Quote (tagged4nothing @ Jan 29 2019 01:33pm)
i'll answer on behalf of us cultists. it's a lot bigger a subject than something easily written. i'll give you the jist, but if you are actually curious... go watch those SC interviews including Wray/Rosenstein, Strzok.
I've watched or listened to a lot of that testimony. I didn't find it edifying.
Quote (tagged4nothing @ Jan 29 2019 01:33pm)
it was the IG's report on the handling of the clinton and trump cases in the fbi. it ended with a very odd choice of words (that msm twisted a bit more to deny everything), but everything stated in the report itself had found numerous issues with the handling of the clinton case and start of the trump case.
hilary was interviewed by peter strzok, but strzok called ahead of time and suggested wiping data from hard drives.(this is not the only issue with this just 1 example)
@bold: What? You'll have to explain that more.
I'm not sure what the FBI did wrong or improper in the Hillary investigation, absent Comey's press conference. Strzok and Page aren't at the FBI anymore because they texted some inappropriate things... had they used their private phones, they would still work for the FBI. There's the question of the Weiner laptop and reopening the investigation timing... it's not clear to me what happened there. I'm sure Goom will write a book as a response and let us know.
Quote (tagged4nothing @ Jan 29 2019 01:33pm)
in short though, hilary got super special treatment for actual crimes that got swept out and ones that was never looked into. she was even charged in a circumstance, but fbi met with her lawyers to change the charge. i'll have to get back about which specific charge it was, but i remember it meant the same thing. only 1 was a criminal charge and 1 wasn't.
i'd also like to remind you that the kick-start to this investigation against trump was paid for by the clinton foundation. (that alone is pretty messed up giving the circumstance they were both running at that time)
It's not clear to me if what Hillary did was a crime. Reasonable people can disagree on that. If Comey thought it was a reasonable case, I think he would have brought it.
You're making a lot of vague claims. Hillary was charged, and then she wasn't? Provide a link of what you're talking about.
The Russia investigation started when an Australian diplomat tipped off the FBI that a Trump campaign aide was talking about Russia having hacked Hillary emails. Furthermore, even if we assume the Steele dossier was the only evidence for the Carter Page FISA(which is not true), it was after Page left the campaign.
Quote (tagged4nothing @ Jan 29 2019 01:33pm)
trump is also current standing president. you might not like it, but you can't just drag him on investigations whenever you feel like it. if that was the case, dems would keep him in a court-like setting his full term.
if evidence was found of "trump" rigging the voting system in an astronomical way that stole the election, he wouldn't be keeping his seat.
in fairness though. hilary had a 15minute fbi investigation on her. trump has had 2 years with an investigation still on-going. so you could ask why the fbi didn't bother actually investigating her.
Trump spends hours every day watching television, and golfs on the weekends. It's absurd that he can't sit down for 8 hours with the FBI to do an interview.
The FBI investigated Hillary for over a year. And the Russia investigation has many more threads, so it's understandable it would take much longer.
This post was edited by IceMage on Jan 29 2019 01:22pm