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 admits error in defense of FBI's FISA process after IG report: 'He was right, I was wrong'

page: 7
53
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 01:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: RetsuUnohana
I really "liked" the part where Comey said he was not aware of the details of the investigation into Trump because that was done by agents several levels below him. So FBI Director does not take active role in investigation of the US President? Sure.

One time I told the Judge, I was wrong to be speeding and I admitted that. He still fined me $150 the same law should apply to those in office when they make 'mistakes'.

he signed the fisa warrants
aware or not he is liable




posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 01:12 PM
link   
Also we have been "told" a few of the higher ups were bad apples, like MaCabe, Strozk, Page but not the rank and file.
Know we are hearing from Comey it was FBI agents several levels below him, the rank and file? They made mistakes?
Last week it was a low-life lawyer. It sounds like it is an FBI issue, not just the leadership, systemic corruption within the FBI.
That's what it looks like to me. I hope they are all jailed, knowingly putting innocent people through this is beyond reprehensible , it is criminal, as bad as it gets. And the President as well, unbelievable....

I wish Comey and the MSM would get their stories right, don't they meet at 4am?

originally posted by: RetsuUnohana
I really "liked" the part where Comey said he was not aware of the details of the investigation into Trump because that was done by agents several levels below him. So FBI Director does not take active role in investigation of the US President? Sure.

One time I told the Judge, I was wrong to be speeding and I admitted that. He still fined me $150 the same law should apply to those in office when they make 'mistakes'.

edit on 16-12-2019 by fringeofthefringe because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-12-2019 by fringeofthefringe because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-12-2019 by fringeofthefringe because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-12-2019 by fringeofthefringe because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 01:22 PM
link   
Thanks Comey, you were right to apologize.

Questions still need answered, folks still need held accountable. He should be apologizing to FBI rank and file also

Where are the rest of the apologies? Is Comey the only one with a modicum of humility?



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 01:33 PM
link   
Some good questions for Comey:
What else did you get wrong?
Do you now believe Trump was right in firing you?
Does the IG report findings mean the Special Counsel should never have been formed?"

When Comey calls - changing an email response from the CIA to the FBI stating that Carter Page is not(instead of is)working with the CIA and using that for a FISA warrant a mistake - I don't take his apology seriously.
Comey deflected responsibility, that was a half assed apology.

Comey has no modicum of humility, he and Mueller knowingly put people in jail, among other atrocities...he is a low life and needs to be brought to justice.
Apology fail....hey Comey, thanks for nothing,

originally posted by: JBurns
Thanks Comey, you were right to apologize.

Questions still need answered, folks still need held accountable. He should be apologizing to FBI rank and file also

Where are the rest of the apologies? Is Comey the only one with a modicum of humility?

edit on 16-12-2019 by fringeofthefringe because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-12-2019 by fringeofthefringe because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-12-2019 by fringeofthefringe because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-12-2019 by fringeofthefringe because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-12-2019 by fringeofthefringe because: spelling, word choice

edit on 16-12-2019 by fringeofthefringe because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 01:34 PM
link   
a reply to: JBurns



Is Comey the only one with a modicum of humility?

hahahah
aaaahahahahaha
that is by far the funniest thing I have read here all day

that dude has absolutely no humility



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 01:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut
Is withholding evidence that has been demanded under subpoena evidence of a crime (Trump's financials and stuff requested by the House Select Committee, to name a couple)?

Trump is fighting it in court - as the law allows, and as he should.


I'd say, yes, they are both evidence that a crime may have been committed and grounds for investigation and prosecution.

Anyone who cannot understand the difference between

a) destruction of evidence that is under subpoena

and

b) fighting a subpoena in court

is an idiot and a moron.



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 02:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut
McCain wasn't weak, he was politically very powerful. He was one of the leaders of the Republican party.

Yes, he was one of if not the biggest RINO in the R party, and also one of the big reasons the R party was such an unmitigated disaster.


Most of the Republican Party leadership had concerns about and initially opposed Trump on several issues prior to Trump becoming President.

Correct again - RINOs all of them, who will hopefully be gone sooner rather than later.



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 02:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
Comey doesn't feel he's going to be indicted, because his second in command wasn't indicted. The courts gave the DOJ until November 15, 2019 to charge Andrew McCabe, or let him go. Apparently the DOJ has quietly let him off the hook.

Indict McCabe by 11-15, or release him: thehill.com...

I don't see anything there that says they cannot pick the investigation up again and then charge him later.



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 02:30 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

I tend to agree, not a Comey fan by any means.

I am not saying it absolves him of any responsibility. He should face felony charges or "years in prison" as Trump put it along with many others.

But to this date I believe he may be the first to use the phrase "He was right, I was wrong"

Am I wrong on that point? Have there been others?



