to your first point: yet again the proof has not materialized that donations to the Clinton Foundation had any bearing on business before the State Department. now, there are a few pretty coincidental things but that does not in and of itself prove that the Clinton Foundation was used illegally, nor that Hillary used it as a cudgel to enrich her personal charity before granting favors. i mean, it's not like the Clinton Foundation was used to buy a 30ft portrait of the Clinton family, a Tim Tebow autographed football or a bribe to an Attorney General to drop an investigation against the Clintons, all while spending not one single dime on the issues they have as their mission statement. just to name a few...
I honestly did not think you were capable of comprehending nuances or the principle of innocent until proven guilty. There is far more evidence of guilt on the part of the Clintons than there is of racial motivation in most police shootings, but all you need to see (since all you ever reference) are the skin colors of the people involved. You do know that Bill Clinton was not actually "the first black president", right?
on the second point: the Clintons are probably not that stupid but there is very little doubt that Comey's actions have influenced the election -- a far cry from "professionalism" IMHO. professionalism would have been to sit on the information until after the granting of a warrant specifically to look at the emails in question, and deciding when the evidence actually comes in to make a statement. instead he decided to blow shit up by making a statement only to republicans in Congress that he may or may not have new information but that he was going to tell them anyway. we'll see if he gets prosecuted, but most likely it will be yet another case of "it's ok to break the law if you're republican"
What law did he break? When the Clinton's break laws you and your ilk start hemming and hawing about how much harm was actually done an whether or no their perjurious statements are relevant to the case (and actually denying that Clinton's sexual affair with a work subordinate has any bearing on his being the subject of a sexual harassment complaint 
), but with no proof he actually broke any laws, you're absolutely certain of his intentions and write off his lack of punishment as evidence of some sort of political double standard.
