Yesterday, we learned this: FBI clears Clinton -- again. Excerpt:FBI Director James Comey told lawmakers Sunday the agency hasn't changed its opinion that Hillary Clinton should not face criminal charges after a review of new emails.No criminal charges will be filed against Hillary Rodham Clinton.
"Based on our review, we have not changed our conclusions that we expressed in July," Comey wrote in the new letter to congressional committee chairmen....
650,000 emails reviewed in eight days. Really? Really?
The innumerable tentacles of the Clinton Political Machine strike again.
ADDENDUM
Remember: DOJ Kadzik involved in new 650,000 Email reviews, helped coverup IRS scandal.
650,000 emails reviewed in eight days. Really? Really?
ReplyDeleteFor all of the Trump campaign's narrative of one person [Comey] reviewing the e-mails, reasonable people will know that there is a team on this case. But more importantly, data mining scripts will determine duplicate e-mails in a matter of moments, and the FBI [like most other intelligence focused agencies] use this operational research method.
Purveyors of conspiracy are going to have to come up with more than this.
- CI
IMO, if the Clintons and their minions wanted to hide something, they would have bypassed at least some of the search terms. Codes and all that -- something that coin dealers do for their pricing listed on each packaged coin.
DeleteBTW, I am no fan of conspiracy theories. But when I get the strong hinckies, my hinckies are infallible. It is my belief that we haven't begun to see the extent of the Clinton Political Machine's deceptions and powers.
I'm not saying that there's nothing incriminating in the e-mails, but if they are indeed duplicates [at least writ large] of e-mails they already had...it's an easy process to determine that.
Delete- CI
CI: At this point, its not even a conspiracy. JustUs was never going to open a grand jury, which is what can lead to a prosecution.
DeleteThey didn't just break that one big federal law; they broke many laws. See my comments below. had you and I done what they did, we would never again hold a security clearance, and we would be in federal prison.
That's not a conspiracy.
SF - With reference to the classified e-mails, there was never any dispute. I'm not arguing that, I'm pointing out that a narrative regarding an inability to screen 650,000 e-mails, is a counterproductive conspiracy theory.
Delete- CI
TWO THINGS to THINK ABOUT:
Delete1. Can you not understand why I and many others on the Right don't believe the public activities of James Comey, since last July, pass the smell test?
The whole thing –– since his July announcement exonerating Hillary from any criminal malfeasance, because "she was just EXTREMELY CARELESS," but had no DELIBERATE INTENT to do WRONG ––
to his surprise October 11th announcement that "POTENTIAL NEW EVIDENCE has been found that demands we REOPEN our INVESTIGATION of HRC's emails ––
to yesterday's BLITHE DISMISSAL of the reopened Investigation wth the extravagant claim that SIX-HUNDRED-FIFTY-THOUSAND EMAILS have been throughly examined by the FBI –– in less than a week–– and NOTHING showed up that would further incriminate HRC or cast doubt on her eligibility to assume the duties of POTUS.
If you can sweep partisanship aside for a minute or two and honestly believe this, I have a beautiful bridge of great historic significance spanning San Francisco Bay that –– just because you are an old and very ,dear friend –– I can sell you DIRT CHEAP.
2. There has been NO historical precedent for an FBI Director to do what James Comey did, so WHY would he perform such an elaborate Song and Dance Routine bound to make him the target of much animosity from BOTH SIDES of the AISLE, if the whole thing was not in fact a CHARADE –– SET UP designed, as Silver Fiddle so intelligently said, to INOCULATE the CLINTON CAMPAIGN against further prosecutorial investigation –– if not from lingering suspicion on the part of impotent observes like stubborn old me?
And for the record I don't care a FIG what sources are responsible for divulging the TRUTH –– if in fact it IS the truth. I also don't care a FIG what their MOTIVES may be in making such revelations known to the general public.
