Pre-release leaks

Boomboom521

Redshirt
Mar 14, 2014
20,115
6
0
But he was, convicted, and spent over a year in prison. Why? He wasn't Hillary.

"To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences". She faced none.
Rice and Powell have received emails on a private account that were classified though.
 

Boomboom521

Redshirt
Mar 14, 2014
20,115
6
0
In one case a sailor took a photo inside a classified sub. Never transmitted the picture from his phone vs. Sending, receiving and storing classified state secrets over an unsecured medium.

Both are crimes. One was prosecuted. One was given a wink and a nod. Hillarys crime was more along the lines of David Petreaus and IMO should have been handled in a similar fashion. Leave govt. Be gone. No clearence. By now.
Wasn’t the sailor ignoring direct orders?
 

TarHeelEer

Freshman
Dec 15, 2002
89,304
53
48
The IG didn't. Here is the summary.



Yes, but THE and company believe Wray and DOJ staffers summarized intentionally to mislead the public as to the IG’s findings as to bias.

DOJ IG Michael Horowitz: "We found the implication that senior FBI employees would be willing to take official action to impact the presidential candidate's electoral prospects to be deeply troubling."

Again, that is about as extreme of vocabulary you will get from an IG.
 
Sep 6, 2013
27,594
120
0
The report clearly states that classified information was sent, received and stored on her server. It was also accessed by at least one foreign hacker. It pays to be able to read.

Yet I posted it right there for everyone to read. What a dilemma; do we believe our lying eyes reading the post that contains part of the report or your post?

LMAO!
 

Shirley Knott

Redshirt
May 26, 2017
12,831
0
0
Boomy can read the headlines and determine whether to believe what is reported or dismiss as right propaganda...
 

TarHeelEer

Freshman
Dec 15, 2002
89,304
53
48
Yet I posted it right there for everyone to read. What a dilemma; do we believe our lying eyes reading the post that contains part of the report or your post?

LMAO!

I'm not sure why you think your post falsifies what dave states. Both are true.
 

Mntneer

Sophomore
Oct 7, 2001
10,192
196
0
We've been beating this dead horse for how long now?

She wasn't charged. They can't handle that.

Fixed it for you.

What people are having an issue with handling is the clear double standard that was applied to her.
 

dave

Senior
May 29, 2001
60,601
818
113
Yet I posted it right there for everyone to read. What a dilemma; do we believe our lying eyes reading the post that contains part of the report or your post?

LMAO!
Believe the report. You know.....where it says she sent, received and stored classified information.
 

TarHeelEer

Freshman
Dec 15, 2002
89,304
53
48
Horowitz 6/18 Statement:
link

"As detailed in our report, we found that the inappropriate political messages cast a cloud over the Midyear investigation, sowed doubt about the credibility of the FBI’s handling of it, and impacted the reputation of the FBI. Moreover, we found the implication that senior FBI employees would be willing to take official action to impact a presidential candidate’s electoral prospects to be deeply troubling and antithetical to the core values of the FBI and the Department of Justice."
 

DvlDog4WVU

All-Conference
Feb 2, 2008
47,231
3,298
113
Horowitz 6/18 Statement:
link

"As detailed in our report, we found that the inappropriate political messages cast a cloud over the Midyear investigation, sowed doubt about the credibility of the FBI’s handling of it, and impacted the reputation of the FBI. Moreover, we found the implication that senior FBI employees would be willing to take official action to impact a presidential candidate’s electoral prospects to be deeply troubling and antithetical to the core values of the FBI and the Department of Justice."
Yikes
 

TarHeelEer

Freshman
Dec 15, 2002
89,304
53
48
"As we describe in Chapter Twelve of our report, most of the text messages raising such questions pertained to the Russia investigation, which was not a part of this review."
 
Sep 6, 2013
27,594
120
0
Looks to me like McCabe will not only not be indicted, but he will ultimately receive a nice pension/settlement. Thanks IG.

