Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 136 of 149 FirstFirst ... 3686126134135136137138146 ... LastLast
Results 2,026 to 2,040 of 2224
  1. #2026
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    1,281
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    You think we could convince the GOP that she is president and they might pass articles of impeachment?
    Louis Gohmert would fall for it.

  2. #2027
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    19,314
    Quote Originally Posted by Walter_White View Post
    I agree, time to impeach Trump.
    based on what? because those on the left don't like what he has done? okay so then the next time there is a Democrat President that the Republicans don't like, I guess that President can be impeached too.

    the anti-Trump movement seems to be getting dumber

  3. #2028
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    82,733
    Quote Originally Posted by SpecialFNK View Post
    or we could hold people accountable for their actions.
    And how would you hold her accountable. What charges would you bring? Please do me a favor and cite specific passages of the legal code along with the appropriate punishments for them?

  4. #2029
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    19,314
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    And how would you hold her accountable. What charges would you bring? Please do me a favor and cite specific passages of the legal code along with the appropriate punishments for them?
    grossly negligent itself is a crime. something that was in the original wording before Strzok was partly responsible for having it changed.


    http://thehill.com/homenews/administ...is-handling-of

    Congressional investigators find irregularities in FBI's handling of Clinton email case
    Republicans on key congressional committees say they have uncovered new irregularities and contradictions inside the FBI’s probe of Hillary Clinton’s email server.

    For the first time, investigators say they have secured written evidence that the FBI believed there was evidence that some laws were broken when the former secretary of State and her top aides transmitted classified information through her insecure private email server, lawmakers and investigators told The Hill.

    That evidence includes passages in FBI documents stating the “sheer volume” of classified information that flowed through Clinton’s insecure emails was proof of criminality as well as an admission of false statements by one key witness in the case, the investigators said.

    The name of the witness is redacted from the FBI documents but lawmakers said he was an employee of a computer firm that helped maintain her personal server after she left office as America’s top diplomat and who belatedly admitted he had permanently erased an archive of her messages in 2015 after they had been subpoenaed by Congress.

    The investigators also confirmed that the FBI began drafting a statement exonerating Clinton of any crimes while evidence responsive to subpoenas was still outstanding and before agents had interviewed more than a dozen key witnesses.

    Those witnesses included Clinton and the computer firm employee who permanently erased her email archives just days after the emails were subpoenaed by Congress
    , the investigators said.


    Lawmakers on the House Judiciary Committee who attended a Dec. 21 closed-door briefing by FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe say the bureau official confirmed that the investigation and charging decisions were controlled by a small group in Washington headquarters rather the normal process of allowing field offices to investigate possible criminality in their localities. The Clinton email server in question was based in New York.

    In normal FBI cases, field offices where crimes are believed to have been committed investigate the evidence and then recommend to bureau hierarchy whether to pursue charges with prosecutors. In this case, the bureau hierarchy controlled both the investigation and the charging decision from Washington, a scenario known in FBI parlance as a “special,” the lawmakers said.

    The FBI declined comment on McCabe’s closed-door testimony and the evidence being shared with Congress.

    Some Republicans on the committee say the findings and revelations have left them more convinced than ever that FBI leadership rigged the outcome to clear Clinton.

    “This was an effort to pre-bake the cake, pre-bake the outcome,” said Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), a House Judiciary Committee member who attended the McCabe briefing before the holidays. “Hillary Clinton obviously benefited from people taking actions to ensure she wasn’t held accountable.”

    Gaetz said he could not divulge the specifics of what McCabe told lawmakers, but that he left the Dec. 21 session believing the FBI had deviated from its “normal objective practices” while investigating Clinton.

    The top Democrat on the panel acknowledged the FBI’s handling of the case was unique, but argued Republicans are politicizing their own panel’s work.

    “To the extent that the Assistant Director of the FBI was involved in that investigation, and recognizing that the investigation itself presented a unique set of circumstances, his testimony did not raise any concerns that would justify the Republicans’ outsized obsession with Hillary Clinton’s emails two years after the fact,” said Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y) who recently took over as the top Democrat on House Judiciary after former Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.) stepped aside after sexual misconduct allegations were made against him.

    Gaetz said he has growing questions about the role the Obama Justice Department played in the case.

