Posted on 10/30/2016 1:31:53 PM PDT by Rockitz
In an exclusive interview with Breitbart News, the former U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Joseph DiGenova gave a stark assessment of what led to FBI Director James Comeys recent decision to reopen the investigation into Hillary Clintons use of a private email server, after an investigation into Anthony Weiners sexting scandal led to the discovery of thousands of emails on the computer of Weiners estranged wife, top Hillary Clinton aide, Huma Abedin. The picture painted by DiGenova, based on what he says are discussions with current and former FBI agents, is one of seething rage inside the Bureau at the way Comey handled the investigation concerning Hillary Clintons private email server. Mr. DiGenova eviscerated the way Comey conducted his investigation and explained that he believes it has tarnished the FBI directors reputation permanently, telling Breitbart News:
The original so-called investigation was not an investigation. It was not thorough. It was not professional. As far as we know there was no grand jury, which an ordinary investigation would have. There were no grand jury subpoenas, there were no search warrants. Immunities were given out like candy. Attorneys were allowed to represent multiple witnesses and defendants which is completely inconsistent with federal policy and ethical standards. The list is endless.
...
Well, he didnt have any choice. He had to send the letter once he was confronted with the evidence of the New York investigation. If he hadnt sent the letter, there would have been leaks out of New York and he would have been embarrassed. So, he sent the letter because he didnt have any choice and its as simple as that. I mean, they were gonna leak it, and he knew it.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Question for legal types:
Comey granted immunity to lots of people. Let’s assume before too long it’s proven that Comey was either paid off or blackmailed, is the immunity still good? What we would have is immunity being granted by a crook. No difference that immunity being sold.
That's nothing. When I google "Hillary" and "criminal" I get 63,900,000 results. Even "Clinton" and "lolita" gets me 784,000 results.
I am hoping that if there was a child and underage sex ring that Bill and Hillary participated in, the whole, ugly, sordid truth comes to light. Now.
If it can ultimately be proved that Comey acted criminally, than the immunities should be invalid as well, IMHO. Then the house of cards will fall.
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.