Comey describes more proof Hillary should have been indicted

FBI director James Comey testified on May 3, 2017 before a Senate  committee that the investigation after October 28, 2016 of Anthony Weiner's computer showed that confidential emails to Hillary Clinton were forwarded by Huma Abedin to Anthony Weiner so Weiner could print them to give to Hillary.

Comey testified: "Somehow, her emails were being forwarded to Anthony Weiner, including classified information. His then-spouse Huma Abedin appears to have had a regular practice of forwarding emails to him for him to print out for her so she could deliver them to the secretary of state."

Somehow?  The only way an email gets forwarded if someone hits the "forward" icon or button.  The "someone" would have to be Hillary or Huma.  Since they are emails addressed to Hillary, the logical conclusion is that Hillary was responsible for forwarding the emails.  Maybe if Comey had put Hillary under oath and asked these questions, then he, and the rest of us, would know the identity of the "someone"  who did the "somehow" and "why."

We have the smartest woman in the world, Hillary Clinton, using a private unsecured email system in her job as secretary of state to send and receive confidential emails dealing with our national security.  But  she is not smart enough to hit the PRINT key on her computer to print out her emails, or she is too cheap to buy a printer to go with her private email system to print the emails.  Therefore, Hillary has Huma forward confidential national security emails to  Anthony Weiner, aka Carlos Danger, a trustworthy character, to print.

This is beyond negligence.  It is grossly reckless conduct that should have been punished.

We have to believe that Hillary and Huma do not know how to print emails.  As a result, Carlos, who obviously has no security clearance, had access to confidential national security emails.  What did Carlos do with the emails, besides give the printed ones to Huma and Hillary?

Knowing this, Comey still believes he was correct in concluding that Hillary did not have the intent to violate the law dealing with government records.  We have discussed that intent is not required, but if it were required, then there would be sufficient evidence for a jury or judge to conclude that Hillary acted with intent.

Yet the Democrats are interested only in asking Comey why he publicly notified Congress on October 28, 2016 that he was investigating new revelations about Hillary's email system.  The Democrats, led by Senator Feinstein, are interested in advancing the myth that Hillary lost because of Comey's letter.  They do not care that confidential emails dealing with national security were forward to Carlos Danger.

This latest revelation about Hillary clearly shows she did not care about national security.  At best, if not intentionally, she acted with reckless disregard of our national security.  Her best defense is that she is not a criminal, but just plain stupid.  She should have been indicted in July 2016.

The evidence discovered after October 28, 2016 that Carlos Danger printed the emails and therefore had access confirms that she should have been indicted.

FBI director James Comey testified on May 3, 2017 before a Senate  committee that the investigation after October 28, 2016 of Anthony Weiner's computer showed that confidential emails to Hillary Clinton were forwarded by Huma Abedin to Anthony Weiner so Weiner could print them to give to Hillary.

Comey testified: "Somehow, her emails were being forwarded to Anthony Weiner, including classified information. His then-spouse Huma Abedin appears to have had a regular practice of forwarding emails to him for him to print out for her so she could deliver them to the secretary of state."

Somehow?  The only way an email gets forwarded if someone hits the "forward" icon or button.  The "someone" would have to be Hillary or Huma.  Since they are emails addressed to Hillary, the logical conclusion is that Hillary was responsible for forwarding the emails.  Maybe if Comey had put Hillary under oath and asked these questions, then he, and the rest of us, would know the identity of the "someone"  who did the "somehow" and "why."

We have the smartest woman in the world, Hillary Clinton, using a private unsecured email system in her job as secretary of state to send and receive confidential emails dealing with our national security.  But  she is not smart enough to hit the PRINT key on her computer to print out her emails, or she is too cheap to buy a printer to go with her private email system to print the emails.  Therefore, Hillary has Huma forward confidential national security emails to  Anthony Weiner, aka Carlos Danger, a trustworthy character, to print.

This is beyond negligence.  It is grossly reckless conduct that should have been punished.

We have to believe that Hillary and Huma do not know how to print emails.  As a result, Carlos, who obviously has no security clearance, had access to confidential national security emails.  What did Carlos do with the emails, besides give the printed ones to Huma and Hillary?

Knowing this, Comey still believes he was correct in concluding that Hillary did not have the intent to violate the law dealing with government records.  We have discussed that intent is not required, but if it were required, then there would be sufficient evidence for a jury or judge to conclude that Hillary acted with intent.

Yet the Democrats are interested only in asking Comey why he publicly notified Congress on October 28, 2016 that he was investigating new revelations about Hillary's email system.  The Democrats, led by Senator Feinstein, are interested in advancing the myth that Hillary lost because of Comey's letter.  They do not care that confidential emails dealing with national security were forward to Carlos Danger.

This latest revelation about Hillary clearly shows she did not care about national security.  At best, if not intentionally, she acted with reckless disregard of our national security.  Her best defense is that she is not a criminal, but just plain stupid.  She should have been indicted in July 2016.

The evidence discovered after October 28, 2016 that Carlos Danger printed the emails and therefore had access confirms that she should have been indicted.