• Please keep all posts on the Rittenhouse verdict here: Rittenhouse Verdict. Note the moderator warnings in the thread. The thread will be heavily moderated with a zero tolerance policy for any baiting, flaming, trolling or other rule breaks. Stick to the topic and not the other posters. Thank you.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

FBI director could appear before lawmakers to explain Clinton decision

Anthony60

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
16,138
Reaction score
4,715
Location
Northern New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
FBI director could appear before lawmakers to explain Clinton decision
FBI director could appear before lawmakers to explain Clinton decision | Fox News

FBI Director James Comey took no questions after his bombshell announcement Tuesday that he would not recommend criminal charges against Hillary Clinton over her private email system, but he - and his boss - may soon answer to lawmakers.

Thinking this needs a new thread...
 

pilot16

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 17, 2012
Messages
988
Reaction score
413
Location
New England
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
He will be testifying before Congress tomorrow.
 

humbolt

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2013
Messages
26,666
Reaction score
17,776
Location
SW Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I suspect that Comey will say that he accepted the decision offered by career prosecutors. After all, no matter what evidence was uncovered, if prosecutors aren't willing to go forward, the evidence has basically been dismissed. It would seem more appropriate to question the career prosecutors who found the evidence presented inadequate to proceed. No, that doesn't mean Loretta Lynch. It means the career prosecutors themselves. They're the ones who made the decision, or so everyone in this administration maintains.
 

shrubnose

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
19,463
Reaction score
8,731
Location
Europe
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
FBI director could appear before lawmakers to explain Clinton decision


FBI Director James Comey took no questions after his bombshell announcement Tuesday that he would not recommend criminal charges against Hillary Clinton over her private email system, but he - and his boss - may soon answer to lawmakers.

Thinking this needs a new thread...



Fox News and the GOP lawmakers are wasting their time.They'll get nowhere with this BS.

Wait and see.
 

ludin

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
57,470
Reaction score
14,585
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I suspect that Comey will say that he accepted the decision offered by career prosecutors. After all, no matter what evidence was uncovered, if prosecutors aren't willing to go forward, the evidence has basically been dismissed. It would seem more appropriate to question the career prosecutors who found the evidence presented inadequate to proceed. No, that doesn't mean Loretta Lynch. It means the career prosecutors themselves. They're the ones who made the decision, or so everyone in this administration maintains.

Then they need to be question if they refuse then disbarred for obstruction of justice along with lynch.
They should all be arrested for felonies.

Lynch had already said numerous times that no matter what happened the doj would not prosecute.
She probably threatened all of her staff with their jobs if they did.

This needs a full congressional hearing and if anyone attempts to plead the 5th they are arrested on obstruction, collusion and corruption charges.
 

ocean515

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2013
Messages
36,760
Reaction score
15,464
Location
Southern California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
FBI director could appear before lawmakers to explain Clinton decision
FBI director could appear before lawmakers to explain Clinton decision | Fox News

FBI Director James Comey took no questions after his bombshell announcement Tuesday that he would not recommend criminal charges against Hillary Clinton over her private email system, but he - and his boss - may soon answer to lawmakers.

Thinking this needs a new thread...

I will be interested to gain some clarity on the "intent" aspect of the FBI's decision. I'm no expert, but the claim there was no intent on the part of Hilary and her crew, and thus, no case, is a curious one.
 

humbolt

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2013
Messages
26,666
Reaction score
17,776
Location
SW Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Then they need to be question if they refuse then disbarred for obstruction of justice along with lynch.
They should all be arrested for felonies.

Lynch had already said numerous times that no matter what happened the doj would not prosecute.
She probably threatened all of her staff with their jobs if they did.

This needs a full congressional hearing and if anyone attempts to plead the 5th they are arrested on obstruction, collusion and corruption charges.

I agree, but you have to know that this will never happen. Who's gonna prosecute the prosecutors? Congress can't. It's a done deal. There's tons of campaign fodder, but nothing to do legally. That the Justice department is completely in the tank for the party in power is not new, but we rarely see a display of it in such stark terms. It's a demonstration of raw political power at the expense of the public at large. In short, it's a giant "**** YOU" to America, because we can.
 

chuckiechan

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 2, 2015
Messages
16,568
Reaction score
7,252
Location
California Caliphate
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Has anyone heard about her staff? Are they cleared by association?

I suppose Comey can just do a "G men don't lie" thing, and tell the committee that Justice told him they were going to bury his report and the least he could do is make the facts public. Maybe Comey using the phrase "a reasonable prosecutor" is a homage to Clinton's "It depends on what the definition of 'reasonable' is", LOL

And there is nothing about the Clinton Foundation.
 

humbolt

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2013
Messages
26,666
Reaction score
17,776
Location
SW Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Has anyone heard about her staff? Are they cleared by association?

I suppose Comey can just do a "G men don't lie" thing, and tell the committee that Justice told him they were going to bury his report and the least he could do is make the facts public. Maybe Comey using the phrase "a reasonable prosecutor" is a homage to Clinton's "It depends on what the definition of 'reasonable' is", LOL

And there is nothing about the Clinton Foundation.