We agreed with Kelley, the FBI’s chief ethics official, that McCabe was not at any time required to recuse from the Clinton-related investigations under the
relevant authorities. However, following the October 23 WSJ article and discussions with Comey, McCabe recused from the Clinton-related investigations on
November 1, 2016. Once McCabe recused himself, he was required to cease participation in those matters. Voluntary recusal is always permissible with the approval of a supervisor or ethics official, even where the elements in section 502(a) are not present.
 

dave

Senior
May 29, 2001
60,601
818
113
Looks to me like McCabe will not only not be indicted, but he will ultimately receive a nice pension/settlement. Thanks IG.

We agreed with Kelley, the FBI’s chief ethics official, that McCabe was not at any time required to recuse from the Clinton-related investigations under the
relevant authorities. However, following the October 23 WSJ article and discussions with Comey, McCabe recused from the Clinton-related investigations on
November 1, 2016. Once McCabe recused himself, he was required to cease participation in those matters. Voluntary recusal is always permissible with the approval of a supervisor or ethics official, even where the elements in section 502(a) are not present.
@wvu2007 mark this one.
 

TarHeelEer

Freshman
Dec 15, 2002
89,304
53
48
Looks to me like McCabe will not only not be indicted, but he will ultimately receive a nice pension/settlement. Thanks IG.

We agreed with Kelley, the FBI’s chief ethics official, that McCabe was not at any time required to recuse from the Clinton-related investigations under the
relevant authorities. However, following the October 23 WSJ article and discussions with Comey, McCabe recused from the Clinton-related investigations on
November 1, 2016. Once McCabe recused himself, he was required to cease participation in those matters. Voluntary recusal is always permissible with the approval of a supervisor or ethics official, even where the elements in section 502(a) are not present.

Well, except for that whole February McCabe report, and his lack of candor thing.
 

dave

Senior
May 29, 2001
60,601
818
113
Looks to me like McCabe will not only not be indicted, but he will ultimately receive a nice pension/settlement. Thanks IG.

We agreed with Kelley, the FBI’s chief ethics official, that McCabe was not at any time required to recuse from the Clinton-related investigations under the
relevant authorities. However, following the October 23 WSJ article and discussions with Comey, McCabe recused from the Clinton-related investigations on
November 1, 2016. Once McCabe recused himself, he was required to cease participation in those matters. Voluntary recusal is always permissible with the approval of a supervisor or ethics official, even where the elements in section 502(a) are not present.
Unless Mccabe has a deal in place he is toast. He was fired for a reason.
 

mneilmont

Sophomore
Jan 23, 2008
20,883
166
0
Yes he was. And that reason was because trump is a dumbass, partisan hack with a very fragile ego who feeds on praise.
When one takes the supervisory position and move into will-and -pleasure division, they must accept the gamble. Trump may be all those things you dream of, but that does not save the *** of a will-and-pleasure employee.
 

dave

Senior
May 29, 2001
60,601
818
113
That report never said the FBI and DOJ were weaponized for political purposes. Just stop it. You don't realize how big of a fool you look like. The report never said the FBI acted in a politcally motivated manner.

So yes, you and dumbdave were both wrong...as always.
Cuntrywrong again.

 

Boomboom521

Redshirt
Mar 14, 2014
20,115
6
0
@Boomboom521 , did you finish reading the report? If so, your assessment?
I got through most of it....I skimmed a great deal.

1- I think it’s pathetic that the FBI adjusts anything due to political implications. The email screw up was Clinton’s fault, and if it’s policy not to comment - they shouldn’t have commented. I don’t believe it was anything but Clinton’s incompetence, but the FBI should have seen the investigation through.

2- I think Comey was a horrible Dir, and the org was borderline out of control....and he should shoulder just as much blame for the lack of trust in the FBI as Trump.

3- I think Lynch did more than I thought she did to avoid bias...but should have addressed the meeting publically.

4- I’m angry that the FBI allowed the lack of thoroughness in the mid year exam.

5- I think there was actual worry within the org that Trump was compromised