Justice Department not going after McCabe

[colfax_m]

Im not worried yet. The IG report was just a few months ago.

Why when Strzok, changed the final report on the Hillary investigation, so that she would be left off the hook for her crimes, did not one FBI agent comment on the way that the report was changed without any reason given or anyone taking official responsibility for the action?

You’re bringing up irrelevant details. The decision not to prosecute Clinton was made after thorough review of all the evidence and relevant statutes. An edit in a report had nothing to do with that decision.

That the conclusion of the report, stated in the language used by the law, that she committed the act that broke the law, and yet the fbi, was not going to prosecute, was bad enough.

That the report was changed to change the final FINDINGS, of the report, and no one spoke out asking who or why that happened,

strongly indicates systemic political corruption of the FBI.

No it doesn’t. The wording of the report was changed to reflect their legal conclusions, not the other way around.

The wording is irrelevant. They had decided not to indict her based on the facts of the case.

They decided to not indict her, despite the findings that she broke the law.


Strzok changed the wording AFTER that, and everyone involved just let it slide, no questions asked.


And that reflects on the organization as a whole.

No. They didn’t find she broke the law. No one that wrote the statement thought she broke the law. Everyone “let it slide” because they all agreed with the conclusion that she didn’t break the law. You’re clinging to this minute detail and blowing it out of proportion because that’s all you have.

 

[eagle1462010]

Why when Strzok, changed the final report on the Hillary investigation, so that she would be left off the hook for her crimes, did not one FBI agent comment on the way that the report was changed without any reason given or anyone taking official responsibility for the action?

You’re bringing up irrelevant details. The decision not to prosecute Clinton was made after thorough review of all the evidence and relevant statutes. An edit in a report had nothing to do with that decision.

That the conclusion of the report, stated in the language used by the law, that she committed the act that broke the law, and yet the fbi, was not going to prosecute, was bad enough.

That the report was changed to change the final FINDINGS, of the report, and no one spoke out asking who or why that happened,

strongly indicates systemic political corruption of the FBI.

No it doesn’t. The wording of the report was changed to reflect their legal conclusions, not the other way around.

The wording is irrelevant. They had decided not to indict her based on the facts of the case.

They decided to not indict her, despite the findings that she broke the law.


Strzok changed the wording AFTER that, and everyone involved just let it slide, no questions asked.


And that reflects on the organization as a whole.

No. They didn’t find she broke the law. No one that wrote the statement thought she broke the law. Everyone “let it slide” because they all agreed with the conclusion that she didn’t break the law. You’re clinging to this minute detail and blowing it out of proportion because that’s all you have.

They let her off because she has dirt on everyone in the swamp and they know it........

110 Felonies outside of Official channels and not ONE CHARGE...............If you think that isn't a crime...........then I have some Ocean Front Property in Arizona to sell you.............

When you own the DOJ you don't get charged...................I can post MANY EXAMPLES of a fraction of this sent people to PRISON for a long time...........

And in the service I signed those papers...........Said you'll be under the jail if you disclose any of this.......

Your side is FULL OF SCHIFF.;..............my new term for Lying asses...........Fitting symbol of the Dem party.

 

[Lesh]

Trumpers seem to have gotten lost

This isn't about Sztrok or Clinton...it's about McCabe...who a Grand Jury refused to indict.

This only came up now..(months after that and against DOJ policy) because Billy the Bagman wants to contrast it with Stone

 

[colfax_m]

Trumpers seem to have gotten lost

This isn't about Sztrok or Clinton...it's about McCabe...who a Grand Jury refused to indict.

This only came up now..(months after that and against DOJ policy) because Billy the Bagman wants to contrast it with Stone

McCabe leaked details of a criminal investigation of the Democratic candidate, before the election to a conservative newspaper and the Republican appointed AG does not prosecute.

And that’s evidence of a liberal deep state.

I swear people have gotten a lot dumber in the last few years.

 

[eagle1462010]

If it wasn't for Double Standards.......the Dems wouldn't have any standards at all.

She had the same security clearance as he did...................But didn't have the NEED TO KNOW.......and for showing a notebook................the Gov't ENDED HIS CAREER.........

