Sources: Mueller has evidence Cohen was in Prague in 2016, confirming part of dossier

You're right, there is in fact a difference. Clinton did in fact break the law. Comey said as much himself as he outlined her offenses during the now infamous press conference. Comey then took the role of being prosecutor, judge and jury and decided that Clinton did not "intend" to break those laws which he detailed. One, that was not his job to do. Secondly, and most importantly, intent is irrelevant in determining guilt or innocence. This fact is, as per usual, ignored by leftists as it destroys the narrative. It's for a judge and jury to determine the outcome of her investigation. Now her intent, or lack thereof may have some bearing during the sentencing should she be found guilty in a court of law, which is where this belongs. Perhaps a kind hearted judge could be found to oversee the trial and then give her a lighter sentence if found guilty because she didn't "intend" to break the law, but the bottom line it was not for Comey, or you, or me, or the media to decide. Until this evidence as outlined by Comey is presented in a courtroom during trial, this case remains a travesty of justice.

A travesty of justice would be charging an innocent woman with espionage.
 
YOU speak as if HRC should be hanged. Trump and associates are being investigated by a Special Counsel.

Playing dumb won't work, smurf.

The tu quoque argument, isn't. His guilt or innocence, as it is conjoined to HRC, is uncorrelated to HRC's "bad judgment" as stated by Comey.

AG Jeff Sessions has been asked, in televised hearings, to appoint an SC to investigate HRC--what's the hold-up?
If you re-read my post I did state that "if" she is found guilty. I don't know whether or not she is or isn't, but the evidence needs to be presented in a court of law. That is my relevant point.
 
Hence, it got laid off on him.

Not to put too fine a point on this. But actually, Comey just took it and told Lynch that he would be making an announcement. Comey is out there arguing that Loretta dirtied herself out on the tarmac so he had to step in as the unappeciated savior.

Wrong on Comey's part. If Loretta had to recuse then it would fall to Rosenstein or another in the chain of command within the Justice Department prosecutorial division/ranks. There is no chain of succession over to the Law Enforcement/Investigators for prosecutorial decisions.

Similarly, if your local district attorney needs to recuse then he/she needs to give the decision making authority to an underling or ask the state AG to appoint someone to do it. There is absolutely no basis for the local chief of police or the chief investigator for the state police to step up the mike and declare that he is in charge, as though he is Al Haig or something.

Comey's duty there was to write up his referral over to the Justice Department and privately explain further as needed to them. Then he is done. Whether the Justice Department prosecutiorial division prosecutes or not is up to them and it is up to them to work out how and who will decide that if Loretta is too dirty.

Comey also had the power to recuse earlier and to ask the AG to appoint a special counsel if he felt that things were too messed up to carry out a clean investigation because he, his people, and/or Loretta were too conflicted.

Again, Comey is out there playing the role of poor public servant who rose to do what is best for the country while knowing it would hurt him. Bullfeathers. He is a total fuck-up and took the unprofessional road at every turn.
 
However, the conclusion of the fbi is on my side.

The fbi recently concluded that the guy in charge of the Hillary investigation was a total fucking liar who would have no future credibility in court so needed to be unceremoniously shit-canned.

And this was even before the yet-to-come IG report on the fbi investigation of hillary is released.

Those factors are not exactly on your side when you and your ilk argue that she had a proper investigation. The IG certainly has not concluded that yet.
 
Jeff Sessions doesn't agree.
Apparently you are correct. I suspect he's looking far into the future and since there's so much corruption and criminal activity in our government he doesn't want to open up a can of worms which may come back to bite the republicans once democrats again have the upper hand. Foolish on his part, because the left will gut whoever and wherever they can moving forward.
 
We're 15 months into a new POTUS term and 20 have been charged and two campaign aides and one Cabinet member have pleaded guilty to felony crimes.

Hillary's campaign? Zero.

How the FUCK are you Repugs this inept? LOCK HER UP!
 
Back
Top