It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Comey Plotted To Avoid Charges Against Hillary BEFORE The FBI Interviewed Her

page: 1
46
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+17 more 
posted on May, 13 2017 @ 10:18 AM
link   
A new article in the New Yorker has some good nuggets of information in it. I guess it is not really new news to many of us but more of a confirmation of what was already suspected, that regardless of what was found in the Clinton Classified Document Scandal that she would not be prosecuted.

www.newyorker.com...




“We had discussions for months about what this looked like,” Michael Steinbach, who retired as the F.B.I.’s executive assistant director for national security in February, 2017, said. “This, for us, was the best course of action, given the political situation that we were in—for us to do it independently.”

As Comey saw it, according to Steinbach and others familiar with his thinking, the public doubted Lynch’s independence and would be less likely to accept the decision if she were involved in announcing it.


www.dailywire.com...#




Amidst the fallout from the firing of FBI director James Comey, a new report reveals that Comey actually planned not to recommend charges against Hillary Clinton over the use of her private email server well before she was interviewed by the FBI.

Clinton wasn't interviewed until July 2. That means a couple of months before the subject of the investigation was interviewed, Comey was plotting a course of action to make the decision not to recommend charges against her seem more palatable to the public.

It's clear in the piece that not only was there never any indication that Comey was going to recommend charges against her, but that Comey knew about an email sent by a Democratic operative who believed that Attorney General Loretta Lynch "would protect Clinton." Comey never raised the issue with Lynch.

Comey apparently planned to save Clinton from charges even before she was interviewed, which would explain why he didn't personally interview her and why the interview was never recorded and why she wasn't forced to answer questions under oath. That is not how someone who is dedicated to upholding the law should operate.


edit on 13-5-2017 by infolurker because: (no reason given)



+14 more 
posted on May, 13 2017 @ 10:22 AM
link   
a reply to: infolurker

That is some pretty harsh judgement coming from a publication that is decidedly liberal in its politics and only goes to further underscore the sentiment that people in power like the Clintons are above constraints that the rest of our society operates under.


+11 more 
posted on May, 13 2017 @ 10:23 AM
link   
How come the Democrats even let Hillary run? Did they think she was so slippery that nothing could stick? Did they believe that the majority of Americans would believe her lies and deflection of her wrongdoings?

The Democrats really have to take a good look at the path their on, it leads far from the way they are supposed to be going.



posted on May, 13 2017 @ 10:27 AM
link   
a reply to: infolurker

So basically he recognized pretty early on that there was nothing to prosecute.



posted on May, 13 2017 @ 10:27 AM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

What stuck?


+20 more 
posted on May, 13 2017 @ 10:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
So basically he recognized pretty early on that there was nothing to prosecute.


Uh, no. Try reading the article:


Comey apparently planned to save Clinton from charges even before she was interviewed, which would explain why he didn't personally interview her and why the interview was never recorded and why she wasn't forced to answer questions under oath. That is not how someone who is dedicated to upholding the law should operate.


+6 more 
posted on May, 13 2017 @ 10:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: rickymouse
How come the Democrats even let Hillary run? Did they think she was so slippery that nothing could stick? Did they believe that the majority of Americans would believe her lies and deflection of her wrongdoings?

The Democrats really have to take a good look at the path their on, it leads far from the way they are supposed to be going.


They can't look back, they mus'nt, they can only see hate at Trump for killing their baby.


+3 more 
posted on May, 13 2017 @ 10:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Sillyolme
So basically he recognized pretty early on that there was nothing to prosecute.


Uh, no. Try reading the article:


Comey apparently planned to save Clinton from charges even before she was interviewed, which would explain why he didn't personally interview her and why the interview was never recorded and why she wasn't forced to answer questions under oath. That is not how someone who is dedicated to upholding the law should operate.


More likely is that the FBI found some damaging things but since Clinton is an untouchable class, he circumvented protocol to allow her to walk away free of any charges. You or I would be rotting away already..


+21 more 
posted on May, 13 2017 @ 10:35 AM
link   
a reply to: infolurker

So, basically Comey knew Hillary was dodgy AF but because Obama was in office at the time, and a good mate of Hills', Comey figured he'd better tow the political establishment line and give special allowances to certain citizens because bloodline and career?



posted on May, 13 2017 @ 10:49 AM
link   
a reply to: infolurker

I don't see what is so unusual. Comey found the evidence too weak to recommend charges. That can happen before witnesses are interviewed and is not concrete. If Hillary or any other witness had said anything in interviews that was incriminating it could easily have gone the other way. The title of the Daily Wire article is click bait. The article doesn't support the title.


As the inquiry neared its end, Comey, who had closely monitored it from the start, requested summaries of more than thirty government prosecutions involving mishandling of classified information. He waded through the records, seeking to understand the cases’ rationale and how they had been resolved. In the end, he agreed with the investigators’ unanimous conclusion: Clinton should not face criminal charges...


The Daily Wire



posted on May, 13 2017 @ 10:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Sublimecraft

No. You should read both articles.


+22 more 
posted on May, 13 2017 @ 10:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

To weak?

Really.

We know and it has been proven that classified information was mishandled. hands down.

Anyone else would have been prosecuted.

You know it

I know it

Anyone with a brain knows it.

Just the fact of intentionally setting up a private email server which had classified information sent to or from it would land us in prison for 20 years.
(Do you disagree?)

Here are highlights of what Comey said:


“Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.”

Clinton’s emails included seven message chains with information classified as top secret.

“None of these emails should have been on any kind of unclassified system.”



Sorry, Intent means nothing. At least for you and I.

Criminal Negligence pure and simple.


You try the "I didn't mean to violate the law" and see how that works for you. Especially after trying to erase the evidence after you were ordered not to. (No intent there right?)
edit on 13-5-2017 by infolurker because: (no reason given)


+14 more 
posted on May, 13 2017 @ 10:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: infolurker

So basically he recognized pretty early on that there was nothing to prosecute.


Holy f#cking sheet!!! Lol, so much wrong with your post. Did I lol? Lol...



posted on May, 13 2017 @ 10:59 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

That's the Daily Wire's interpretation of the New Yorker article though.



posted on May, 13 2017 @ 11:03 AM
link   
a reply to: infolurker

The plot thickens.



posted on May, 13 2017 @ 11:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kali74
That's the Daily Wire's interpretation of the New Yorker article though.


Yeah, I just caught that. I feel cheated out of my Clinton hatred now.



posted on May, 13 2017 @ 11:07 AM
link   
a reply to: infolurker

Yes too weak. Did you read the article in entirety? Comey poured over similar cases trying to find precedent, justification for both charging and not charging. He concluded that there was lack of intent, which was a key requirement for bringing charges.

Was it stupid? Yes. I don't know how anyone with a brain would think it would be a good idea to use private servers to send classified information, but it wasn't new either. Powell did it, Rice did it and well beyond Secretaries of State.



posted on May, 13 2017 @ 11:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Kali74
That's the Daily Wire's interpretation of the New Yorker article though.


Yeah, I just caught that. I feel cheated out of my Clinton hatred now.


It's okay, I'm saddened that she won't go to jail for screwing Bernie out of the nomination.


+2 more 
posted on May, 13 2017 @ 11:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: infolurker

So basically he recognized pretty early on that there was nothing to prosecute.

Yeah. He didn't even need to look at the evidence. He magically knew.



posted on May, 13 2017 @ 11:10 AM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Where did the article say that he didn't look at evidence?



new topics

top topics



 
46
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join