Just a small example of the UNEQUAL PROSECUTION of the law.................Maybe he should have slept with Hillary................BARF.........then it wouldn't have ended his career.

 

[Care4all]

Trumpers seem to have gotten lost

This isn't about Sztrok or Clinton...it's about McCabe...who a Grand Jury refused to indict.

This only came up now..(months after that and against DOJ policy) because Billy the Bagman wants to contrast it with Stone

the grand jury failed to indict him 2 to 3 different times that the Barr DOJ tried.... so it wasn't like they did not make an effort for the president, to indict him on some thing, any thing.... but the grand jury found no evidence to support charging him with any of the alleged crimes the prosecutor put forth...

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

If it wasn't for Double Standards.......the Dems wouldn't have any standards at all.

She had the same security clearance as he did...................But didn't have the NEED TO KNOW.......and for showing a notebook................the Gov't ENDED HIS CAREER.........

Just a small example of the UNEQUAL PROSECUTION of the law.................Maybe he should have slept with Hillary................BARF.........then it wouldn't have ended his career.

How is this even relevant? McCabe is no longer employed by the government either. What in the wide world of sports are you babbling about ...?

 

[eagle1462010]

Trumpers seem to have gotten lost

This isn't about Sztrok or Clinton...it's about McCabe...who a Grand Jury refused to indict.

This only came up now..(months after that and against DOJ policy) because Billy the Bagman wants to contrast it with Stone

Those groups of people are ALL TIED TO ALL THESE THINGS...........including the investigation of Clinton......They were ALL PART OF LETTING HILLARY OFF THE HOOK...............even though she was guilty as sin..........

We can go to the Obama years......and the ABUSE OF FISA............SHALL WE.....

The Uncovering – Mike Rogers’ Investigation, Section 702 FISA...

They were using the FISA courts as a Weapon long before Trump was even on the scene..........

The FISA warrants on Page WERE ILLEGAL............PERIOD..........

 

[Correll]

Why when Strzok, changed the final report on the Hillary investigation, so that she would be left off the hook for her crimes, did not one FBI agent comment on the way that the report was changed without any reason given or anyone taking official responsibility for the action?

You’re bringing up irrelevant details. The decision not to prosecute Clinton was made after thorough review of all the evidence and relevant statutes. An edit in a report had nothing to do with that decision.

That the conclusion of the report, stated in the language used by the law, that she committed the act that broke the law, and yet the fbi, was not going to prosecute, was bad enough.

That the report was changed to change the final FINDINGS, of the report, and no one spoke out asking who or why that happened,

strongly indicates systemic political corruption of the FBI.

No it doesn’t. The wording of the report was changed to reflect their legal conclusions, not the other way around.

The wording is irrelevant. They had decided not to indict her based on the facts of the case.

They decided to not indict her, despite the findings that she broke the law.


Strzok changed the wording AFTER that, and everyone involved just let it slide, no questions asked.


And that reflects on the organization as a whole.

No. They didn’t find she broke the law. No one that wrote the statement thought she broke the law. Everyone “let it slide” because they all agreed with the conclusion that she didn’t break the law. You’re clinging to this minute detail and blowing it out of proportion because that’s all you have.

The wording of the final report and the wording of the law is clear. She broke the law. And the FBI choose to let it slide.


Strzok changed the wording AFTER that.

 

[eagle1462010]

If it wasn't for Double Standards.......the Dems wouldn't have any standards at all.

She had the same security clearance as he did...................But didn't have the NEED TO KNOW.......and for showing a notebook................the Gov't ENDED HIS CAREER.........

Just a small example of the UNEQUAL PROSECUTION of the law.................Maybe he should have slept with Hillary................BARF.........then it wouldn't have ended his career.

How is this even relevant? McCabe is no longer employed by the government either. What in the wide world of sports are you babbling about ...?

The discussion was unequal application of our LAWS and HILLARY...............

He got FRAGGED for hardly a damned thing...............Yet Hillary committed 110 FELONIES and didn't get tried..............McCabe.........Comey and the rest of the BS artist at the FBI were involved IN ALL OF IT.

 

[colfax_m]

You’re bringing up irrelevant details. The decision not to prosecute Clinton was made after thorough review of all the evidence and relevant statutes. An edit in a report had nothing to do with that decision.

