October 30, 20204 yr 10 minutes ago, Arsenal79 said: I’m much smarter than you but I’ll answer even though you viciously slandered me. The FBI has the evidence. That’s the FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION. It’s being used in an active criminal investigation of the Biden family. Whatever else Tucker has, he kindly decided to not disclose in an act of mercy and compassion for the fallen son, Hunter Biden.
October 30, 20204 yr 44 minutes ago, Kz! said: Yes? I don't consider Tucker's lost mail a huge part of the story. Do you? That silliness is all I've been commenting on.
October 30, 20204 yr 16 minutes ago, Arsenal79 said: I’m much smarter than you but I’ll answer even though you viciously slandered me. The FBI has the evidence. That’s the FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION. It’s being used in an active criminal investigation of the Biden family. Whatever else Tucker has, he kindly decided to not disclose in an act of mercy and compassion for the fallen son, Hunter Biden. hmmmm, so the fbi has the evidence and yet unlike last election, no announcment from the fbi right before the election. oh and tucker carlson suddenly has mercy for biden. that's really, really stupid. but a perfect answer from you.
October 30, 20204 yr 4 minutes ago, Alpha_TATEr said: hmmmm, so the fbi has the evidence and yet unlike last election, no announcment from the fbi right before the election. oh and tucker carlson suddenly has mercy for biden. that's really, really stupid. but a perfect answer from you. No announcement from the FBI because they don’t want to "politicize” an election. Multiple sources have confirmed it’s ongoing. But hey, if you’re comfortable voting for Shanghai Joe while he’s being investigated for selling out our country, that says it all about your TDS affliction!
October 30, 20204 yr Just now, Arsenal79 said: No announcement from the FBI because they don’t want to "politicize” an election. Multiple sources have confirmed it’s ongoing. But hey, if you’re comfortable voting for Shanghai Joe while he’s being investigated for selling out our country, that says it all about your TDS affliction! so the fbi, who announced the hillary investigation right before the last election, doesn't want politicalize this election.
October 30, 20204 yr 1 hour ago, Kz! said: I don't think that's a major part of the story, but you can add it as the final bullet point if it makes you feel better. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA 1 hour ago, Kz! said: Yes? I don't consider Tucker's lost mail a huge part of the story. Do you? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
October 30, 20204 yr 3 minutes ago, Alpha_TATEr said: so the fbi, who announced the hillary investigation right before the last election, doesn't want politicalize this election. I don't want to be involved in this clown show in here, but this isn't entirely accurate. Comey came out and announced the decision not to charge Clinton in the summer. At that time he promised to update Congressional leadership if there were any further developments. So a week before the election, he had to notify Congressional leaders about re-opening the investigation because he had pledged to do so. Shockingly, this leaked out and caused an ish storm. But the mistake here was making a public statement in the summer and pledging to update Congress if anything changed. Comey boxed himself in with those moves. I get what Comey was thinking -- Lynch boxed him in by meeting former President Clinton in Phoenix. But the FBI shouldn't have made any announcement, or simply put out a statement from Yates (Deputy AG) saying no charges were being filed. The GOP/Fox News would have gone nuts, but that press conference was a huge debacle.
October 30, 20204 yr There is no point responding to these idiots anymore, they have gone from funny to sad to pathetic
October 30, 20204 yr As an add-on to my post above, the Comey 2 part mini-series on Showtime last month was pretty good. Worth a watch. Shows a man who was in an impossible position that he clearly made worse because he was so certain of his righteousness.
October 30, 20204 yr 1 hour ago, Kz! said: Yes? I don't consider Tucker's lost mail a huge part of the story. Do you? Is "we found it, but now I am just gonna sit on it because I am nice" a big part of the story?
October 30, 20204 yr 16 minutes ago, vikas83 said: I don't want to be involved in this clown show in here, but this isn't entirely accurate. Comey came out and announced the decision not to charge Clinton in the summer. At that time he promised to update Congressional leadership if there were any further developments. So a week before the election, he had to notify Congressional leaders about re-opening the investigation because he had pledged to do so. Shockingly, this leaked out and caused an ish storm. But the mistake here was making a public statement in the summer and pledging to update Congress if anything changed. Comey boxed himself in with those moves. I get what Comey was thinking -- Lynch boxed him in by meeting former President Clinton in Phoenix. But the FBI shouldn't have made any announcement, or simply put out a statement from Yates (Deputy AG) saying no charges were being filed. The GOP/Fox News would have gone nuts, but that press conference was a huge debacle. It wasn't really leaked out. Comey sent a letter to congress, and that letter was inevitably going to be made public. Comey did box himself in. But he really ought to have waited until they actually determined whether the emails changed anything, and not just rushed to inform congress when "potential" new evidence was found.
October 30, 20204 yr 28 minutes ago, Alpha_TATEr said: so the fbi, who announced the hillary investigation right before the last election, doesn't want politicalize this election. Yes you are correct sir! Remember how everyone complained 4 years ago
October 30, 20204 yr 9 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said: It wasn't really leaked out. Comey sent a letter to congress, and that letter was inevitably going to be made public. Comey did box himself in. But he really ought to have waited until they actually determined whether the emails changed anything, and not just rushed to inform congress when "potential" new evidence was found. The problem was he told them he would update them on any developments or changes. He left himself no room. EDIT: Looking back, he testified under oath to Congress that the investigation was closed. When he had to re-open it, he had to supplement his testimony. Just a debacle to have given that testimony. Obviously, he thought Clinton would win and that this would leak after the election, making it appear the FBI covered up for her. He was wrong.
