Just imagine, for one moment, how the media's reaction and response would have been, if Trump had done exactly what Hilary had done with those emails, including lying to the FBI.... more than once, and potentially putting the national security of the USA at stake or in jeopardy.
What a farce
When you get a gap, let us know Denny.... you have loads of experience in this regard
Snarkhole, the Dems are now doing everything you accused Trump of doing...you truly see no problem here?
@Draad,
They have no choice. The Republicans tried to cheat in the last election, so how can the Democrats trust them again? With changing demographics, Republicans have fewer voters every 4 years.
At some point in history, this might become inevitable.
If there are 2 main parties competing, there would come a day when one of them started to become a minority.
They see their chances each year are getting less, they would have no choice but to try to end Democracy with a coup - like trying to approve false electors to ensure their own parties win.
It is domestic terrorism not accepting the legal government that was voted in by the Democratic will of the people. Many Republican politicians will have to go to jail.
Trump needs to publish his search warrant in the media if he wants the public to know why the FBI said they did the raid.
How did the Re[publicans try to cheat in the last election? Have you an proof suggesting support of your statement?
Your forecast is actually wrong. The Democrats have lost the support of the Hispanic community and increasing number of Blacks are leaving them as well. The Virginia Governor election proved that the parents have turned against them in their campaign to indotrinate children and they turned to vote Republican in the suburbs, Seeing all opinion polls and you must bein to realize that the Democrats are becoming an extreme leftist organization and in mortal danger. They are in fact the dangerous organization in this case.
It is indeed "domestic terrorism" not to accept the election results? Indeed then why and how can the actions from the 2016 election outcome be rated differently and why is the Democratic Party conduct was different and exempt from your statement.
Trump does not have a copy of the warrant since the FBI refused to hand the document to his lawyer to make a copy of it. By the way why is Trump accused of taking documents when leaving the WH - is that a legitimate issue at all? Obama took more than 30 000 documents with him when leaving the WH. Why is he not investigated? .
Stav
You are actually the worst conspiracy theorist on site and everything you say is based on conspiracy theories. The biggest conspiracy theory this century - the Russian Hoax could potentially miss the description since it was not based on a theory - but on lies invented by the Democrats - starting from Obama, Biden, Clinton and the DNC - as to Russian Collusion with Trump. You fell for that one hook, line and sinker,
Whatever you write are sometimes a theory as to what happened - eg the NATO issue. Facts do not play any rule in your theory - so facts are to be ignored and theory must become all that counts.. . The North Korea example is so obtuse it denies reality. .
Stav is totally deranged when it comes to American policies. . He s a
total addict of misinformation and try and write things that never
happened as factual. . .
Stav
You are actually the worst conspiracy theorist on site and everything you say is based on conspiracy theories. The biggest conspiracy theory this century - the Russian Hoax could potentially miss the description since it was not based on a theory - but on lies invented by the Democrats - starting from Obama, Biden, Clinton and the DNC - as to Russian Collusion with Trump. You fell for that one hook, line and sinker,
Whatever you write are sometimes a theory as to what happened - eg the NATO issue. Facts do not play any rule in your theory - so facts are to be ignored and theory must become all that counts.. . The North Korea example is so obtuse it denies reality. .Yes you actually do amaze all of us that you are so at odds with reality and the truth STAV.
"Trump needs to publish his search warrant in the media if he wants the public to know why the FBI said they did the raid. "
That's half the problem...he didn't receive a copy. His lawyer viewed it from 10 feet away...that's it. Guess who the judge/magistrate was who signed off on the warrant?
Draad
I knew the judge's name - he is an elected local district court judge. His main claim for fame is he contributed a huge amount of money to the 2012 election campaign of Obama. These judges often got help to cover their election campaign costs from Soros and are normally really undermine jurisprudence. Nothing of their weird decisions ever survive appeals to higher courts.
"I've no idea how a person can be so at odds from reality"
Well, in all fairness.... from what you recently posted, it looks like you still think that everything Hillary did, was completely above board.... and that she did absolutely nothing wrong.... just because she handed over "some" emails to the FBI.
Hillary's constant and blatant dishonesty, directly towards the FBI, on more than one occasion.... warranted no further action according to you..... just because she handed over "some" emails.....
Yeah.... makes sense
"I've no idea how a person can be so at odds from reality"
I wasn't just referring to one particular post from Mike but he is a long history of posting stuff that's just so far from reality it can be debunked with a couple of seconds of searching.
Well, in all fairness.... from what you recently posted, it looks like you still think that everything Hillary did, was completely above board.... and that she did absolutely nothing wrong.... just because she handed over "some" emails to the FBI.
No I don't think everything Hilary Clinton did was above board. As the investigation concluded it was extremely careless of her to use a private e-mail server for government business. As for Clinton lying, that can't be proved. None of the e-mails she sent/received to her private e-mail server where marked as classified at the time (they where later classified), so Clinton may genuinely not have been aware of their sensitive nature. She was responding to events in real time and was using her own e-mail server out of convenience so she wouldn't have to carry multiple devices but she shouldn't have done so because the nature of her work meant there was a reasonable chance some of the information in those e-mail could of later become classified. It was very careless of her. Likewise with the deletion of e-mails, again the investigation couldn't find any evidence that there was deliberate attempt by Clinton to delete work related e-mails
Now absolutely if you want to blast Clinton for being reckless with her handling of sensitive information go ahead and do so. That's absolutely fair to do so and in the context of Clinton running for President at the time, it would bring into question her competency to be President and something which her political opponents could genuinely attack her with as part of normal politics.
If you want to believe Clinton lied or that the FBI covered for you. Well you can do that as well but at that point its your political point of view. Your entitled too it. Just the say way people are entitled to have the view Trump colluded with Russia, despite the Muller report not finding evidence to support that view.
My original response was simply highlighting the fact that Clinton turned over her e-mail server to the FBI, so there was no need for them to raid her residency. I'm aware they recovered more e-mails, but I think that was from the original server she handed over to them. Even if there was more e-mails to uncover they may have been on servers not located in any of the Clinton residencies.
I'm not sure yet of the facts with the raid on Trumps residency on why the FBI felt they needed to raid the property as opposed to getting Trump to hand them over the documents he had kept. Shall wait and see.
Yeah.... makes sense
I'm sensing you don't like Clinton, but that's not enough in the court of law to convict someone, she's entitled to due process, just like Trump is (someone I detest). The FBI obviously felt they had insufficient evidence to press charges. Unless you can present evidence of the FBI covering up for her its just your opinion if you want to question the decision not to press charges against her.
"I'm sensing you don't like Clinton, but that's not enough in the court of law to convict someone"
Not a fan of her, but it's not that at all... just that you questioned why I thought that the handing over of the servers to the FBI should have been more than good enough, from Hillary's side.... which quite frankly, I believe is very naive on your part...especially because she also didn't do it willingly or voluntarily.
"Unless you can present evidence of the FBI covering up for her its just your opinion if you want to question the decision not to press charges against her"
I never said the FBI covered up for her, I said that given her behaviour at the time and the constant dishonest conduct regarding those emails with the FBI, it certainly warranted a search warrant, and nothing even remotely close happened like that....it was left to slide...
"If you want to believe Clinton lied"
How did she not lie...?
You cannot escape the fact that she did in fact lie to the FBI, multiple times.....firstly that she had handed over all the emails to the FBI.... which was totally incorrect... and she was incorrect by the thousands.....
She then lied that there were never any classified emails sent on these servers, which was then proven that Top Secret emails were in fact sent recklessly, which could have put the national security of the USA at risk.... more than 200 emails were retroactively classified.
You are also aware that Clinton's own lawyers deleted about 30 000 emails before handing over all the evidence to the FBI.... why would that be normal, or even permitted.....
After Hillary steadfastly refused to provide her servers, when she eventually did, 4 emails were determined to be classified and are still listed as classified till this day... another lie....
You must also know that Hillary's IT specialist at the time, who set up her servers, also refused every single question related to these servers, and pleaded the 5th amendment to every single question posed to him.... in fact he did it more than 125 times....
"None of the e-mails she sent/received to her private e-mail server where marked as classified at the time"
You are incorrect here...some were classified..... others even "Top Secret"
Sure, you can argue that none of this was done deliberately......she simply just forgot about all these things...and didn't lie.....and if you really believe that those are the actions of a honest individual, go ahead.... but it most definitely warranty a search of some sort, especially given the ramifications towards the USA as a nation.....