That the conclusion of the report, stated in the language used by the law, that she committed the act that broke the law, and yet the fbi, was not going to prosecute, was bad enough.

That the report was changed to change the final FINDINGS, of the report, and no one spoke out asking who or why that happened,

strongly indicates systemic political corruption of the FBI.

No it doesn’t. The wording of the report was changed to reflect their legal conclusions, not the other way around.

The wording is irrelevant. They had decided not to indict her based on the facts of the case.

They decided to not indict her, despite the findings that she broke the law.


Strzok changed the wording AFTER that, and everyone involved just let it slide, no questions asked.


And that reflects on the organization as a whole.

No. They didn’t find she broke the law. No one that wrote the statement thought she broke the law. Everyone “let it slide” because they all agreed with the conclusion that she didn’t break the law. You’re clinging to this minute detail and blowing it out of proportion because that’s all you have.

The wording of the final report and the wording of the law is clear. She broke the law. And the FBI choose to let it slide.

Strzok changed the wording AFTER that.

You’re confusing a few issues. Strzok changed the wording of a draft of a statement Comey made at his press conference. The wording was changed in the draft because it did not reflect their legal conclusions. The draft was edited by the highest level FBI team on the case and no one involved in that statement thought there was a case against Clinton.

It was never the final wording and it was not in the report. You have your facts mistaken.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Yet Hillary committed 110 FELONIES and didn't get tried...

No she didn't. I am not going to debate with a delusional freak who states his own fantasies as fact.

 

[eagle1462010]

US woman gets five years in prison for leaking NSA document

The former Air Force translator worked as a contractor at a National Security Agency (NSA) office in Augusta, Georgia, when she printed a classified report and left the building with it. Winner told the FBI she mailed the document to an online news outlet.

In court on Thursday, Winner apologised and acknowledged that what she did was wrong, taking responsibility for "an undeniable mistake that I made".

"I would like to apologise profusely for my actions," she told the judge. "My actions were a cruel betrayal of my nation's trust in me."

Authorities never identified the news organisation.

The Justice Department announced Winner's June 2017 arrest the same day The Intercept reported on a secret NSA document.



AND YET THESE GUYS..........NOTHING.

 

[eagle1462010]

Yet Hillary committed 110 FELONIES and didn't get tried...

No she didn't. I am not going to debate with a delusional freak who states his own fantasies as fact.

Then iggy me you Wanker....................because the documents we can provide have actual court rulings to what was done..........

And there is NO DOUBT........THAT HILLARY committed FELONIES...............

She got off because of the system..........had she been a low private her ass would be in jail for just ONE SCREW UP...........

 

[Correll]

That the conclusion of the report, stated in the language used by the law, that she committed the act that broke the law, and yet the fbi, was not going to prosecute, was bad enough.

That the report was changed to change the final FINDINGS, of the report, and no one spoke out asking who or why that happened,

strongly indicates systemic political corruption of the FBI.

No it doesn’t. The wording of the report was changed to reflect their legal conclusions, not the other way around.

The wording is irrelevant. They had decided not to indict her based on the facts of the case.

They decided to not indict her, despite the findings that she broke the law.


Strzok changed the wording AFTER that, and everyone involved just let it slide, no questions asked.


And that reflects on the organization as a whole.

No. They didn’t find she broke the law. No one that wrote the statement thought she broke the law. Everyone “let it slide” because they all agreed with the conclusion that she didn’t break the law. You’re clinging to this minute detail and blowing it out of proportion because that’s all you have.

The wording of the final report and the wording of the law is clear. She broke the law. And the FBI choose to let it slide.

Strzok changed the wording AFTER that.

You’re confusing a few issues. Strzok changed the wording of a draft of a statement Comey made at his press conference. The wording was changed in the draft because it did not reflect their legal conclusions. The draft was edited by the highest level FBI team on the case and no one involved in that statement thought there was a case against Clinton.

It was never the final wording and it was not in the report. You have your facts mistaken.

If the wording never showed that there was a case against CLinton, then why would it have to be changed to reflect the legal conclusions? Your words there. And they don't make sense.

 

[Care4all]

Trumpers seem to have gotten lost

This isn't about Sztrok or Clinton...it's about McCabe...who a Grand Jury refused to indict.

