Comey: ‘No reasonable prosecutor’ would have charged Clinton under ‘gross negligence’

anatta said:
The question has been hanging..it's not just me...it's a serious legal point

he's correctly shown her to be a liar..and that is something she has to own..no "witch hunts"
Click to expand...

No, the Republicans on now on to their next witch hunt in case you haven't heard. Hillary will not be charged with any crime concerning her emails.
 
Rana said:
No, the Republicans on now on to their next witch hunt in case you haven't heard. Hillary will not be charged with any crime concerning her emails.
Click to expand...
so her untruthful statements under oath to Congress.. just let that slide?

It always amazes me that the Clintonistas low bar for Clinton is an actual indictment.
her "extreme carelessness" "negligence" and lying to America are really no big deal
 
anatta said:
so her untruthful statements under oath to Congress.. just let that slide?

It always amazes me that the Clintonistas low bar for Clinton is an actual indictment.
her "extreme carelessness" "negligence" and lying to America are really no big deal
Click to expand...

She didn't lie, it was what she believed to be the truth at the time.

It wasn't my decision, it was the decision of the FBI and the DoJ. I don't think either of those are Clintonistas. The Republicans were the ones who forced Lynch's hand and made her announce that she would accept the decision of the FBI and as Comey showed, he showed no special favor to Clinton.
 
Rana said:
She didn't lie, it was what she believed to be the truth at the time.
Click to expand...
not according to Comeys testimony today-he confirmed her untruthful statement before Congress - are you claiming she didn't know she was being untruthful?

Rana said:
It wasn't my decision, it was the decision of the FBI and the DoJ. I don't think either of those are Clintonistas. The Republicans were the ones who forced Lynch's hand and made her announce that she would accept the decision of the FBI and as Comey showed, he showed no special favor to Clinton.
Click to expand...
so it wasn't Bill Clinton climbing onto her plane who "forced Lynch's hand"?

by anatta
It always amazes me that the Clintonistas low bar for Clinton is an actual indictment.
her "extreme carelessness" "negligence" and lying to America are really no big deal
Click to expand...
^ but this was the point I was making
 
anatta said:
not according to Comeys testimony today-he confirmed her untruthful statement before Congress - are you claiming she didn't know she was being untruthful?

so it wasn't Bill Clinton climbing onto her plane who "forced Lynch's hand"?


^ but this was the point I was making
Click to expand...
He did not confirm her untruthfulness, I think you need to check on that. Comey refused to comment on it, I do believe.

No, it was the Republicans and their noise machines making a big deal of the meeting and it is why Lynch said she would accept the FBI's conclusion, therefore, no charges.
 
Rana said:
He did not confirm her untruthfulness, I think you need to check on that. Comey refused to comment on it, I do believe.

No, it was the Republicans and their noise machines making a big deal of the meeting and it is why Lynch said she would accept the FBI's conclusion, therefore, no charges.
Click to expand...
I believe he confirmed the facts didn't match ( but it's been a long day) - but refused to characterize her testimony.

.Lynch said she had already made up her mind to accept the recommendation-nothing to do with Repubs there.
but the meeting was a big deal in terms of optics/independent from influence- not "noise"
 
anatta said:
I believe he confirmed the facts didn't match ( but it's been a long day) - but refused to characterize her testimony.

.Lynch said she had already made up her mind to accept the recommendation-nothing to do with Repubs there.
but the meeting was a big deal in terms of optics/independent from influence- not "noise"
Click to expand...
No, it is especially noise if she already said she would accept the recommendations, because, if she had already determined why did the meeting matter?
Its noise.
 
Rana said:
No, it is especially noise if she already said she would accept the recommendations, because, if she had already determined why did the meeting matter?
Its noise.
Click to expand...
she never declared beforehand she would accept the recommendation - she says she was always going to-
but she never stated it. One could say the meeting forced her hand, and she is unable to refute that.
She has nothing on the record beforehand to quell speculation ( not simple partisan noise).

It was a gross impropriety meeting anyone( or family) whom is subject to FBI criminal investigation
 
anatta said:
I believe he confirmed the facts didn't match ( but it's been a long day) - but refused to characterize her testimony.

.Lynch said she had already made up her mind to accept the recommendation-nothing to do with Repubs there.
but the meeting was a big deal in terms of optics/independent from influence- not "noise"
Click to expand...
I was discussing her truthfulness before Congress, and I will state, again, he did not discuss that issue because he said he had not investigated it.
 
Rana said:
I was discussing her truthfulness before Congress, and I will state, again, he did not discuss that issue because he said he had not investigated it.
Click to expand...
I seem to recall something about his confirming her untruthfulness ..but brain fatigue is wearing me down
 
anatta said:
so her untruthful statements under oath to Congress.. just let that slide?

It always amazes me that the Clintonistas low bar for Clinton is an actual indictment.
her "extreme carelessness" "negligence" and lying to America are really no big deal
Click to expand...

You act surprised, Hills could sacrifice babies on the steps of Congress and Rana wouldn't flinch.

Sent from my LENOVO Lenovo K50-t5 Using Ez Forum for Android
 
Milagro said:
You act surprised, Hills could sacrifice babies on the steps of Congress and Rana wouldn't flinch.

Sent from my LENOVO Lenovo K50-t5 Using Ez Forum for Android
Click to expand...


What a gross lie about me, you have now reached a new low.
 
Rana said:
Sorry, I'm going with the FBI on this, I feel they are a little better versed on the laws than yourself.
Click to expand...

Well, the FBI played judge and jury so maybe you're right. Why wasn't a grand jury convened?

The I in FBI stands for 'investigation': it's not their role to determine whether someone should be indicted, that's why we have grand juries. The FBI gathers the facts and the grand jury weighs them and determines whether to release an indictment.

Or at least let the AG make that determination. But Lynch kind of sorta recused herself, which was pretty slick if you think about it. Had she really-really recused herself, that raises the specter of a non-political appointee weighing the facts on Hillary and coming to the 'wrong' conclusion.

But by saying she would abide by Comey's determination gets her off the hook without that risk. All Comey had to do was play judge and jury.

You have to be a special breed of hack to think that's all honky-dory.
 
Rana is "going with the FBI" because she likes the outcome. Rest assured had Comey said otherwise Rana would be screaming. Nobody should have ever thought Crooked Hillary was going to be indicted
 
Rana said:
And yet, before the verdict, they loved Comey, thought he would decide the right thing, until he did and now they want his head! What a waste of money!
Click to expand...

was it a waste of money to find out that 1) she did in fact lie......2) she was extremely careless.......3) she would have been terminated if she had been working for the FBI?....

think of that.....she isn't qualified to be an FBI agent and you want her to be the president.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top