We know that Comey went out of his way, over and beyond any protocol, to criticize and damage Clinton. Not that it was his motivation, but it was certainly was the effect.
If Comey was trying to protect Clinton, he did the worst possible job. It strains credulity.
Comey covered for Clinton with an incomplete FBI investigation and closed the matter as quickly as possible.
Letter from Senator Grassley to FBI Director Wray
Mr. Corneyâs final statement acknowledged âthere is evidence ofpotential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified informationâ but nonetheless cleared Secretary Clinton because he claimed there was no intent or obstruction ofjustice. Yet, evidence of destruction of emails known to be under subpoena by the House of Representatives, and subject to congressional preservation requests, was obtained in interviews around the time that Mr. Corney began drafting his exoneration statement.8 Moreover, the Justice Department entered into highly unusual immunity agreements with Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson in June 2016-after Mr. Corney began drafting his exoneration statement-to review Clinton email archives on their laptops.9
The immunity agreements limited the FBIâs ability to review Clinton email archives from Platte River Networks that were created after June 1, 2014, and before February 1, 2015, and which had been sent or received from Secretary Clintonâs four email addresses during her tenure as Secretary of State.10 These limitations prevented the FBI from reviewing records surrounding a March 2015 conference call that Paul Combetta, an employee of Platte River Networks, had with David Kendall and Ms. Mills, the attorneys for Secretary Clinton. I I After having been initially untruthful and then receiving his own immunity agreement, Mr. Combetta admitted in his third FBI interview, in May 2016, that after a March 2015 conference call with Secretary Clintonâs attorneys, he used BleachBit to destroy any remaining copies of Clintonâs emails. 12
The limitations in the immunity agreements with Ms. Mills and Ms. Samuelson also kept the FBI from looking at emails after Secretary Clinton left office-the period in which communications regarding destruction or concealment of federal records would have most likely taken place. 13 And finally, the agreements provided that the Department would destroy any records which it retrieved that were not turned over to the investigative team and would destroy the laptops.14 Despite public claims by the FBI that the laptops were not in fact destroyed, the purpose ofthat promise to destroy them has not been explained.15 However, Judiciary Committee staffreviewed the immunity agreements as part oftheir oversight work, so there is no question that the terms o f the agreement called for the Department to destroy evidence that had not been fully and completely reviewed.
And we shall hear all about it here.
Once again youâre proven wrong over and over again.
Comey had too. Leaks coming out of New YorkâŚand they were going to subpoena those email on Weenier laptop.
I like that Conanism. Iâm going to use Weenier from now on.
We went through this before. The subpoena is not a public document. No one but the FBI and NYPD would know about the subpoena.
The leaks coming out of New York prove that the law enforcement agencies were working in a corrupt manner against Clinton which directly contradicts your long held belief.
What would have happened if Comey said nothing to Congress about opening the investigation? Try me.
Clinton would have still lost.
People in Rustbelt states werenât voting about Hillary emailsâŚsomething that you and other libs failed to understand.
And yes subpoena from my understanding is a matter of public record.
Itâs entirely possible, but thatâs your conjecture. Iâd ask you to provide evidence to support it, but I donât think you have anything other than your gut. No one would argue that this action helped Clinton. Rudolph Giuliani himself was gloating about the lucky break they got before it was released saying: âWe got a couple things up our sleeve that should turn this around. Even the liberal pollsters will get to see.â
You donât speak for âpeople in the rustbelt statesâ so donât even try. When was the last time you lived here?
If you want to claim youâre proving me wrong âagain and againâ then actually do it. Prove that the subpoena would have automatically been public knowledge.
2009 to 2010. Gone back few times. About every other year. May go back this summer.
But Iâve keep in touch with family and friends all the time. And they are all tradesmen.
Some union, some not. But oddly what brought my original attention was they both started talking and saying the same thing.
Thatâs when I knew it was ripe for Rustbelt to fallâŚand it could have happen in 2012 if Romeny did what I suggested back then.
Do your own homework.
I didnât make the claim. You did. Now you donât want to back it up.
My guess, either you know you made it up or youâre too lazy to go about proving it. Which one is it Conan? Are you too afraid to admit it?
Next time you want to claim youâve âproven me wrongâ, Iâm going to remind you of this. You havenât proven squat. Not now. Not ever.
Not surprised at all. Birds of a feather and all. Doesnât give you the right to speak for the Rustbelt. Not everyone here is as gullible as you.
Donât know New York laws but either way if courts are involve it does become a matter of public record at some point.
Either way Comey had too. The pressure was on.
And none of that matters. The fact that John Good tried warning the FBI the dangers of tarnishing their image if they werenât careful.
But apparently Comey and upper levels of Hoover building didnât care, they felt protecting Hillary was more important.
The Republicans run the DoJ, and Comey has been gone for over a year. However, Hillary has not been indicted.
And she wonât be. They are afraid.