Not a fan of her, but it's not that at all... just that you questioned why I thought that the handing over of the servers to the FBI should have been more than good enough, from Hillary's side.... which quite frankly, I believe is very naive on your part...especially because she also didn't do it willingly or voluntarily.
You originally said My
remark is directly attributed to the fact that the FBI did not raid
any of Hillary's residences, despite all the clear evidence regarding
the emails.....
What clear evidence. From my understanding there was around 60,000 e-mails on Hilary Clinton's e-mail sever. Her lawyers went through it and determined about half where worked related and turned over to the relevant authorities and the other half where determined by her lawyers to be personal and deleted. It later turned out that some of the e-mails that where supposed to be personal and deleted where recovered and turned out to be work related but the investigation could find no evidence that the the e-mails where deleted on purpose to hide the fact they where work e-mails. After all its common for people to do house keeping on e-mails and delete old unneeded e-mails.
So I'm yet to see why the FBI needed to search any of Clinton's residencies. Those e-mails where recovered from the server they already had. Was there any evidence that Hilary was hiding additional e-mails on another device somewhere in her residency? Even if their was evidence to indicate additional e-mails, they may not have been stored on a device in the Clinton residency.
Now take the current search off Trumps residency. We are not privy to the full facts yet. But a report I've seen on the Guardian today suggests that among the documents Trump held on to where classified nuclear weapons documents. This was possibly what justified the search.
And if you think its naive, people who still say Trump colluded with Russian despite the finding of the Muller report could easily say the Muller Report found extension links between Trump's side and Russia and its naive to think there wasn't collusion. But just like you assertion I'm naive, that's coming from your political viewpoint not an evidence based one.
I never said the FBI covered up for her, I said that given her behaviour at the time and the constant dishonest conduct regarding those emails with the FBI, it certainly warranted a search warrant, and nothing even remotely close happened like that....it was left to slide...
You have provided nothing to indicate a search warrant was warranted.
How did she not lie...?
You cannot escape the fact that she did in fact lie to the FBI, multiple times.....firstly that she had handed over all the emails to the FBI.... which was totally incorrect... and she was incorrect by the thousands.....
She then lied that there were never any classified emails sent on these servers, which was then proven that Top Secret emails were in fact sent recklessly, which could have put the national security of the USA at risk.... more than 200 emails were retroactively classified.
There is a difference between lying and being incorrect. One is intentional the other not necessarily so.
I suggest using the below link as a refresher on the Clinton e-mail's story.
You are also aware that Clinton's own lawyers deleted about 30 000 emails before handing over all the evidence to the FBI.... why would that be normal, or even permitted.....
Because hers lawyers determined those e-mails to be private. What business does the FBI or state department have having access to her private e-mails? Are you not entitled to delete your personal e-mail.
After Hillary steadfastly refused to provide her servers
Simply politics. The pressure to release was coming from Republicans who where making political capital out of it.
4 emails were determined to be classified and are still listed as classified till this day... another lie....
Where they marked as classified at the time?
You must also know that Hillary's IT specialist at the time, who set up her servers, also refused every single question related to these servers, and pleaded the 5th amendment to every single question posed to him.... in fact he did it more than 125 times....
Maybe he was hiding something, or maybe it was political gamesmanship that he was called to testify. You going be as critical of Trump for taking the 5th the other day?
"None of the e-mails she sent/received to her private e-mail server where marked as classified at the time"
You are incorrect here...some were classified..... others even "Top Secret"
Well being a bit pedantic here, there was classified information in some of the e-mails, paragraphs marked as classified (a C beside them indicated that) but none of the e-mail headers where marked as classified and often the classified text was well down in the body of the e-mail, sometimes in long e-mail chains. Its possible Clinton assumed there was no classified information within the e-mails when the e-mail header didn't flag it as such, didn't see the C mark beside the paragraphs, or didn't know what the C meant.
Sure, you can argue that none of this was done deliberately......she simply just forgot about all these things...and didn't lie.....and if you really believe that those are the actions of a honest individual, go ahead.... but it most definitely warranty a search of some sort, especially given the ramifications towards the USA as a nation.....
Nothing you have said warranted a search. Your political views are biasing you.
"and the other half where determined by her lawyers to be personal and deleted"
Mmmm, and that is normal behaviour....
"Was there any evidence that Hilary was hiding additional e-mails on another device somewhere in her residency?"
Now that is the big question..... we will never know will we, because no search was conducted.....
Hillary could also quite easily have forgotten other laptops or flash drives that she had at home with other incriminating material on it, since she clearly seems to be so forgetful.
"Even if their was evidence to indicate additional e-mails, they may not have been stored on a device in the Clinton residency"
Mmmmm, yes, but only a search would have cleared that...you just made my point for me.
"But a report I've seen on the Guardian today suggests that among the documents Trump held on to where classified nuclear weapons documents. This was possibly what justified the search"
Yes, just like when the FBI were tipped off about Hi lary using a private server.... who knows what would have been found if they in fact did have a look at her residence.....again, you are proving my point for me.... nothing was found, because not one single search happened.
Trump's search resulted from a tip off, which is nothing different to the FBI being informed about what Hilary did with her emails, but nobody searched her residence for potentially national security leaks....again, erratic behaviour from the FBI
"You have provided nothing to indicate a search warrant was warranted"
Yet you say the Trump search was legit..... however, there were similar tip offs, similar risks to the national security of the USA, but only one search was conducted, on Trump.... yeah ok
"Because hers lawyers determined those e-mails to be private. What business does the FBI or state department have having access to her private e-mails?"
If you were being accused of potentially leaking top secret and classified national documents, then the FBI should have access to absolutely everything... full disclosure
"Where they marked as classified at the time?"
From what I remember, yes
"You going be as critical of Trump for taking the 5th the other day?"
100% yes
"Well being a bit pedantic here, there was classified information in some of the e-mails, paragraphs marked as classified (a C beside them indicated that) but none of the e-mail headers where marked as classified and often the classified text was well down in the body of the e-mail, sometimes in long e-mail chains. Its possible Clinton assumed there was no classified information within the e-mails when the e-mail header didn't flag it as such, didn't see the C mark beside the paragraphs, or didn't know what the C meant."
Lol, I really do think that Hillary was very well versed in knowing exactly what was classified, Top Secret etc etc.... and should have acted accordingly, even if it was at the top, the middle or the bottom of ANY document....so your excuse is because it was contained somewhere in the document, it could be overlooked....
"Nothing you have said warranted a search. Your political views are biasing you"
Nope, working on facts alone
Aaaaaaah ... it was personal emails ... private emails ... nothing more.
Hilary didn't dispose of anything incriminating and if she did it was a silly mistake, right?
An accident.
She didn't mean to do it.
Oops!!!
She's innocent, DA ... don't you know that?
Stavanger says so.
Trump is guilty cause Stavanger says so.
This poor bitter little man was bitching about Boris too.
There are many like him who swallow the nonsense you see on CNN as fact .
Just a sad bitter little man who's only love is to argue and complain about something or other.
"She's innocent, DA ... don't you know that?"
Of course she is CC....... Hilary never did anything wrong.... and she played open cards from the very beginning...
Now that is the big question..... we will never know will we, because no search was conducted.....
Hillary could also quite easily have forgotten other laptops or flash drives that she had at home with other incriminating material on it, since she clearly seems to be so forgetful.
Mmmmm, yes, but only a search would have cleared that...you just made my point for me.
LOL That's not how the law works. You need evidence to obtain a search warrant. There was no evidence to suggest there was other devices with other incrementing material. Clinton being incorrect in regard previous statements (again that's not the same as lying) is not evidence to suggest their was more e-mails located somewhere else and certainly not grounds for a search warrant. And what exactly did she forget?
Yes, like when they were tipped off about Hilary using a private server.... who knows what would have been found if they in fact did have a look at her residence.....again, you are proving my point for me.... nothing was found, because not one single search happened.
Did someone tip them off about additional incrementing material? That's a no right? So again no evidence to suggest additional e-mails where located anywhere so again no grounds for a search warrant.