The TRUTH –– providing if is IS the TRUTH, and not a tendentious pastiche of selected facts and figures designed to promote an agenda –– is the best prophylactic, the best antiseptic, the most powerful antibiotic, the greatest healing force humanity has at its disposal.
TRUTH invariably HURTS as it HEALS, because it disabuses ALL of us of many of our pet assumptions and stubborn convictions.
The PROBLEM lies in finding the way to know for SURE that what we are dealing with IS the TRUTH –– and not some seductive gobbledygook that strokes our egos while it panders to our prejudices and basest instincts.
IF we are honest with ourselves –– and not merely bigoted partisan automata –– ALL of us should welcome any revelation of genuine TRUTH –– no matter where it might lead.
I hasten to add that isolated, carefully selected FACTS dug up via Opposition Research organizations are NOT to be confused or equated with the TRUTH.
The FBI is not corrupt, but we must recall it is the investigative arm (with no prosecutorial powers) of the JustUs Ministry and is subordinate to it.
ReplyDeleteObama's JustUs Minister, Loretta Lynch, abused the reputation of the FBI to provide cover to Hillary. Lynch and the Clinton Crime syndicate were able to do this because most people don't understand how the system works.
The big question mark is why Comey injected himself into this so loudly and so often. I though perhaps he'd had a change of heart, or had planned to unleash some revenge after they rolled him, but now I must revert to my original opinion: He is a shameless political hack.
This is how our turdworld banana republic government of the elites for the elites and by the elites work: If you have enough money and power, you are above the law. If you're a little guy who sticks his head up, it's SWAT raids and IRS audits for you.
Hillary and her gang of criminals routinely sent classified information over unsecured e-mail, and even had her non-citizen, non-cleared maid print them out, as well as go into her home SCIF and retrieve Top Secret documents from the classified fax machine.
Not only did they not get prosecuted (they broke dozens of electronic communications laws) they will all be granted Top Secret Clearances and granted access to dozens of SAPs and Compartments.
We are no longer a nation of laws.
SF,
DeleteThe FBI is not corrupt
I have my doubts about that -- especially after 8 years of the Obama regime.
My point is, they cannot prosecute. They can only investigate.
DeleteLoretta Lynch set up the rules of the investigation, she handed out immunity to the prime suspects, and she assured Hillary's team there would be no grand jury. That guaranteed the investigation would go nowhere. Hillary and her gand of perps knew that if they all stuck to their stories (which they all coordinated on) and lied their asses off, their would be no consequences.
Although I implicate Comey and his #2 in this--I believe they are both corrupt political hacks in service to a corrupt oligarchy--That is not the FBI's fault.
Oh well...
"What difference, at this point, does it make?"
DOJ Kadzik involved in new 650,000 Email reviews, helped coverup IRS scandal is the headline. Best bud of Podesta. Says it all.
DeleteBunkerville,
DeleteYep. Thanks for that reminder!
From your blog:
DOJ Kadzik involved in new 650,000 Email reviews, helped coverup IRS scandal.
Will add the link to the body of this blog post.
We may no longer be a nation of laws, Silver fiddle, but don't YOU try disobeying any of those non-existent limits on your freedom.
DeleteIf you DO, sir, YOU will land in the penitentiary faster than you can say, "Jim Comey" –– or "John Roberts."
FT, Yup. I have detailed that in other posts on this topic today. You survive and even thrive by not pissing off the regime.
DeleteI want to provide some words of comfort for my fellow Right Blogistanis.
ReplyDeleteThis will not be a 1984 totalitarian government. It will be a soft tyranny, carried out by citizens keeping other in line though social media, public shaming and apology rituals.
It's not so bad if you just lie and go along with it all. That's how you avoid the IRS audits and blacklists.
More likely, it won't even be that. It's been my experience that when nations are finally and completelyl taken over by criminal gangs of oligarchs, they don't concern themselves with what's going on with the little ants below their feet, unless some ants should get in the way, and then of course they are crushed. But, mind your own business, and even a fearsome stalinist regime like Saddam's will never concern itself with you.
