Posted on 10/29/2016 3:16:30 AM PDT by Helicondelta
I know a lot of people are very skeptical of this. And they have reason to. I really thought Comey was going to recommend indictment the last go around. Why he did not, I don’t know, but part of me thinks that he did not want to put the FBI in the position of tanking a major party candidate and he decided to let the people decide. He laid out the case to indict but then at the last second pulled the rug out. it is plausible he did this intentionally, the American people would have to decide if she is worthy after all this. (Kind of reminds me of John Robert’s Obamacare comments - he did not want to act as a veto over political will and if Obamacare stinks then it is up to the people to force Congress to change, not to ask the court to change it for them).
Now in re-opening the investigation, it has to mean the information is explosive, is either evidence of intent, evidence of other crimes, or evidence of lying to the FBI. The election is just days away and there may not be time for the FBI to do much. I agree that this could be Comey trying to get in front of what they suspect will leak out soon. It may be that Comey is feeling the pressure inside the FBI and has to do an about face with new evidence in hand. But most importantly, I think it means that the FBI will come down like a ton of bricks on someone, Huma or Hillary most likely. He cannot re-open the investigation and then close it again. That would make him look even more ridiculous. IMO only, this has to be heavy information, heavy enough to break the facade Comey erected by saying there is no evidence of intent (or, it is evidence of some other crime like bribery).
Inside the FBI, agents are reportedly furious at the methods used and the facade of “no evidence of intent”. If this facade is broken by the new evidence then Comey has no choice but to act swiftly and harshly. And the American people won’t stand for it either. Comey said there was no intent, no crime there to prosecute, so now if there is proof of intent or of other serious crimes, to save the reputation of FBI they have to come down hard on their targets. The FBI has no choice - their credibility is on the line. Comey tried something, for some reason only he knows, to paper it over. The FBI has to stand up if it turns out that all these people were lying to them. They cannot take that lying down.
I will lay money that he emailed, chatted or skyped all the time with George Soros and may still. No one is looking for anything lke that because they are so focused on Hillary. If its there it will probably surface once people begin focusing on it and prove that treason was occurring with a traitor infiltrator at the helm.
Whoa...interesting article.
Whole dang world is falling apart.
Corrupt Comey, yes. But, corrupt agents? The word is that the agents are livid that Comey whitewashed Clinton back in July; the agents were pretty much in open revolt from what I understand.
Wonder how many people are aware of this? Word for word from the Cornell Law Library - RE: H Clinton
Apparently, the FBI forgot to visit the Law Library. Former United States Attorney General Michael Mukasey tells MSNBC that not only is Hillary Clinton's private email server illegal, it "disqualifies" her from holding any federal office. Very specifically points to one federal law, Title 18. Section 2071.
Here's what it says:
"(a) Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States.
Yes, it explicitly states "shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States."
Shouldn't voters know that? The media won't tell them. So it's up to YOU
It's to late....my trust in the FBI is forever lost.
They've been taken over by the Communists just like every other branch of the US government.
Lois Lerner is still laughing.
Hold it...he's Black and cannot be held accountable.
It'd be racist.
Loretta Lynch is scrambling to get new orders from Bill Clinton.
(1)The FBI investigated Hillary's emails and illegal server.
(2) The FBI knows and knew that Huma was Hillary's number two lieutenant.
(3)The FBI knew that Huma had a husband of sorts and that it was likely that they corresponded electronically.
(4)The FBI knows that most people have computers in their home.
(5)In this in-depth investigation the FBI didn't bother to look at Huma's house for a computer or any other documents that might aid in the investigation (see (2) above).
(6)Conclusion: Either the FBI are a bunch of dumb fxxx's or there was nothing but an exercise to fool the public that something was being investigated.
One can only hope that this new info won't be swept under the rug and business as usual continues.
__________________________
From CNN, July 2016...
His first run-in came in the mid-1990s, when he joined the Senate Whitewater Committee as a deputy special counsel. There he dug into allegations that the Clintons took part in a fraud connected to a Arkansas real estate venture gone bust. No charges were ever brought against either Clinton..."