That's a separate investigation. Expect the same result.
 

nota bene

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
64,456
Reaction score
35,889
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
I suspect that Comey will say that he accepted the decision offered by career prosecutors. After all, no matter what evidence was uncovered, if prosecutors aren't willing to go forward, the evidence has basically been dismissed. It would seem more appropriate to question the career prosecutors who found the evidence presented inadequate to proceed. No, that doesn't mean Loretta Lynch. It means the career prosecutors themselves. They're the ones who made the decision, or so everyone in this administration maintains.

Didn't a significant number of career prosecutors ditch the DOJ after Eric Holder became AG (after the Philly New Black Panthers voter intimidation thing)?
 

Anthony60

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
16,138
Reaction score
4,715
Location
Northern New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Fox News and the GOP lawmakers are wasting their time.They'll get nowhere with this BS.

Wait and see.

What's the BS? Comey may have raised more questions than he answered. You afraid of what the truth might be?
 

Anthony60

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
16,138
Reaction score
4,715
Location
Northern New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
I will be interested to gain some clarity on the "intent" aspect of the FBI's decision. I'm no expert, but the claim there was no intent on the part of Hilary and her crew, and thus, no case, is a curious one.

Yes, especially when intent is not required to bring a case, and he said they weren't going to bring a case because of lack of intent. That needs an explanation.
 

eohrnberger

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 20, 2013
Messages
48,288
Reaction score
31,265
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I will be interested to gain some clarity on the "intent" aspect of the FBI's decision. I'm no expert, but the claim there was no intent on the part of Hilary and her crew, and thus, no case, is a curious one.

One without founding, if you ask me. The simple logic is inescapable.

Did Hillary accidentally order the installation, configuration, and on going system administration of her private servers?
I think not. That was most certainly purposeful and with intent.

Hillary knew that she was going to send and receive classified materials via email as part of her role as SoS. To think that she didn't know this would be is not credible.

Her exclusive use of this email and these servers it was a certainty that they would handling, passing and storing classified materials.

1 + 1 + 1 = 3

Hillary grossly mishandled classified materials on purpose and with intent, with the result and impact of putting the national security at risk.

Did I miss anything?
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
82,589
Reaction score
37,170
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
What's the BS? Comey may have raised more questions than he answered. You afraid of what the truth might be?

Is this you supporting infinite investigations?
 

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,928
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
What's the BS? Comey may have raised more questions than he answered. You afraid of what the truth might be?

I'm wondering if that wasn't Comey's objective.
 

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,928
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Is this you supporting infinite investigations?

Until we get to the bottom of it, yes. Its called, "checks and balances". Its Congress's job. Keeping politicians honest is probably the most important job Congress has.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
82,589
Reaction score
37,170
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Until we get to the bottom of it, yes. Its called, "checks and balances". Its Congress's job. Keeping politicians honest is probably the most important job Congress has.

See, here's the problem.

They got to the bottom of it. What you really want is to skip the whole investigation thing and just convict the woman because you'd decided the "truth" long before the investigation even started.
 

reinoe

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 8, 2013
Messages
16,824
Reaction score
7,183
Location
Out West
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
FBI director could appear before lawmakers to explain Clinton decision
FBI director could appear before lawmakers to explain Clinton decision | Fox News

FBI Director James Comey took no questions after his bombshell announcement Tuesday that he would not recommend criminal charges against Hillary Clinton over her private email system, but he - and his boss - may soon answer to lawmakers.

Thinking this needs a new thread...
Trey Gowdy better not be at the helm. If there's one person who could never find the truth while generating sympathy for the accused it's that clown. He's awful.
 

Anthony60

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
16,138
Reaction score
4,715
Location
Northern New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
I'm wondering if that wasn't Comey's objective.

Yes, it's possible. He may have said that he'll follow orders, but he won't lie before Congress. And maybe he tailored the announcement that way, because he lays out the case against her, then says no case at the end. He had to know that Congress would question him.
 

Anthony60

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
16,138
Reaction score
4,715
Location
Northern New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Trey Gowdy better not be at the helm. If there's one person who could never find the truth while generating sympathy for the accused it's that clown. He's awful.

Hopefully, Ted Cruz will be asking the questions.
 

countryboy

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2014
Messages
18,765
Reaction score
7,408
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
See, here's the problem.

They got to the bottom of it. What you really want is to skip the whole investigation thing and just convict the woman because you'd decided the "truth" long before the investigation even started.

Comey's statement alone seems to indicate gross negligence on the part of Clinton, at the very least.
 

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,928
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
See, here's the problem.

They got to the bottom of it. What you really want is to skip the whole investigation thing and just convict the woman because you'd decided the "truth" long before the investigation even started.

Um, no, they didn't get to the bottom of it. Comey explicitly stated that she broke the law, but refuses to recommend a charge.
 

humbolt

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2013
Messages
26,666
Reaction score
17,776
Location
SW Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Didn't a significant number of career prosecutors ditch the DOJ after Eric Holder became AG (after the Philly New Black Panthers voter intimidation thing)?

I know of some. Whether that qualifies as significant or not probably depends on who you talk to. I view any departure from a career at Justice over principle as significant, but obviously others don't, or justice wouldn't be defined by the party in power.
 

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,928
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Yes, it's possible. He may have said that he'll follow orders, but he won't lie before Congress. And maybe he tailored the announcement that way, because he lays out the case against her, then says no case at the end. He had to know that Congress would question him.

It appears that he was taking the monkey off his back. There's no way he could believe that he wouldn't be called in front of Congress.
 
Top Bottom