Elkhorn Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 listening the hearing so far, they're not attacking comey , just asking questions and they're asking good questions and I think his explanation of how they reached the conclusion is a little better than Tuesday. his explanation on why they did not pursue gross negligence was good and I understand it a whole lot better, and as for the reason they weren't going to prosecute is because they cannot prove it beyond reasonable doubt, in other words they know that she did something wrong they just cannot prove it beyond a reasonable doubt . None of what he is saying today in front of Congress helps Hillary, it's still points to how incompetent and careless she was Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SVT MXZ XRS Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 3 minutes ago, Elkhorn said: listening the hearing so far, they're not attacking comey , just asking questions and they're asking good questions and I think his explanation of how they reached the conclusion is a little better than Tuesday. his explanation on why they did not pursue gross negligence was good and I understand it a whole lot better, and as for the reason they weren't going to prosecute is because they cannot prove it beyond reasonable doubt, in other words they know that she did something wrong they just cannot prove it beyond a reasonable doubt . None of what he is saying today in front of Congress helps Hillary, it's still points to how incompetent and careless she IS Slight fix for accuarcy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt.Storm Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 12 minutes ago, Elkhorn said: listening the hearing so far, they're not attacking comey , just asking questions and they're asking good questions and I think his explanation of how they reached the conclusion is a little better than Tuesday. his explanation on why they did not pursue gross negligence was good and I understand it a whole lot better, and as for the reason they weren't going to prosecute is because they cannot prove it beyond reasonable doubt, in other words they know that she did something wrong they just cannot prove it beyond a reasonable doubt . None of what he is saying today in front of Congress helps Hillary, it's still points to how incompetent and careless she was Wouldn't that be what a prosecutor would have to do in a court of law? I didn't know Commie was one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elkhorn Posted July 7, 2016 Author Share Posted July 7, 2016 30 minutes ago, Capt.Storm said: Wouldn't that be what a prosecutor would have to do in a court of law? I didn't know Commie was one. Yes it is but they are saying they don't believe they can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, that's why they're not pursuing charges. I understand his explanation with the intent , I don't like it I'd rather see him bring charges but I understand more today from listening to him talk why they are not. But everything he keeps answering and expanding on from Tuesday, further hurts Hillary, and points even more to how incompetent and careless she was. He has reiterated she's done something wrong , today's hearings are providing more ad soundbites. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt.Storm Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Elkhorn said: Yes it is but they are saying they don't believe they can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, that's why they're not pursuing charges. I understand his explanation with the intent , I don't like it I'd rather see him bring charges but I understand more today from listening to him talk why they are not. But everything he keeps answering and expanding on from Tuesday, further hurts Hillary, and points even more to how incompetent and careless she was. He has reiterated she's done something wrong , today's hearings are providing more ad soundbites. She put some our country's top secret info onto a server that was not secured by gov standards and she knew it. What do you call that? It's at least willful misconduct no? Edited July 7, 2016 by Capt.Storm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oleroule Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 ^^^^treason Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 Because hey IT guy plead the fif, and then they deleted all condemning emails. She's guilty of many things here including obstruction of justice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elkhorn Posted July 7, 2016 Author Share Posted July 7, 2016 I can bet that Obama and the DOJ and probly most on the left are pissed that Comey laid out all the things they found she did wrong before he said they wouldn't pursue an indictment , he didn't have to do that, I think he did it on purpose. Especially when he said that no one knows what I'm about to say 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Momorider Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 5 minutes ago, Elkhorn said: I can bet that Obama and the DOJ and probly most on the left are pissed that Comey laid out all the things they found she did wrong before he said they wouldn't pursue an indictment , he didn't have to do that, I think he did it on purpose. Especially when he said that no one knows what I'm about to say I can smell the stench from here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt.Storm Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Elkhorn said: I can bet that Obama and the DOJ and probly most on the left are pissed that Comey laid out all the things they found she did wrong before he said they wouldn't pursue an indictment , he didn't have to do that, I think he did it on purpose. Especially when he said that no one knows what I'm about to say I agree..Comey is bought and paid for. he prolly did the best he could to throw he under the buss..but still. Edited July 7, 2016 by Capt.Storm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elkhorn Posted July 7, 2016 Author Share Posted July 7, 2016 There's a lot of good questions and a lot of good answers and a lot of new info that probably everybody doesn't hear, I'm just tired of these stupid Democrats acting like little babies and being so partisan on