IG lost the forest in the trees!

… and, I haven’t heard pundits argue the case either.

I’ll give IG Horowitz the benefit of the doubt re: his team’s investigation and conclusions.

click to read the report

But, there was, in my opinion, a glaring omission…


Comey – in his July 6 press conference – laid out the case against Hillary in detail.

Note: Comey’s litany of evidence against HRC gives some modest credence to to IG’s contention that the politically biased investigators did collect a substantial body of evidence against Clinton.

Then, Comey drew the apparently non sequiturial conclusion that “no reasonable prosecutor would go forward with the case”.

One of the IG’s few bombshells was the revelation that Comey was also conducting government business on a non-secured email system … albeit public Gmail, not a private server.

More precisely, Comey should have qualified his conclusion to read “I, Jim Comey – the most reasonable prosecutor that I know – and, someone who is currently committing a comparable transgression…”

Then, everything would make more sense.

IMPORTANT: Comey’s recommendation did not constitute an acquittal for HRC … just a  recommendation not to submit the evidence to a Grand Jury.

In basketball parlance, that’s a reversible decision … as evidenced by Comey’s willingness to reopen the case when it was discovered that HRC’s server was essentially cloned to Weiner’s laptop.

Interesting irony: Stryk’s decision to slow roll the investigation of Weiner’s laptop – hoping to delay its revelation until after the election – may have been “too cute by half” and cost Hillary the election.

If he had played it straight up, the Comey letter would have come weeks earlier and given HRC’s campaign some time to shake off the effect. 


OK, let’s get to the point …

The IG revealed another bombshell: the FBI had hard evidence that HRC’s unsecured email set-up was, in fact, hacked by at least one foreign government or agency … and that at least one document classified as “secret” was purloined.

That’s important “new news” … at least to the level of Weiner’s laptop.

So, why not re-open the Clinton Email Case, go forward to a Grand Jury with the evidence … and let the Grand Jury decide whether or not to indict her.

Surely, there’s a non-biased prosecutor in the DOJ who would be willing and able to present the case.

If the Grand Jury decides against indictment, case closed.

If the Grand Jury decides to indict, then let the wheels of justice roll forward.

Then, the “matter” can finally be put to rest … maybe.


Follow on Twitter @KenHoma

>> Latest Posts


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s