Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It'll be interesting to see where (if anywhere) this goes. I think there was a hell of a lot of very suspicious activity going on behind the scenes on this, and I wouldn't be surprised if there are prosecutable felonies on both sides of the aisle. There are a lot of ways this could potentially go, and no matter who's in charge of the investigation, they may find some pretty easy targets.
Yet the left had no concern for Clinton's wrong doing and defended her against the obvious transgressions of her history as SoS.
Fascinating at how fast this topic died down once it was pointed out this is the Obama Administration blaming the Obama administration for Hillary's failures.
I thought....at the time anyway...that the reason Comey made a public statement was to make it clear that there SHOULD be consequences. Loss of security clearance, was one example he gave.
If he had left it up to the DOJ, they NEVER would have said such a thing. His statement even included a line saying nobody knew what he was going to say.
If you didn't trust the agency you worked for, wouldn't that be a slick move? You don't tarnish your reputation with the public and don't allow the liars to continue their lie that no wrongdoing was found at all.
Comey definitely needs to step down at some point, for the good of the country. Like I said, I doubt he had sinister intentions, but his attempt to appease both sides was not executed properly.
Yet the left had no concern for Clinton's wrong doing and defended her against the obvious transgressions of her history as SoS.
Why the concern now?
Don't ask me. Ask someone who defended Clinton.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dequindre
Comey definitely needs to step down at some point, for the good of the country. Like I said, I doubt he had sinister intentions, but his attempt to appease both sides was not executed properly.
My gut feeling was that he was being pressured from both sides, and made a call he did not like making in June - and overcompensated by making a call he shouldn't have made in October. Just like in hockey, when a referee blows a call and tries to make up for it by giving the other team a gimme, he just makes it twice as bad. I think the guy was caught in the middle of something that really went against his grain, he did not respect or agree with his superiors, and he handled the whole thing 180 degrees wrong at several crucial junctures.
And I also think that it'll be years before the right books are written and we finally learn the whole story. I doubt very much this "investigation" is going to shed much light.
Last edited by Mr. In-Between; 01-12-2017 at 04:34 PM..
In any case, now you see the ball of yarn with all the colors, when it's all said and done- we can all go. Ahh, but it would serve mr T, well to shut his. he's twisting non facts and not looking good.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
but it would serve mr T, well to shut his.
he's twisting non facts and not looking good.
