DIRTY-COP-COMEY
Posted on 04/12/2018 8:24:07 PM PDT by Meet the New Boss
Defending his July 2016 public statement about the Hillary Clinton email case, then-FBI Director James Comey told senior agents later that year he worried the Justice Department would "screw around" with a decision on whether to prosecute her, and he said that regardless of what happened, "we knew it was going to suck in a huge way," according to an FBI transcript reviewed by Fox News.
In October 2016, Michael Kortan, who was serving as the FBI's public affairs chief but has since retired, shared the transcript of Comey's comments on the Clinton case delivered behind closed doors to special agents in charge.
snip
"The decision that there wasn't a prosecutable case here was not a hard one. The hard one, as I've told you, was how do we communicate about it. I decided to do something unprecedented that I was very nervous about at the time, and I've asked myself a thousand times since, was it the right decision. I still believe it was."
snip
Comey also relayed to agents a conversation he said he had with Lynch before the July 2016 announcement. "'Madam Attorney General, I'm about to do a press conference, and I'm not going to tell you what I'm going to say.' She asked some question. I don't remember what it was, and I said, 'I'm sorry. I'm not going to answer approximately (sic) questions. I hope someday you'll understand why, but I think it's very, very important that I do this independently.'"
snip
In a portion of the transcript, which was redacted, Comey spoke of the challenge in "trying to get a lawyer to give you their laptop that you use for all of their legal work. Huge concerns there about attorney-client privilege, attorney work product. He had a few options there."
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Comey talks like a 7th grader.
...and we all know where Stormy is hiding “it”.
This "Q" bull is tiring. Raid THIS, trolling Sambos. More crap being spread as some secret war being conducted behind the scenes. Gimme a break. It's fantasy wrapped in desperate belief and plopped upon a shyt platter for morons to feast. NO proof ANY of this happening and still the counter-revolutionaries march on.
It’s a parody. I completely agree with you.
No challenge; instigate an FBI raid, silly!
That’s why it’s important that some rats go down for this coup plot.
Wow! Comey is, like, fer shure, a master wordsmith.
Part of why, to be sure.
But I really do think that the Left has been so conditioned, as if they were Pavlovian brutes, that they will, not just may but in many cases “will”, suddenly discover that even convictions aren’t evidence of wrongdoing that they will accept.
When I wrote about this “standard of evidence”, sure, that’s what I’m seeing. But it has not YET transpired that they have been confronted with this evidence that they seem to want to say they might accept. When they are confronted with evidence that matches up to that standard will they really accept it?
Every so often I suggest that what is really involved with the Clintons in particular is not just that they don’t accept the evidence that can be given but that having backed these people then, they have backed them now and forever and what is really at stake for the Left is that they cannot accept that they weren’t right to begin with.
Their pride demands that they were and are right, not just those old enough to have initially supported Clinton but also all of those that generation has mentored and taught and so forth.
They cannot be wrong and so the aren’t. QED. That is why Bill and Hillary no matter their abundant foiables must be the most brilliant and the most deserving ... to the point that it took a black man to somehow be more Historical than the triumph of the Clinton Supporters over all Clinton Naysayers.
And of course what is true of the Clintons is true of their attachment to the Party of the Clintons too.
Consider, do you recall Obama saying that he wasn’t going away? I sure do. But could he have really created this subversive shadow government by some accounts he seems to have in just the short time since November of ‘16? Of course not. But that means he was creating it when everyone assumed that the next POTUS would be Hillary. He didn’t want the Party to remain the Party of Clinton, he still wants the Party of Obama. I’m persuaded he wasn’t gonna really give up power even to Hillary and what Trump is facing is the same mechanism he intended to keep power even with her in office.
I really, really do NOT like Obama, his Muslim Brotherhood loving ass managed in only a decade to rival my dislike for the Clintons ... but I do consider him savvy. A man I described while in office as managing scandals with the appearance of scandals, training his supporters to blind themselves to any suggestion of wrongdoing in the Administration because the Right were ever eager to jump on any hint of wrongdoing (that he was doing to the Left something like turning up the heat under a proverbial frog in a frying pan) could arguably understand that for his sake Hillary must be thwarted after victory if the Party was to become his, and not to remain theirs.
“When dealing with so-called “progressives” I have noticed that there is a tendency for them to treat the lack of convictions as the proof that there were no crimes committed.”
Well said. I’ve noticed that as well.
Their favorite line: “These are just allegations that have been long debunked”.
He’s a devious little dirtbag to rationalize away the injustice in all this. There have been a number of cases where people have been prosecuted for the very slightest and most innocent of security protocol transgressions. Those people were forced to plea down or were otherwise prosecuted and penalized with fines and prison time. The case against her was not ‘slight’. She left her server unsecured for extended periods to which Comey admits it was likely hacked by foreign intel services. She transmitted backups of her communications using insecure means onto at least 3 separate devices on at least 3 separate occasions. She explicitly rejected the advice and admonition of the government’s IT security people. She purposefully destroyed evidence under subpoena.
How could anyone with integrity, who spent a lifetime in the so-called justice system, who was head of the vaunted FBI, permit the injustice of letting her walk while prosecuting so many others for what were obviously innocent mistakes?
The very least of this decision was to prove to the citizens that there are at least 2 systems of justice, one for the wealthy and powerful and politically connected, and one for everyone else. Many people, usually but not always on the old left, have made similar claims; that there is an injustice in the justice system. That claim has not had much traction in the mainstream. As far as I am concerned it is now a proven fact.
Ahh...you forgot to add “TRUST SESSIONS” in your parody.
I thought Lynch disputed Criminal Comey’s claims in her recent interview?
DIRTY-COP-COMEY
What or who is this Q and why do people believe him? And where can you look him/it up? All I get is Q radio.
Q???? Where do you get this?
Wow, what a honed and articulate speaker. He's clearly bound for bigger and better things. Maybe junior high school class president?
trolling same post on multiple threads every time
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3647146/posts?page=23#23
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3647135/posts?page=57#57
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3647152/posts?page=8#8
Stop spamming the threads, please.
Sorry!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.