    Former FBI Director James Comey has testified he made the decision not to seek criminal charges against Clinton — with no Justice Department input — because he feared any involvement from the department might taint the findings after then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch met with former President Bill Clinton on a tarmac during the closing days of the probe in June 2016.

    He also argued in an initial July 5, 2016, press conference announcing the decision that he did not believe he could show that Clinton intended to send classified information over her server.

    But Gaetz said his panel has evidence the FBI took actions while writing the exoneration statement that required Justice input, such as immunizing witnesses in June 2016. He said he would like to learn more about what instructions, sentiments and communications were conveyed between the department and the FBI.

    “I think we have more questions than answers based on what we’ve learned,” Gaetz said.

    Both parties are likely to learn more in the first quarter of 2018 when the Justice Department inspector general is expected to release initial findings in what has become a wide-ranging probe into the FBI’s handling of the Clinton email case as well as whether agents and supervisors had political connections, ethical conflicts or biases that affected their work.

    In the meantime, Republicans on three House committees and the Senate Judiciary Committee have pieced together new evidence from recent interviews and document productions.

    That information wasn’t available to them when Comey announced in July 2016 that he would not seek charges against Clinton even though she and her aides had transmitted more than 110 pieces of classified information through her insecure email server, some of it at the “top secret” and “secret” levels.

    One storyline that has emerged is that the FBI’s own documents stated there was evidence some laws had been broken, but bureau leaders declined to pursue charges on the grounds they could not prove Clinton and her aides intended to violate the law.

    Those concerns were reflected in the initial draft statements Comey and his leadership team began writing in spring 2016. The Hill first reported in November that Comey’s original May 2, 2016, draft included the words “grossly negligent” — the language supporting a criminal charge for mishandling classified information — but it was later changed to the softer “extremely careless.”

    GOP congressional investigators told The Hill multiple drafts of the statement also included specific language acknowledging there was “evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information.”

    Furthermore, the May 2, 2016, draft included a second passage that suggested the large amount of highly classified information — eight top secret passages and 37 secret passages — that passed through Clinton’s private server suggested criminality.

    “The sheer volume of information that was properly classified as Secret at the time it was discussed on email (that is, excluding the “up classified” emails) supports an inference that the participants were grossly negligent in their handling of that information,” the FBI’s original draft read, according to a source who has seen it.

    Comey used some of the language the agents had put in the initial drafts of the memo when he made his announcement of no charges.

    “Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case,” Comey said.

    The FBI also confirmed that a key witness, a computer technician who deleted Clinton emails from her server in March 2015 after a congressional subpoena had been issued for them, originally lied to the FBI during his interviews, memos show. The witness's name was redacted from documents released by the FBI but he was identified as an employee of a computer firm that helped maintained Clinton’s email server.

    His admission of false statements came one day after the Comey statement was already being drafted, investigators told The Hill.

    The computer employee originally told the FBI in a February 2016 interview that he did not recall making any deletions from Clinton’s server in March 2015, FBI records show.

    But then on May 3, 2016, the same employee in a subsequent FBI interview told agents he had an “oh **** moment” and in late March 2015 deleted Clinton’s email archive from the server, according to FBI documents reviewed by The Hill.

    Lying to the FBI is a federal felony, a crime that former Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn recently pleaded guilty to. But the FBI decided not to pursue criminal charges against the witness, and instead gave the technician an immunity deal so he could correct his story, congressional investigators said.

    Republican investigators say the most glaring irregularity they have found is the decision to begin drafting a statement exonerating Clinton before much of the investigative interviewing and evidence gathering was even done.

    While the first draft of the statement was dated May 2, 2016, FBI records gathered by congressional investigators show agents were still receiving evidence responsive to grand jury subpoenas well after that, including documents and other evidentiary items logged on May 13, May 19 and May 26.

    A House GOP lawmaker told The Hill his staff also has identified at least a dozen interviews that were conducted after the drafting effort began, including of some figures who would have key information about intent or possible destruction of evidence.

    Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley's (R-Iowa) staff has a higher number: 17 witnesses including Clinton were interviewed after the decision was already made.

