Democrats see disparity in FBI's handling of Clinton, Russia

>Comey acknowledged the extraordinary national interest in an election-year investigation into a presidential candidate when he took the unusual step in July of publicly announcing the bureau’s decision to not recommend charges for Clinton and of discussing evidence his agents had reviewed and the legal standard they were applying. His characterization of Clinton and her aides as “extremely careless” was condemned by Democrats as unnecessary editorializing.

>That news conference was followed by hours of testimony before Congress and then, just 11 days before the Nov. 8 election, a vaguely worded letter to Congress advising that new emails potentially connected to the case had been discovered and would need to be reviewed.

>A follow-up letter nine days later said the email review had done nothing to change the FBI’s original conclusion, further angering Democrats about why a public disclosure was made before the FBI had even obtained a warrant to search the emails.

>Now, amid reports of the FBI’s ongoing Russia inquiries, tensions have risen over the paucity of public information.

>Tempers flared during a contentious closed-door meeting on Capitol Hill last month, when House Democrats angry over the public disclosures in the Clinton case confronted Comey over his silence. He maintained a similar stance earlier that week during an appearance before the Senate Intelligence Committee, when he said, “I would never comment on investigations — whether we have one or not — in an open forum like this so I can’t answer one way or the other.”

>Rep. Elijah Cummings of Maryland, the top Democrat on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said he’d been stymied by the FBI in his requests for information on any inquiries into Russian meddling in the presidential election or intercepted communications with Russian officials. Yet when it came to the Clinton case, he said, “it seemed like it was almost a blow-by-blow” account from the bureau.

>“It’s placed Comey under significant scrutiny,” Cummings said, “and I think people will be looking very carefully at how he handles this entire situation.”

>The FBI declined to comment.

>Nonetheless, there are distinctions in the two cases that prevent them from being perfectly analogous.

>A counterintelligence investigation that examines contacts with foreign officials is, by design, typically out of public view, and often information that is accumulated for intelligence purposes is never made public.

>The intelligence community inspector general referred the Clinton email matter to the Justice Department in a letter that was released to members of Congress and subsequently made public. Law enforcement officials then took certain overt steps, such as taking from a law office a thumb drive containing Clinton’s emails, that made it virtually impossible to deny that an investigation was underway.

>Comey himself was mostly tight-lipped as his agents reviewed whether Clinton had unlawfully mishandled classified information, except to say that the FBI was committing resources toward the matter and that he was receiving regular updates on it.

>His first extensive comments came at a July press conference at FBI headquarters, when he acknowledged the unusual nature of the public statement he was about to make but said “the American people deserve those details in a case of intense public interest.”

>People close to him have said he felt compelled to alert Congress about the discovery of additional emails — found on a laptop belonging to Anthony Weiner, the now estranged husband of top Clinton aide Huma Abedin — after having previously testified under oath that he would update members if there was a need to revisit the investigation. There were also concerns that the FBI’s work could leak out.

>>112255
>Comey announces that investigations are underway
>Announces investigations are concluded with no results

>When new evidence comes up Comey announces investigation is reopened
>Comey announces nothing came of it, case is closed again

I get the feeling that in about 2 months those 4 lines will be the litmus test for political affiliation in America.

>https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/statement-by-fbi-director-james-b-comey-on-the-investigation-of-secretary-hillary-clinton2019s-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system
But as for the additional information he gave back in July, it really is concerning that he told the news that if anyone else had done what Hillary did they would have been stripped of clearences and charged with at minimum mishandling of classified materials.

The difference for the Trump Russia allegations circling through the news is that the extent of the evidence right now is
>Trump encouraged russia to turn over anything it had hacked from hillarys server
>One of trumps aides talked to an ambassador in december, the recent ousting of 35 russian diplomats came up and this may violate the logan act based on what the transcript says
>Trumps ex campaign manager also worked on a campaign for a Ukrainian Prime minister, got him elected by sculpting his image and policy as more european/american than russian

>>112382
>But as for the additional information he gave back in July, it really is concerning that he told the news that if anyone else had done what Hillary did they would have been stripped of clearences and charged with at minimum mishandling of classified materials.

that's definitely true, though. look at petraeus.

>>One of trumps aides talked to an ambassador in december, the recent ousting of 35 russian diplomats came up and this may violate the logan act based on what the transcript says

already confirmed as nothing, even by MSM afaik

>>Trumps ex campaign manager also worked on a campaign for a Ukrainian Prime minister, got him elected by sculpting his image and policy as more european/american than russian

manafort you mean? manafort's connected somehow to the deep state/intelligence, somehow. who knows what's in play on that level. probably a war, considering the current amount of bullshit flying around.

