So We Find Out FBI Has Been Investigating Trump Since July

[ZZ PUPPS]

And why didn't Comey prosecute Lynch and Holder for their crimes?

Comey is NOT a prosecutor, he's the director of the FBI.

He failed to recommend prosecution to Justice in the Obama Administration of the RaT front runner/assured nominee. The AG of said administration chose not to prosecute.

 

[forkup]

But there was NO surveillance. Now if you're stupid enough to believe they've been investigating since July and didn't do surveillance you're too stupid to form a rational conclusion.

Then we find out today there is 20 people in NSA who can unmask the names of those who are being monitored. Looks like the only question left for this part of this waste of time is who was the Obama mole in the NSA who leaked Flynn's name which proves the surveillance.

So, the only crime committed was the leaks, felony, up to 10 years in Federal prison. Libtardos better hope to hell they don't find out there's a direct tie to Obama and the one who leaked in the NSA.

Democrat's are going to keep this Russian witch hunt up until they inadvertently expose Obama and his dirty deeds.

^ Lol zero grasp of the issue

What part of "you're too stupid to form a rational conclusion." did you not understand?

The leak was a crime. Comey stated clearly there was NO hack of voting machines. Your butthurt is all about Hillaryous' loss and the swamp being drained of Communists and criminals.

Rational????? So the director of the FBI categorically denies in front the house intelligence committee that neither he nor anyone in the justice department tapped Trump's phone's. But you and Trump insists it happened while providing no hard evidence at all? Rationally speaking what is more likely? Comey the FBI director, appointed by a Republican president exposing himself to perjury charges or Trump with a proven track record of having problems separating fact from fiction just making up a false accusation while having a particularly bad news cycle as was the case when he made those tweets?

You left out an important caveat. All Q&A's have been based upon LEGAL surveillance. Do you think all governmental activities are legal - that none are under the table? If so, there is no need for secrecy.

Think it through. Comey can decline to answer that question as he did on several occasions during that hearing. He instead categorically denies it, so ANY surveillance done would immediately expose him as perjured himself. You honestly think someone who is a bureaucrat, a politician ( his job is political in nature) and a lawyer would expose himself like that?? It's not that he denied an investigation taking place. So why admit to that but not wiretapping??? The word was rational right? So answer my question posed, provide some actual proof to your claims. As it stands now it literally is Trumps word. Something that has been proven iffy on numerous occasions against the whole justice department. If you would have to say which of the 2 is more likely to lie, can you honestly claim Trump would be more trustworthy.

 

[jc456]

But there was NO surveillance. Now if you're stupid enough to believe they've been investigating since July and didn't do surveillance you're too stupid to form a rational conclusion.

Then we find out today there is 20 people in NSA who can unmask the names of those who are being monitored. Looks like the only question left for this part of this waste of time is who was the Obama mole in the NSA who leaked Flynn's name which proves the surveillance.

So, the only crime committed was the leaks, felony, up to 10 years in Federal prison. Libtardos better hope to hell they don't find out there's a direct tie to Obama and the one who leaked in the NSA.

Democrat's are going to keep this Russian witch hunt up until they inadvertently expose Obama and his dirty deeds.

Benghazi.

nasty and sad. Clinton ought to be in prison for it. agree?

 

[jc456]

But there was NO surveillance. Now if you're stupid enough to believe they've been investigating since July and didn't do surveillance you're too stupid to form a rational conclusion.

Then we find out today there is 20 people in NSA who can unmask the names of those who are being monitored. Looks like the only question left for this part of this waste of time is who was the Obama mole in the NSA who leaked Flynn's name which proves the surveillance.

So, the only crime committed was the leaks, felony, up to 10 years in Federal prison. Libtardos better hope to hell they don't find out there's a direct tie to Obama and the one who leaked in the NSA.

Democrat's are going to keep this Russian witch hunt up until they inadvertently expose Obama and his dirty deeds.

^ Lol zero grasp of the issue

What part of "you're too stupid to form a rational conclusion." did you not understand?

The leak was a crime. Comey stated clearly there was NO hack of voting machines. Your butthurt is all about Hillaryous' loss and the swamp being drained of Communists and criminals.

Rational????? So the director of the FBI categorically denies in front the house intelligence committee that neither he nor anyone in the justice department tapped Trump's phone's. But you and Trump insists it happened while providing no hard evidence at all? Rationally speaking what is more likely? Comey the FBI director, appointed by a Republican president exposing himself to perjury charges or Trump with a proven track record of having problems separating fact from fiction just making up a false accusation while having a particularly bad news cycle as was the case when he made those tweets?

You left out an important caveat. All Q&A's have been based upon LEGAL surveillance. Do you think all governmental activities are legal - that none are under the table? If so, there is no need for secrecy.

Think it through. Comey can decline to answer that question as he did on several occasions during that hearing. He instead categorically denies it, so ANY surveillance done would immediately expose him as perjured himself. You honestly think someone who is a bureaucrat, a politician ( his job is political in nature) and a lawyer would expose himself like that?? It's not that he denied an investigation taking place. So why admit to that but not wiretapping??? The word was rational right? So answer my question posed, provide some actual proof to your claims. As it stands now it literally is Trumps word. Something that has been proven iffy an numerous occasions. And the whole justice department. If you would have to say which of the 2 is more likely to lie, can you honestly claim Trump would be more trustworthy.

definitely. you?

 

[Care4all]

And why didn't Comey prosecute Lynch and Holder for their crimes?

Comey is NOT a prosecutor, he's the director of the FBI.

The FBI can request Prosecutions, and in this case Comey let Clinton Skate while telling the world she committed felonies but he thought she was too stupid to do jail for it.

So maybe I should rephrase. Why did Comey let Clinton off the hook?

It does not matter how they arrive at a prosecution or indictment. It was clear she committed multiple felonies.

Why didn't Lynch Prosecute her? Why didn't anyone prosecute or indict her?

Looks like a sweetheart deal to me.
Everyone covering everyone else's ass.

Prosecute her for what? For some obscure espionage law that didn't relate to anything she had done wrong and had never been used before? Breaking rules is not breaking the law or criminal...in most cases.

You bought in to the FOX NEWS faux leaks and garbage and lies from their unnamed sources...

 

[Luddly Neddite]

What kills me in all of this and I put up a thread about it is that they claim to have investigated since last summer and yet not once have they examined the DNC servers.

I mean Holy toledo what type of investigation is this? It's a witch hunt not an investigation. And why would they have everyone else under surveillance but NOT Trump Tower? Come on. That boat don't float.

What about trump's private server, that he still has ...
Or his old, easily hacked android phone, that he still has ...

 

[jc456]

But there was NO surveillance. Now if you're stupid enough to believe they've been investigating since July and didn't do surveillance you're too stupid to form a rational conclusion.

Then we find out today there is 20 people in NSA who can unmask the names of those who are being monitored. Looks like the only question left for this part of this waste of time is who was the Obama mole in the NSA who leaked Flynn's name which proves the surveillance.

So, the only crime committed was the leaks, felony, up to 10 years in Federal prison. Libtardos better hope to hell they don't find out there's a direct tie to Obama and the one who leaked in the NSA.

Democrat's are going to keep this Russian witch hunt up until they inadvertently expose Obama and his dirty deeds.

What a joke you are. Your orange clown is under investigation for colluding with Russia to subvert our democracy and all you can do is point the finger at Obama.
Hilarious.
Plus no mention that the clown lied his ass off about Obama wiretapping his phones disgracing the office of the presidency and the whole county.
The Trump / Russian collusion will be found out sooner or later But we need a special prosecutor into this traitor.

Russian witch hunt? Lmao
Why were so many people connected to the clown in " constant contact" with Russian officials?
No answers huh.
You're scared shitless the truth will be revealed.

why is he under investigation exactly? colluding how? where when, name fking something you loser. I love winning.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

That 20 head count was NSA only. The FBI will be several times that. Plus all organizations that the info was distributed to - such as Justice and the White House. Trey Gowdy was very focused in his line of questioning.

He was the same little pin headed hack as he always is.

These jerks have had their butts handed to them over and over again. The same will happen here.

 

[jc456]

And why didn't Comey prosecute Lynch and Holder for their crimes?

Comey is NOT a prosecutor, he's the director of the FBI.

The FBI can request Prosecutions, and in this case Comey let Clinton Skate while telling the world she committed felonies but he thought she was too stupid to do jail for it.

So maybe I should rephrase. Why did Comey let Clinton off the hook?

It does not matter how they arrive at a prosecution or indictment. It was clear she committed multiple felonies.

Why didn't Lynch Prosecute her? Why didn't anyone prosecute or indict her?

Looks like a sweetheart deal to me.
Everyone covering everyone else's ass.

Prosecute her for what? For some obscure espionage law that didn't relate to anything she had done wrong and had never been used before? Breaking rules is not breaking the law or criminal...in most cases.

You bought in to the FOX NEWS faux leaks and garbage and lies from their unnamed sources...

well that is much more real than any fking ruskie thingy you're playing around with in pretendland.

 

[forkup]

^ Lol zero grasp of the issue

What part of "you're too stupid to form a rational conclusion." did you not understand?

The leak was a crime. Comey stated clearly there was NO hack of voting machines. Your butthurt is all about Hillaryous' loss and the swamp being drained of Communists and criminals.

Rational????? So the director of the FBI categorically denies in front the house intelligence committee that neither he nor anyone in the justice department tapped Trump's phone's. But you and Trump insists it happened while providing no hard evidence at all? Rationally speaking what is more likely? Comey the FBI director, appointed by a Republican president exposing himself to perjury charges or Trump with a proven track record of having problems separating fact from fiction just making up a false accusation while having a particularly bad news cycle as was the case when he made those tweets?

You left out an important caveat. All Q&A's have been based upon LEGAL surveillance. Do you think all governmental activities are legal - that none are under the table? If so, there is no need for secrecy.

Think it through. Comey can decline to answer that question as he did on several occasions during that hearing. He instead categorically denies it, so ANY surveillance done would immediately expose him as perjured himself. You honestly think someone who is a bureaucrat, a politician ( his job is political in nature) and a lawyer would expose himself like that?? It's not that he denied an investigation taking place. So why admit to that but not wiretapping??? The word was rational right? So answer my question posed, provide some actual proof to your claims. As it stands now it literally is Trumps word. Something that has been proven iffy an numerous occasions. And the whole justice department. If you would have to say which of the 2 is more likely to lie, can you honestly claim Trump would be more trustworthy.

definitely. you?

Lol I can not argue against someone who needs nothing more then the word of someone who even his own advisers say not to be taken too seriously.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

But there was NO surveillance. Now if you're stupid enough to believe they've been investigating since July and didn't do surveillance you're too stupid to form a rational conclusion.

Then we find out today there is 20 people in NSA who can unmask the names of those who are being monitored. Looks like the only question left for this part of this waste of time is who was the Obama mole in the NSA who leaked Flynn's name which proves the surveillance.

So, the only crime committed was the leaks, felony, up to 10 years in Federal prison. Libtardos better hope to hell they don't find out there's a direct tie to Obama and the one who leaked in the NSA.

Democrat's are going to keep this Russian witch hunt up until they inadvertently expose Obama and his dirty deeds.

What a joke you are. Your orange clown is under investigation for colluding with Russia to subvert our democracy and all you can do is point the finger at Obama.
Hilarious.
Plus no mention that the clown lied his ass off about Obama wiretapping his phones disgracing the office of the presidency and the whole county.
The Trump / Russian collusion will be found out sooner or later But we need a special prosecutor into this traitor.

Russian witch hunt? Lmao
Why were so many people connected to the clown in " constant contact" with Russian officials?
No answers huh.
You're scared shitless the truth will be revealed.

why is he under investigation exactly? colluding how? where when, name fking something you loser. I love winning.

Why is it the same ones always ask the same questions but always refuse to educate themselves?

Do some reading of something besides jones, dimbart, dredge, gateway, yadda yadda.

Seriously, everyone else knows. Why don't you and your fellow trumpkins?

 

[jc456]

And why didn't Comey prosecute Lynch and Holder for their crimes?

Comey is NOT a prosecutor, he's the director of the FBI.

The FBI can request Prosecutions, and in this case Comey let Clinton Skate while telling the world she committed felonies but he thought she was too stupid to do jail for it.

So maybe I should rephrase. Why did Comey let Clinton off the hook?

It does not matter how they arrive at a prosecution or indictment. It was clear she committed multiple felonies.

Why didn't Lynch Prosecute her? Why didn't anyone prosecute or indict her?

Looks like a sweetheart deal to me.
Everyone covering everyone else's ass.

Prosecute her for what? For some obscure espionage law that didn't relate to anything she had done wrong and had never been used before? Breaking rules is not breaking the law or criminal...in most cases.

You bought in to the FOX NEWS faux leaks and garbage and lies from their unnamed sources...

well that is much more real than any fking ruskie thingy you're playing around with in pretendland.

Fk, we actually have fking evidence. Michael Flynn.......

 

[ZZ PUPPS]

But there was NO surveillance. Now if you're stupid enough to believe they've been investigating since July and didn't do surveillance you're too stupid to form a rational conclusion.

Then we find out today there is 20 people in NSA who can unmask the names of those who are being monitored. Looks like the only question left for this part of this waste of time is who was the Obama mole in the NSA who leaked Flynn's name which proves the surveillance.

So, the only crime committed was the leaks, felony, up to 10 years in Federal prison. Libtardos better hope to hell they don't find out there's a direct tie to Obama and the one who leaked in the NSA.

Democrat's are going to keep this Russian witch hunt up until they inadvertently expose Obama and his dirty deeds.

^ Lol zero grasp of the issue

What part of "you're too stupid to form a rational conclusion." did you not understand?

The leak was a crime. Comey stated clearly there was NO hack of voting machines. Your butthurt is all about Hillaryous' loss and the swamp being drained of Communists and criminals.

Rational????? So the director of the FBI categorically denies in front the house intelligence committee that neither he nor anyone in the justice department tapped Trump's phone's. But you and Trump insists it happened while providing no hard evidence at all? Rationally speaking what is more likely? Comey the FBI director, appointed by a Republican president exposing himself to perjury charges or Trump with a proven track record of having problems separating fact from fiction just making up a false accusation while having a particularly bad news cycle as was the case when he made those tweets?

You left out an important caveat. All Q&A's have been based upon LEGAL surveillance. Do you think all governmental activities are legal - that none are under the table? If so, there is no need for secrecy.

Think it through. Comey can decline to answer that question as he did on several occasions during that hearing. He instead categorically denies it, so ANY surveillance done would immediately expose him as perjured himself. You honestly think someone who is a bureaucrat, a politician ( his job is political in nature) and a lawyer would expose himself like that?? It's not that he denied an investigation taking place. So why admit to that but not wiretapping??? The word was rational right? So answer my question posed, provide some actual proof to your claims. As it stands now it literally is Trumps word. Something that has been proven iffy on numerous occasions against the whole justice department. If you would have to say which of the 2 is more likely to lie, can you honestly claim Trump would be more trustworthy.

The only thing he said was that he had seen no evidence of LEGAL surveillance. He was not asked IF ANY ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES had been uncovered.

Gowdy had cornered him in the box but never dropped that bomb of a question. That was either a mistake on his part (perjury set up if untruthful) or intentional. In any event, it is atypical of Trey.

 

[jc456]

What part of "you're too stupid to form a rational conclusion." did you not understand?

The leak was a crime. Comey stated clearly there was NO hack of voting machines. Your butthurt is all about Hillaryous' loss and the swamp being drained of Communists and criminals.

Rational????? So the director of the FBI categorically denies in front the house intelligence committee that neither he nor anyone in the justice department tapped Trump's phone's. But you and Trump insists it happened while providing no hard evidence at all? Rationally speaking what is more likely? Comey the FBI director, appointed by a Republican president exposing himself to perjury charges or Trump with a proven track record of having problems separating fact from fiction just making up a false accusation while having a particularly bad news cycle as was the case when he made those tweets?

You left out an important caveat. All Q&A's have been based upon LEGAL surveillance. Do you think all governmental activities are legal - that none are under the table? If so, there is no need for secrecy.

Think it through. Comey can decline to answer that question as he did on several occasions during that hearing. He instead categorically denies it, so ANY surveillance done would immediately expose him as perjured himself. You honestly think someone who is a bureaucrat, a politician ( his job is political in nature) and a lawyer would expose himself like that?? It's not that he denied an investigation taking place. So why admit to that but not wiretapping??? The word was rational right? So answer my question posed, provide some actual proof to your claims. As it stands now it literally is Trumps word. Something that has been proven iffy an numerous occasions. And the whole justice department. If you would have to say which of the 2 is more likely to lie, can you honestly claim Trump would be more trustworthy.

definitely. you?

Lol I can not argue against someone who needs nothing more then the word of someone who even his own advisers say not to be taken too seriously.

dude, too funny, and yet here you are in a thread about something that has been going on for seven months with the existence of nothing. Naw, you don't get to make that claim douche bag.

 

[Care4all]

How exactly does Comey allow HIllary Clinton weeks to purge her server of "Yoga Pants" emails 30,000 of them, and even let her Bleach Bit that server despite two court ordered preservation orders, and then not charge her with Title 18 Violations?

gawd you are so misinformed...there was never a subpoena from Congress or anyone for her server....the subpoena was for her govt emails...subpoenas by law, are court ordered for specific items, and the Congress had no jurisdiction over her personal emails for the govt archives record. Even employees are told NOT to send their personal emails to the govt archives for preservation. Hillary followed the rules, and the law.

 

[The Original Tree]

What part of "you're too stupid to form a rational conclusion." did you not understand?

The leak was a crime. Comey stated clearly there was NO hack of voting machines. Your butthurt is all about Hillaryous' loss and the swamp being drained of Communists and criminals.

Rational????? So the director of the FBI categorically denies in front the house intelligence committee that neither he nor anyone in the justice department tapped Trump's phone's. But you and Trump insists it happened while providing no hard evidence at all? Rationally speaking what is more likely? Comey the FBI director, appointed by a Republican president exposing himself to perjury charges or Trump with a proven track record of having problems separating fact from fiction just making up a false accusation while having a particularly bad news cycle as was the case when he made those tweets?

You left out an important caveat. All Q&A's have been based upon LEGAL surveillance. Do you think all governmental activities are legal - that none are under the table? If so, there is no need for secrecy.

Think it through. Comey can decline to answer that question as he did on several occasions during that hearing. He instead categorically denies it, so ANY surveillance done would immediately expose him as perjured himself. You honestly think someone who is a bureaucrat, a politician ( his job is political in nature) and a lawyer would expose himself like that?? It's not that he denied an investigation taking place. So why admit to that but not wiretapping??? The word was rational right? So answer my question posed, provide some actual proof to your claims. As it stands now it literally is Trumps word. Something that has been proven iffy an numerous occasions. And the whole justice department. If you would have to say which of the 2 is more likely to lie, can you honestly claim Trump would be more trustworthy.

definitely. you?

Lol I can not argue against someone who needs nothing more then the word of someone who even his own advisers say not to be taken too seriously.

Kinda like taking Crowdstrike's word when The DNC paid them to do their 'Editorial" on the DNC server that no one has been allowed to see and the Federal Government has refused to Subpoena, huh?

 

[tinydancer]

Seems like Trump is petting the KGB

More so than the Podesta Group working for the KGB bank? Directly taking $$$$$$$$ to lobby for the lifting of sanctions?

 

[jc456]

What kills me in all of this and I put up a thread about it is that they claim to have investigated since last summer and yet not once have they examined the DNC servers.

I mean Holy toledo what type of investigation is this? It's a witch hunt not an investigation. And why would they have everyone else under surveillance but NOT Trump Tower? Come on. That boat don't float.

What about trump's private server, that he still has ...
Or his old, easily hacked android phone, that he still has ...

it was already stated that it was under surveillance, where have you been. Again, more evidence to trumps claim. D'OH!!!

 

[jc456]

Seems like Trump is petting the KGB

More so than the Podesta Group working for the KGB bank? Directly taking $$$$$$$$ to lobby for the lifting of sanctions?

how about the clinton foundation? Let's do that investigation.

 

[forkup]

^ Lol zero grasp of the issue

What part of "you're too stupid to form a rational conclusion." did you not understand?

The leak was a crime. Comey stated clearly there was NO hack of voting machines. Your butthurt is all about Hillaryous' loss and the swamp being drained of Communists and criminals.

Rational????? So the director of the FBI categorically denies in front the house intelligence committee that neither he nor anyone in the justice department tapped Trump's phone's. But you and Trump insists it happened while providing no hard evidence at all? Rationally speaking what is more likely? Comey the FBI director, appointed by a Republican president exposing himself to perjury charges or Trump with a proven track record of having problems separating fact from fiction just making up a false accusation while having a particularly bad news cycle as was the case when he made those tweets?

You left out an important caveat. All Q&A's have been based upon LEGAL surveillance. Do you think all governmental activities are legal - that none are under the table? If so, there is no need for secrecy.

Think it through. Comey can decline to answer that question as he did on several occasions during that hearing. He instead categorically denies it, so ANY surveillance done would immediately expose him as perjured himself. You honestly think someone who is a bureaucrat, a politician ( his job is political in nature) and a lawyer would expose himself like that?? It's not that he denied an investigation taking place. So why admit to that but not wiretapping??? The word was rational right? So answer my question posed, provide some actual proof to your claims. As it stands now it literally is Trumps word. Something that has been proven iffy on numerous occasions against the whole justice department. If you would have to say which of the 2 is more likely to lie, can you honestly claim Trump would be more trustworthy.

The only thing he said was that he had seen no evidence of LEGAL surveillance. He was not asked IF ANY ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES had been uncovered.

Gowdy had cornered him in the box but never dropped that bomb of a question. That was either a mistake on his part (perjury set up if untruthful) or intentional. In any event, it is atypical of Trey.

Donald Trump Exposed As A Hopeless Conspiracy Theorist By Basically Everyone Who Matters | The Huffington Post
Listen to the question please. He literally asked Comey about any truthfulness in the Trump tweet. It's only a minute long so go over it. Comey didn't hedge at all and he even went further to extent his answer to the entire justice department.