I lived in a Latin American military dictatorship. We partied, went to the beach and had a wonderful time. Food and booze was plentiful and no one was cowering in fear. It only got dangerous when the regime began to totter, and that's when we feared for our lives.
I lived in a nominal democracy that was actually run by an uneasy cartel of the military establishment and the oligarchy. The former president had to be smuggled out in the trunk of a car when I lived there, because the new gang of criminals were going to prosecute him for his corruption.
Again, I had a wonderful time. Yeah, we had some violent riots in front of the US embassy and I had to take the back way in, indigenous activists burned down an airport and they sometimes locked up the city with violent protests, but you learned how to work around all that. I played music in clubs, went hiking with friends and had a great time. People in that nation enjoyed life, the beauty around them, and their friendships.
Hiking in the Andes, I took a picture of two smudged Quechua girls, perhaps barely three-years old, knee-deep in the mud happily playing with two headless dolls. They were laughing and enjoying themselves, in their own world as children often are.
In the bombed-out streets of Kabul back in the 2000's, I saw Afghanis squatting around a fire in the midst of the rubble. They were singing, dancing and roasting meat over a spit.
Mankind endures. That's what we do.
As long as one has enough to eat...and no health problems requiring medicines and treatments that is when it gets sketchy. Add that we are an aging population so hunting and gathering may nor work so well.
DeleteSF,
DeleteIt's not so bad if you just lie and go along with it all.
I'm not good at that.
In fact, I walked away from two very lucrative jobs because I simply cannot compromise my own integrity. I must be this way because of my upbringing and my own innate wiring (German and Welsh).
Bunkerville,
DeleteThat is my own situation -- and Mr. AOW's, too.
I don't see us having any food or health care shortages. I think life will be pretty good from that standpoint.
DeleteWhat I do see happening:
- Communities grappling with increased diversity, thanks to continued mass importation of poor, backwards people whose cultures are not compatible with ours.
- A slow poisoning of the First Amendment, starting with the reinstatement of the fairness doctrine, and they will struggle to make it reach as far into the internet as possible.
- Citizens United will be re-litigated before Hillary's Supreme Court, resulting in the progressive-approved decision this time, guaranteeing dissident free-lancers can't mount insurgency challenges to party-selected candidates during an election.
- Also, look for an end to internet anonymity, or a very severe restriction to it, where only very determined Anonymous types can still enjoy it. Seriously, Facebook and other social media authenticators could very easily force you to produce ID before they give you a logon.
Once all that is going as planned, the real fun will begin.
Whoever frames the debate, wins the debate. Progressives have already been successful at that in the free market of ideas, but there are still too many noisy dissidents out there sowing chaos and causing some to doubt the party line.
Put some "reasonable controls" on speech (C'mon, everybody knows you can't shout "fire" in a crowded theater) and we can filter out the trolls and the liars, ushering in a wonderful new world of "real speech" where crazy rightwingers can't poison the public square with their kook theories and slander.
Once the oligarchs achieve that, anything is possible.
That's funny... I left a comment about how they would slowly erode free speech, and it disappeared.
DeleteGlad I'm not paranoid...
SF,
DeleteThat comment was trapped in the spam folder. I have released the comment.
SF,
DeleteAnd expect more oppressive regulations -- especially from the EPA.
I predict that these regulations will substantially reduce the amount of money we receive if we sell our homes.
I also predict that further dumbing down in education -- especially at the college level, where minorities will be allowed entry regardless of scores on standardized tests.
AOW, I have read about federal regulations having bearing on real estate transactions, and I don't doubt it for a minute.
DeleteI forgot to add in one more step on the road to "True Speech:" Implement Canada- and Netherlands-style Hate Speech Codes.
DeleteSF... I cannot believe you don't see any problems ahead with healthcare? Take a look at the VA. We will all be in a VA type health system. In fact Obamacare has destroyed our health system with its regs that have nothing to do with the plan. Most hospitals are on the verge of bankruptcy.. why all the mergers which only is delaying the end. No new technology ... thats what is happening.