Trump's search resulted from a tip off, which is nothing different to the FBI being informed about what Hilary did with her emails, but nobody searched her residence for potentially national security leaks....again, erratic behaviour from the FBI
We don't have the full information on the search of Trumps property yet. Maybe the FBI have a reason to believe their was a need to conduct a search urgently because very sensitive information was strongly believed to be located there or that Trump's lawyers where not complying or that there was a imminent danger of the documents being destroyed. Truth is none of us know yet. Hilary handed over her server so their was no need for a search and after she did so there was no evidence that e-mails existed. Why the FBI felt they could obtain what they needed via Clinton's lawyers and why they felt they needed to raid Trump's home I don't know. Maybe we will find out in time.
Yet you say the Trump search was legit..... however, there were similar tip offs, similar risks to the national security of the USA, but only one search was conducted, on Trump.... yeah ok
I didn't say it was legit. We don't have all the facts yet.
If you were being accused of potentially leaking top secret and classified national documents, then the FBI should have access to absolutely everything... full disclosure
She wasn't being investigated for leaking top secret information and nation documents.
From what I remember, yes
From my understanding the e-mails where only considered classified later, though some e-mails contained classified content.
100% yes
As long as we are being consistent.
Lol, I really do think that Hillary was very well versed in knowing exactly what was classified, Top Secret etc etc.... and should have acted accordingly, even if it was at the top, the middle or the bottom of ANY document....so your excuse is because it was contained somewhere in the document, it could be overlooked....
Yes she should of known but its plausible that she assumed that if the e-mail was being sent to her and other people then it already had vetted and didn't contain classified information and its very easy to overlook content in long e-mail chains that could be the equivalent of hundreds of page, its something I've done and see others do as well many times.
Nope, working on facts alone
You have provided nothing that would of justified a search of her residencies. If its you're opinion that Clinton lied that's your view, that's the not the view of the FBI and even if it was it not evidence of a further crime.
Trump is guilty cause Stavanger says so.
Where did I say that?
This poor bitter little man was bitching about Boris too.
Seems the UK public and Tory MP's where bitching about Boris too. That's why they got rid of him
Just a sad bitter little man who's only love is to argue and complain about something or other.
Holding up a mirror huh?
If that information alone, does not constitute a search of her premises, I don't know what does....
LOL how does it. If doesn't indicate the existence of further e-mails or incrementing evidence that they need to search for. It just indicates how careless Clinton was her handling of e-mails they already had in their possession.
Stav, you seem to support the search of Trump
Let's see what their justification/evidence was for conducting the search in the first place and what evidence if any turns up.
despite
them knowing full well that there could definitely be more cause for
concern regarding the national security of the USA....
You're stretching now. No they didn't know full well. They found no indication that Clinton leaked anything or that her e-mail was compromised.
"LOL That's not how the law works. You need evidence to obtain a search warrant"
Bollocks.... you are not even making common sense now......listen to yourself..
There was absolutely zero evidence against Trump, only a tip off, yet the FBI raided his home..... and if they find something on him, I hope he gets nailed to the full extent of the law......but now you are just contradicting yourself... because then they needed zero evidence back then, to go through Hilary's premises... just the tip off that they received.... precisely like Trump.... so again, you are 100% proving my point....
"She wasn't being investigated for leaking top secret information and nation documents"
Absolute Bollocks, of course she was.... there was a huge concern that she had unintentionally leaked classified information, and also that she may have even been hacked.... whether she was or not, is not an issue, the concern of leaked documents was there right from the very beginning....
"From my understanding the e-mails where only considered classified later, though some e-mails contained classified content"
Your understanding is incorrect
"but its plausible that she assumed that if the e-mail was being sent to her and other people then it already had vetted and didn't contain classified information and its very easy to overlook content in long e-mail chains that could be the equivalent of hundreds of page, its something I've done and see others do as well many times"
Not plausible at all.... someone like Hilary Clinton, in the senior and sensitive position that she was, should and would have known precisely what was deemed as confident ial, classified or Top Secret information.... that is just basic common sense.....stop defending the indefensible.... besides, some emails were clearly marked as Classified or Top Secret and she still screwed that up
If that is honestly what your expectations would be from someone in such a senior and secure position within your government, then sorry to say, but your standards are low.
"If doesn't indicate the existence of further e-mails or incrementing evidence that they need to search for"
Ok, so what indicated that Trump's home has to be raided... what evidence was provided or obtained?
Absolutely nothing..... nada... ..zero.....it was just a tip off from some informant.
