4merper4mer Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 Destruction of evidence in a case looking for evidence is illegal. Not for Hillary. #bringbackournishimura Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Observer Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 Destruction of evidence in a case looking for evidence is illegal. But not what the FBI was referred to investigate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 But not what the FBI was referred to investigate. Yes it was. You can try to convince yourself otherwise if it makes you feel better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 Yes it was. You can try to convince yourself otherwise if it makes you feel better. He Hillary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Observer Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 (edited) Yes it was. You can try to convince yourself otherwise if it makes you feel better. So you think Comey was lying today when he said he was not asked by Congress to look into whether Clinton lied (or obstructed)? Today and yesterday I saw a man who is seething at Clinton but was handcuffed by his legal duty to investigate Clinton under certain statutes quoted earlier in this thread by me. Comey would love a broader mandate. And given it, will come back with a much different result. Clinton is a long ways from out of the woods. You let your uniform get in the way of your vision. Clinton is in deep crap but got off because an honest guy followed his mandate. Comey did everything he could over the last two days to ask for another bite at the apple of this investigation. He's going to get it. Edited July 7, 2016 by Observer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 So you think Comey was lying today when he said he was not asked by Congress to look into whether Clinton lied (or obstructed)? Today and yesterday I saw a man who is seething at Clinton but was handcuffed by his legal duty to investigate Clinton under certain statutes quoted earlier in this thread by me. Comey would love a broader mandate. And given it, will come back with a much different result. Clinton is a long ways from out of the woods. You let your uniform get in the way of your vision. Clinton is in deep crap but got off because an honest guy followed his mandate. Comey did everything he could over the last two days to ask for another bite at the apple of this investigation. He's going to get it. Yes he was lying. How can you not charge someone with at least obstruction when they admit to willfully destroying evidence pertaining to the case you are investigating? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 (edited) So you think Comey was lying today when he said he was not asked by Congress to look into whether Clinton lied (or obstructed)? Today and yesterday I saw a man who is seething at Clinton but was handcuffed by his legal duty to investigate Clinton under certain statutes quoted earlier in this thread by me. Comey would love a broader mandate. And given it, will come back with a much different result. Clinton is a long ways from out of the woods. You let your uniform get in the way of your vision. Clinton is in deep crap but got off because an honest guy followed his mandate. Comey did everything he could over the last two days to ask for another bite at the apple of this investigation. He's going to get it. There should be no question that this investigation from its outset was done in a way to clear her of any criminal responsibility. It was a sham from the beginning and I think most have felt that way for many months. More than one TV news outlet has read the statute on air regarding gross negligence and classified material and it's absolutely clear that she is at least guilty of that. That statute does not require criminal intent. This is all about winning politically for Obama and his party which is very clearly how he approaches virtually everything he touches. Look at the bag of **** he is leaving for his successor. Now the electorate can speak and in electing her will prove that our citizens are as guilty of being dumbasses as politicians. Party trumps all else for the majority of voters. Integrity is way down the priority list. Hillary is an absolutely despicable character who displays all of the worst characteristics we don't like in politicians, yet having the big D next to her name and running on agenda which completely misses the big issues we face and instead buys votes with untruths and other people's money is a winning strategy even for a hag like her. Edited July 7, 2016 by keepthefaith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 (edited) Today and yesterday I saw a man who is seething at Clinton but was handcuffed by his legal duty to investigate Clinton under certain statutes quoted earlier in this thread by me. Edited July 7, 2016 by 4merper4mer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 There should be no question that this investigation from its outset was done in a way to clear her of any criminal responsibility. It was a sham from the beginning and I think most have felt that way for many months. More than one TV news outlet has read the statute on air regarding gross negligence and classified material and it's absolutely clear that she is at least guilty of that. That statute does not require criminal intent. This is all about winning politically for Obama and his party which is very clearly how he approaches virtually everything he touches. Look at the bag of **** he is leaving for his successor. Now the electorate can speak and in electing her will prove that our citizens are as guilty of being dumbasses as politicians. Party trumps all else for the majority of voters. Integrity is way down the priority list. Hillary is an absolutely