This only came up now..(months after that and against DOJ policy) because Billy the Bagman wants to contrast it with Stone

Those groups of people are ALL TIED TO ALL THESE THINGS...........including the investigation of Clinton......They were ALL PART OF LETTING HILLARY OFF THE HOOK...............even though she was guilty as sin..........

We can go to the Obama years......and the ABUSE OF FISA............SHALL WE.....

The Uncovering – Mike Rogers’ Investigation, Section 702 FISA...

They were using the FISA courts as a Weapon long before Trump was even on the scene..........

The FISA warrants on Page WERE ILLEGAL............PERIOD..........

seek help



The prosecutors seeking to find a crime on McCabe, are BARR PICKED TRUMP SUPPORTING PROSECUTORS..... not Stzrok or McCabe or Comey or the FBI.... silly silly silly one! With a newly picked grand jury.....

 

[eagle1462010]

Former NSA Contractor Reality Winner Pleads Guilty to Leaking Classified Information

The 63-month prison sentence is “unusually harsh for a leak case,” according to the Times. It’s the longest known term imposed by a federal court for an Espionage Act violation, according to the Intercept. (Chelsea Manning’s 35-year-sentence for a leaking classified intelligence was issued by a military court.) Winner’s plea deal would avert a trial that was scheduled for October.

It’s worth noting that not all leaks are illegal. But the Espionage Act, a WWI-era law, criminalizes unauthorized disclosure of national security secrets that could be used to harm the United States or aid a foreign government. Winner was charged under Section 793, which prohibits “gathering, transmitting or losing defense information.” When prosecuting defendants under the act, the court does not consider whether the disclosure was in the public interest

The Obama administration brought nine or 10 leak-related prosecutions, depending on how they are counted—about twice as many as those brought by all previous administrations combined. At least eight of those investigations involved the Espionage Act.

It’s not clear how many leak cases the Trump administration is pursuing. Attorney General Jeff Sessions said last year that the Department of Justice was pursuing three times as many leak investigations as were open at the end of the Obama administration. The Trump administration has resolved at least two leak cases through plea deals: Winner’s and the case of former FBI agent Terry Albury, who pleaded guilty in April to leaking classified documents concerning the FBI’s treatment of minority communities in Minnesota. Prosecutors in Albury’s case reportedly said they would seek a sentence of 46 to 57 months in prison.

Trumpers seem to have gotten lost

This isn't about Sztrok or Clinton...it's about McCabe...who a Grand Jury refused to indict.

This only came up now..(months after that and against DOJ policy) because Billy the Bagman wants to contrast it with Stone

Those groups of people are ALL TIED TO ALL THESE THINGS...........including the investigation of Clinton......They were ALL PART OF LETTING HILLARY OFF THE HOOK...............even though she was guilty as sin..........

We can go to the Obama years......and the ABUSE OF FISA............SHALL WE.....

The Uncovering – Mike Rogers’ Investigation, Section 702 FISA...

They were using the FISA courts as a Weapon long before Trump was even on the scene..........

The FISA warrants on Page WERE ILLEGAL............PERIOD..........

seek help



The prosecutors seeking to find a crime on McCabe, are BARR PICKED TRUMP SUPPORTING PROSECUTORS..... not Stzrok or McCabe or Comey or the FBI.... silly silly silly one! With a newly picked grand jury.....

The

LOL

I said along time that this was a SHOW.............They aren't going to take down many and the ones going down are PEONS..................That is how the dang system works.......

But don't come in here and piss on my back and tell me it's Raining.............everyone with common sense knows this is all BS........and that McCabe, Comey were all in on this BS.....including letting Hillary off the hook.

You just walk by the ties that bind don't you..............Look past the abuse of the IRS.........FISA courts......which I provided a link that has COURT DOCUMENTS backing it up...........and you SAY NOTHING.........Obama Administration was doing this before Trump was even a dang topic........

So...........seek help.......LOL.................

You keep the blinders on............because if you didn't .....you might actually see how corrupt our gov't has become.

 

[Care4all]

US woman gets five years in prison for leaking NSA document

The former Air Force translator worked as a contractor at a National Security Agency (NSA) office in Augusta, Georgia, when she printed a classified report and left the building with it. Winner told the FBI she mailed the document to an online news outlet.