>>112389
Its just to outline the differences in situations. Im well aware the MSM has nothing concrete to go on and a good old fashioned red scare will keep the boomers glued to their TVs for those sweet sweet ratings. The evidence as is has been pretty flimsy to go by but the immense desire to see Trump impeached makes the evidence seem much stronger than it is. If theres something more substantial i havnt seen it come along on spidr.today

>>112392
I think that if you look past all the MSM, that Trump is actually a fairly good president. He may even be the best, especially if he chases the nonwhites out.

>>112398
I look at statements put out by his representatives and himself, and I see dysfunction, chaos, and stupidity. Whether you agree or not with his policies, his implementation of said policies are terrible. That's the thing that so many people don't get. Implementation is usually as important, if not more important then the policy itself. A good idea can turn to absolute shit very quickly if you don't do a good job getting it up and running.

>>112399
Fucking this so much. Trump is blatantly incompetent when it comes to actually governing and to dispute this is to put one's position at odds with observable, objective reality. You can't run the US government like a company, and I'm doubtful you can even run a company the way Trump is trying to run the US government.
People defending him always do so from an ideological standpoint, nobody even tries to defend the way his policies are executed. That's an implicit admission of his utter incompetence when it comes to running a government. It's a shame really, he's in a position to totally reform government in a good way but seems to have no intention to do so. He exposed the political establishment as bumbling fools but won't use the power and influence he gained in doing so to actually make things better. Instead he squanders his political capital by ranting about crowd sizes, tweeting outrageous things and getting into pointless fights with media outlets and his own intelligence agencies. There appears to be no good faith from him whatsoever.

>>112404
He is keeping his promises:
-Build a wall against Mexican Illegals.
-Make mexico pay for it(Nafta fight)
-Keep Muslims out of the country(he is trying)
-Drain the swamp(Lifelong ban to lobbying for foreign countries and 5 year ban for national companys.

You have for the first time in generations a President who cares for the people instead of beeing a Wallstreet puppet, and you keep crying. Why?

>>112409
>draining the swamp
kek, he's pretty much setting new records for cronyism

>>112409
>New H1B visas are now 130k minimum
>Gave teeth to anti-trafficking agencies
>Major healthcare and finance reforms have started by creating committees to inspect and report to him on what is working for the american people and what isnt
>Dollar got stronger, DOW is up
>Mattis just told NATO pay up or we will reconsider our place as the world police

Really Im just disapointed that the media takes the bait every time he dangles it out there. The man is like catnip

>>112409
Not him, but you literally just proved his point. Dodging criticism of Trump's weak execution by turning the discussion into an ideological one. His proposals for the wall are a mess (budget? schedule? logistics? who needs 'em!?), his travel ban was and is a shitshow, he passed toothless legislation against lobbying only to give his wall street cronies all the power they could ask for by appoining them directly into his cabinet, the list goes on and I'm sure it'll only get longer as we get further into his presidency.

Learn to tell the difference between reasoned criticism of public policy and "crying" about an election. Nobody brings that shit up but Trumpettes, because everyone else is looking at how badly the president is fumbling every opportunity to establish himself as a competent leader. For the record, many people including myself were just as critical of Obama, so please don't try to Conway this discussion into a partisan mudslinging contest. Indiscriminate drone strikes that levelled hospitals and killed numerous innocents were just as reprehensible then as they are now. Not to mention his failure to take a firm stance against the use of torture and the existence of Guantanamo Bay, which still houses people who committed no crimes and were detained illegally. The fact is, that shit, and the election, it's over. We're trying to analyze what's happening right now, and every time someone prods the White House for real answers about the shoddy implementation of nearly every policy proposed thus far, we get
>Muh crowds were huge
>3 million illegals voted against me
>Buy Ivanka Trump's shoes
>Russia's not so bad! They only blew up a Malaysian jetliner, invaded a neighboring country and annexed part of another, and have been spending the past two decades funding activist groups in the US that seek to divide and destablize it on both sides of the party line with impish glee!

I don't even know why I responded to your bullshit troll anyways

>>112404
>oh nooo he's been in the office for nearly a month already, hasnt drained the swamp and reformed the government completely
>drumpfkins BTFO
you're quite literally retarded.

So we're still out to shoot the messengers while ignoring the fact that Hitlery is the most corrupt politician in US history?

>>112418
>but hillary
>but hillary
>but hillary
Are you faggots actual broken records when it comes to this shit?

