Article

2016-11-03 -Lurid Crime Tales-

FBI Sources: Clinton Foundation Case Moving Towards "Likely an Indictment"

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve White 2016-11-03 00:00|| || Front Page|| [1 views ] Top

#1 Indictment of who is the question. Most likely a mid-range person that is expendable so McKacklepants can take the throne.

Posted by DarthVader 2016-11-03 00:25|| 2016-11-03 00:25|| Front Page Top

#2 Gonna be hard to find a mid-range person who doesn't already have immunity...

Posted by Steve White 2016-11-03 00:35|| 2016-11-03 00:35|| Front Page Top

#3 Doesn't immunity fade if they find out the person lied.

Posted by rjschwarz 2016-11-03 00:44|| 2016-11-03 00:44|| Front Page Top

#4 O can't pardon her without a conviction, because the Constitution says she is innocent until proven guilty. To pardon her without a conviction of a specific crime would make her look guilty!

Posted by Bobby 2016-11-03 07:26|| 2016-11-03 07:26|| Front Page Top

#5 Bobby, think Nixons pardon by Ford, he was never convicted of anything.

Posted by Shipman 2016-11-03 07:30|| 2016-11-03 07:30|| Front Page Top

#6 If Zero was going to pardon them anyway, why did he allow the FBI to investigate in the first place? Why has he not fired Comey?

Posted by Glenmore 2016-11-03 08:04|| 2016-11-03 08:04|| Front Page Top

#7 @#6: Zero didn't let anything go forward. He may have been aware of the investigations, but could not stop them (although DO"J" appeared to have done their best.).

FBI Directors are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate for 10-year terms. This give some protection against Political influence.

Zero couldn't remove Comey without some seriously nasty evidence. Mr. Comey impresses me as a "Boy Scout" with a squeaky clean CV and, therefore, somewhat immune to dismissal pressure.

It's going to be an interesting 5 days.....

Posted by Vast Right Wing Conspiracy 2016-11-03 08:36|| 2016-11-03 08:36|| Front Page Top

#8 From Judge Napolitano column"
At the time he sent his Friday letter, Comey had not yet seen the contents of the Weiner laptop because the search warrant authorizing FBI agents to access its contents was not signed until Sunday. If he saw something incriminating before he wrote his letter, he saw it unlawfully; yet his duty was to bring what he saw to the Department of Justice, for which he works, not to hint about it publicly to Congress.
Comey's progress report to Congress is prohibited by the internal regulations of the DOJ and the FBI -- and by the canons of legal ethics that regulate lawyers. Comey had no obligation to send the letter at any time; moreover, sending it last week was a direct violation of DOJ and FBI rules that prohibit all public announcements about candidates for public office within 60 days of Election Day.

this text for link added after midnight -- sorry

-- tw

(Again I try and fail to get link to show)

Posted by Glenmore 2016-11-03 09:08|| 2016-11-03 09:08|| Front Page Top

#9 When the "Obama DOJ" stands for everything but Justice for all, it's pretty hard to demand fielty to their political decrees. Comey should never have said it was "closed" in July but the Weiner investigation saw new info and I think he had to note that. Note Judge Napolitano has been wrong on MANY things before, but never unsure

Posted by Frank G 2016-11-03 09:25|| 2016-11-03 09:25|| Front Page Top

#10 See this damning article (with WSJ excerpt) at AOSHQ

Posted by Frank G 2016-11-03 09:43|| 2016-11-03 09:43|| Front Page Top

#11 Three-prongs to investigation: 1. Weiner schlong problem with underage girls, 2. RICO-level corruption in the CF and CGI, and 3. mishandling (maybe treason and espionage) of classified info?

Posted by JohnQC 2016-11-03 10:59|| 2016-11-03 10:59|| Front Page Top

#12 "prongs" should not be used in a Weiner-related comment

Posted by Frank G 2016-11-03 12:28|| 2016-11-03 12:28|| Front Page Top

#13 I can't see any scenario where a Democrat in the Oval Office will allow anyone of any status to be charged with a crime. If Clinton is elected this story will be debunked as media hype and Mitch and Paul will dine in the White House with Hil & Bill.
The FBI has had AW's computer for nearly 6 weeks if reports are true. It's hard to believe they haven't done something by now other than CYA.

Posted by jvalentour 2016-11-03 14:29|| 2016-11-03 14:29|| Front Page Top

#14 #12 "prongs" should not be used in a Weiner-related comment

Time for a "Go to your room. Frank G."

Posted by JohnQC 2016-11-03 15:53|| 2016-11-03 15:53|| Front Page Top

#15 #13 The FBI has had AW's computer for nearly 6 weeks if reports are true.

In addition to the AW/HumaA computer, the FBI is reported to have Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson's computers too. Searching the latter computers would imply the immunity agreements have been violated by Mills and Samuelson.

Posted by JohnQC 2016-11-03 16:02|| 2016-11-03 16:02|| Front Page Top

#16 Can't do it JQC, only a MOD has the necessary seniority to deal with FrankG.

Posted by Shipman 2016-11-03 18:23|| 2016-11-03 18:23|| Front Page Top

#17 Bwahahahaha!

Posted by Frank G 2016-11-03 20:46|| 2016-11-03 20:46|| Front Page Top

#18 @#'s 13 / 15 - Getting the story out that the laptops had been destroyed was, in hindsight, brilliant.

Posted by Blossom Unains5562 2016-11-03 21:29|| 2016-11-03 21:29|| Front Page Top

23:56 Zenobia Floger6220
23:22 Sock Puppet of Doom
22:52 Omomort Cheager7040
22:43 Omomort Cheager7040
22:38 Zenobia Floger6220
22:21 JohnQC
21:50 rjschwarz
21:49 rjschwarz
21:32 rjschwarz
21:29 Blossom Unains5562
21:22 Blossom Unains5562
21:17 Blossom Unains5562
21:11 Skidmark
20:50 Frank G
20:49 Frank G
20:48 Frank G
20:47 Jon Ericson
20:46 Frank G
20:38 Alpha2c
20:08 swksvolFF
19:27 European Conservative
19:13 jvalentour
19:05 charger
19:02 Blossom Unains5562