Asiantravel Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 7 minutes ago, keemapoot said: Both Gingrich (with his historic contract with America in 1994) and Giuliani (with his historic prosecution of NY mafia and then later 9/11) both had their impressive moments in the sun. Unfortunately, as both became increasingly irrelevant and unimportant, they have grasped onto trump for a free ride. Not too smart as that will soon be a ride to disgrace, and then these two 73 year olds will properly retire and give it a rest. Tired, old, and irrelevant...as well as backing the fascist. Not a distinguished ending for either. I don't know about all that because I more attention to the fascinating presentation of the legal arguments as to how and why Clinton has broken the law on so many occasions which is much more relevant than character assassination Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keemapoot Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 1 minute ago, Asiantravel said: I don't know about all that because I more attention to the fascinating presentation of the legal arguments as to how and why Clinton has broken the law on so many occasions which is much more relevant than character assassination Maybe you should pay attention to actual legal arguments published all over the place by actual legal scholars, legal experts and legal practitioners, rather than those presented by slanted partisans. You might see things in a new light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phuket Stan Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 18 minutes ago, Asiantravel said: low life? I'm sure there are many people in New York that remember 9/11 and would disagree with you on that anyway at least they both have the upper hand advantage in that they are not currently under FBI investigation I was there....I remember the publicity seeking ratbag that he is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asiantravel Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 2 minutes ago, keemapoot said: Maybe you should pay attention to actual legal arguments published all over the place by actual legal scholars, legal experts and legal practitioners, rather than those presented by slanted partisans. You might see things in a new light. submitting the evidence against her to a grand jury would be a great start Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony5 Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 7 minutes ago, Publicus said: FBI has lost it too in this crazy election campaign. Comey has taken FBI back to the dayze of J. Edgar Hoover.... Former DOJ spokesman for Eric Holder Matthew Miller, a self described “recovering flack from DOJ, DSCC”, schooled Republican FBI Director James Comey for violating his power and lambasted him for commenting on a case within 60 days of an election. “The department and the FBI have very strict rules about when they can comment on ongoing cases and Director Comey has violated those rules going back to his original press conference when he closed the case,” Miller said on CNN. James Comey’s abuse of power The FBI director violated time-honored Justice Dept. practices with his remarks about Clinton’s emails. washingtonpost.com 85 Retweets624 likes “But this latest example violates a long standing practice which is that the department goes out of its way not to do anything that can be seen as trying to influence an election in the closing days of an election, and usually they interpret the closing days to be seen as the last 60 days let alone the last 11 days.” Whatever happened to the FBI policy to not comment on ongoing investigations. And political ones in particular with an election of the Potus a handful of days away. Looks definitely like Comey does in fact want to become the most powerful guy in America. FBI Dictator James Comey, the bigger they are the harder they fall. You mean a presidential candidate who breached state secrets should been given the go ahead and kept quiet about those serious offences until after the election when the candidate may have immunity of prosecution? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Publicus Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 5 minutes ago, Anthony5 said: You mean a presidential candidate who breached state secrets should been given the go ahead and kept quiet about those serious offences until after the election when the candidate may have immunity of prosecution? Potus does not have immunity of anything. Opinion such as the post itself is one thing. Fact free spouting is quite another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keemapoot Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 5 minutes ago, Asiantravel said: submitting the evidence against her to a grand jury would be a great start Again, I suggest you start with maybe wiki to see how a grand jury can convene to issue an indictment, and what standards of probable cause are needed. With all the lawyers in Congress who have been spending millions of taxpayer dollars to this point to push for this, it hasn't happened. Yeah, yeah, I know a grand conspiracy by everyone and everything explains it, just like the rigged election and polling system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony5 Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 7 minutes ago, Publicus said: Potus does not have immunity of anything. Opinion such as the post itself is one thing. Fact free spouting is quite another. You say............... https://www.quora.com/Can-a-president-be-prosecuted In the US, the current president is mostly immune from prosecution while in office. However, a president may be remove from office by a process called impeachment. The process comes in two steps. 1. The House writes up Articles of Impeachment--this is like a criminal indictment, and the House is the sole authority allowed to do this. The Articles of Impeachment must be approved by a 2/3rds supermajority of the members of the House. 2. The Senate then tries the impeachment. This is like a criminal trial--when an impeachment trial involves the President of the United States, the trial is overseen by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Again, a 2/3 supermajority must vote to convict. Any suggestion how a impeachment would work out with a majority of Democrats in the house? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Publicus Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 Methinks and rightly so that soon after the election James Brien Comey should be standing in the District of Columbia unemployment line. Except that the law says one cannot qualify for unemployment compensation when one has been fired from the job. No matter who one may be. James Comey has cast his lot to play to become the most powerful public official in the United States Government. No U.S. Government official has ever tried to pull off his own coup, a legal coup or a bureaucratic coup or a political coup. Friday, James Comey, the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, acting independently of Attorney General Loretta Lynch, sent a letter to Congress saying that the F.B.I. had discovered e-mails that were potentially relevant to the investigation of Hillary Clinton’s private server. Coming less than two weeks before the Presidential election, Comey’s decision to make public new evidence that may raise additional legal questions about Clinton was contrary to the views of the Attorney General, according to a well-informed Administration official. Lynch expressed her preference that Comey follow the department’s longstanding practice of not commenting on ongoing investigations, and not taking any action that could influence the outcome of an election, but he said that he felt compelled to do otherwise. http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/james-comey-broke-with-loretta-lynch-and-justice-department-tradition Comey has lost his marbles and his career. Republicans in the Congress cannot save an official of the Executive Branch appointed by the chief executive Potus. Comey is also a bureaucrat subject to the directions, supervision and orders of the Attorney General who is the chief of the Justice Department. FBI pre-election coup fail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keemapoot Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 ^ Comey is defintely a dead man walking. Definitely a coup fail, but also seemingly out of character such a dramatic J. Edgar move by this mild mannered G-man. Still scratching my head, but sticking to the theory of golden parachute offered by big GOP donors or something. Again, out of character. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunroaming Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 We seem to have fallen into the quote unquote trap. The only thing missing is the "I told you so" tag at the end of each quote. It's not hard to find statements delivered as fact by both sides which actually makes them all invalid to some extent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Publicus Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 13 minutes ago, Anthony5 said: You say............... https://www.quora.com/Can-a-president-be-prosecuted In the US, the current president is mostly immune from prosecution while in office. However, a president may be remove from office by a process called impeachment. The process comes in two steps. 1. The House writes up Articles of Impeachment--this is like a criminal indictment, and the House is the sole authority allowed to do this. The Articles of Impeachment must be approved by a 2/3rds supermajority of the members of the House. 2. The Senate then tries the impeachment. This is like a criminal trial--when an impeachment trial involves the President of the United States, the trial is overseen by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Again, a 2/3 supermajority must vote to convict. Any suggestion how a impeachment would work out with a majority of Democrats in the house? Impeachment by the U.S. House. Removal vote up or down by the U.S. Senate. We're not talking about a traffic ticket or if a President Donald Trump gropes a foreign ambassador. Or if a President Donald Trump willfully does not pay contractors on one of his construction projects. Or if a President Trump sets up a ripoff university. Etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asiantravel Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 16 minutes ago, keemapoot said: Again, I suggest you start with maybe wiki to see how a grand jury can convene to issue an indictment, and what standards of probable cause are needed. With all the lawyers in Congress who have been spending millions of taxpayer dollars to this point to push for this, it hasn't happened. Yeah, yeah, I know a grand conspiracy by everyone and everything explains it, just like the rigged election and polling system. I read that just one item alone can easily be proven against Clinton and Huma Abedin which is making false statements to a federal agent considered a felony. now the news is coming out that the FBI have found "tens of thousands of emails" belonging to Huma Abedin on Weiner's laptop and there are security concerns over Huma Abedin has " deep ties to Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and the radical Muslim Brotherhood " BREAKING: FBI Notes Reveal Security Concerns Over Huma Abedin http://counterjihad.com/breaking-fbi-notes-reveal-security-concerns-huma-abedin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prbkk Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 6 minutes ago, keemapoot said: ^ Comey is defintely a dead man walking. Definitely a coup fail, but also seemingly out of character such a dramatic J. Edgar move by this mild mannered G-man. Still scratching my head, but sticking to the theory of golden parachute offered by big GOP donors or something. Again, out of character. A more likely and less sinister take would be that he has seen material he can't ignore, lest he be accused of misleading congress....so is ignoring the flack ( and the seriously compromised Loretta Lynch) and acting without fear or favour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Publicus Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 6 minutes ago, keemapoot said: ^ Comey is defintely a dead man walking. Definitely a coup fail, but also seemingly out of character such a dramatic J. Edgar move by this mild mannered G-man. Still scratching my head, but sticking to the theory of golden parachute offered by big GOP donors or something. Again, out of character. Out of character to us, definitely for sure. My experience in Washington makes me curious what Comey is like to work with or for each day, every day. Behind closed doors. In the Justice Department Building no less. On the top floor corner office on the Constitution Avenue side. With a view of the Washington Monument off to the right. J. Edgar's office. Rare is the elected or high appointed official in Washington who is not an eccentric, paranoid, egomaniac behind closed doors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony5 Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 7 minutes ago, Publicus said: 24 minutes ago, Anthony5 said: You say............... https://www.quora.com/Can-a-president-be-prosecuted In the US, the current president is mostly immune from prosecution while in office. However, a president may be remove from office by a process called impeachment. The process comes in two steps. 1. The House writes up Articles of Impeachment--this is like a criminal indictment, and the House is the sole authority allowed to do this. The Articles of Impeachment must be approved by a 2/3rds supermajority of the members of the House. 2. The Senate then tries the impeachment. This is like a criminal trial--when an impeachment trial involves the President of the United States, the trial is overseen by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Again, a 2/3 supermajority must vote to convict. Any suggestion how a impeachment would work out with a majority of Democrats in the house? Impeachment by the U.S. House. Removal vote up or down by the U.S. Senate. We're not talking about a traffic ticket or if a President Donald Trump gropes a foreign ambassador. Or if a President Donald Trump willfully does not pay contractors on one of his construction projects. Or if a President Trump sets up a ripoff university. Etc. Sure don't forget to expose your hatred against Trump to make your point, in which you fail miserably anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Publicus Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 Gotcha goat eh... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linzz Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 9 hours ago, keemapoot said: Yeah, this is a gift from heaven for the GOP. An October surprise that is really unprecedented. Having their guy Comey in the FBI has paid off finally, in spite of his relatively balanced bi-partisan history to date. I'm wondering what kind of package the billionaire donors to the GOP gave him? So Comey is bi-partisan and praiseworthy when he didn't indict Hillary when he should have but when new info comes to light he is a GOP stooge who shouldn't do his job? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asiantravel Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 Watergate's Carl Bernstein: FBI Wouldn't Reopen A Probe Unless It Is "A Real Bombshell" http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/10/28/bernstein_fbi_would_not_reopen_case_unless_new_evidence_was_a_real_bombshell.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Credo Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 It's my understanding that the investigation was never closed. Comney is updating Congress on a link between the investigation on Anthony Weiner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses G. Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 10 minutes ago, Linzz said: So Comey is bi-partisan and praiseworthy when he didn't indict Hillary when he should have but when new info comes to light he is a GOP stooge who shouldn't do his job? He is trying to get his reputation for being straight arrow back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linzz Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 9 hours ago, Silurian said: Yawn, the boy who cried wolf email. Just the word email sends the right wingers into a feeding frenzy even though there is no substance to them so far. It doesn't matter if they are new or existing emails. All that matters is the magic "email" word was spoken and they all tear into the email carcass like jackals. Keep yelling email enough times and it becomes background noise. Email! Email! Email! No really I mean it this time. EMAIL! Nothing to see here. Move along. So if there is nothing to see here and if 33000 deleted emails were innocent, why pay to bleach bit them and those who did plead the 5th amendment? Why destroy numerous devices with hammers? Why the proven lies at the hearings? Lack of "Intent" was the reason she was excused. Perhaps intent now is proven. Glad you're not in charge of the FBI Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilostmypassword Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 ANd if it turns out he says he's found nothing, you'll agree that he's regained it? 8 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said: He is trying to get his reputation for being straight arrow back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses G. Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 1 minute ago, ilostmypassword said: ANd if it turns out he says he's found nothing, you'll agree that he's regained it? He still has to answer for not calling for a grand jury the first time around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 My guess is Coomey doesn't want to spend the next eight years getting whined at by Trey Gowdy. I mean who would? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linzz Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 5 hours ago, Pimay1 said: I'll tell you something else that's funny. All the progressives and lefty liberals on TVF are in the panic mode. Now the shoe is on the other foot and it's entertaining to say the least to read some of their posts. You are right. The trump supporters are crowing and the Hillary supporters are digging in. But I think it's a sad day for America, not for Hillary but for America as this looks to be worse than Watergate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses G. Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 1 minute ago, Linzz said: You are right. The trump supporters are crowing and the Hillary supporters are digging in. But I think it's a sad day for America, not for Hillary but for America as this looks to be worse than Watergate. Biden is getting it. This is a BIG DEAL. Trump may very well win. http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2016/10/29/biden-will-reach-out-if-trump-wins.html?via=mobile&source=copyurl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
attrayant Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 It will be several days before polls reflect the impact, if any. But for whatever it's worth, my facebook feed is dead quiet about this. For all of August and September I had to watch all my friends endlessly bicker about Hillary this and Trump that. But nobody seems to care about this except for the Trumpettes who already hate Hillary anyway. I think Comey's actions are more of a story than whatever Weiner-mails might have been found. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linzz Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 4 hours ago, Thakkar said: "There is no indication the emails in question were withheld by Clinton during the investigation, the law enforcement official told Newsweek, nor does the discovery suggest she did anything illegal. Also, none of the emails were to or from Clinton, the official said." http://www.newsweek.com/hillary-clinton-emails-fbi-comey-donald-trump-anthony-weiner-huma-abedin-514918 These emails are making news because they were discovered on the computer shared by Anthony Weiner (being investigated for sexting) and his wife Uma Abedin who is a key Clinton aid. EVEN IF any email on that computer were deemed classified, Clinton neither sent them or received them, nor did they go through her server. So, again, a nothingburger Not if Hillary sent them to Uma as her aide because she didn't like receiving long emails on her blackberry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
attrayant Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 1 minute ago, Linzz said: Quote Clinton neither sent them or received them Not if Hillary sent them to Uma How could she have sent them if she didn't send them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.