• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

FBI Lied About Lynch-Clinton Tarmac Meeting, 30 Page Document to be Released Next Month

cpwill said:
Okedoke. What section of law makes it a crime for the President to fire a prosecutor if that prosecutor is currently also investigating someone who is in the same political party as the President?

Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

If it's done in order to hinder the investigation it's called obstruction of justice.

hence, why they asked for emails to see what the reason was for the firings in the middle of his term.
 
iliveonramen said:
If it's done in order to hinder the investigation it's called obstruction of justice.

hence, why they asked for emails to see what the reason was for the firings in the middle of his term.
Click to expand...

So... There is no law making it illegal to fire a prosecutor if they are investigating a someone who is also a member of the party you are a member of?

Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk
 
truthatallcost said:
I can find no mention of the above story on any of the DNC's attack dog media companies, such as NBC (too busy covering up Harvey Weinstein's rape history?), CNN, NYT, LA Times, ABC, CBS, MSNBC, etc.

1. Do you think the MSM is deliberately staying away from the story?
2. Do you think the FBI has something to hide regarding the Lynch/Clinton affair?
Click to expand...

So are you outraged that President Trump's lawyers are reaching out to Mueller for a face to face meeting?
 
ludin said:
You are jumping up and down and yelling and screaming fires and fires about trump in which so far there has been 0 evidence that he has done anything wrong.
Click to expand...

lol wut?


CA is always on fire this time of year. They have wildfires every year because they do nothing to control them in the first place.
Click to expand...

Way to blame the victim.

PR has been mismanaged for years and years and years by their local government attempting to blame trump is foolish.
Click to expand...

Again - blaming the victim.

We are no war near close to war with NK it is a bunch of postering with little else.
same goes for iran.
Click to expand...

Do you mean posturing?

None of their emails have contained classified data. Again you don't know the argument and are just screaming at the sky.
It had nothing to do with using private emails it has everything to do with violating classified data handling laws.
Click to expand...

If you based your entire presidential campaign on a candidate who used private emails for government business, would you be stupid enough to allow people in your administration to use private emails for government business? Oh wait - this is Trump we are talking about, so scratch that last question.

You need to learn what the issue is.
Click to expand...

And you need to learn spelling, grammar and punctuation.

Anyone else caught doing what she did would have ended up in leavenworth for a long time.
instead the DOJ, FBI and other government officials worked out a fix because they knew she had violated law
and should have had her clearances pulled making her ineligible for president.
Click to expand...

Right - because the FBI was so concerned about her presidential candidacy that he, a Republican, wanted to help a Democrat get into the White House.
 
Superfly said:
Way to blame the victim.
Click to expand...

Not victim blaming at all. it is very much their fault for not taking precautions and allowing underbrush and other things to build up
which is what causes most of the devastation. I know i live in a state that does controlled burns all the time.
where lightning strikes can cause brush fires almost instantly.

Again - blaming the victim.
Click to expand...

It isn't blaming the victim when it is there fault. You don't know what blaming the victim is.

If you based your entire presidential campaign on a candidate who used private emails for government business, would you be stupid enough to allow people in your administration to use private emails for government business? Oh wait - this is Trump we are talking about, so scratch that last question.
Click to expand...

that wasn't what the entire campaign was about you should learn to pay more attention.

And you need to learn spelling, grammar and punctuation.
Click to expand...

You need to learn to actually create an argument, However what it does show is that you can't refute a real argument when presented.

Right - because the FBI was so concerned about her presidential candidacy that he, a Republican, wanted to help a Democrat get into the White House.
Click to expand...

I guess you miss the parts where the DOJ told the FBI not to make it an investigation.
He was trying to protect his job instead of doing his job.

the FBI isn't a republican democrat thing.
 
ludin said:
Not victim blaming at all. it is very much their fault for not taking precautions and allowing underbrush and other things to build up
which is what causes most of the devastation. I know i live in a state that does controlled burns all the time.
where lightning strikes can cause brush fires almost instantly.
It isn't blaming the victim when it is there fault. You don't know what blaming the victim is.
Click to expand...

I certainly do know what blaming the victim is. You are giving us a perfect example with your posts. Instead of being considerate of the fact that people are dying, and that people are drinking out of Superfund sites just to get water, you are basically parroting dear leader, by saying, "Well, their infrastructure was bad in the first place. Not my fault!" Pathetic way to look at tragedies - "Well, if you hadn't done this..."

