One Explanation Of The FBI Director's Actions

OK, so what could make a career FBI man, who everyone says is a straight shooter, not recommend sHrILLARY be indicted?

First, let's look at the known facts:

The Sec of State set up a private email server contrary to State Dept protocol.

She used this non secure email to conduct business.

There were a minimum of 100 classified secure or higher documents that went through this server that were so classified at the time.

The SoS claimed repeatedly that there were NO documents that were classified as secure at the time.

The POTUS endorses former SoS as the most qualified candidate for POTUS ever.

There was a clandestine meeting between the former POTUS, who is the husband of the current candidate for POTUS who is under investigation by the FBI, and the USAG. (Said USAG owes her career to this former POTUS as he nominated her to the federal bench in the first place.)

When clandestine meeting is made public USAG says she will take recommendation of head of FBI, who happens to report to her.

Current POTUS schedules a campaign event with former SoS before FBI makes recommendation.

FBI recommends no prosecution of former SoS despite massive amount of evidence.

So what then can explain this fact chain?

Understand that I have ZERO knowledge of what actually took place. But, being human, we look for explanations for what we don't understand, and we will make up stories that fit what we see. That is how many folk tales came into being.

So here is my theory on what happened.

I believe the POTUS told the USAG that sHrILLARY was NOT to be prosecuted. (He wouldn't have risked looking like a fool endorsing her if he believed she would be prosecuted.) Things were moving forward and the USAG was going to drop the case. Then the former POTUS, in an effort add a little insurance to the deal, clandestinely met with the USAG to apply a little pressure. Then the former SoS announces that the USAG will likely be kept on if she is elected. (What's a little bribery amongst friends, eh?) The USAG then goes to the FBI Director and says, you will go out and say you are NOT recommending this case for prosecution. The FBI Director is between a rock and a hard place. He can follow the evidence and probably lose his job or he can do what he's told and lose face. He is an honorable man by all accounts and try's to come up with a way he can do as he's told while still letting the evidence do its job.

So yesterday he goes in front of the press and lays out exactly how the former SoS was either a criminal or criminally incompetent and a habitual liar but doesn't recommend prosecution. Then refuses to take questions and exits the stage, leaving everyone to question what just happened. Insuring that this will be discussed ad nausium.

The FBI Director has done what he was told to do, not recommend prosecution, thus getting his boss off the hot seat of having to decide not to prosecute. While at the same time laying it out for the American people so they can clearly see how the former SoS is much more interested in what benefits her than the security of the nation and is more than happy to lie about it.

At least that's the way an old farm boy sees it.