"In 2002, Comey, then a federal prosecutor, took over an investigation into President Bill Clinton's 2001 pardon of financier Marc Rich, who had been indicted on a laundry list of charges before fleeing the country . ..."
http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/07/politics/who-is-james-comey-fbi-director-things-to-know/index.html
__________________________________
"The Whitewater controversy (also known as the Whitewater scandal, or simply Whitewater) began with investigations into the real estate investments of Bill and Hillary Clinton and their associates, Jim and Susan McDougal, in the Whitewater Development Corporation, a failed business venture in the 1970s and 1980s."
Whitewater Convictions
Jim Guy Tucker: Governor of Arkansas at the time, removed from office (fraud, 3 counts)
John Haley: attorney for Jim Guy Tucker (tax evasion)
William J. Marks, Sr.: Jim Guy Tucker's business partner (conspiracy)
Stephen Smith: former Governor Clinton aide (conspiracy to misapply funds). Bill Clinton pardoned.
Webster Hubbell: Clinton political supporter; Rose Law Firm partner (embezzlement, fraud)
Jim McDougal: banker, Clinton political supporter: (18 felonies, varied)
Susan McDougal: Clinton political supporter (multiple fraud). Bill Clinton pardoned.
David Hale: banker, self-proclaimed Clinton political supporter: (conspiracy, fraud)
Neal Ainley: Perry County Bank president (embezzled bank funds for Clinton campaign)
Chris Wade: Whitewater real estate broker (multiple loan fraud). Bill Clinton pardoned.
Larry Kuca: Madison real estate agent (multiple loan fraud)
Robert W. Palmer: Madison appraiser (conspiracy). Bill Clinton pardoned.
John Latham: Madison Bank CEO (bank fraud)
Eugene Fitzhugh: Whitewater defendant (multiple bribery)
Charles Matthews: Whitewater defendant (bribery)
Ultimately the Clintons were never charged, but 15 other persons were convicted of more than 40 crimes, including Bill Clinton's successor as Governor, who was removed from office.[40]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitewater_%28controversy%29#Convictions
or,
https://web.archive.org/web/20090326122112/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitewater_%28controversy%29
(First Tuesday after the first Monday in November.)
“lost faith in the Bureau.”?
How about lost faith in Obamma’s entire federal gub mint?
Hell - they uncovered criminality during the first one and opted to whitewash it. I doubt this latest will be able to be covered with whitewash or it would never have seen the light of day in the first place.
The emails were said to have been stumbled upon rather than uncovered in a purposeful review
They never let up
I still think that Bill Clinton met Loretta Lynch on the tarmac right before Comey made his announcement not to prosecute despite a mountain of evidence in order to threaten Lynch and anyone else that might think to prosecute Clinton crimes. We already know that people die when they cross the Clintons, so any threat would have had a lot of weight behind it.
Lynch then would have communicated the threat to Comey. And Comey would have then come up with some excuse to not prosecute—in this case, claiming that “lack of intent” was sufficient reason to absolve Hillary.
The calculus here is that the typical liberal voter is not voting on which person they think is best qualified to be president, but purely on emotion. They fantasize that electing the “right” person will lead to utopia (although they cannot specify how). I do not know how many people have high level security clearances, but I would guess that the average liberal has never had a clearance and has no clue about national security. So, when Comey said that there was “no intent” in sharing top secret information on an unsecured private server, the excuse sounded plausible to them.
Perhaps now, there is evidence of another crime that won’t be so easily excused. Wishful thinking—what if they found her talking about planning/executing a hit on someone inconvenient?
Too bad someone hasn’t hacked Comey’s email system. I’ll bet there’s some interesting information in there, maybe even a smoking gun (or two).
They, the FBI, the so-called Justice Department, the President, the (Republican) Congress; they have been running interference for her for years. Big whup. They found something really bad. Is as bad as aiding and abetting ISIS? Is as bad as shaking down corporations foreign governments for bribes in return for who knows what.
So someone read something on Weiner's computer. Whatever it is, we wouldn't know about it if they didn't tell us; or if Wikileaks didn't tell us. And if Wikileaks did tell us, it would just be email #35001. Even my eyes have glazed over at this point.
Why now?
ML/NJ
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.