I guess you miss the parts where the DOJ told the FBI not to make it an investigation.
He was trying to protect his job instead of doing his job.
Click to expand...

So he was trying to protect his job when he told Loretta Lynch that there was nothing to investigate? No evidence of wrongdoing, other than carelessness?
 
holbritter said:
:confused:

Wait, what?
Click to expand...

Apparently, an investigator privately meeting the husband of someone they are investigating is unethical. Am i supposed to believe that an investigator privately meeting the very person they are investigating is just fine and dandy?
 
Absentglare said:
Apparently, an investigator privately meeting the husband of someone they are investigating is unethical. Am i supposed to believe that an investigator privately meeting the very person they are investigating is just fine and dandy?
Click to expand...

What does that have to do with the OP and the FBI lying about having documents?
 
holbritter said:
What does that have to do with the OP and the FBI lying about having documents?
Click to expand...

So you didn't read the quote or source in the OP?

That encounter, which occurred on the tarmac at Phoenix’s airport, was significant because it took place while the Justice Department was investigating Hillary Clinton’s potential mishandling of classified information on her private email account.
Click to expand...

Now that you understand why the meeting was controversial, perhaps you can address the double standard of whining about this meeting while staying silent from even more serious and less ethical interference.
 
truthatallcost said:
The President of NBC was recently caught covering up rape allegations against Harvey Weinstein. If that doesn't reek of sewage, I don't know what does.
Click to expand...

And Fox covered for several of its employees while they, how did Trump describe it, oh ya grabbed *****. One is just as bad as the other, agree?

Just keeping it fair and balanced:lol:
 
The FBI has not been obliging to the Committees in Congress seeking documents pertaining to this issue or others such as unmasking records and documents related to the Trump Dossier etc. And by law the Congress is suppose to be the oversight of the FBI. What the heck?

Judicial Watch earlier were told by the FBI they did not have any documents they had requested about the Lynch/Clinton Tarmac Meeting through a FOIA. Yet the proof they did find showed up in another case they were working on that clearly proved conversations on the matter occurred with the FBI.

Add all this to the recent news of the FBI Sat On Evidence Tying The Clintons To A Russian Bribery Scheme since 2009 and just yesterday under a new FBI Director Wray, FBI Confirms That Comey Drafted Statement On Clinton Probe Months Before Investigation Ended. That is quite telling.

I am beginning to believe the FBI needs a good enema.
 
cpwill said:
So... There is no law making it illegal to fire a prosecutor if they are investigating a someone who is also a member of the party you are a member of?

Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Yeah, it falls under public corruption and obstruction of justice.
 
Fishking said:
Questioning Judicial Watch is funny. Have they ever had to retract anything or been shown to be wrong?
Click to expand...
They've sued the government about a hundred ****ing times, only to be laughed out of court in each case. They are just conservative activists that like to waste the time of our courts.

A better question is: have they ever been right about anything?
 
CletusWilbury said:
It would probably have to be pictures of the emails you described where the classified content is apparent/clear (paraphrased)
or even if one has to read between the lines
Thanks!
Click to expand...

Sincerely sorry for the delay - I had a damn reply all typed out, and the $*)@)!(((#&$#&&$^@ Backspace key stole it from me. :mad:


Hillary had no less than 22 emails too classified to be made public because they were at the Top Secret. Level. "Top Secret" is defined as "information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security."

Comey's investigators found no less than seven separate email chains containing SAP (Special Access Program) material, which is material that even those with Top Secret clearances cannot access unless they are one of a finite number of people especially "read on" to the program.
 
MovingPictures said:
They've sued the government about a hundred ****ing times, only to be laughed out of court in each case. They are just conservative activists that like to waste the time of our courts.

A better question is: have they ever been right about anything?
Click to expand...

Uhhh....you said words that you obviously don't understand. Do you know what they sue the government over? Again, when have they ever had to retract anything or been shown to be wrong? Answer the question asked, not one you made up to answer that was even wrong then. Lol...defeated by your own strawman.
 
The tarmac meeting probably didn't matter.
Hillary clear criminal intent probably didn't matter.
Hillary's 'interview' probably didn't matter.
Hillary's emails to Huma that ended up on Weiner's laptop probably didn't matter.

Because . . .
[h=3]FBI releases early draft of Comey's Clinton statement - CNNPolitics[/h]www.cnn.com/2017/10/16/politics/comey-draft-clinton-statement/index.html
1 day ago - FBI releases early draft of Comey's Clinton statement ... Comey to other top officials asking for "any comments on this statement so we may roll it ...

[h=3]Comey wrote draft exoneration of Clinton months before July 2016 ...[/h]www.cnn.com/2017/08/31/politics/comey-clinton-investigation/index.html
Sep 1, 2017 - In one exchange from the redacted transcripts, an unidentified FBI aide says that Comey first wrote a draft of the July statement in May 2016.

[h=3]Did James Comey Break Rules by Drafting Hillary Clinton Statement ...[/h]www.newsweek.com/comey-clinton-investigation-draft-statement-trump-658620
Sep 1, 2017 - President Donald Trump, who fired Comey in May, said as much on Friday, tweeting, “Wow, looks like James Comey exonerated Hillary Clinton ...

[h=3]Comey drafted letter on Clinton email investigation before completing ...[/h]www.foxnews.com/.../comey-drafted-clinton-email-exoneration-letter-before-completin...
1 day ago - Comey drafted letter on Clinton email investigation before ... Comey in his role as FBI director and President Trump's decision to fire him in May.

[h=3]James Comey started drafting statement exonerating Hillary Clinton ...[/h]www.washingtonexaminer.com/james-comey-started-drafting...fbi.../2633095
Aug 31, 2017 - Former FBI Director James Comey started to draft a statement ... Comey began drafting the exoneration statement in April or May 2016, before ...

[h=3]GOP chairmen: Comey may have cleared Clinton before interviewing ...[/h]thehill.com/.../348743-gop-chairmen-comey-may-have-cleared-clinton-before-intervi...
Aug 31, 2017 - Grassley and Graham say one of the officials told investigators that Comey decided in early May 2016 to draft a statement clearing Clinton of ...

[h=3]Clinton emails: Comey circulated draft statement months in advance[/h]https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/...comey...drafting.../769528001/
1 day ago - FBI documents: Comey began drafting statements on Clinton email ... officials to "send me any comments on this statement so we may roll into ...
Click to expand...

the out come of the FBI investigation into 'the matter' was already preordained, already back in May, before Hillary was even interviewed by the FBI.
 
Fishking said:
Uhhh....you said words that you obviously don't understand. Do you know what they sue the government over? Again, when have they ever had to retract anything or been shown to be wrong? Answer the question asked, not one you made up to answer that was even wrong then. Lol...defeated by your own strawman.
Click to expand...
:2wave:

Judicial Watch says Department of Justice unit organized protests against George Zimmerman | PolitiFact Florida
Judicial Watch says ISIS operating a camp in Mexico--near El Paso | PolitiFact Texas
DHS Quietly Moving, Releasing 'Vanloads' of 'Illegal Aliens' Away from Border
Nancy Pelosi's Jet
Did a Study Show That Hillary Clinton Received More Than 800,000 Votes from Non-Citizens in the 2016 Election?
 
Last edited:
ludin said:
The fact is that breaking the law doesn't matter anymore. it is only your intent to break the law.
if you didn't intend to do it then you are ok.

that is the new precedent that Comey set for everyone as equal protection now applies.
So now a prosecutor must argue and prove that you intended to break the law not that you just did break the law.
Click to expand...

Welcome to the mental minefield that is legal litigation.
 
Absentglare said:
So you didn't read the quote or source in the OP?



Now that you understand why the meeting was controversial, perhaps you can address the double standard of whining about this meeting while staying silent from even more serious and less ethical interference.
Click to expand...


Yes I did. The OP and thread wasn't about a single quote. The meeting is actually a different subject. The subject is the FBI lying. I am amazed how this is going over most of your ilks head. Liberals are the ones yipping about and making it about the meeting.
 
cpwill said:
Sincerely sorry for the delay - I had a damn reply all typed out, and the $*)@)!(((#&$#&&$^@ Backspace key stole it from me. :mad:
Click to expand...

I hate it when that happens. There is a solution, but I'm too lazy to use it. (typing in notepad)
Similar in a way to the issue of not using secure email systems.

Hillary had no less than 22 emails too classified to be made public because they were at the Top Secret. Level. "Top Secret" is defined as "information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security."

Comey's investigators found no less than seven separate email chains containing SAP (Special Access Program) material, which is material that even those with Top Secret clearances cannot access unless they are one of a finite number of people especially "read on" to the program.
Click to expand...

That's what I have seen. Which of those were classified afterwords? I'm surprised they only found 7 SAP material for two years, in all email sent to the Secretary of State.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom