ADVERTISEMENT

This is exactly what Coney did yesterday.

Can't imagine he was "ordered" to do anything and from everything I've read he was honorable enough to resign had someone run that type of interference directly at him....do believe that he was told even if he recommended charges that the newest puppet, LL and the DOun-J career scumbag department lawyers weren't going to prosecute, which probably forced his hand.

Suspect that the serial rapist Bill promised LL a new position in the cabinet or they were going to create a new department called "Department of Women who's legs are bigger then their necks protection and equality." LL would be the inaugural member followed by hildabeast.

Had this been an R or conservative I would have wanted them charged and sent to jail in Tijuana. Which is one of the things that people like sys and dUPe can't grasp. This is not about a party surviving by winning a presidency, at all costs. It is about a country of laws surviving because the very laws that make us great are respected and followed.

After looking through some of the examples of us low life cretins who were PROSECUTED for far less, anyone who argues that there aren't two distinct sets of rules in this country is a complete and utter dumbass.

Hopefully he will end his service honorably, although with what he said can not imagine hildabeast keeping him around were she-it to win, and he will write a tell all book and torpedo all of them. As a thread below mentioned the only way to ever clear this up will be to have a States Convention and start de-nutting the federal government with the first order of business term limits.
 
Last edited:
Agree?

http://www.caintv.com/theory-under-orders-to-let-hil

If she had been indicted, we would be facing Biden/Warren 16 - a somehow even bigger shit sandwich option than is already on the table. This way, she stays in the game but the game is exposed.

Don't agree. We never would have seen Biden. Nothing would have happened to her. The dems circle the wagon and she's elected. JMHO.
 
Agree?

http://www.caintv.com/theory-under-orders-to-let-hil

If she had been indicted, we would be facing Biden/Warren 16 - a somehow even bigger shit sandwich option than is already on the table. This way, she stays in the game but the game is exposed.
Biden/Warren is only a small shit sandwich for the 48% percent of the people that would vote against them. Leaving Hillary in the race is giant shit sandwich for everyone who wishes to see the USA continue as a republic. Say what you will about Biden/Warren, your chief disagreements with them will be on their ideas and policies. If Hillary is president the chief disagreement with a huge segment of the population will be her legitimacy and criminality. I don't know if we can take it.
 
I think Mega is probably partially correct as to Comey's calculation. But, I think it was Sanders that he feared, not Biden. He feared that if he indicated the FBI was recommending an indictment, the political pressure would mount on her to resign. While anyone with a lick of sense can see that the "charges" Comey laid out against Clinton cleared the bar within the applicable statute for criminality with quite a bit of room for comfort, the way he stated it gave Hillary enough wiggle room within the coterie of useful idiots that is her media rah-rah squad and the typical lefty voter. As we know, all Hillary, or any Clinton needs is a smidge of wiggle room. Comey, I think, tried his best to lay out what she did, but still leave it to the American voters to decide, thinking it would be too much of a fiasco if he did otherwise and would likely serve to elect Sanders.

I said quite awhile back that I thought Biden would end up being the Dem. nominee. However, I think he waited too late if he wanted to jump in and that Sanders received so much support from hardcore, even violent, supporters that the DNC would have a riot on its hands if they tried to install Biden over Sanders.
 
I'm not sure I agree with Cain, but the fix was in. The only thing that went wrong with the meeting between Bill Clinton and Lynch is that they were caught. If anyone sees this timeline for anything other than its reality, they are a true bootlicker.

June 28 - meeting between Lynch and Clinton on a private tarmac that was supposed to be devoid of media except some local media guy got tipped off.

July 2 - Hillary meets with the FBI.

July 5 - With a blazing speed not previously seen by a federal law enforcement agency, the FBI manages to wrap things up over the holiday weekend and Comey announces no charges early Tuesday to stay ahead of the media talking rounds before the DNC starts.

The ONLY thing that wasn't planned was the exposure of the Clinton/Lynch meeting. Without that discovery, this blows over without much of a peep. I'd be going into hiding if I were the guy that exposed the secret meeting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Headhunter
I'm not sure I agree with Cain, but the fix was in. The only thing that went wrong with the meeting between Bill Clinton and Lynch is that they were caught. If anyone sees this timeline for anything other than its reality, they are a true bootlicker.

June 28 - meeting between Lynch and Clinton on a private tarmac that was supposed to be devoid of media except some local media guy got tipped off.

