Thoughts On The Hillary Clinton Email Scandal

As I write, it's pouring rain. A good day to sort out all the recent news that's been grabbing America's attention.

I'll start with Hillary Clinton's email issue.  After reading extensively about it,  there's not one iota of doubt in my mind that Hillary Clinton's guilty of subverting the use of a government email server/email address for purposes of convenience and also in order to avoid government and public scrutiny regardless of her claims.

There's also no doubt that others knew Hillary's address of  hdr22@clintonemail.com  was not a government one and thus had also violated law by sending classified email to her.

A key person who had helped Hillary maintain and monitor the private server was Bryan Paglinano who had previously worked as an IT person for a former Hillary for president PAC.  Later, he obtained a position in the State Department in the IT division.

When requested to discuss his involvement with the private server by the Judiciary and Homeland Security &Governmental Affairs committees, he would not answer any questions. He also said he would plead the 5th amendment if pushed to do so.

Paglinano was then given immunity by the Justice Department for cooperation. Who runs the Justice Department, AG Loretta Lynch. Who appointed her? President Obama. Who would like nothing more than for Hillary to be the next POTUS? Obama. Why? So he could play puppet master and have a 3rd term. Hillary will then owe him big time if she comes out scot-free and wins the presidency, thus he'll retain control and it'll be a win-win situation for both.

So no surprise that we haven't heard a peep out of Paglinano since he was given immunity in order to cooperate. He's cooperated alright, but not in the name of truth and justice...

Are there others like him who will refuse to tell the truth?  My bet is that there are. But we won't hear from them.

In regard to the recent FBI Director James Comey hearing about the email matter.

Again, after massive amount of reading up on the story, I can see why and how he came up with the 'lack of intent' playbook to defend his position of recommending that the current POTUS candidate not be charged of various violations. Just as he stated, all previous cases brought under the law have required 'proof of intent to mishandle classified information' in order for a government official to be charged. And yes, maybe it was tough to prove in the past,  but not in the case of Mrs. Clinton with so many contradictory statements made in public that can easily be verified.

But Comey is one smart cookie. He wanted to save his job. He knew he couldn't come out and directly recommend that Hillary be charged with a crime. So he didn't. However, he did lay out precise arguments for reasons she should be. And ones that can't be refuted by anyone because of her out and out contradiction of statements made in the public arena.

So the FBI Director gets to hang onto his job (at least for now) for not lowering the boom on Mrs. Clinton. Yet he's offered up enough info to possibly ruin her chances of winning the presidency. Was that intentional? Does he secretly NOT want Hillary to be the next POTUS &consequently devised a strategy to save himself, yet ruin her chances at the same time?

Regardless of Comey's recommendation,  it isn't over for her. Not by a long stretch.

What I'm hoping for is that the drip, drip, drip of accusations &legal violations get enough press coverage from ALL sources that anyone, unless they are in a coma, will come to the conclusion that in no way would they vote her.

I'm even hoping the diehard Democrats that have been excusing both Bill and Hillary's behavior and missteps since the 90s,  might face the truth, put country before their own ideological beliefs  and vote for another candidate.