In court on Thursday, Winner apologised and acknowledged that what she did was wrong, taking responsibility for "an undeniable mistake that I made".

"I would like to apologise profusely for my actions," she told the judge. "My actions were a cruel betrayal of my nation's trust in me."

Authorities never identified the news organisation.

The Justice Department announced Winner's June 2017 arrest the same day The Intercept reported on a secret NSA document.



AND YET THESE GUYS..........NOTHING.

Gawd, you really need some help... you can't even discern simple differences that matter....

Winner STOLE the top secret documents, with the INTENT to pass the top secret information on to a newspaper.

Clinton did no such thing... there was absolutely no INTENT to hand deliver, personally stolen top secret information over to the newspaper or enemies....

YOU ARE CLUELESS, and ranting on like a madman without a head..... seriously.... your comparisons, even for the patraeus situation which Comey testified before congress, was much much much much worse than what Hillary did,

and Patraeus only got a slap on the wrist misdemeanor with no jail time in a plea deal...

 

[colfax_m]

No it doesn’t. The wording of the report was changed to reflect their legal conclusions, not the other way around.

The wording is irrelevant. They had decided not to indict her based on the facts of the case.

They decided to not indict her, despite the findings that she broke the law.


Strzok changed the wording AFTER that, and everyone involved just let it slide, no questions asked.


And that reflects on the organization as a whole.

No. They didn’t find she broke the law. No one that wrote the statement thought she broke the law. Everyone “let it slide” because they all agreed with the conclusion that she didn’t break the law. You’re clinging to this minute detail and blowing it out of proportion because that’s all you have.

The wording of the final report and the wording of the law is clear. She broke the law. And the FBI choose to let it slide.

Strzok changed the wording AFTER that.

You’re confusing a few issues. Strzok changed the wording of a draft of a statement Comey made at his press conference. The wording was changed in the draft because it did not reflect their legal conclusions. The draft was edited by the highest level FBI team on the case and no one involved in that statement thought there was a case against Clinton.

It was never the final wording and it was not in the report. You have your facts mistaken.

If the wording never showed that there was a case against CLinton, then why would it have to be changed to reflect the legal conclusions? Your words there. And they don't make sense.

Why do you think the wording was the most important determinant of whether there was a case?

They were drafting a statement accurately reflect their conclusions. They initially wrote gross negligence but changed that because it wasn’t accurate. That’s what happens when you draft something. You make changes.

 

[eagle1462010]

US woman gets five years in prison for leaking NSA document

The former Air Force translator worked as a contractor at a National Security Agency (NSA) office in Augusta, Georgia, when she printed a classified report and left the building with it. Winner told the FBI she mailed the document to an online news outlet.

In court on Thursday, Winner apologised and acknowledged that what she did was wrong, taking responsibility for "an undeniable mistake that I made".

"I would like to apologise profusely for my actions," she told the judge. "My actions were a cruel betrayal of my nation's trust in me."

Authorities never identified the news organisation.

The Justice Department announced Winner's June 2017 arrest the same day The Intercept reported on a secret NSA document.



AND YET THESE GUYS..........NOTHING.

Gawd, you really need some help... you can't even discern simple differences that matter....

Winner STOLE the top secret documents, with the INTENT to pass the top secret information on to a newspaper.

Clinton did no such thing... there was absolutely no INTENT to hand deliver, personally stolen top secret information over to the newspaper or enemies....

YOU ARE CLUELESS, and ranting on like a madman without a head..... seriously.... your comparisons, even for the patraeus situation which Comey testified before congress, was much much much much worse than what Hillary did,

and Patraeus only got a slap on the wrist misdemeanor with no jail time in a plea deal...

BS............

I'll keep posting my GET HELP STUFF........you do your thing..........I don't care....

They have for 3 years tried to undo the election......PERIOD.....They were dirty under Obama..and still are.......

The FISA Courts should have caused Prosutorial Misconduct already........

The Uncovering – Mike Rogers’ Investigation, Section 702 FISA...
The FBI’s Private Contractors – FISA Abuse, the Steele Dossier & A...

They were weaponizing FISA before Trump was even a candidate..........

But you keep the blinders on.