Turning off the lights at the FBI

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Hillary wins, she should basically destroy the FBI as we know it. Not even Hoover would have interfered so brazenly in a presidential election (and tolerated leaks like this). Who would have thought that the October surprise would not be from Putin's FSB but rather from a rogue FBI?! The FBI culture needs a total re-boot, and the best way to do it is to break the agency up and transfer its various functions to more accountable agencies.

Sounds like you would have preferred that the rest of us not have knowledge of what was really going on with the Clintons, the DNC "behind the scenes" activities, etc. If not for the leaks, how would we know the truth?

We don't know any "truth," we know innuendo. And the leaks have been entirely one sided and totally meant to smear Clinton - why else would a dead FBI Twitter suddenly have Marc Rich papers? That was 16 years ago, the facts were known then. Sounds like you don't mind a partisan agency so long as it favors your version of the truth. Why don't we know more about Donald's dealings with Putin, because we know there are issues.

Dems didn't seem to mind Comey breaking SOP by announcing he wasn't recommending an indictment at that time. The famed Rep predilection for talking out of your butt: as there was no evidence of a crime, no we didn't mind her not being indicted. We did mind his little partisan rant at the expense of impartiality.

Apparently that Twitter is based on FOIA requests. From what I've read, if they get 3 FOIA requests for the same thing, they post it online instead of mailing them. I'm not FBI, so I can't confirm that that's true, but that's what I heard. Or it's a rogue FBI agent pissed that DOJ tried to squash their investigation(s). Who knows. From a year's quiet account, they just suddenly released the Marc Rich papers, poof? Can I and twof of my friends request some JFK stuff. Seems more likely to be rogue agents and not, as they claim, an update automatically adding stuff.

The NYT already wrote about how the FBI hasnt found any direct connection between Trump and "the Russians." Again, "so far." Donald, known cheat and swindler, is being given a courtesy that Hillary is not. They had had Weiner's computer since October 3 and still they waited till late October to announce - against tradition, sense, and the Hatch Act, even before having a warrant. Those emails could literally have nothing to do with Hillary, we don't know "so far," but Hill got tossed under the bus and Don, with at least three FBI investigations going did not. Why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What do Dems want Comey to do? Lie to the congress like Hillary?

He must notify congress because he told them previously the investigation was closed. Is telling the truth a sin now?

Why is Obama campaigning on taxpayers' dollars and time not a violation of Hatch Act?

For the same reason that Saint Ronald Reagan's campaigning didn't violate the Hatch Act. The campaign or the DNC picks up certain expenses of the plane, etc., but security and other stuff always follows the president. Get over it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems very off that they made two releases so close to the election. The election is definitely rigged against Clinton. The FBI seems to be working with the alt-right media to cheat Clinton.

+1
They are also very clearly investigating at least three Russian cases between Trump and his campaign and Russia, an issue that is arguably more important, and nary a whisper.

It because there has already been releases showing there is NO connection. CBS and NY Times already reported this...wake up

There has been no such determination by the FBI or DOJ. What there has been based on the nature of the certitude of the reporting is an off-the-record "leak" authorized at the highest levels of the FBI downplaying the known ties between Russia and the Trump campaign and efforts by the former to influence the election through illegal backing and release of email communications via Wikileaks. Comey is running a rogue operation at this point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems very off that they made two releases so close to the election. The election is definitely rigged against Clinton. The FBI seems to be working with the alt-right media to cheat Clinton.

+1
They are also very clearly investigating at least three Russian cases between Trump and his campaign and Russia, an issue that is arguably more important, and nary a whisper.

It because there has already been releases showing there is NO connection. CBS and NY Times already reported this...wake up

There has been no such determination by the FBI or DOJ. What there has been based on the nature of the certitude of the reporting is an off-the-record "leak" authorized at the highest levels of the FBI downplaying the known ties between Russia and the Trump campaign and efforts by the former to influence the election through illegal backing and release of email communications via Wikileaks. Comey is running a rogue operation at this point.

I said in the other FBI thread that I believe the Russians have sex tapes of a number of FBI higher ups and are blackmailing them into manipulating the election.

[Anonymous]

Good article on Comey from a former Kirkland & Ellis (i.e., Republican law firm) partner. https://thelawyerbubble.com/2016/11/02/james-comey-and-the-fbi/

Harper is no partisan hack. He's a middle-of-the-road observer of the legal profession. His comments on Comey resonate with me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ROFLMAO! A month ago the FBI was straight-shooting & non-partisan when it was ordered to stop investigating Clinton. Now, it needs to be broken up and is a centerpiece to partisan politics, because it gained a conscious and is completing what it should have doing the entire time.


BTW, Bernie supporters, do you agree with PP above who states the election is rigged against Clinton?

First, no. They weren't "ordered to stop," quit making shit up.
Second, no. Comey's little armchair chat pontificating about Hillary was also a partisan dick move.

+1. Those positive statements about the FBI were an effort to be gracious in the face of ridiculous politicking by Comey during that press conference because there was no need to rub his nose in it. Not everyone feels the need to find the fight in everything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good article on Comey from a former Kirkland & Ellis (i.e., Republican law firm) partner. https://thelawyerbubble.com/2016/11/02/james-comey-and-the-fbi/

Harper is no partisan hack. He's a middle-of-the-road observer of the legal profession. His comments on Comey resonate with me.

You mean that Comey is way, way out of line? Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:ROFLMAO! A month ago the FBI was straight-shooting & non-partisan when it was ordered to stop investigating Clinton. Now, it needs to be broken up and is a centerpiece to partisan politics, because it gained a conscious and is completing what it should have doing the entire time.


BTW, Bernie supporters, do you agree with PP above who states the election is rigged against Clinton?

Hmmm, I think there were many folks who were troubled by Comey's break from FBI protocol last summer in making a public announcement.

[Anonymous]

I lost faith in the FBI when a friend who works for the agency told me that they charged someone with having bomb making materials after they found a bottle of Drano under the kitchen sink and a computer store catalog laying around. "Bomb making materials" is what shows up in the indictment and the papers...not the one bottle of Drano and an electronics catalog. Law enforcement will contort whatever they need to fit their narrative, therefore, I trust none of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ROFLMAO! A month ago the FBI was straight-shooting & non-partisan when it was ordered to stop investigating Clinton. Now, it needs to be broken up and is a centerpiece to partisan politics, because it gained a conscious and is completing what it should have doing the entire time.


BTW, Bernie supporters, do you agree with PP above who states the election is rigged against Clinton?

Hmmm, I think there were many folks who were troubled by Comey's break from FBI protocol last summer in making a public announcement.

It's not the FBI Agents or Comey. It's *hem others in the DOJ. Sounds to me like the FBI is doing everything they can to tell the American people that Hillary Clinton is a criminal. Comey literally laid out the case against her in his first announcement. I think it was pretty clear his hands were tied. He gave the American people too much credit by assuming they could read between the lines.

Just my opinion. I can't stand either candidate, so for me it doesn't matter. I'm just sitting back and watching.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ROFLMAO! A month ago the FBI was straight-shooting & non-partisan when it was ordered to stop investigating Clinton. Now, it needs to be broken up and is a centerpiece to partisan politics, because it gained a conscious and is completing what it should have doing the entire time.


BTW, Bernie supporters, do you agree with PP above who states the election is rigged against Clinton?

Hmmm, I think there were many folks who were troubled by Comey's break from FBI protocol last summer in making a public announcement.

It's not the FBI Agents or Comey. It's *hem others in the DOJ. Sounds to me like the FBI is doing everything they can to tell the American people that Hillary Clinton is a criminal. Comey literally laid out the case against her in his first announcement. I think it was pretty clear his hands were tied. He gave the American people too much credit by assuming they could read between the lines.

Just my opinion. I can't stand either candidate, so for me it doesn't matter. I'm just sitting back and watching.

That sounds to me like a witch hunt. Either there's something there to indict or there isn't. They don't get to say, nothing to investigate but hint hint there is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ROFLMAO! A month ago the FBI was straight-shooting & non-partisan when it was ordered to stop investigating Clinton. Now, it needs to be broken up and is a centerpiece to partisan politics, because it gained a conscious and is completing what it should have doing the entire time.


BTW, Bernie supporters, do you agree with PP above who states the election is rigged against Clinton?

Hmmm, I think there were many folks who were troubled by Comey's break from FBI protocol last summer in making a public announcement.

It's not the FBI Agents or Comey. It's *hem others in the DOJ. Sounds to me like the FBI is doing everything they can to tell the American people that Hillary Clinton is a criminal. Comey literally laid out the case against her in his first announcement. I think it was pretty clear his hands were tied. He gave the American people too much credit by assuming they could read between the lines.

Just my opinion. I can't stand either candidate, so for me it doesn't matter. I'm just sitting back and watching.

That sounds to me like a witch hunt. Either there's something there to indict or there isn't. They don't get to say, nothing to investigate but hint hint there is.

They have to have someone willing to prosecute. Without a prosecutor, it doesn't matter how much evidence they find.

[Anonymous]

I think at both turns (July and October) Comey has been willing to take a hit to his personal reputation to protect the voting process.

Hero both times.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ROFLMAO! A month ago the FBI was straight-shooting & non-partisan when it was ordered to stop investigating Clinton. Now, it needs to be broken up and is a centerpiece to partisan politics, because it gained a conscious and is completing what it should have doing the entire time.


BTW, Bernie supporters, do you agree with PP above who states the election is rigged against Clinton?

Hmmm, I think there were many folks who were troubled by Comey's break from FBI protocol last summer in making a public announcement.

It's not the FBI Agents or Comey. It's *hem others in the DOJ. Sounds to me like the FBI is doing everything they can to tell the American people that Hillary Clinton is a criminal. Comey literally laid out the case against her in his first announcement. I think it was pretty clear his hands were tied. He gave the American people too much credit by assuming they could read between the lines.

Just my opinion. I can't stand either candidate, so for me it doesn't matter. I'm just sitting back and watching.

That sounds to me like a witch hunt. Either there's something there to indict or there isn't. They don't get to say, nothing to investigate but hint hint there is.

They have to have someone willing to prosecute. Without a prosecutor, it doesn't matter how much evidence they find.

Agree. And, when new evidence is discovered, that could be a game changer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ROFLMAO! A month ago the FBI was straight-shooting & non-partisan when it was ordered to stop investigating Clinton. Now, it needs to be broken up and is a centerpiece to partisan politics, because it gained a conscious and is completing what it should have doing the entire time.


BTW, Bernie supporters, do you agree with PP above who states the election is rigged against Clinton?

Hmmm, I think there were many folks who were troubled by Comey's break from FBI protocol last summer in making a public announcement.

It's not the FBI Agents or Comey. It's *hem others in the DOJ. Sounds to me like the FBI is doing everything they can to tell the American people that Hillary Clinton is a criminal. Comey literally laid out the case against her in his first announcement. I think it was pretty clear his hands were tied. He gave the American people too much credit by assuming they could read between the lines.

Just my opinion. I can't stand either candidate, so for me it doesn't matter. I'm just sitting back and watching.

That sounds to me like a witch hunt. Either there's something there to indict or there isn't. They don't get to say, nothing to investigate but hint hint there is.

They have to have someone willing to prosecute. Without a prosecutor, it doesn't matter how much evidence they find.

If they had recommended an indictment, THAT would have been saying everything they could say about Hillary being a criminal. And Lynch was already on the record as saying she would accept the FBI's recommendation, so not prosecuting would be politically untenable.