camera Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mainecat Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 There was never any criminal intent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt.Storm Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Mainecat said: There was never any criminal intent. You never heard of about criminally negligent behavior? Edited July 7, 2016 by Capt.Storm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elkhorn Posted July 7, 2016 Author Share Posted July 7, 2016 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Mainecat said: There was never any criminal intent. That's not what he said, he said they couldn't prove criminal intent beyond a reasonable doubt there's a big difference . I believe that Comey was disappointed when they got to the end of this and came to the realization with the reasonable doubt aspect I believe he came out and did that conference in front of the press, laid out all the wrongdoings they found, pulled the pin on a grenade and tossed it at the media, then said however, we wont pursue charges..and walked away you didn't answer any questions and here we are today. 100s of soundbites for Hillary ads straight from the FBI directors mouth lol Edited July 7, 2016 by Elkhorn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt.Storm Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 hell she could be charged with perjury if nothing else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleepr2 Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 18 minutes ago, Mainecat said: There was never any criminal intent. LOL! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elkhorn Posted July 7, 2016 Author Share Posted July 7, 2016 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Capt.Storm said: hell she could be charged with perjury if nothing else. Well funny you say that because earlier in the hearing Comey opened the door to that. When Chaffitz asked him about looking into perjury under oath, Comey said I need a referral from Congress to look into that, and Chaffitz said you'll have one later today. Edited July 7, 2016 by Elkhorn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt.Storm Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 Just now, Elkhorn said: Well funny you say that because earlier in the hearing Comey opened the door to that. When Chaffitz asked him about looking into perjury, Coney said I need a referral from Congress to look into that, and Chaffitz said you'll have one later today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Momorider Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 39 minutes ago, Mainecat said: There was never any criminal intent. BULLFUCKINGSHIT there was a massive intent to hide shit from FOIA it's a big lie idiots like you and apparently the FBI believe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt.Storm Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 3 minutes ago, Momorider said: BULLFUCKINGSHIT there was a massive intent to hide shit from FOIA it's a big lie idiots like you and apparently the FBI believe Just her lying under oath is a felony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Momorider Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 Just now, Capt.Storm said: Just her lying under oath is a felony. When did this happen they said she wasn't under oath while being questioned by the FBI mind you lying the the FBI was a felony. But there are no transcripts of that meeting Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt.Storm Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 2 minutes ago, Momorider said: When did this happen they said she wasn't under oath while being questioned by the FBI mind you lying the the FBI was a felony. But there are no transcripts of that meeting Chaffetz made the disclosure during an exchange over false statements made by Clinton on her private email server. “Did Hillary Clinton lie under oath?” Chaffetz asked. “Not to the FBI,” Comey responded. “Not in a case we were working.” Chaffetz then reminded the FBI director that Clinton claimed under oath that “there was nothing marked classified” in her emails, either “sent or received.” Comey said was “aware” of the comments but the FBI has not investigated the testimony because there has not been a referral from Congress. “Do you need a referral from Congress to investigate her statements under oath?” Chaffetz pressed. “Sure do,” Comey replied. “You’ll have one,” Chaffetz said. “You’ll have one in the next few hours.” Watch the exchange below: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016/07/07/watch-how-fbi-director-responds-when-asked-if-hillary-clinton-lied-under-oath-about-emails/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Momorider Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 2 minutes ago, Capt.Storm said: Chaffetz made the disclosure during an exchange over false statements made by Clinton on her private email server. “Did Hillary Clinton lie under oath?” Chaffetz asked. “Not to the FBI,” Comey responded. “Not in a case we were working.” Chaffetz then reminded the FBI director that Clinton claimed under oath that “there was nothing marked classified” in her emails, either “sent or received.” Comey said was “aware” of the comments but the FBI has not investigated the testimony because there has not been a referral from Congress. “Do you need a referral from Congress to investigate her statements under oath?” Chaffetz pressed. “Sure do,” Comey replied. “You’ll have one,” Chaffetz said. “You’ll have one in the next few hours.” Watch the exchange below: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016/07/07/watch-how-fbi-director-responds-when-asked-if-hillary-clinton-lied-under-oath-about-emails/ Public comments are not under oath. When did she testify about this email fiasco under oath? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt.Storm Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 Just now, Momorider said: Public comments are not under oath. When did she testify about this email fiasco under oath? i'm not sure..but apparently it happened..maybe during the Benghazi deal? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oleroule Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 a clinton and perjury....that brings back memories of..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.