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 02:43 PM
link   
I'm sure this is like totally illegal.



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 02:47 PM
link   
a reply to: JBurns



But to this date I believe he may be the first to use the phrase "He was right, I was wrong"

Am I wrong on that point? Have there been others?

comey is by no means the first to utter that phrase

he is attempting to substitute a "mistake" for criminal behavior
sorry
as the fbi is happy to remind you , ignorance of the law does not constitute immunity from the law



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 03:03 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

I hope they don't have an orange jumpsuit that will fit him...Maybe a pink one...



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 03:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: chr0naut
Is withholding evidence that has been demanded under subpoena evidence of a crime (Trump's financials and stuff requested by the House Select Committee, to name a couple)?

Trump is fighting it in court - as the law allows, and as he should.


I'd say, yes, they are both evidence that a crime may have been committed and grounds for investigation and prosecution.

Anyone who cannot understand the difference between

a) destruction of evidence that is under subpoena

and

b) fighting a subpoena in court

is an idiot and a moron.


Both mean that evidence under subpoena is withheld from lawful investigation. They are functionally the same in the eyes of the law.

You seem to like calling everyone who has a difference of opinion to you, idiots and morons.




posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 03:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut
"Anyone who cannot understand the difference between

a) destruction of evidence that is under subpoena

and

b) fighting a subpoena in court

is an idiot and a moron."

Both mean that evidence under subpoena is withheld from lawful investigation. They are functionally the same in the eyes of the law.

Ah. So you freely admit to being an idiot and a moron. Of course I already knew that, but at least you admit it. That's the first step to getting help.


You seem to like calling everyone who has a difference of opinion to you, idiots and morons.

Nope, only those who cannot understand the difference between fighting a subpoena in the courts, as allowed by law, and destruction of evidence that is under subpoena, which is highly illegal.



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 03:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: chr0naut
McCain wasn't weak, he was politically very powerful. He was one of the leaders of the Republican party.

Yes, he was one of if not the biggest RINO in the R party, and also one of the big reasons the R party was such an unmitigated disaster.


Most of the Republican Party leadership had concerns about and initially opposed Trump on several issues prior to Trump becoming President.

Correct again - RINOs all of them, who will hopefully be gone sooner rather than later.


No, he was a Republican, a veteran, POW, had never been a member of the Democratic Party, a Republican Presidential candidate twice (he lost to Obama and Bush), he never was a turncoat like the current POTUS, he both opposed and supported Trump on several issues because Trump is supposed to work for the Party, not the Party for Trump.

McCain was a long time staunch Republican Party member, like from the old days.

Trump is the 'in name only' one.



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 03:56 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

Sorry Most Conservatives that voted Trump, hated voting for McCain. Not like we had a choice.

I know I feel bad about it.

Ditto for Mutt.



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 03:56 PM
link   
So why was comey and others so confident there was no abuse without having the facts? Did they in fact have demonstrable bias? Perhaps a political motive? Or further was comey and others actually involved in this abuse? a reply to: neo96




posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 03:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Rob808

They figured the Left behind people in the agencies would cover for them. Probably didn't expect Horowitz and Durham.



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 04:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: chr0naut
"Anyone who cannot understand the difference between

a) destruction of evidence that is under subpoena

and

b) fighting a subpoena in court

is an idiot and a moron."

Both mean that evidence under subpoena is withheld from lawful investigation. They are functionally the same in the eyes of the law.

Ah. So you freely admit to being an idiot and a moron. Of course I already knew that, but at least you admit it. That's the first step to getting help.


No, I am fairly confident in my intellectual capability and made no such admission. As anyone who can read the quoted text in the posts above can see.



You seem to like calling everyone who has a difference of opinion to you, idiots and morons.

Nope, only those who cannot understand the difference between fighting a subpoena in the courts, as allowed by law, and destruction of evidence that is under subpoena, which is highly illegal.


As the subpoena is already issued and such requests for evidence are usually time-sensitive in relation to other court cases, I believe it would be illegal for a judge to hamper the established judicial process by withholding evidence from another existing court.

Do you know of any precedent of one court blocking the action of another court that is properly following established procedure? I would understand if the high court were overturning the decision of another on the grounds that they were not following proper procedure, but not this, which negates proper procedure.

edit on 16/12/2019 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 07:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

She had 25+ years as a soviet before moving to Manhattan.

She didn't become a citizen until a year after she had married Trump.

Attractive model, 1/4 of a century younger than her 'mark'. Clearly often expressing her 'differences of opinion' with him.

Nah, it's all a sweet fairy tale romance.




She is almost 50 now... Do you think she has done her time for all the crimes you stated?




top topics



 
53
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join