DeleteBunker, Yeah, we may end up with some government-induced shortages, but I don't see any reason why we won't still enjoy world class medical technology.
DeleteHas anyone else ever felt that [we] are but players in some sort of an Orwellian inspired movie?
ReplyDeleteWe're trapped in a really bad surreality TV program. Wait till Hillary appoints Beyonce Secretary of State.
DeleteOrwell? Nah, David Lynch.
DeleteIf Trump wins it will be like something straight out of Eraserhead.
Kitty Panne & M.T. Bowels, retired Vaudeville team, said
DeleteSaid RN, as the Bishop withdrew,
“My dear sir, I’m afraid this won’t do,
For the Vicar is slicker,
And thicker and quicker
And longer and stronger than you!
Comment from FT's blog this morning:
ReplyDeleteThe Debonair Dude November 7, 2016 at 10:05 AM
James Comey the Fink would have you believe that the FBI "examined" 650,000 of Hillary the Hun’s and Gal Pal Huma's emails in 8 days. Now lets take a look at the possibilities of that actually happening! There are 86,400 seconds in a day. Comey the Fink says that these Genius went through 81,250 ( Eighty One Thousand Two Hundred and Fifty) emails a day.....that's a little over ONE SECOND per email. Remember now, each of these emails has to be looked at and examined in terms of it's date, it's subject-matter, which agency it involves and what that agency's security level was on that particular subject....in 1.2 seconds...because you'll believe pretty much anything... Lets not forget that It took a year to go through 30,000 and ONLY 8 days to go through 650,000.And nothing about ANY record of "Benghazi's video" or "bleach bits, or the Clinton Foundation"? Pardon me while my Eyes Roll.
I have to go with CI on this one. Digital compares of thousands of documents can be completed in mere seconds. I didn't expect any bombshells in there. Comey already said it was AOK that Hillary had sent top secret information. My hope was they would find proof someone lied.
DeleteComey is just another Establishment stooge, but he's still trying to shuffle off his stubborn scruples.
SF,
DeleteI don't have that level of faith in digital comparison.
You should -- no human team could out-perform a computer at this task. You work out what keywords or phrases (with wildcards) to check for, and the computer can faithfully apply those tests to the whole corpus in, at most, minutes. Then, you can tweak the settings and do it again. Dates, agencies, all get checked completely accurately and repeatably.
DeleteMakes total sense that the newer, larger set would take less time to examine than the original set, because many of the tests developed for the first set could be applied to the new set. The time is taken in developing the tests, not so much in running them.
Sorry, Jez, but with Kadzik as the overseer, I don't have faith in this digital comparison. Garbage in, garbage out.
DeleteThe blithe assumption by contemporary, technocracy-oriented individuals –– mesmerized, and lulled into complaisance no doubt by the industrial propaganda supporting their largely artificial, semi-robotized way of life –– is more than a little frightening to an old fossil like me.
DeleteWhy? BECAUSE there appears to be a BLIND FAITH among these devotees of technocracy that simply ASSUMES that it would be virtually impossible for anyone using this advanced methodology for reading hundreds-of-thousands of pages in SECONDS, presumably with pinpoint accuracy, to do so with a calculated, agenda driven bias.
The HUMAN ELEMENT is not perfectible, and that, I suppose, is why WE are being systematically PHASED OUT in favor of Robots and other soulless, heartless Automata devoid of Insight or any kind of nuanced thinking hat might interfere with "GETTING the JOB DONE" regards of what effect "The Job" might have on human existence.
And what do you suppose is to become of us once we are no longer needed to keep the great Ferris Wheel of Civilized Scotty rotating?
I }}}}}}}}}SHUDDER {{{{{{{{{{ to think.
"Virtually impossible"?
DeleteSorry, my friend. It is indeed possible and the technology is used in banking, complex code design and is used to legally-verify all kinds of documents.
*sigh* the posited objection was not that someone would subvert the technology.