Literally no one outside of the extreme left thinks hillary wasn't corrupt and basically ran her campaign on being 'anti trump' than anything legitimate. But that doesn't excuse the trump admin from being super shady about shit like this

Liberals have run themselves so deep into the ground with their stupid bullshit that it's basically impossible to criticize any of trump's actions without having some right winger fuckhead saying that the left is equally if not more so guilty of the same thing

The minute we see some sort of gop or trump riot against the left I guarantee this'll be the first thing out of their mouths

>>112425
>the extreme left
who?

>Liberals
all?

Not saying I disagree with your conclusion but sweeping generalisation are part of the problem with modern politics.

>>112425
I think anon is refering to the hypocrisy of widespread media support for Clinton vs their current anti-corruption stance. The one good thing about Trump being in the whitehouse is that MSM won't suck his dick at every opportunity.

>>112411
You keep saying this because it fits your narrative, but it's just wrong.

Our problem has never been "evil CEOS working in our government" it's TRAITORS IN OUR GOVERNMENT. like the people who fucked up the Yemen raid and got Navy Seals killed.

>>112425
>Literally no one outside of the extreme left thinks hillary wasn't corrupt
heh

heheheh

BWAAHAHHAHAHAH

> it's basically impossible to criticize any of trump's actions without having some right winger fuckhead saying that the left is equally if not more so guilty of the same thing

>the partys are teh same guys stop being so partisam!!!

>>112425
ironically i think the extreme left hates hillary more than the moderate left; to the extreme left, she's a bourgeoisie traitor in league with the capitalist establishment, and/or a neocon (which they hate)

the "moderate left" in america are just republicans with slightly more liberal social policies. they aren't anti-war in any way except a marginally reactionary way, and if they could countenance voting for hillary "my name is synonymous with everything leftists are supposed to hate" then they aren't actual leftists for the most part.

granted, she had quite a propaganda machine going. but still, facts were freely available as to her actual conduct and yet a great deal of people voted for her.

>>112425

>Literally no one outside of the extreme left thinks hillary wasn't corrupt and basically ran her campaign on being 'anti trump' than anything legitimate.

Nah, the partisan left and conservative/centrist democrats loved her, but the far left, both the socialist and social justice wings, absolutely detested her. The funny thing is, is that blacks and hispanics are fairly conservative when it comes to a lot of shit, and those are the ones who tended to have the most enthusiasm about Clinton.

>>112459
Yeah. The Clintonite wing of the Democrats tend to sneer down at the poor and uneducated just as much as the country club Republicans, and are just as willing to jump in on the class warfare shit. It's even more hypocritical, because they'll pat themselves on the back at how tolerant they're making the country when another minority gets into the Forbes 500 even as wealth inequality grows and the middle class is hollowed out, education and medical insurance/medicine gets even more pricey, and the employment market shits on the worker class more.

>>112252
Federal Bureau of Ignorance
Crack Importers Association
Department of Homo Sexuals

>>112404
Of course people defending him will do it from an ideological point of view and eschew the personal fuck up he's acting like. Politics isn't an assured quality. Getting rid of Trump wouldn't be putting someone in who can implement his policies competently, it'd be empowering the opposite end of the spectrum with the Democrats thanks to the two party system and the back and forth pendulum it creates. There likely won't be another chance to do what Trump is trying to do so people are supporting him despite his idiocy for that reason. The left did the same thing when they went all in with Clinton.

>>112414
While I can't totally agree with the person you responded to, there comes a point when "handled well" is impossible. No matter how trump sets forth on the travel ban he is gonna be met with extreme opposition which is gonna turn it into a shitshow. Of all things this TEMPORARY travel ban has been turned into an ideological battle by the opposition (who I don't fully disagree with) all the while ignoring the word temporary in it as well as refusing to believe a "we gotta get our shit together and work out how to handle a huge influx of new people humanely for everyone" mentality exists (and of course some people just want all the non-whites gone, I'm aware they exist). This entire thing is going to be a shitshow DUE to ideological concerns, desires, and obstructions. Once again I am not saying Trump is competent or incompetent, just pointing out how this idea of him being able to streamline everything to perfection in a way that leaves everyone happy is impossible and frankly retarded. Also ignoring that he IS trying to keep his promises and has been fighting, however poorly, to do so is just as bad as dodging criticism of his execution. Times are strange and things will get stranger.

>>112252
>public disclosures about Hillary Clinton’s emails
they did nothing of the kind, so that's the dems lying again