You’ve stated a lot of bullshit and no facts.
And you still haven’t answered whether you’ve even considered the possibility, just a tiny little chance, that maybe James Comey is an honorable public servant who just happens to disagree with you on what the law says about what Hillary Clinton did.
Cite? Seriously - please show conclusive proof that I have lied in any manner.
You said “the head of the FBI came out and read a LONG list of criminal fuckups” on the part of Hillary Clinton. This is either a lie or a statement of crushing ignorance, since he went out of his way in the same speech as well as later to say that the mistakes she made were not criminal violations.
It doesn’t matter a hill of beans whether he disagrees with anyone on this. He is an officer of the law; it’s not up to him to decide whether to arrest someone when they break the law. He stood up there and laid out a list of violations that Hillary committed, then refused to arrest her for them.
Must be nice to be a Clinton. If that had been John or Jane Q. Citizen, they’d be in jail already.
More conjecture.
Of course they would. They had no business breaking into State Department servers.
Comey was very careful to explain in great detail why indictment was not on the table.
Maybe the problem is your short attention span.
Maybe you should explain why you think he was wrong.
Bullshit. Everyday people break laws and rules all the time without being in jail. I’ve been in dozens of businesses as an “invisible” technician and it’s very common, even when the consequences are obviously harmful. The only ones that are vulnerable are those outside large organizations.
It was clear in the FBI report that bypassing classified channels was commonplace because using classified channels was so cumbersome.
And anyone in the business world at the level Hillary Clinton is at wouldn’t get penalized either.
More lies, or deliberate errors. He didn’t read it a list of violations of the law.
Get a new source of information; whatever you have is lying to you. Or maybe you don’t care.
Trained reflex: He *knows *Clinton is a liar, therefore what she said must have been lies.
That makes sense to a frighteningly large number of people.
Clothy, you do understand that, in order for her actions to be a crime, there would have to be INTENT for her to leak classified information, right? And, since they were unable to find any intent, it doesn’t add up to criminal levels.
I don’t know why you refuse to pay attention to that fact.
Also, with all due respect, I would like an answer to the question asked way earlier in this thread:
Is it possible for someone to disagree with you politically without being corrupt/stupid/criminal/choose your own adjective?
Because, like Middle White Class Suburban Man, actually supporting a Democrat would make his head explode?
Scratch that. Reverse it.
He’s my second-favorite superfluous superhero. First is Arm-Fall-Off Boy.
Every time he sees his ex-girlfriend with another man, he goes to pieces.
Preach it, brother! Why, I’ll bet she could run a stop sign and kill somebody, and not even get a traffic ticket.
Or get indicted for stealing a Maserati, plus multiple weapons charges just to see the charges dropped.
Etihw Elddim? Now I’m even more confused.
[Del]Etihw Elddim[/del], I think you mean…
Yeah, that’s him all over.
Did we ever find out who the fix was in with? Not the AG, she already said she would go along with whatever Comey found.
I’m thinking that Obama may have had the measure of the man and an understanding of the law, having some passing education in the subject. Remember that Comey said his entire team was of one mind on the crucial issue? If the arguments were that “cut and dry”, Obama may have concluded that Comey was an honest conservative who would disregard his partisan inclinations and do the right thing. Pretty good bet, and he was right.
Anyway, he might well have concluded that there was no reason for him to fix anything. Even if he could.