The posited objection was that there was no way the FBI could have "examined" 650,000 of Hillary the Hun’s and Gal Pal Huma's emails in 8 days."
As Jez, CI and I have pointed out, yes there is. The technology to digitally examine and compare documents, bitmaps, code, is easily available, has been around a long time, and is incredibly fast.
Arguing that a malefactor on the inside has subverted the process is a distinct issue, but the technology does exist. I use it in my work to verify some pretty important stuff.
Silver... and in the response to yours, CI's and Jez' replies, we've received the standard responses from the dissenting side that No, it is not possible or they do not believe.
DeleteIt is the only response that can come from people who have denigrated the ability of the government for years. To admit it is possible is to shatter their unfaith in the ability of government to do anything efficiently.
And it also tears at their desire to believe conspiracy theories that support their POV, even when their are other ample things t legitimately criticize.
Dave,
DeleteKeep soothing yourself with the failed idea of the government's efficiency.
The day will come when something will happen to you personally so that you will no longer be able to deny the inefficiency of the governmental bureaucracy -- not to mention governmental corruption.
SF,
Delete"Virtually impossible"?
Sorry, my friend. It is indeed possible and the technology is used in banking, complex code design and is used to legally-verify all kinds of documents.
And in banking there have been glitches to the extent that valid customers have been accidentally locked out of their own accounts.
I personally have come up against such barriers with the electronic medical records. Around and around in circles I've gone in the vain attempt to correct medication errors somehow locked into my record.
The same has happened with Verizon, which supposedly has state of the art technology.
Look. I don't doubt the importance and the efficacy of technology. I there are downsides, too.
As for Comey's assertion yesterday that nothing criminal has surfaced, a lot of people just don't believe that. That perception -- right or wrong -- may control the outcome of this election.
It is the only response that can come from people who have denigrated the ability of the government for years.
DeleteYou're [I think intentionally] conflating the opposition to practices outside the Constitutional role of Government. There is a huge difference between legitimate intelligence data mining [whether or not you agree that it occurred correctly] and say, federal control of healthcare.
Likewise, to arbitrarily presume every act of government is inherently corrupt, calls into question functions such as the military and the intelligence community.....
AOW: We agree there is no basis for believing anything Patsy Comey says. My response was restricted to the technology in question. The comparison of electronic documents and data is simple, fast and reliable.
DeleteDave,
DeleteIf Obama had done the right thing and turned this all over to a special prosecutor, who in turn would have impaneled a grand jury to examine the evidence, collected through normal FBI procedures untampered by the Justice Department, and unhampered by Justice handing out immunity to all the suspects, we could have had an answer one way or the other.
Thanks to Obama's JustUs Ministry meddling and obfuscating, we'll never know now, will we?
SF,
DeleteI understand.
And no offense taken, my friend.
AoW: when you said "level of faith in digital comparison" I assumed that your issue was with the "digital" adjective. It's quite reasonable not to trust Kadzik.
DeleteFreeThinke, I haven't made that assumption, or talked about that side of the issue at all. But in fact, applying hidden biasses was easier in the pre-digital age. The beauty of a repeatable, documented battery of tests is that the method is explicit, so the investigator's bias is more discoverable in the digital era.
Jez,
DeleteThank you for understanding that, at times, I don't express what I mean as clearly as I did before this terrible kidney malady struck.
I understand that the investigator's bias is more discoverable in the digital era, but only if somebody checks.
Who is watching the watchers?
I sympathise! I can't imagine your pain. :(
Delete"Who watches the watchers" is not a new problem (it is, of course, a 2000-year-old question). I agree that it remains relevant, but computers have not made it worse.
Marlon Bluto said
ReplyDeleteOne piece of GOOD NEWS that ought to cheer you up:
JANET RENO, the BULLYING BITCH, ARSONIST, MASS MURDERER of WACO, and BRUTAL ABDUCTOR of six-year-old ELIAN GONZALES is DEAD at 78.