October 30, 20204 yr Just now, vikas83 said: The problem was he told them he would update them on any developments or changes. He left himself no room. I agree with that. Was stupid. But he could have gotten around that interpretation by saying nothing they found had changed anything yet. If they found something in those emails? Ok, fair game. But saying "oh here's some emails we didn't know existed - better run to Congress!!" that seems dumb.
October 30, 20204 yr The entire Hunter Biden thingy was the equivalent of Trump spiking the ball to stop the clock. Yes it offered him some value but it most certainly did not solve his problem.
October 30, 20204 yr 38 minutes ago, Arsenal79 said: No announcement from the FBI because they don’t want to "politicize” an election. Multiple sources have confirmed it’s ongoing. But hey, if you’re comfortable voting for Shanghai Joe while he’s being investigated for selling out our country, that says it all about your TDS affliction! Hey, if your comfortable voting for p-grabber Trump; 26 sexual assaults/rape Trump; impeached Trump; fined for fraudulent charity Trump; extorting Ukraine Trump; hush money to porn star for sex while cheating on his wife Trump; Failure to release tax returns Trump; and on and on and on and on Trump -- that says it all about YOU and your affliction. 2 minutes ago, vikas83 said: The problem was he told them he would update them on any developments or changes. He left himself no room. BS -- there technically was no development until they determined if the emails were new. They weren't. He could have waited until that determination.
October 30, 20204 yr 9 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said: It wasn't really leaked out. Comey sent a letter to congress, and that letter was inevitably going to be made public. Comey did box himself in. But he really ought to have waited until they actually determined whether the emails changed anything, and not just rushed to inform congress when "potential" new evidence was found. How did he "box himself in". Let's assume he did nothing until AFTER the election. What would have happened -- some angry congressman, yelling at Comey? Who cares. Comey's a sanctimonious idiot. Oh noooo, I made a promise to Congress.
October 30, 20204 yr 4 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said: I agree with that. Was stupid. But he could have gotten around that interpretation by saying nothing they found had changed anything yet. If they found something in those emails? Ok, fair game. But saying "oh here's some emails we didn't know existed - better run to Congress!!" that seems dumb. See Edit I added above. He had no choice once they re-opened the investigation because it made his prior testimony no longer accurate.
October 30, 20204 yr 4 minutes ago, caesar said: Hey, if your comfortable voting for p-grabber Trump; 26 sexual assaults/rape Trump; impeached Trump; fined for fraudulent charity Trump; extorting Ukraine Trump; hush money to porn star for sex while cheating on his wife Trump; Failure to release tax returns Trump; and on and on and on and on Trump -- that says it all about YOU and your affliction. BS -- there technically was no development until they determined if the emails were new. They weren't. He could have waited until that determination. No. He testified that it was over under oath to Congress. Once he re-opened the case, he had to supplement his testimony. If he didn't, and it leaked, GOP lawmakers would have come after him for perjury.
October 30, 20204 yr 6 minutes ago, vikas83 said: The problem was he told them he would update them on any developments or changes. He left himself no room. EDIT: Looking back, he testified under oath to Congress that the investigation was closed. When he had to re-open it, he had to supplement his testimony. Just a debacle to have given that testimony. Obviously, he thought Clinton would win and that this would leak after the election, making it appear the FBI covered up for her. He was wrong. There was nothing that said he had to on a particular date or time, update Congress. He could have waited. And even if Hillary won, its easily explained as: 1. hadn't seen any evidence that emails were NEW or bad; 2. Not enough info to provide a meaningful update 3. Policy of FBI to not say stuff right before elections about investigations
October 30, 20204 yr 3 minutes ago, vikas83 said: No. He testified that it was over under oath to Congress. Once he re-opened the case, he had to supplement his testimony. If he didn't, and it leaked, GOP lawmakers would have come after him for perjury. Had to - but WHEN. No one said it has to be done the friggin' SECOND its opened. That wasn't in there. And that's not perjury -- by not updating congress. Comey was worried about how the FBI would "look". Not being up on a perjury charge.
October 30, 20204 yr 3 minutes ago, vikas83 said: See Edit I added above. He had no choice once they re-opened the investigation because it made his prior testimony no longer accurate. Show me the rule where if you change your testimony (or anticipate changing), it has to be done RIGHT THEN AND THERE, rather than waiting to see if it really was anything new.
October 30, 20204 yr 3 minutes ago, vikas83 said: See Edit I added above. He had no choice once they re-opened the investigation because it made his prior testimony no longer accurate. Was the case officially re-opened? I honestly do not know what distinguishes an open vs closed case. The letter stated the following: Quote In connection with an unrelated case, the FBI has learned of the existence of emails that appear to be pertinent to the investigation. I am writing to inform you that the investigative team briefed me on this yesterday, and I agreed that the FBI should take appropriate investigative steps designed to allow investigators to review these emails to determine whether they contain classified information, as well as to assess their importance to our investigation. Although the FBI cannot yet assess whether or not this material may be significant, and I cannot predict how long it will take us to complete this additional work, I believe it is important to update your Committees about our efforts in light of my previous testimony. Is investigators reviewing new evidence actually re-opening the case? The way I would read that, as a layman in these matters, is that they were reviewing the emails to determine if the case needed to be re-opened. They had no specific reason to believe the emails would contain classified material, they just knew they had found some more potential evidence. But does that open a case officially? Or does it just mean we're seeing if this means we need to open a case? (I'm asking, honestly don't know)
Create an account or sign in to comment