I gave the example, which you chopped off and stuck into the next section. There were multiple FBI agents that allegedly went to the press to state they were investigating Hillary Clinton, in violation of FBI rules. It was this reason, allegedly, that Comey broke DoJ rules to say that Hillary was under investigation about a month before the election.
I hadn't heard that multiple agents came forward. Do you have a source for that?
No, again, Comey broke DoJ rules by announcing an investigation into a political candidate within a couple of months in an election -- this led to him later cause him to announce the investigation was over and no charges would be filed.
Well I think he would have announced that the investigation was over anyway.
It was my understanding that the press had been saying her investigation was already over. Then either more evidence was acquired or Comey felt obligated to correct them.
I sincerely hadn't heard that agents were coming forward. I'd like to see a source for that.
If you look at polling before the announcements and after, basically all the polls showed at least a 5% drop in the polls for Clinton with many telling the pollsters that Comey's announcements had changed their votes. If FBI agents had not leaked to the media and Comey not confirmed those leaks, chances are that Hillary would have been President.
Polls predicted a Hillary win by a landslide. The reason polling has been wildly off since 2016 is this sort of hyperpartisan smear of the right. If someone knows they are going to be called a Nazi or white supremacist for voting for 1 of 2 candidates....well, they're either not going to answer polls or just lie.
Same thing happened in the last two midterms I think.
I'm not claiming that the Clinton campaign and Democrats didn't make their share of mistakes, merely that the announcement of the FBI investigation caused a marked drop in the polls that Hillary never appeared to recover from.
Polls still had her winning. Look if you can't vote for someone without being painted as the death of democracy (this goes for both sides) your polls will always be badly off.
I he was corrupt, why did Trump appoint him?
Corrupt?
I didn't say that was corrupt. He probably was investigating. He was smart enough not to reveal any details to Trump or the press. That's why he's still sitting there. He's smart, not corrupt.
Now...you could say that by not revealing details of the investigation he's corrupt now...but it would just get him fired anyway if it was serious. He sort of has to wait for the correct opportunity.
Now, you can say that's not in the interest of the people, the nation, either party....and a host of other things and I'll point out that he didn't get there in the first place by principles or being dumb. He's got some smarts at least.
I guess you are claiming Comey was less corrupt than Wray; which then begs the question, why did Trump fire Comey and hire Wray?
I actually thought Comey was treated a little too harshly.
Trump was notorious for firing staff and replacing them with sycophants and loyalists. You either did what he wanted or got replaced. It's not a great cabinet and that's part of his cavalcade of mistakes. As an outsider...he really needed smart people and he needed to listen when they disagreed.
He didn't. Even Pence wouldn't go along with him at the end.
Also, you do know that the FBI director is not a political position, per se.
It really shouldn't be. You work for the president though....he sets the agenda.
Instead, new President's don't replace the Director of the FBI (as Biden hasn't), rather they are appointed for a 10 year term -- this was intentionally done to prevent the FBI from being a political position.
Is that a tradition, rule, policy, contract?
The federal government is a hierarchy....President sits at the top.
I was under the impression they get a 10 year appointment but rarely make it through one. They can be fired.
This is why Trump firing Comey, particularly for what appeared to be political reasons, was such a big deal.
I don't think that's why it was a big deal.
You have evidence that the FBI "sat on the Hunter laptop?"
I have admissions from the CEO of Facebook itself he was warned about the story and should consider it Russian propaganda.
And you do realize that year that the FBI "sat on the Hunter laptop" that Trump was in the White House and the DoJ was controlled by AG Barr -- so why would Barr be sitting on Hunter's laptop when he planned to leave with Trump (and actually left about a month before)?
Are you under the impression that the DOJ and FBI are the same thing?
As I've pointed out elsewhere, the true answer appears to be that there actually is little actual "evidence" on Hunter's laptop that could be used in court for a prosecution.
I don't know but when you consider some of people claiming to have copies and their lack of arrest... I wouldn't bet on it.
I think Gaetz said he had a copy....shortly before he was found completely uninvolved in those sex trafficking allegations.
If you recall, the Wall Street Journal and Fox News -- two media organizations that are strongly Republican and were opposed to Biden -- refused to run the story of Hunter's laptop.
Right. FBI put the word out.
They specifically said, even after talking to Tony Bobulinski and the documents he had, that the evidence did not support running the story. Even Tucker Carlson, who interviewed Carlson and was going to have a huge "exposé" after reviewing Bobulinski's documents, but then the episode he was going to expose Hunter and Joe's connection to Hunter's business, Carlson instead talked about how he'd picked on Hunter enough, and did something different that night, instead.
Uh huh.
Now maybe you know something more than I do but I've seen nothing from the laptop, nor any actual reporting of what is on the laptop (as opposed to political commentary where claims are made but no evidence is provided) that ties Joe Biden to the laptop.
I've seen little, heard less, but suspect much.
You'll see FBI directors are fired all the time...this one isn't. I honestly don't think Biden is making his own appointments....some are ridiculous. Count all the Trump appointees still working.
I'm not sure what you are trying to say. I'm saying politics is killing the country -- that both parties are out to promote themselves rather than do what is best for the country.
Yeah...
As for Comey, again, he broke rules by commenting on the ongoing investigation of a political candidate just prior to an election (I believe the rule states 3 months prior to the election).
Well it's a bit misleading if the media says that it's over. I don't blame him for correcting the record. Seems like they could have asked him.
Additionally, the Classified information on Hillary's server was, from what I've seen, information sent to her by State Department officials as part of her job and most were not properly marked that they were classified.
Yeah...sure.
It wasn't anything she "removed" from the State Department.
Yes...it absolutely was.
Her "crime," if you will, was having a private server rather than using the State Department server for email --
Right. It's crime for me to mishandle classified information too.
though, to be fair, her predecessor had done it as well (both Rice and Powell);
Almost as if it's the norm.
so perhaps a good thing is that Secretaries of State are no longer using private servers.
Yeah...they're all following the rules now.
Additionally, Hillary was not keeping the emails after she stepped down as Secretary;
Huh?
in fact, my recollection is that the plan was in place (prior to the investigation) to archive the emails (information) on the server before destroying them with the single copy of the archive going to the State Department to satisfy their records laws.
Why destroy them?
In the other case, I assume you are referring to the FBI's seeking a search warrant for records from Mar-A-Lago. The Search Warrant went before a judge, as the law requires, and needed to convince the judge to issue the search warrant.
Must be difficult.
I believe the "nuclear capabilities" was added to the search warrant because that is one type of Classified document that the President cannot declassify -- the Nuclear Secrets are classified by law and the classifications controlled by Congress, unlike most other Classified information is controlled by the Executive Branch and that can be declassified by the President.
Like most things...I wouldn't be surprised if Trump didn't know that and no one told him.
That these documents were added because they were something Trump couldn't claim he had "declassified" before he took them to Mar-A-Lago.
Uh huh.
Last, the only reason "nuclear capabilities" was publicized, in this case, is that Pres. Trump wanted the Search Warrant released to the public.
Iranian nuclear capabilities is on the search warrant?
Maybe the director isn't that smart.