July 2 - Hillary meets with the FBI.

July 5 - With a blazing speed not previously seen by a federal law enforcement agency, the FBI manages to wrap things up over the holiday weekend and Comey announces no charges early Tuesday to stay ahead of the media talking rounds before the DNC starts.

The ONLY thing that wasn't planned was the exposure of the Clinton/Lynch meeting. Without that discovery, this blows over without much of a peep. I'd be going into hiding if I were the guy that exposed the secret meeting.

The meeting with Hillary on July 2 was likely just to advise her as to what he was going to recommend on charges, etc. The investigation was likely done.

That is pretty common.
 
Is it just too much to accept that the guy did his job without external influence? What is it in his background that leads you to believe he would compromise his ethics on this? How can you disrespect by all accounts a good an honorable former prosecutor?

SMH at the butt hurt on this board...
 
Is it just too much to accept that the guy did his job without external influence? What is it in his background that leads you to believe he would compromise his ethics on this? How can you disrespect by all accounts a good an honorable former prosecutor?

SMH at the butt hurt on this board...


From his statement, explaining why the FBI wasn't recommending charges be brought:

"In our system, the prosecutors make the decisions about whether charges are appropriate based on evidence the FBI has helped collect. … we frequently … engage in productive conversations with prosecutors about what resolution may be appropriate, given the evidence."

I think you can surely do the math.
 
Is it just too much to accept that the guy did his job without external influence? What is it in his background that leads you to believe he would compromise his ethics on this? How can you disrespect by all accounts a good an honorable former prosecutor?

SMH at the butt hurt on this board...

Then explain why he built a case. In public.
 
From his statement, explaining why the FBI wasn't recommending charges be brought:

"In our system, the prosecutors make the decisions about whether charges are appropriate based on evidence the FBI has helped collect. … we frequently … engage in productive conversations with prosecutors about what resolution may be appropriate, given the evidence."

I think you can surely do the math.
I think he did the math for me:

“Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.”
 
Then explain why he built a case. In public.
“Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.”
 
I can't believe all the people who have fallen for the legendary integrity of James Comey BS that everyone hides behind.

The Wall Street Journal has done a good job of documenting that this Comey guy, even though he was appointed by a Republican, has a long track record of going after conservatives and giving Democrats a pass.

He's just another lackey for the Democrat political elites he does what he's told to protect his friends and they in turn pronounce from the mountain tops how much integrity he has.

Just look at all the illegal activities of the IRS, EPA, and many others that the FBI has completely ignored.
 
Stick whatever brand - R/D - on whomever. The shit flowing out of the douche-bag is still the same, and it ain't cleansing!!
 
Man I'm glad you are here to explain this stuff. That idiot Rudy Giuliani sure seems to think his former employee dropped the ball.

And I'm glad I don't have to read his insipid shit. That said, Rudy gets it.
 
The meeting with Hillary on July 2 was likely just to advise her as to what he was going to recommend on charges, etc. The investigation was likely done.

That is pretty common.
Thanks for the insight JD.
 
Is it just too much to accept that the guy did his job without external influence? What is it in his background that leads you to believe he would compromise his ethics on this? How can you disrespect by all accounts a good an honorable former prosecutor?

SMH at the butt hurt on this board...
I'm not pointing any fingers at Comey. There are others involved above him that are much more political and much less trustworthy.

What are your thoughts on the Bill/Loretta meeting? I had no doubts Hillary wasn't going to get a slapping. What is concerning is what was said and how it was said, especially after the meeting fiasco. It could all be on the up and up, but the history of Hillary and the Obama administration doesn't support readily coming to that conclusion.
 
I'm not pointing any fingers at Comey. There are others involved above him that are much more political and much less trustworthy.

What are your thoughts on the Bill/Loretta meeting? I had no doubts Hillary wasn't going to get a slapping. What is concerning is what was said and how it was said, especially after the meeting fiasco. It could all be on the up and up, but the history of Hillary and the Obama administration doesn't support readily coming to that conclusion.
If people think the biggest attempt at influence was that meeting on the tarmac - well I think you get the point. Pretty amateurish IMO - no way you pull that off without someone getting wind of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Medic007
If people think the biggest attempt at influence was that meeting on the tarmac - well I think you get the point. Pretty amateurish IMO - no way you pull that off without someone getting wind of it.
I completely agree. I know you aren't a sycophant and I really do appreciate that about you. The Mike's Harder Lemonade is a point of contention though.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT