2016 Postmortem

randome

(34,845 posts)

31. You keep slipping your bias into the equation.

Wed Jun 29, 2016, 09:34 AM

Jun 2016

You're subtly implying that there is already "some evidence of criminal activity" when you know absolutely nothing about that.

The FBI investigates. That's what they do. There does not need to be evidence of anything, only for someone in the Administration to direct or request an investigation, and for the FBI to agree to conduct one.

The only thing you have correct is where you say 'potential criminal activity' but then you swing back to the other extreme and are stating there is 'evidence' without any...um, evidence.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

166 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

GE polls look great and may they hold and build for Hillary, but FBI investigation precludes comfort [View all] morningfog Jun 2016 OP

Cannot rec this itsrobert Jun 2016 #1

Agreed. revolutionfoundation Jun 2016 #8

+1 nt NCTraveler Jun 2016 #12

Regurgitation of a non issue. Please move on. RBInMaine Jun 2016 #2

It is not a non issue. The FBI doesn't do "non-issues." morningfog Jun 2016 #6

You seem to claim it is an issue... NCTraveler Jun 2016 #13

Your post makes no sense whatsoever. morningfog Jun 2016 #15

But it isn't a "criminal" investigation. tonyt53 Jun 2016 #19

Yes it is. That is the function of the FBI. morningfog Jun 2016 #22

Yes, it is a function - but just one of many. The email investigation is not criminal investigation tonyt53 Jun 2016 #28

No one knows what the investigation is, has, or will ultimately uncover. morningfog Jun 2016 #32

Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #35

Different cases, different laws and rules. tonyt53 Jun 2016 #55

No ... The FBI serves many other investigative functions, beyond criminal activities. 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #135

Judge links Clinton aide's immunity to 'criminal investigation' morningfog Jun 2016 #137

You wish it wasn't the case? That is why you have started over 100 OP on the topic snooper2 Jun 2016 #142

I doubt it is 100 OPs, but YES. I wish it wasn't the case. morningfog Jun 2016 #145

And you are certain that the un-named "criminal investigation" is targetting HRC ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #143

I have never said that Hillary is a target. morningfog Jun 2016 #144

LOL ... That is such bullshit. But, okay. You stick with that. 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #146

Link, quote, or slink on away. morningfog Jun 2016 #148

Your every damned post says you suspect (are hoping for) an indictment of HRC ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #152

Now you are just making shit up. Go ahead. morningfog Jun 2016 #154

Really? The FBI disagrees with you. Old Crow Jun 2016 #160

Judge links Clinton aide's immunity to 'criminal investigation' morningfog Jun 2016 #129

The reality is I have no concerns... You do. NCTraveler Jun 2016 #37

YOu have no foundation for your confidence. morningfog Jun 2016 #39

It is an issue on right wing nut job sites not in the real world Gothmog Jun 2016 #84

The FBI does "non-issues" all the time. Adrahil Jun 2016 #51

Let's hope this is one. They've been at it nearly a year. morningfog Jun 2016 #52

Exactly right! PJMcK Jun 2016 #105

It's an issue. Huma 840high Jun 2016 #151

Bad post metroins Jun 2016 #3

How so? morningfog Jun 2016 #7

Ask yourself metroins Jun 2016 #11

Critical thought and discussion. Recognition and acknowledgement of where we are. morningfog Jun 2016 #14

Where 'we' are... Blanks Jun 2016 #61

That doesn't follow. morningfog Jun 2016 #64

The fact that you REFUSE to follow... Blanks Jun 2016 #156

Only bad if it confounds your set expectations. leveymg Jun 2016 #38

Intent is what's missing from this conversation. randome Jun 2016 #41

Law Enforcement uses a term called willfull blindness or willfull ignorance that may apply here. floriduck Jun 2016 #107

There is no evidence that the Pagliano matter is related to Clinton. randome Jun 2016 #113

Maybe not to you but the FBI had its reasons. You nor I know why. floriduck Jun 2016 #115

I'm not making anything of it. You originally stated Hillary did nothing wrong. My point was to floriduck Jun 2016 #121

Lol metroins Jun 2016 #49

Do you tire of being wrong? Gothmog Jun 2016 #155

Your fourth paragraph is wise PJMcK Jun 2016 #4

Well said!!! n/t RKP5637 Jun 2016 #101

"I support Hillary, BUT..." 72DejaVu Jun 2016 #5

Sorry if you are bothered by the truth. morningfog Jun 2016 #9

You're right, we don't know 72DejaVu Jun 2016 #57

What unsubstantiated negative rumors? Are you denying that the FBI investigation continues? morningfog Jun 2016 #59

There is a substantiated investigation that could bite us in the ass... Human101948 Jun 2016 #80

They will certainly come up in the debates Motley13 Jun 2016 #106

They do look great for us. NCTraveler Jun 2016 #10

I'l rec it. yellerpup Jun 2016 #16

Hope springs eternal in the human breast; Agnosticsherbet Jun 2016 #17

Indeed. I hope this is resolved favorably for Hillary and her staff quickly. morningfog Jun 2016 #21

It is not a criminal investigation. I believe the FBI has said this. randome Jun 2016 #18

The FBI has not said that. The FBI only does criminal investigations. morningfog Jun 2016 #20

Not true. itsrobert Jun 2016 #23

To characterize this as a criminal investigation is disingenuous. randome Jun 2016 #24

LOL. Look at your list and please identify the the non-criminal investigations. morningfog Jun 2016 #25

You keep slipping your bias into the equation. randome Jun 2016 #31

You seem to have a lack of understanding of how the FBI operates and what they do. morningfog Jun 2016 #34

They investigate people without evidence all the time -background checks and the like. randome Jun 2016 #36

But you do not "know." You hope, for sure. I do too. morningfog Jun 2016 #40

"They would not investigate with no evidence of wrong doing." NCTraveler Jun 2016 #90

Indeed. If there was evidence, there wouldn't be any need for an investigation. randome Jun 2016 #103

LOL. morningfog Jun 2016 #150

You have said that multiple times and it is completely wrong. NCTraveler Jun 2016 #89

Of course it is true. morningfog Jun 2016 #93

No, it is not. NCTraveler Jun 2016 #97

You use the FBI for investigations which aren't criminally related? morningfog Jun 2016 #99

Have a great day. This is hard to watch. NCTraveler Jun 2016 #100

Can you link to such an investigation? morningfog Jun 2016 #102

Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #147

Judge links Clinton aide's immunity to 'criminal investigation' morningfog Jun 2016 #149

Judge links Clinton aide's immunity to 'criminal investigation' morningfog Jun 2016 #118

No Rec for the OP. riversedge Jun 2016 #26

Thanks for the kick regardless. morningfog Jun 2016 #29

On this issue I take the Constitutional Lawyer who was elected President at his word. gordianot Jun 2016 #27

Fully agreed. morningfog Jun 2016 #30

... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #33

Your favorite cartoons? morningfog Jun 2016 #44

I think they apply to these ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #46

You are wrong on all counts. To a T. morningfog Jun 2016 #47

That is my interpretation of the inference you insinuate. 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #56

Yes, and it is dead wrong and insulting. morningfog Jun 2016 #58

Maybe, but the evidence is not hard to produce my conclusions ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #60

Your prejudgment sees what it wants. morningfog Jun 2016 #62

Perhaps. But, again, your posts speak for themselves. 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #63

They do and I stand by them. Your bias reads a lot of bullshit into them. morningfog Jun 2016 #65

Communication is not only what is said; but, also, what is heard ... and that is on you, as well. 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #68

No, you don't like what I say. That doesn't mean you are right to make shit up about my intentions. morningfog Jun 2016 #70

Nope. I won't be apologizing for your consistent eeyorism ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #73

Fine. Your character, or lack thereof, is on clear display. morningfog Jun 2016 #74

You have made multiple dishonest statements and are questioning 1strongs character? NCTraveler Jun 2016 #92

You don't know what you are talking about. morningfog Jun 2016 #95

I think you should just stick with that. nt. NCTraveler Jun 2016 #98

It's not my "character, or lack thereof" that is on the line. 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #104

Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #112

Only to an anonymous poster on an anonymous message board ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #123

This is just a pathetic attempt to type Hillary's name in with some random R B Garr Jun 2016 #42

Nicely put. This 'issue' isn't weighing on anyone's mind so now's the time to bring it up again! randome Jun 2016 #133

Meh. Snowden did a ton more damage and the "concerned" here just love him..... bettyellen Jun 2016 #43

I liked Snowdon, yes. morningfog Jun 2016 #45

Concern is noted and appreciated. Ryano42 Jun 2016 #48

No. This has nothing to do with Bernie. morningfog Jun 2016 #50

What's the point of this post. Adrahil Jun 2016 #53

Discussion. Is this not a discussion board for political discussion? morningfog Jun 2016 #67

Discuss what? What to do if the indictment fairy DOES come? Adrahil Jun 2016 #88

The Hillary machine is rolling now TomJulie Jun 2016 #54

Here is the likely summary of the FBI investigation as it pertains to Hillary Clinton.. DCBob Jun 2016 #66

From what is in the public, I agree with your analysis up the last two points. morningfog Jun 2016 #69

It's my understanding that radical noodle Jun 2016 #119

Wow. I hope so. I wish they'd just get on with it one way or another. The uncertainty is damaging. zazen Jun 2016 #124

Its just mostly common sense based on things that I've read. DCBob Jun 2016 #159

Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #71

I don't know what the fuck you are talking about. morningfog Jun 2016 #72

I don't need to check myself MaggieD Jun 2016 #75

Oh yeah! I remember you. morningfog Jun 2016 #77

You remember me because you sent me rude PMs MaggieD Jun 2016 #79

Tsk tsk. morningfog Jun 2016 #82

good grief.... chillfactor Jun 2016 #76

Uh. No, it is an ongoing risk for us. morningfog Jun 2016 #78

Peddling ridiculous right wing talking points dressed up as concern is a disgusting tactic lapucelle Jun 2016 #81

Facts are not right wing talking points. morningfog Jun 2016 #83

An investigation is not an indictment, stopbush Jun 2016 #85

All true, but I hope to hell the investigation is the only step. morningfog Jun 2016 #86

I dunno. Nixon won in a landslide in 1972 stopbush Jun 2016 #94

At the time of the 1972 elections, it was NOT KNOWN that Nixon John Poet Jun 2016 #141

This message was self-deleted by its author rjsquirrel Jun 2016 #87

did we really land on the moon? stonecutter357 Jun 2016 #91

Huh? Do you have a point? morningfog Jun 2016 #96

yes. stonecutter357 Jun 2016 #108

I totally got it bravenak Jun 2016 #111

Are you suggesting the FBI is not conducting an investigation? morningfog Jun 2016 #131

And now from left field... PJMcK Jun 2016 #109

Things are getting into CT territory. bravenak Jun 2016 #110

THe FBI and DOJ are not the GOP. morningfog Jun 2016 #114

The GOP initiated it. That's enough for me to know it is straight up bullshit. bravenak Jun 2016 #117

It's already gone to the FBI and the DOJ, the bodies that prosecute crimes. morningfog Jun 2016 #120

It came OUT OF THE BENGHAZI INVESTIGATION. Which is bullshit and they added more shit. bravenak Jun 2016 #122

You can't say it is a fake scandal when the FBI and DOJ are taking it seriously. morningfog Jun 2016 #125

Yes I can. bravenak Jun 2016 #126

The impeachment was by the same kind of right winger nuts that did the Benghazi witch hunt. morningfog Jun 2016 #127

Same shit different day bravenak Jun 2016 #128

Because they are Congress. The FBI and DOJ are independent agencies from separate branches morningfog Jun 2016 #130

They use all of our instituitions in their games. bravenak Jun 2016 #134

It is not clear when or on whose request the FBI started its investigation. morningfog Jun 2016 #136

Find that out then before you get us all 'concerned' bravenak Jun 2016 #138

LOL. It really doesn't matter. The FBI and DOJ do not do the right wingers' bidding. morningfog Jun 2016 #139

And they will end this investigation into rightwing CT with no arrest. bravenak Jun 2016 #140

Ignore it like everyone else. SmittynMo Jul 2016 #161

k&r! and I wish the FBI would hurry the hell up with this because we don't need more uncertainty zazen Jun 2016 #116

He has no more ligitimate concern than does anyone on Hillary's team. upaloopa Jun 2016 #153

This can in fact "be poo-poo-ed away like the faux scandals form Gowdy." Lord Magus Jun 2016 #132

ISIS DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2016 #157

Agreed. nt geek tragedy Jun 2016 #158

KICK! snooper2 Jul 2016 #162

+1 n/t FSogol Jul 2016 #163

I'm feeling pretty comfortable at this point. Nye Bevan Jul 2016 #164

We will be fine ismnotwasm Jul 2016 #165

+1 Nye Bevan Jul 2016 #166