I’ve concluded that the Hillary Rodham Clinton e-mail controversy has as many lives as, say, the JFK assassination conspiracy theories and the notion that men didn’t really walk on the moon.
Congressional Republicans now are examining whether Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Rodham Clinton committed perjury during her testimonial marathon in 2015.
They have put forward a case that Clinton lied while testifying when questioned by lawmakers about whether she sent out classified material using her personal e-mail server while she was secretary of state.
The hearing ended. The FBI then concluded that it had no credible evidence to prosecute Clinton over her use of the e-mail server. Sure, FBI Director James Comey had some harsh words for Clinton, saying she was “extremely careless” in handling those e-mails.
Was there criminality involved? None, said Comey.
That should end it, right?
Oh, no.
Now, the chairmen of the House Judiciary and Oversight committees are wanting to prove that Clinton committed perjury while testifying about her e-mail use.
Clinton said she didn’t send classified information on her e-mails; Comey said that is an untrue statement. Clinton said her staff reviewed all e-mails to identify work-related messages; Comey said the staffers didn’t read them entirely. Clinton said she used on e-mail server; Comey said she used several.
Does this constitute perjury? Did she deliberately deceive congressional interrogators?
I keep returning to Comey’s final report. He said “no reasonable prosecutor” would find reasons to indict Clinton over the e-mail matter. Did he say during his lengthy dissertation that she committed perjury? No.
The FBI director himself is a former federal prosecutor. He’s a thorough lawyer steeped in these the nuts and bolts of intense federal investigations.
Oh, but there’s this other matter.
Hillary Clinton is running for president of the United States and at this moment is the odds-on favorite to be elected to the highest office in the land.
Might there be a political motive in bringing this perjury investigation forward?
Hmmm. Maybe?