SIng HALLELUJAH! Shout HOSANNA! GIVE THREE CHEERS, STRIKE UP the BAND, then Let the Dancing in the Streets begin. Olé!
Yea, well, she went along with the special prosecutor and that is how we got Billy boy if my memory serves me. It was Hillary who forced her hand on the Waco thing. VInce Foster ended up dead
DeleteGive it up.
DeleteThe followers of the psychotic Waco child molester self immolated.
Oh, Freethinke, a court ruled that Elian Gonzales should be united with his father. I know that the right wing talk about "rule of law" is just mouth music but give it a try.
QUESTION:
ReplyDeleteWith all of this technology why did it take MONTHS to go through, a reported, 33,000 E-mails (the first batch) and only a week or so to go through, a reported, 650,000 E-mails? It's been said that:"if they are indeed duplicates [at least writ large] of e-mails they already had...it's an easy process to determine that." Well, 33,000 v 650,000 would seem to indicate a lot more than just duplication. It seems to me that something still stinks about this whole issue!
Jez explained this above. To add to this, the 33,000 emails were from, to or through Clinton. We don't know the number, but given that they were taken from a operate party's computer, it's fair to day that some number below 650,000 are actually germane to Clinton.
DeleteThat should read: a separate party's computer
DeleteBreaking just now.
ReplyDeleteHillary Clinton will NOT light up the sky with Fireworks over NYC if she wins the Presidency as was announced yesterday -- her campaign is calling off a planned fireworks show ... TMZ has learned.
It is being said that she is buying Comey a Vacation Home in the Caribbean instead.
Better that than the axe over his head...I guess. As for me, sorry, she'd have to kill me, I refuse to lie, for her or anyone else. EXCEPT to save another's life!
Deletetmw
Instead, she will mount her broom, launch her flying monkeys, and write
Delete"SURRENDER AMERICA"
in red smoke in the sky, cackling all the way, as Soros-funded street thugs chase and bead Trump voters and Soros-funded human traffickers gear up for an invasion of million of "migrants"
I never thought for one minute that the FBI, led by the intrepidly corrupt director Comey, would fail at clearing 650,000 emails in the 691,200 seconds there are in 8 days. Actually, not for one second did I believe they'd "find" any proof of the red queen's shenanigans. With Kadzik, Lynch & Obama on board the fix, it was a done deal that Hillary would get yet another pass. Hope for a landslide tomorrow or we can kiss our Republic goodbye.
ReplyDeleteCube,
DeleteI see that we agree on all points!
Good to see you here again, friend. As you may or may not know, I've been too ill to keep up with my usual blog rounds; therefore, I haven't visited your site in a while.
This kidney disease and the related deep-organ pain I have been battling is kicking my a$$!
Oh my goodness. I had no idea. Please keep in touch. You,re special to me. Please let me know how tou're doing.
DeleteCube,
DeleteThank you for caring.
Here an index of posts explaining what I've been enduring.
The year from hell!
Government, corrupt or not, is ultimately a reflection of those who put it in power. A complacent, uninformed and dependent electorate assures its own eventual HELL!
ReplyDeleteSince so many have a positive genius for missing the point, I shall post this again in hope that SOMEONE will deign to give it the consideration it deserves. ENGLISH happens to be my FIRST language, and I've always been given excellent grades in every course I've taken involving use of the language, so the fault must be YOURS not MINE, if you don't understand what I'm saying.
ReplyDeleteThe blithe assumption by contemporary, technocracy-oriented individuals –– mesmerized, and lulled into complaisance no doubt by the industrial propaganda supporting their largely artificial, semi-robotized way of life –– is more than a little frightening to an old fossil like me.
Why? BECAUSE there appears to be a BLIND FAITH among these devotees of technocracy that simply ASSUMES that it would be virtually impossible for anyone using this advanced methodology for reading hundreds-of-thousands of pages in SECONDS, presumably with pinpoint accuracy, to do so with a calculated, agenda driven bias.
