CNN senior legal analyst Elie Honig rejected former FBI Director James Comey’s claim that “no reasonable prosecutor” would have brought charges against Hillary Clinton in 2016 over her private server.
Comey said that Clinton had been “extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information,” and that there was “evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information.”
But Comey ultimately decided that “our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case” as he let Hillary off the hook.
But Honig disagrees and said: “I don’t necessarily agree with James Comey based on what we know about the case.
“I don’t agree that no reasonable prosecutor would have charged Hillary Clinton.
“I do think there are reasonable prosecutors that could have charged Hillary Clinton, I think it’s a very close call.
“If the question is:
“Well what’s the difference between the Hillary Clinton case, which is right on the razor’s edge, and the Trump case, I think it’s a couple of things.
“First of all, the nature of the documents.
“Hillary Clinton had some documents that had classified markings, Donald Trump had over 100 documents that went to our most core national security issues.
“Second of all, there’s just the willful disobedience and obstruction by Donald Trump.
“The fact that he lied.
“I mean this is the second half of the indictment, that he lied to his lawyers to get them to lie to DOJ and the grand jury.
“So I don’t necessarily agree that what Hillary Clinton did could not have been charged by any reasonable prosecutor.
“But I certainly believe that what Trump did was worse,” he said.