despicable character who displays all of the worst characteristics we don't like in politicians, yet having the big D next to her name and running on agenda which completely misses the big issues we face and instead buys votes with untruths and other people's money is a winning strategy even for a hag like her. Comey wasn't even there for the interview. And has already been discussed, it wasn't recorded and she wasn't put under oath. Pathetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 Comey wasn't even there for the interview. And has already been discussed, it wasn't recorded and she wasn't put under oath. Pathetic. Comey's not an investigator. He's the director. Why would he be there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 This is a tweet just now from CNBC. BREAKING: State Department reopens probe of how Hillary Clinton, top aides handled classified information - AP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted July 8, 2016 Share Posted July 8, 2016 Like who? He was pretty much the Middle East's primary anti-Islamic, anti-Shiite pressure bulkhead. He was enemies with the Iranians and their proxies, the Kurds, Sunni milita, Sunni insurgents (early days of al-Qaeda) and strong Sunni nations (Kuwait, UAE, the Saudis). The man barely left Iraq, leaving foreign relations to Aziz because he was too busy warding off all of the factions that have become household names today. If he was funding "terrorists" it was his own intelligence services. Saddam was the West's secular "main man" up until 1990. The biggest mistake Saddam made was he invaded Kuwait. The West couldn't turn a blind eye to that due to the massive Saudi influence and pressure that persists to this day. So by having a grudge against every single faction in ME, Saddam kept the region safe and secure? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted July 8, 2016 Share Posted July 8, 2016 This is a tweet just now from CNBC. Will be interesting to see of Huma gets a security clearance if Hillary is elected. My guess is yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted July 8, 2016 Share Posted July 8, 2016 Comey's not an investigator. He's the director. Why would he be there? Because of the high profile nature of the investigation and being a former prosecutor. But doing a search, I guess FBI directors typically don't interview people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 8, 2016 Share Posted July 8, 2016 Will be interesting to see of Huma gets a security clearance if Hillary is elected. My guess is yes. Of course she will. It's Huma's assistant to her assistant who will not get a job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted July 8, 2016 Share Posted July 8, 2016 Will be interesting to see of Huma gets a security clearance if Hillary is elected. My guess is yes. It's not a guess. They will get what they want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 8, 2016 Share Posted July 8, 2016 So by having a grudge against every single faction in ME, Saddam kept the region safe and secure? What's interesting, though, is that his "cabinet" included Kurds, Shiites, and even Arab Christians (Tariq Aziz, I believe). In that he kept the region "stable," it's because the instability he caused was nationalistic rather than ethnic. In his absence, the instability became much more ethnic. And it's the fatal flaw in our policies in the Middle East that we just can't understand ethnic strife. We think we can...but we only, literally, see it in terms of "black and white," and can't understand that the gulf between, say, an Iraqi Turkmen and Iraq Circassian is much wider than that between an American white and American black. For that matter, there's a wider gulf between "African-Americans" and actual black Africans than between Boers and African blacks. Our country really doesn't know jack **** about ethnicity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Observer Posted July 8, 2016 Share Posted July 8, 2016 Yes he was lying. How can you not charge someone with at least obstruction when they admit to willfully destroying evidence pertaining to the case you are investigating? The AG can charge her. The FBI Director was tasked with looking into her possible guilt with respect to the two statutes mentioned before. Comey had to play the hand he was given. You don't understand it. That's OK. Comey wants another shot at Clinton but with a broader mandate--he was seething while testifying. He can't stand her. I would not be shocked if she was indicted in a second pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keukasmallies Posted July 8, 2016 Share Posted July 8, 2016 The AG can charge her. The FBI Director was tasked with looking into her possible guilt with respect to the two statutes mentioned before. Comey had to play the hand he was given. You don't understand it. That's OK. Comey wants another shot at Clinton but with a broader mandate--he was seething while testifying. He can't stand her. I would not be shocked if she was indicted in a second pass. Think about the first five words you wrote! Are you serious, Loretta ain't gonna' do no such thing no matter the evidence, the allegations, etc. Hill'ry is on Loretta's team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted July 8, 2016 Share Posted July 8, 2016 The AG can charge her. The FBI Director was tasked with looking into her possible guilt with respect to the two statutes mentioned before. Comey had to play the hand he was given. You don't understand it. That's OK. Comey wants another shot at Clinton but with a broader mandate--he was seething while testifying. He can't stand her. I would not be shocked if she was indicted in a second pass. :w00t: :w00t: :w00t: :w00t: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts