It's official: The FBI is covering up Clinton's crimes

Breaking now. FBI agreed to destroy laptops of Clinton aides with immunity deal, sources say. It seems that the FBI had a "side deal" with at least 2 of Hillary's aides, and they promised to destroy the aides' laptops after the FBI had finished examining them. And yes, these aides were given immunity.

At this point, anyone who can't see that this is a coverup is so delusional they need to be institutionalized.

I wonder if this might actually be the beginning of the end for the whole concept of immunity. If Trump does win, I think it would actually be quite easy for him to convince a federal judge to throw out all of the FBI's immunity promises, on the grounds that they appear to have been granted not in the course of seeking justice, but as part of a conspiracy to obstruct it. Heck, even if Obama pardons these people, the pardons themselves could be thrown out for the same reason: justice demands that the president not be allowed to pardon himself and his co-conspirators.

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

Whoa...

Kinda opens up new questions about that plane convo between Lynch and Bill, huh?

Pardon Moi, have You any immunity?

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan
Don't they usually destroy them for Security reasons anyway? They do it with phones.

originally posted by: ugmold
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan
Don't they usually destroy them for Security reasons anyway? They do it with phones.

And planes... But usually the buildings are insured to the hilt so the owner actually makes $$$ right after the calamity...

The laptops seem like they would not be important but they likely had a lot of file folders on it with accounting information on the foundation, points of contact. One thing I find strange about all these emails is there are none we know about regarding financials. This is hundreds of millions of dollars yet nothing. No back and forth traffic on costs per speech, no discussion of topics and then all these aliases...Chelsea, Obama...those are the only ones we know about. Probably a lot more fake names and emails.

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

And the plot thickens. Wonder what excuse will be used this time. LOL the system is a joke.

originally posted by: ugmold
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan
Don't they usually destroy them for Security reasons anyway? They do it with phones.

Trouble is, this happened while the "former" State Department people were no longer government employees.

originally posted by: slapjacks
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

Wonder what excuse will be used this time.

A vast right wing conspiracy lacking intent?

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

Why am I not at all surprised. So the FBI gets information from these 2 aides, and promises them immunity, but then what else are they going to do with the information they got? Keep it stored away in some deep dark place, or use it against Hillary? Anyone?

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: slapjacks
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

Wonder what excuse will be used this time.

A vast right wing conspiracy lacking intent?

ding ding ding ding! we have a winner!

Every day brings more and more evidence that the FBI was complacent in covering up this crime.

Here is my favorite part from the article in the op'

Aides expressed shock at the parameter, saying it is especially troubling as Mills and Samuelson already had immunity from the consequences of whatever might be on the laptop.

“You’re essentially extending immunity to everyone,” one aide said.

www.foxnews.com...

This is exactly right, it amounts to immunity for everyone.

The FBI was so desperate to find out what was on these computers that they claimed they were forced to offer these immunity deals. Now we find out that they also promised to destroy the evidence after viewing it.

This would be hilarious if it wasn't so sad. So even if they found evidence that say Hillary or anyone else intended to hide evidence, or purposefully destroy it, they would not be able to use this evidnce because they promised they would destroy the evidence in side deals! This means that the FBI knew that access to these computers had ZERO chance of helping their case. Yet they tossed around immunity anyways.

And why not just subpeona these computers? Well Comey said it would have took to much time. So instead of taking a little time to do things right, the FBI got a quick peak at the computers in exchange for immunity and destroying the evidence after the peak.

Imagine this in another case. "Sir would you please hand over your gun that we think was involved in a murder. Don't worry, we will give you immunity, and destroy the gun after we get it so it can never be used as evidence."

This is beyond Trump vs Hillary. All of these agencies are in it together. Obama's administration is above the law. They control the DOJ and now the FBI. There is no one left to investigate them. Now the precedent is set. The next President, Republican or Democrat will be able to break any law they please, as both of these investigative agencies have now proven to be political entities.

We wouldn't even need prisons if everyone was treated this "fairly" by the justice system.

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

The House Oversight Committee should remove Comey and his team of agents immediately.. Isn't this why we have this committee in the first place, checks and balances? Well, something bad is out of balance with the FBI and they need to be put in "check" immediately.. I hope Chaffetz and Gowdy tackle this..

And a side note... Trey Gowdy would make a wonderful AG...

Just to clarify because I think it is important -

The FBI cannot grant immunity - Only the DOJ can.


Types of immunity.

Transactional immunity, colloquially known as "blanket" or "total" immunity, completely protects the witness from future prosecution for crimes related to his or her testimony. Use and derivative use immunity prevents the prosecution only from using the witness's own testimony or any evidence derived from the testimony against the witness.

However, should the prosecutor acquire evidence substantiating the supposed crime—independently of the witness's testimony—the witness may then be prosecuted for the crime.

While prosecutors at the state level may offer a witness either transactional or use and derivative use immunity, at the federal level, use and derivative use immunity is quite common

Immunity is contingent on the person receiving it telling the truth and cooperating with the investigation. If a person lies / omits / withholds information the immunity can be invalidated.

Anyone else find it weird we keep seeing articles discussing the FBI and who was granted immunity? One would think they would get the info right in the stories and note only the DOJ can grant immunity.

This mess is being dropped at the doorsteps of the FBI and the DOJ is being ignored.

the destruction of the laptops is particularly troubling as it means that the computers could not be used as evidence in future legal proceedings, should new information or circumstances arise.

This is just mind-boggling....the extent the FBI went to in order to make sure The American People never get to the truth of this matter. Their obstruction of justice is just in our face, bold and ugly.

What can Congress or The American People do when all the evidence has been destroyed and the ciminals have been given protection, and the investigative agency itself blatantly obstructs justice?!

If Donald Trump were to be elected, even with pardons issued by Obama, he could have re-opened the case if new evidence or circumstances arose. But, by destroying these particular laptops, the FBI just put another nail in the coffin of justice regarding this whole sordid affair.

Whatever they are protecting and hiding is some serious ---- real serious ---- crimes against the American People.

a reply to: queenofswords

Someone correct me if im wrong but its been my experienc, regarding evidence, that a judges order is required in order to destroy evidence.

originally posted by: Xcathdra


Anyone else find it weird we keep seeing articles discussing the FBI and who was granted immunity? One would think they would get the info right in the stories and note only the DOJ can grant immunity.

This mess is being dropped at the doorsteps of the FBI and the DOJ is being ignored.

Yep, I noticed just a few articles mention it was the DOJ that did this
on the "side". Kind of like Bill Clinton met Loretta on a plane, on the side.

Not to say that The FBI in this case isn't beyond fishy though, because it is.

You'd think they'd find something damming at the rate she supposedly destroys evidence.

I'd love to know more about if her snakeskin, when she sheds a layer out, is evidence too.

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan
Wonder if those two aides will have an fatal accident or commit suicide.