people and another set of Rules for higher ups, and this [fact] alone decries and substantiates the conduct of the FBI in this Investigation as a dis-service to the Public and a calculated bias understood by all.

We know other witnesses in this Case were placed under oath. Why were they subject to different treatment if lying to the FBI is a crime, why does the FBI place anyone under an oath to collect evidence by testimony?

The FBI Director was placed under oath for this hearing. The FBI certainly patted itself on the back for integrity of the Investigation as non-partisan, but who is helped and who is hurt in this Affair? The People's Office of Secretary of State was usurped! Hillary Clinton in affect privatized the People's Office of Secretary of State.

Director Comey testified that Top Secret information was read by People without a Security Clearance. He assumed it did not hurt The People of the United States. He did not assume Top Secret Intelligence , evidence, destroyed by people without a Security Clearance working on that Server hurt The People of the United States and constituted the willful destruction of The People's Intelligence or Property.

That action constituted a stabbing Death of FOIA for that Intelligence that concerned National Security Matters in the People's Office of Secretary of State.

The coy response of Director Comey was he was not asked to investigate the specific crime of a violation of FOIA. The victim of FOIA was being repeatedly stabbed viciously in front of the FBI Director, yet no recommended options for indictment were given for consideration to the Justice Department.

Amending the charges is a routine procedure for Prosecutors at their discretion given the Facts. A recommendation for indictment with the exact same Facts involved simply with a violation consideration under a different statute.

The Director quoted two considerations of Laws in the 1917 and 1922 statutes but failed considerations of FOIA evasion, a much more modern Felony subscribed by Congress recently. Why?

If the entire "History of Prosecution" was the Bench Mark Director Comey was fielding or reaching for Reasonably, in his consideration of recommendation to prosecute or not to recommend Prosecution, he was grandstanding behind 99 years while completely missing ..completely missing, the closest 10 years!

Failing to recognise these crimes and many others in this collaborated offense to and upon The People in his considered recommendation, but grandstanding the Investigation Publically without the options of Prosecutors to Amend the Charges effectively places the choices of Prosecutors in a Compromised position of the exact set of circumstances.

If I were a Prosecutor I would say Director Comey intentionally hamstrung my amended charges in a public manner, and publicly shot justice in the foot.

For Instance, many Democratic Representatives in the Hearing today pressed Director Comey's assertion that the Hearing Today and the Investigation by enlarge recommended by a referal of a Government Agency properly, concerned with national security, was a witch hunt.

They continually pressed him about the considerations of the set of circumstances involved warranting no recommendation for indictment for Prosecution without citing specific statute. This had the broad affect of covering all laws intersecting the circumstances that most people would normally feel the FBI would consider in their recommendation to the Justice Department regarding the Investigation of the Facts.

Director Comey's Testimony today reminded me of a little boy told to clean his room by his mother. Upon inspection of the room the mother complained that the bed was still not made and many of the toys were noticeably pushed under the bed instead of being picked up and put in the toy box.

Upon seeing the unhappy look on his mother's face the boy exclaimed she did not tell him to make his bed or pick up the toys and put them in the toy box.

The Chairman Representative UT. R. Jason Chaffetz said in regards to Director Comey's assertion he did not have a direct complaint noticed from a Congressional Committee regarding the allegation of perjury under oath by Hillary Clinton in the Benghazi Hearings regarding her email, or the violation of FOIA abscondsion this Investigation considered in the intersection, that Director Comey would have those exact direct notice within hours.

The damage by the spokesman for the FBI in excusing by singular statute, many times not explicitly defined, the corruption apparent, mitigated by the compromise of national security, in what he testified was a Server easier to hack then a public domain Gmail account,  indeed places a greater burden on Prosecutors for instance finding the Felony ascribed to a deliberate destruction of FOIA eligible documents known to exist but destroyed by the directive of the person holding the office, or the Felony to produce such but not to comply, to Amend the charges for such.

Director Comey's Grandstanding in the name of Transparency also has the affect of polluting the Grand Jury pool quite thoroughly with the Media attention his Office Represents.

In fact, Director Comey testified he was hung up on establishing or proving, I assume to Prosecutors who would have to decide whither to take the case, by the evidence, "intent" to commit a crime, but noticeable testified that consideration excluded a malfeasance of applicable laws surrounding an avoidance of FOIA and the destruction of documents falling under FOIA's claims.

He watched these laws bleeding to death before him but could not bring himself to stop the bleeding, choosing to ignore them, and in Grandstanding the circumstance Publically, acted indeed as an accomplice. Perhaps a witness cheering the rape of a victim? Turning his head, and saying he saw "nothing"?

My opinion changed today of the integrity I hoped to see by Director Comey.  I saw a calculation to protect the Bureau over We The People in the application of Laws intersecting the circumstances of crime(s) and the recommendation of the Bureau three weeks before the Democratic National Convention kicking off July 25th through the 29th.

I saw a political calculation in polluting an Investigation and the blatant deferance in the manner of treating Witnesses in an Official Investigation. I think this was deplorable and a dis-service to the Public Interest in the Standard of the Laws.

This made me feel like Director Comey in compromising Standards was willfully more comfortable with Hillary Clinton as President than Donald Trump and he was acting childish about it. It made me feel like the service of the FBI hinged on elections rather than Justice and it made me feel like our Election System was further Compromised within Institutions rather than decided by We The People. It made me feel like Director Comey could not Trust the Democratic Party to find another Candidate in three weeks. Justice in our Election Process can never be claimed with a Compromised claim of Trust or Injustice no matter the Candidate Justice happens to claim. The assumption is Crooked.

I did watch the post-Hearing also with the Inspector Generals who were responsible for the negative or blistering IG Report on Hillary Clinton Server that said in essence her compromised Server was not approved nor would have been if she'd asked. I found the two Inspector General's testimonies more assuring than compromising of a Quality Standard.

We will see what happens in the continuation UT. R Jason Chaffetz promised would be forth coming and how the FBI Director acts upon the detailed request after his compromising indulgences this week.

CRJ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T41tTkKrBQ4&feature=player_embedded


________________________


CRJ

Support Today the Choice Democrats have of a solid common-sense-defense , not a politically correct weakness

Cody Robert Judy
www.codyjudy.us
Contribute to the Cody Robert Judy Working Today for a Better America Tomorrow Campaign 2016 for U.S. President

https://twitter.com/CodyRobertJudy/status/742455835314376704


http://codyjudy.us/i…/codyrobertjudyforpresident2012_011.htm

Here's the Link to Contribute if you'd like to Cody's Campaign improve your record for Taking A Stand for the Constitution.



Thank You!


Sincerely,
Cody Robert Judy Campaign
Cody Robert Judy



Campaign Committee to elect Cody Robert Judy U.S. President in 2016.


Web Site www.codyjudy.us
Keep coming back!


INSPIRING - I believe in You


Cody's Record is one you can Trust as one in the public service, and one that has served our Nation and will serve our Nation well in the Office of the President. The nucleus of our Constitution that may just be the collaboration or difference between the Truth and the Lie you will have a choice in voting for.

Help Support Cody Robert Judy's Campaign for President Cody is doing what not even Mr Trump or any other Republican Candidate for President can do. Remember - Principle over Party!





























No comments:

Post a Comment