    “Making a conclusion before you interview key fact witnesses and the subject herself violates the very premise of good investigation. You don't lock into a theory until you have the facts. Here the evidence that isn't public yet shows they locked into the theory and then edited out the facts that contradicted it,” the GOP lawmaker said, speaking only on condition of anonymity because the documents are not yet authorized for release.

    A senior law enforcement official directly familiar with the investigation, speaking only on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to talk to the media, told The Hill that the FBI “did have evidence of statutory violations” but the decision not to prosecute was driven by a belief that there wasn’t enough proof Clinton and aides intended to violate those laws or even knew they were violating them.

    The official also acknowledged evidence gathering continued even as Comey began drafting the public statement, including the execution of an immunity deal on June 10, 2016, with Clinton advisers Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson that resulted in laptops with evidence being turned over to agents late in the probe.

    “The leadership had a sense of where the evidence was likely headed and the idea was they would begin drafting their conclusions and if we found anything that changed that sense we’d alert them,” the official said.

    The official said the decision to grant immunity to the Clinton advisers as well as the computer technician involved in the email deletions was made “with the idea it would be better to know all the circumstances” before the case was closed out.

    Comey has told Congress he made the decision not to charge Clinton after she was interviewed on July 2, 2016.

    Congressional investigators told The Hill they also have found some contradictions between the FBI’s official account of what happened and what more recently released documents show.

    One that is being pursued aggressively by Grassley involves whether the FBI actually investigated possible violations of the Federal Records Act, which required the preservation of all of Clinton’s work-related emails.

    The FBI admits it recovered thousands of State emails that originated or passed through Clinton’s private server — some which had been deleted — that were never turned over to the State Department as government records by Clinton’s team.

    While the FBI believed none of those were deleted intentionally to keep them from the government, the Records Act allows for a misdemeanor charge in each instance where a government document is destroyed carelessly, investigators said.

    Comey told Grassley back in 2016 that the FBI did investigate whether the unlawful destruction of federal records occurred.

    But Grassley’s staff has now obtained a sworn affidavit from an FBI agent that directly contradicts the former director’s assurance. The agent testified under penalty of perjury that the Clinton email case did not address the destruction of federal records, Grassley said.

    The longtime Senate chairman went to the Senate floor before the holidays to raise another concern: the FBI did not pursue criminal charges when Clinton’s email archives were permanently deleted from her private server days after a subpoena for them was issued by a congressional committee investigating the 2012 attack on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi.

    The deletion occurred on the same day Clinton’s former chief of staff and her lawyer had a call with the computer firm that handled the erasure using an anti-recovery software called BleachBit, Grassley said.

    “You have a conference call with Secretary Clinton’s attorneys on March 31, 2015, and on that very same day her emails are deleted by someone who was on that conference call using special BleachBit software,” Grassley said. “The emails were State Department records under subpoena by Congress.

    “What did the FBI do to investigate this apparent obstruction?” Grassley asked. “According to affidavits filed in federal court — absolutely nothing. The FBI focused only on the handling of classified information.”
    multiple possible charges for multiple people involved. grossly negligent, lying to the FBI, obstruction of justice.
    people want to go bat **** crazy when it comes to those on the right, but with something like this for those on the left it's meh no big deal.






    http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/01/0...-abedin-emails

    Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said Huma Abedin's mishandling of classified material "cries out for a criminal investigation."

    On Friday, the State Department released a batch of emails that revealed the top Hillary Clinton aide forwarded State Department emails and passwords to her personal Yahoo email account before every Yahoo account was hacked.

    Several documents marked "classified" were also found on a laptop belonging to Abedin's estranged husband, Anthony Weiner.

    On "Fox & Friends First," Fitton agreed with President Trump that it appears former FBI Director James Comey and others at the bureau declined to seriously investigate Clinton or her aides' potential security issues.

    "Presumably, these four or five documents that were uncovered on Friday were known to the FBI at the time, but they let it go," Fitton said. "Remember, there was other classified material they already knew about, so it was just outrage on top of outrage in terms of the failure of the FBI and Justice Department to follow up on this."

    Fitton said President Trump should demand the Justice Department conduct a "damage assessment" to see whether national security was put at risk given the sensitive materials discovered on Weiner's laptop.

    He said Trump's appointees are making "fear-based" decisions because they do not want to go up against the "Clinton machine." Fitton ended by saying Abedin's emails are key to the pay-for-play investigation of the Clinton Foundation, since she was the "go-between" for favors.

    the anti-Trump movement seems to be getting dumber

  5. #2030
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Where the smog meets the shore
    Posts
    43,596
    Impeach Hillary!!

  6. #2031
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    82,733
    Quote Originally Posted by GGGGG-Men View Post
    Impeach Hillary!!
    I can’t believe she’s Fox News President.

  7. #2032
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    19,314
    Quote Originally Posted by GGGGG-Men View Post
    Impeach Hillary!!
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    I can’t believe she’s Fox News President.
    why is it that this is all either of you have to say. partisan ********.

    I guess I should say thank you for proving me right..
    Quote Originally Posted by SpecialFNK View Post
    people want to go bat **** crazy when it comes to those on the right, but with something like this for those on the left it's meh no big deal.
    when people break the law and cover up for those breaking the law everyone should want justice.

    the anti-Trump movement seems to be getting dumber

  8. #2033
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    23,792
    If Hillary or Abedin are found to have committed treason or any crime, I'd support them getting punished.

  9. #2034
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Where the smog meets the shore
    Posts
    43,596
    Quote Originally Posted by SpecialFNK View Post
    why is it that this is all either of you have to say. partisan ********.

    I guess I should say thank you for proving me right..


    when people break the law and cover up for those breaking the law everyone should want justice.
    Impeach her now!!! Throw her out! Lock her up!!!

  10. #2035
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Where the smog meets the shore
    Posts
    43,596
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    If Hillary or Abedin are found to have committed treason or any crime, I'd support them getting punished.
    Ditto! Agreed 100%. However, Trump could murder the Pope on live television and his supporters would be like "well, the Pope kinda deserved it for..."

  11. #2036
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    19,314
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018...ombshells.html

    IG report on Clinton email case, document dump could hold new year bombshells
    Robert Mueller’s special counsel probe gets most the publicity these days, but another investigation involving the 2016 election is wrapping up soon and could be just as explosive.

    For the last 12 months, the inspector general of the Department of Justice has been conducting a review of the FBI and DOJ’s actions related to the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server while she was secretary of state.

    A final report on the investigation is expected within several months. But in the coming days, the Department of Justice is also expected to provide Congress with “many, many more” records related to the review, according to the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

    “[The IG is] doing a thorough job that folks across the political spectrum will be interested in,” Tom Fitton, the president of Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group that has sued for Clinton’s emails, told Fox News.

    The investigation is looking at a variety of allegations, including whether it was improper for former FBI Director James Comey to make a public announcement about not recommending prosecution over the email arrangement – he also faulted Clinton and her associates for being “extremely careless” with classified information.

    Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz also is reviewing whether FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe should have recused himself from the probe early because of his family’s ties to the Democratic Party. (He did not do so until a week before the election.)

    Horowitz told lawmakers during a November congressional hearing that he is aiming to release the report in the “March, April time period.”

    “We’re moving along quite expeditiously,” Horowitz told the House Oversight Committee.

    The inspector general said his team has interviewed dozens of people and had reviewed about 1.2 million records in the course of its investigation.

    And Congress is gearing up to thumb through them.

    During a House Judiciary Committee hearing last month, Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., said the Justice Department has committed to turning over a large number of those records by Jan. 15.

    So far, other documents already turned over to the committee have made a big splash.

    The inspector general’s review uncovered the anti-Trump texts from FBI official Peter Strzok, who called Trump an “idiot” and texted about an “insurance policy” against a Trump presidency.

    Strzok had been assigned to Robert Mueller’s special counsel probe, but has since been reassigned.

    As the one-year anniversary of Horowitz' announcement of the review approaches, the inspector general says the classified information involved and necessary security clearances have slowed the process.

    That announcement spelled out the scope of the probe. On Jan. 12, 2016, a release from Horowitz said the review would look into allegations that DOJ or FBI policies were not followed with Comey’s public announcement and letters to Congress about the Clinton probe.

    Horowitz said his team would look at whether “certain underlying investigative decisions were based on improper considerations.”