In other words.... the exact same tip off that they received regarding Hilary's emails..
"You need evidence to obtain a search warrant"
Lol, this is funny
As I said..... you are making no sense at all, and you are completely contradicting yourself.... so what is a standard for the one individual, is clearly not the same standard for the other individual.....ok...
Your interpretation of the law is entirely skew....not biased or prejudicial at all
Bollocks.... you are not even making common sense now......listen to yourself..
You have not presented any evidence that any additional e-mails existed. Come back when you have some.
There was absolutely zero evidence against Trump, only a tip off, yet the FBI raided his home..... and if they find something on him
Now I get to call bollocks. I've no idea what evidence was used to obtain the search warrant for Trumps residency and neither do you. Lets wait a little bit and see what information is contained when the search warrant. I believe its due to be published today. The fact you're already claiming their is no evidence show how biased you are.
and if they find something on him, I hope he gets nailed to the full extent of the law......but now you are just contradicting yourself... because then they needed zero evidence back then, to go through Hilary's premises...to go through Hilary's premises... just the tip off that they received.... precisely like Trump.... so again, you are 100% proving my point....
What do you mean zero evidence back then. The whole thing is far more complicated that would could be described as merely a tip off that the FBI acted on..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton_email_controversy#Initial_awareness
What tip off was given against Trump? What are the details.?
Absolute Bollocks, of course she was.... there was a huge concern that she had unintentionally leaked classified information, and also that she may have even been hacked.... whether she was or not, is not an issue, the concern of leaked documents was there right from the very beginning....
To quote Comey
Our investigation looked at whether there is evidence classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on that personal system, in violation of a federal statute making it a felony to mishandle classified information either intentionally or in a grossly negligent way, or a second statute making it a misdemeanor to knowingly remove classified information from appropriate systems or storage facilities.
Consistent with our counterintelligence responsibilities, we have also investigated to determine whether there is evidence of computer intrusion in connection with the personal e-mail server by any foreign power, or other hostile actors.
So no she wasn't being investigated for leaking top secret information.
Your understanding is incorrect
Maybe, can you provide a link where e-mails she sent received where clearly marked as confidential at the top and not a paragraph somewhere down in the body of the text.
Not plausible at all.... someone like Hilary Clinton, in the senior and sensitive position that she was, should and would have known precisely what was deemed as confidential, classified or Top Secret information.... that is just basic common sense.....stop defending the indefensible.... besides, some emails were clearly marked as Classified or Top Secret and she still screwed that up
Well you go on about basic common sense but you have no grasp of what probable cause is and what constitutes evidence. You seem to think speculation is enough justify search someone home. Clinton was found to be careless. If you want to believe she lied, fine go ahead and do so. But from my life experience, I've seen countless example of carelessness when it comes to e-mails in working environments. Politicians are still humans and not exempt from mistakes.
If that is honestly what your expectations would be from someone in such a senior and secure position within your government, then sorry to say, but your standards are low.
No its not my expectation, its just reality. Whether she should of been punished for it more is not really my place to say. Personally I'm no fan of her's but if you want to talk about standards lo ok at all the people defending Trump after 4 years of utter lunacy that nearly ended in a coup d'etat.
k, so what indicated that Trump's home has to be raided... what evidence was provided or obtained?
I don't know and neither do you!!!! Its not been published yet.Absolutely nothing..... nada.....zero.....it was just a tip off from some informant.
Where are you getting this information from?
In other words.... the exact same tip off that they received regarding Hilary's emails..
Read the wiki link above on Hilary e-mails particularly the part about initial awareness and FBI investigation and security referral. I'm not sure how you could claim that to be a similar sequence events to what le d to Trumps residency being raided. Seemed like a series of events occurred before the FBI got involved with investigating her e-mails.
As I said..... you are making no sense at all, and you are completely contradicting yourself.... so what is a standard for the one individual, is clearly not the same standard for the other individual.....ok...
No I just appreciate the fact you can't just search someone home without evidence. And I haven't given an opinion on whether Trump's home being searched was justified or not. I'm not the one jumping to a conclusion that the circumstances are the same for both situations. You're jumping to that conclusion for political reasons.
Your interpretation of the law is entirely skew....not biased or prejudicial at all
Right back at you.
