No Reasonable Prosecutor?

With all the evidence, with all the wasted U.S. Taxpayer's loot for the Hillary Rodham Clinton "Private Server" investigation, all we get in the end is NOTHING. OK, Hillary got to wear a proud smile! But what did FBI Chief Comey really mean by the phrase "No Reasonable Prosecutor" would find reason to indict, with enough evidence to "indict that ham sandwich"? And if so this so far NOTHING, why did the House of Congress Oversight Committee just serve a "Subpoena" to the FBI, just yesterday, as it ain't over with yet. Even though the government is getting ready to shutdown due NO funding, the Hillary expedition to go where no criminal has gone before keeps on trekking. There is something fishy, no doubt. Now even though Comey read the riot act out loud with respect to Hillary's "extreme carelessness" approach to government affairs dealing with "Confidentiality", why no indictment? Because of "Precedence Set" to NOT indict based on what is best for National Security. Back in 2011, a 4-Star General named "Hoss" Cartwright was under investigation, for supposedly being careless about referring to the Stuxnet virus when talking to the media. The damage had already been done by deploying the virus, but it was still somewhat a secret even though Siemens - who helped develop the "worm" - was taking credit. Yes, our NSA designed this "rouge virus", to cause destruction abroad with our enemies. Besides Siemens, Israel's Mossad helped out, and it was supposed to be a well kept secret, until the "virus" was let loose on our own network and today infects thousands of computers - or sits silently waiting until it is given the "Green Light" to cause havoc. But when the investigation targeted the "Hoss", who was a Bush appointee and stayed put when Obama took over as Commander-in-Chief, with all the evidence that he may have talked to a single individual working for the Washington Post, it was silently forgotten about. Why? Because of the fact that if a trial, then all that evidence obtained by the FBI becomes public information, just too damn damaging. And in efforts to move forward any criminal indictment, the White House would have to clear "Classified Evidence" to unclassified, which it said NO. It is a Catch-22, as without the evidence, there is NO case and herein we find the reason behind "No Reasonable Prosecutor". If you can't use the evidence, there is NO case! It is NO different with Hillary Clinton, the reason the DOJ has taken a NO STANDING except accepting Hillary's extreme careless excuses. So nothing accomplished except the fact crime may pay when the system finds merit to protect this nation's interest. And Congress is still on a witch hunt, and in the end will find out the truth, that sometimes malfeasance finds its own perverted justice, depending on the size of the fish we try to fry. It means Hillary was guilty, but best to let her off the hook. CASE CLOSED! To re-iterate, according to Comey:

"Our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case," Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past."

"There is evidence of potential violations", just can't have it! This is what "We the People" need to know and understand, was it out of National Security interests that the Obama White House said NO to un-classifying the evidence?

House of Congress Oversight Committee serves "Subpoena" to the FBI
September 12, 2016