[Now read that ast paragraph AGAIN –– at least two or three times before shooting off your mouth, After that, MAYBE we might begin to communicate.]
The HUMAN ELEMENT is not perfectible, and that, I suppose, is why WE are being systematically PHASED OUT in favor of Robots and other soulless, heartless, witless Automata devoid of Insight or any kind of nuanced thinking that might interfere with "GETTING the JOB DONE" regardless of what effect "The Job" might have on the quality of human existence.
And what do you suppose is to become of us once we are no longer needed to keep the great Ferris Wheel of so-called Civilized Society rotating?
I }}}}}}}}}SHUDDER {{{{{{{{{{ to think.
No one here has argued that Corrupt Comey and his Hillary Insider #2 could not have subverted the technology.
DeleteWhat we have argued against is the patently false assertion that a high volume of digital documents cannot be rapidly scanned.
I don't know what else to say at this point. The technology exists in many forms with all kinds of functionality. I have used it as have millions of other in all manner of critical and high-level tasks.
That's not blind faith. It is understanding the science of binary bit compare, and having seen it work.
The process goes even faster if you are comparing the documents to a baseline of already pored-over documents.
This fact is separate and distinct from the possibility that someone purposely misused or subverted the technology in question. In Comey's FBI, anything is possible, but the bottom line here is that the technology exists to scan--in many different ways, to include comparison to other documents--over half a million documents in mere hours, with human beings being the limiting and delaying factor in the process.
I apologize if I appear to rub it in, but you're the one who brought it up again. I understand and agree with AOW's point that software glitches happen, but I refer you back to my earlier comments.
What is this?
ReplyDeleteFBI director received millions from Clinton Foundation, his brother’s law firm does Clinton’s taxes
Excerpt:
FBI director received millions from Clinton Foundation, his brother’s law firm does Clinton’s taxes
POLITICS
September 29, 2016
A+
A-
Email
Print
A review of FBI Director James Comey’s professional history and relationships shows that the Obama cabinet leader — now under fire for his handling of the investigation of Hillary Clinton — is deeply entrenched in the big-money cronyism culture of Washington, D.C. His personal and professional relationships — all undisclosed as he announced the Bureau would not prosecute Clinton — reinforce bipartisan concerns that he may have politicized the criminal probe.
These concerns focus on millions of dollars that Comey accepted from a Clinton Foundation defense contractor, Comey’s former membership on a Clinton Foundation corporate partner’s board, and his surprising financial relationship with his brother Peter Comey, who works at the law firm that does the Clinton Foundation’s taxes....
Details at the above link.
Is that information accurate?
I'd offer.....that it's hard to say. This "ETF News" seems sort of...'click-bait-y'.....
DeleteCI,
DeleteThat site is a stranger to me.
But I'm wondering if the information in the above article is verifiable or can be debunked?
The same info is at Breitbart.
DeleteNot shocking that it's at Breitbart......they're a bit in the tank for Trump. I'd be interested to see a more independent report on this allegation. Could be true....or not.
DeleteThere is scant information about Peter Comey available. He's not even mentioned on James B. Comey's Wikipedia page. I find that lack of mention a bit odd.
DeleteIt’s hard to believe that there could be a dumber person on Fox News than Geraldo Rivera. But, sad to say, there is: it’s moron liberal Juan Williams from The Five.
ReplyDeleteJuan recently tried to defend Hillary Clinton and her disturbing track record of being bribed, and it backfired on him completely. He actually made Hillary Clinton look like even more of a criminal.
Juan was asked about the email leak that revealed Hillary’s pay to play fraud charity accepted $12 million in bribe money from the Muslim King of Morocco in exchange for favors.
Williams stated that the humongous $12 million bribe was simply a “donation” and that “she was trying to be a loyal soldier to the family foundation.” the internet erupted in mockery of Juan.
Just checking in. I got nothing to say that I can say out loud.
ReplyDeleteEd,
DeleteI understand!