Perhaps if you open your eyes and understood all the points you made about Hillary emailing classified documents to all concerned was in fact a criminal act and she should have been investigated at that stage.
But the "FIX was in" from the day she had lunch with Obama in the WH prior to entering the Presidential race.
Plus cases of tampering with evidence and lawyers altering documentation during the investigation and what about the legal documents forwarded to the "Secret Court" on four applications that require the source to declare that the document and its contents are true and verified when they actually contained false evidence and nothing was ever verified.
All that and not one single referral to investigate any or all of these incidents of false information and corruption.
Covered up and obstructed by the Demorats in Congress, the FBI plus the State department and its Demorat operatives in every government department.
Crimes and corruption rule the Demorats in all that they say or do.
Traitors to the core.
Double standards from day one...the Deep State will have their way...if they can get and keep Biden in office, they can do anything...
If Donald Trump tried to nuke the world - even if it could be proven- all Trump has to do is say it is fake news, and the Trumpanzees love him again.
You can have your own opinion, but you can't have your own facts - at least if you want to face reality.
The Trumpanzees are always playing the victim, saying that it is unfair etc. etc. They just do not acknowledge proven facts, and no matter what Trump does.
As an outsider of America, if any president had behaved like this - regardless of ideology they belong in jail.
SB
I have enough of this BS. Trump never stood for wars anywhere and tried to negotiate peace all the time. That is why people like Cheyne and her father hate him so much. The Nuk e story came from a book from an idiot claiming that Trump was going to nuke China - a ttal BSA story invented by the Washington Post.
That BS was so far fetched that only total brainwashed scum like you would believe it. Obama took more than 30 000 documents with him - but the fact is the crooked bastard did it and nobody did what Garland and his FBI assistants did in this case. Fact is every President ever did that and we can accept that the whole scam is an election propaganda BS and it will not work out.
I expected some BS from the Democrats and forecasted a new set of riots organized and funded by them - but never expected the level of depravity that actually happened. The fact is that nobody bar brainwashed idiots like you believes the Democrats anymore and the country is veering into a dictatorship. The Democrats now wants to recruit 87 000 new IRS agents - a requirements being that they would have to use force and be armed to implement their regime. requirements. Nobody ever was that brazen about creating a force like that in the history of the USA.
The above requirement for appointment was removed from the IRS website after Republicans objected to it - but that does not mean it will not be implemented. The armed agents will likely come from the Democrat terrorist subsidiaries BLM and Antifa.
You talk about facts - but you have zero proof of facts anyway - so stop your BS please..
Sharktwat you really are a TWAT.
Go and have another Smoke up man.......
FART, your master is going down....
Apparently, Trump ignored the subpoena to return classified information. He should never have had this when he left the Whitehouse. He ignored them and his home was taken over by a search warrant . That is routine legal practice. If Hillary Clinton had done the same should have been arrested.
Stav
Just one thing about the FBI -
* they never put Clinton under oath when they interview her about the e-mails because that would have opened her up to lying to the FBI and they knew that she lied t them; and
* they never put General Flynn under oath either and then they drew up a draft report that subsequently vanished and was change by the FBI to sound like they had something about a telephonic discussion Flynn - at that time was Trump's nominee to serve as National Security Advisor - something entirely normal in such cases.
The second draft - which also vanished - they sent to the WH for fnal aproval and what came out of that was that he final draft was approved by the WH and put on the records of the FBI. The WH document was sent to the Mueller investigations and he ordered that charges be laid against Flynn.
What came out at the subsequent trial was that Flynn admitted to the charge of lying to the FBI because the FBI threatened to lay charges against his son for some incident if he did not plead guilty in court. This came out of the woodwork when Flynn's lawyer demanded documents from the FBI on the issue and from the Justice Department When that came out it even shocked Barr and he ordered withdrawal of the charges.
Anyway - the FBI nd CIA had a recording of the telephonic discussion between the Russian Ambassador and Flynn - but never eve released that recording.
One of the e-mails sent by Clinton to Podesta - her campaign manager in the 2016 election - contained comments as to her relationship with Putin. In it she wrote that she has "direct access to Putin's inner sanctum". Podesta was and is a complete and corrupt idiot who served on Obama's staff in the WH. Another set of documents on his server was a report that he received a gift of 75 000 shares in a Russian Company with links to the Kremlin - which shares he transferred to a Company owned by his daughter.
So why was Podesta corrupt idiot? He used the word "Password"| to enter his computer and a person got all the info on the computer and passed it to Wikileaks - who published it. When confronted by Fox News his excuse was that the documents was stolen from his computer and that he was not guilty of wrongdoing. The FBI have prove of that as well.
The difference is that the FBI clearly intended to absolve Clinton from any wrongdoing and refuse to consider what really happened in the Podesta case.
The whole history of the FBI was to cover up wrongdoing by the Democrats and try all-out to go for Trump. They leaked countless information to the media opposed to Trump and the stories were all lies as to Russian Collusion with Trump. There is no doubt that the FBI and the CIA are against Trump because of the threat he posed as to the way they operated since the 1990's. Effectively they are a loyal subsidiary of the Democrats and such a threat to the existing Constitution. They act like the KGB did in Russia under Stalin and like the Chinee Security Services operate at present. They will even go against individual Democrats who do not go along with the Biden program and recently even raided the home of Rep Cuellar - a Democratic Party .member of the House - who opposes the Open Border Policy of Biden. However, there were a large number of raids on homes and offices of Republican Party supporters over the last 18 months and they found nothing. If they found anything charges would have been laid.
The allegation is that the FBI were actually looking for copies of the hard drive of Hunter's laptop - but they could not even find those.
In closing off on the issue - the question is who is actually in charge of the government of the USA - is it the Democratic Party and its President or is it the unelected Washington Bureaucrats. In one interview Schumer - the Senate leader of he Democrats - said that they would ruin anybody opposed to their tactics - even spreading lies on issues. The Justice Department, the FBI, the CIA and all other Federal Departments are part of the Washington control system of the Federal Government.
I can name a lot of other cases where the FBI is not an independent organization fighting crime - which in the USA is a massive problem - and they are an arm of a totally corrupt Government. Incidentally that raid on the home of Trump has nothing to do with legality - but is an effort by the Justice Department and the FBI to influence the outcome of the election in 8 November 2022 - which the Republicans would win bearing the disastrous record of the Biden Administration. Nothing will come out of it since the way it was done was illegal and they would find nothing of consequence anyway.
,
"All that and not one single referral to investigate any or all of these incidents of false information and corruption"
Spot on AJH
"Double standards from day one"
Agreed Db, but Stav fails to see any of it..... he is completely blind to it
"Personally I'm no fan of her's but if you want to talk about standards look at all the people defending Trump after 4 years of utter lunacy that nearly ended in a coup d'etat"
Ahhhh.... and there it finally is....... the confirmation
I have reported numerous times on this forum that I am not a big fan of Trump, I have called him a prick, a arrogant asshole and so much more over the years.
I have also very clearly said that if he is ever found guilty of any charges levelled against him, that he should face the full might of that law.. and I stand by that.
However, having said that, if you can honestly tell yourself, that Trump and Hilary were given the same or similar treatment by the FBI, for extremely similar issues or concerns, which could have directly affected the national security of the USA, and put thousands of people's lives at risk......, you are utterly delusional.
Agreed Db, but Stav fails to see any of it..... he is completely blind to it
You simply don't understand how the law works.
Ahhhh.... and there it finally is....... the confirmation
If you think what Hilary did made her suitable to President of the United States, your absolutely entitled to that opinion, just as I'm entitled to my opinion that anyone who stills supports Trump after his term as President has no business talking about standards.
However, having said that, if you can honestly tell yourself, that Trump and Hilary were given the same or similar treatment by the FBI, for extremely similar issues or concerns, which could have directly affected the national security of the USA, and put thousands of people's lives at risk......, you are utterly delusional.
Not delusional, its called fairness. We don't have all the facts yet. Yet it didn't stop Trump supporters and republicans politicizing and making a hole host of misleading claims about the search. There is zero evidence at this point for example that Biden knew about the search. Wray was a Trump appointee and even moderate republicans have come out disgusted by Republicans in congress comparing the search to Nazi/gestapo.
https://www.politifact.com/article/2022/aug/09/comparing-hillary-clintons-emails-and-donald-trump/