    Congressional Republicans have since raised questions about another aspect: Comey's team drafting a statement effectively clearing Clinton even before interviewing her and other key witnesses. It's unclear whether Horowitz will tackle this in his findings.

    Horowitz, though, said he would look into allegations that McCabe should have been recused from the investigation. McCabe’s wife ran as a Democrat for a Virginia Senate seat in 2015, and she received donations from the super PAC of Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, a close Clinton ally.

    A recent story published by The Washington Post said McCabe plans to retire in several months after becoming eligible for benefits – which means it’s plausible he could leave the FBI before the review about him is released.

    The review is also looking at whether the Justice Department’s assistant attorney general for legislative affairs “improperly disclosed non-public information to the Clinton campaign” and should have been recused. That’s in reference to official Peter Kadzik, who had been an attorney in the past for Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta.

    Horowitz said the review is looking at whether any DOJ or FBI employees improperly disclosed non-public information.

    It seems likely that the president and other conservatives will seize on the report after it’s released.

    “The political compromise of the DOJ and FBI during the Obama administration needs to be confronted immediately,” Fitton said.

    But Fitton also acknowledged that the report could be welcomed by Clinton – who has blamed Comey’s Oct. 28, 2016 letter telling Congress he had re-opened the email investigation for contributing significantly to her loss.

    “Recall the focus of the investigation was what Comey was doing in respect to Hillary Clinton – did he do something inappropriate in releasing information about his investigation of her,” he said. “So it could be something that Hillary Clinton would be interested in.”

    the anti-Trump movement seems to be getting dumber

  12. #2037
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    82,733
    #LockHerUpJustSoRepublicansCanMoveOnFromInvestigat ingHer

  13. #2038
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    19,314
    https://ijr.com/the-declaration/2018...llary-clinton/

    While the FBI looks into the Clinton Foundation, Judicial Watch has uncovered more details about Hillary Clinton's emails.

    According to Judicial Watch, Clinton is not as technologically illiterate as she appeared during the presidential race.

    In August 2015, Clinton was asked about her private email server being wiped. “What, like with like a cloth or something? I don't know how it works digitally at all,” Clinton said, indicating she was clueless about her private email server's vulnerabilities.

    But that's not all. Judicial Watch also found three classified exchanges from the new emails that were released:

    On March 8, 2011, Clinton sent classified information regarding Bahrain to Justin Cooper, who reportedly had no security clearance, with instructions to show it to Bill Clinton. Cooper was the Bill Clinton aide who asked State Department IT specialist Bryan Pagliano to build a server for Mrs. Clinton in early 2009, as she started her new job as Secretary of State.

    On August 24, 2010, Clinton emailed Cooper additional classified information to print, including the secretary's call sheet for Indian Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee.

    In a February 13, 2010, email exchange, Clinton passed along classified information to Cooper. It originally was sent to Cheryl Mills (Clinton's then-chief of staff) by U.S. Ambassador to Mexico Carlos Pascual. The classified information included a note from Mexican Foreign Secretary Patricia Espinosa to Clinton. In the email to Cooper, Clinton asks him to “look for Espinosa's note and respond.”


    In addition, Clinton was warned about security issues with her personal email by Cooper.

    He sent her the following email on June 6, 2011:

    All of your older messages will remain on the server. There is a way for me to move everything on to the new device, but the security whizzes have convinced me that this is a horrible thing to do because you also transfer any viruses, spyware and junk overseas providers hide on there.

    We also have some new security features and polices [sic] that I would like to add to any new berry you have — the most noticeable difference will require a more complex password. It is a constant fight to keep up with the security measures and unfortunately we keep seeing reminders of why we need to.


    Based on the new information, it seems Hillary Clinton was given plenty of warning about the dangers of personal email use, and still, she downplayed it during the election.

    the anti-Trump movement seems to be getting dumber

  14. #2039
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    2,917
    People on the trump team knew about the dangers of personal email use and did it after the election. Are we still pretend angry?

  15. #2040
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    82,733
    Yea using private email doesn’t seem to be a big deal. Hell it seems more secure than what the government was offering or popular private options. Government email has been hacked. Gmail has been hacked. Is there ANY evidence that Clinton’s private email was hacked?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •