And this from Reuters

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN12Y2WY

Anonymous wrote:They should really put the lights out of the FBI's New York field office. Apparently it's called "Trumplandia," a number of agents who are personally close of Rudy Guiliani and want Trump. That's the viper's nest, the rogue group of secret policemen who are trying to swing the U.S. presidential election.

Go take your meds, sweetie. The voices aren't real.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Sure. But they didn't have any new evidence. They had the lap top for nearly a month and when he sent his cowardly letters to Congress, they didn't heaven have a warrant. We have more evidence of Donald's Russian ties.

Sounds to me that they have new evidence. Reports indicate that at least some of the emails that have been found that went through the Clinton server are not duplicates. I can’t wait to read about yoga and wedding plans.

We are all on pins and needles waiting for this earth-shattering "new" info. Pray tell, when might we get something, anything specific??

Comey isn't the real story -- he was trying to keep the whole thing under control and get ahead of the leaks. It's the NY Field office. MSNBC is showing a story tonight how Guiliani went on Fox News last week and could barely help himself, smugly boasting that a some big things were doing to come out about Hillary in a couple of days -- and that's when the announcement came out and the FBI leaks started

They should really put the lights out of the FBI's New York field office. Apparently it's called "Trumplandia," a number of agents who are personally close of Rudy Guiliani and want Trump. That's the viper's nest, the rogue group of secret policemen who are trying to swing the U.S. presidential election.

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.

In case this hasn't been shared yet: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/11/03/meet-donald-trump-s-top-fbi-fanboy.html

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Sure. But they didn't have any new evidence. They had the lap top for nearly a month and when he sent his cowardly letters to Congress, they didn't heaven have a warrant. We have more evidence of Donald's Russian ties.

Sounds to me that they have new evidence. Reports indicate that at least some of the emails that have been found that went through the Clinton server are not duplicates. I can’t wait to read about yoga and wedding plans.

It does? How? They didn't even have permission to look. What could possibly have possessed Comey to announce what was (and still is, at this point) no new information? And why did they sit on the news for three weeks?

Well, one report was that the agents that found the evidence connecting the emails to the Clinton server went to the FBI Deputy Director, Andrew McCabe to report it. He had that information and then went to Comey AFTER it was made public that his wife was given a pretty hefty political donation from McAuliffe (HRC’s pal and Gov. of VA). The timing makes sense.
Whether this is accurate or not remains to be seen.... and I feel certain the information will come out.
And, when they found this information, Comey felt obligated to tell Congress since he had testified, under oath, that if anything significant changed, the investigation would continue.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Sure. But they didn't have any new evidence. They had the lap top for nearly a month and when he sent his cowardly letters to Congress, they didn't heaven have a warrant. We have more evidence of Donald's Russian ties.

Sounds to me that they have new evidence. Reports indicate that at least some of the emails that have been found that went through the Clinton server are not duplicates. I can’t wait to read about yoga and wedding plans.

It does? How? They didn't even have permission to look. What could possibly have possessed Comey to announce what was (and still is, at this point) no new information? And why did they sit on the news for three weeks?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

And that might make sense - but only to someone who doesn't understand that that's not the way the FBI works. They don't make "recommendations". That's why those of us who understand the FBI know that something is off. The FBI conducts an investigation and turns the material over to a federal prosecutor. The end. It's up to the prosecutor to decide what to do with it. The problem is most people watch too many television crime dramas and don't understand this.

Actually, someone who know would know there are several layers between an FBI agent and a prosecutor. There are also several more layers between a prosecutor and a grand jury, andd a grand jury and an indictment.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Sure. But they didn't have any new evidence. They had the lap top for nearly a month and when he sent his cowardly letters to Congress, they didn't heaven have a warrant. We have more evidence of Donald's Russian ties.

Sounds to me that they have new evidence. Reports indicate that at least some of the emails that have been found that went through the Clinton server are not duplicates. I can’t wait to read about yoga and wedding plans.

Anonymous wrote:And that might make sense - but only to someone who doesn't understand that that's not the way the FBI works. They don't make "recommendations". That's why those of us who understand the FBI know that something is off. The FBI conducts an investigation and turns the material over to a federal prosecutor. The end. It's up to the prosecutor to decide what to do with it. The problem is most people watch too many television crime dramas and don't understand this.

So what's going on over there?

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Sure. But they didn't have any new evidence. They had the lap top for nearly a month and when he sent his cowardly letters to Congress, they didn't heaven have a warrant. We have more evidence of Donald's Russian ties.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

And that might make sense - but only to someone who doesn't understand that that's not the way the FBI works. They don't make "recommendations". That's why those of us who understand the FBI know that something is off. The FBI conducts an investigation and turns the material over to a federal prosecutor. The end. It's up to the prosecutor to decide what to do with it. The problem is most people watch too many television crime dramas and don't understand this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

What made them look under someone's kitchen sink? Seriously doubt that's an every day occurrence!

It's a ridiculously untrue story. I'll give the poster the benefit of the doubt and assume she only knows "her friend's" side of the story.

Anonymous wrote: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.

What made them look under someone's kitchen sink? Seriously doubt that's an every day occurrence!