3 ms·

And the FBI Twitter account is also leaking information about the Clintons. If you ask me the FBI and other government agencies want to bring HRC down, probably

And the FBI Twitter account is also leaking information about the Clintons. If you ask me the FBI and other government agencies want to bring HRC down, probably for her reckless handling of classified information. Either this or these agencies are secretly controlled by Putin.

dragonwriter 10y ago
Or, not-secretly controlled by Republicans, in the case of the FBI.
- DominikR 10y ago
  Hm, so it's a Russian-Republican FBI-CIA conspiracy against Hillary? Even though 2 weeks ago Comey was praised by the Democrats for not indicting HRC. They sure are all out to get her it seems.
- WillPostForFood 10y ago
  That's weak sauce argument. If the FBI was controlled by Republicans they would have indicted Hillary Clinton for mishandling classified information instead of giving a press conference letting her off the hook. And they would have let General Petraeus (who was a potential Republican primary candidate) off instead of bringing charges against him. FBI was a hero to Democrats and a villain to Republicans a couple months ago and now it flipped. So the FBI probably isn't controlled by either party.
  - dragonwriter 10y ago
    > If the FBI was controlled by Republicans they would have indicted Hillary Clinton No, they wouldn't have, because the FBI can't indict anyone; indictments are sought by Justice Department prosecutors (who don'the work for the FBI) and issued by grand juries (who also don't work for the FBI.) All the FBI can do is investigate, conduct lawful arrests, and provide information to prosecutors who decide whether and when to prosecute (including seeking indictments.) Well, and conduct politically motivated information releases, though that isn't a legal option, as it violates the Hatch Act. And the FBI is, in fact, controlled by a Republican. This is a matter of simple, undisputable fact. And that's a Republican whose naked political manipulation has been criticized not only by Democrats, but by numerous Republicans, including, among other notables, former Attorney-General Alberto Gonzales, and by others with no love of Democrats, like conservative icon, Fox News legal anlayst, and Libertarian Party member Judge Andrew Napolitano. > And they would have let General Petraeus (who was a potential Republican primary candidate) off instead of bringing charges against him Again, that's Justice Department prosecutors, not the FBI. Plus, that kind of blatant political manipulation that is likely to get you fired or forced to resign is a one-time-only thing that only works well if you do it right before the election. If a partisan Republican -- especially working in a Democratic Administration -- was going to do it, they do just what Comey did, do it close enough to the general election that it would have an effect, but not so close that it wouldn't have time to get plenty of play in the media and magnification through partisan propaganda outlets.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

dragonwriter 10y ago

Or, not-secretly controlled by Republicans, in the case of the FBI.

DominikR 10y ago
Hm, so it's a Russian-Republican FBI-CIA conspiracy against Hillary? Even though 2 weeks ago Comey was praised by the Democrats for not indicting HRC. They sure are all out to get her it seems.
WillPostForFood 10y ago
That's weak sauce argument. If the FBI was controlled by Republicans they would have indicted Hillary Clinton for mishandling classified information instead of giving a press conference letting her off the hook. And they would have let General Petraeus (who was a potential Republican primary candidate) off instead of bringing charges against him. FBI was a hero to Democrats and a villain to Republicans a couple months ago and now it flipped. So the FBI probably isn't controlled by either party.
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  > If the FBI was controlled by Republicans they would have indicted Hillary Clinton No, they wouldn't have, because the FBI can't indict anyone; indictments are sought by Justice Department prosecutors (who don'the work for the FBI) and issued by grand juries (who also don't work for the FBI.) All the FBI can do is investigate, conduct lawful arrests, and provide information to prosecutors who decide whether and when to prosecute (including seeking indictments.) Well, and conduct politically motivated information releases, though that isn't a legal option, as it violates the Hatch Act. And the FBI is, in fact, controlled by a Republican. This is a matter of simple, undisputable fact. And that's a Republican whose naked political manipulation has been criticized not only by Democrats, but by numerous Republicans, including, among other notables, former Attorney-General Alberto Gonzales, and by others with no love of Democrats, like conservative icon, Fox News legal anlayst, and Libertarian Party member Judge Andrew Napolitano. > And they would have let General Petraeus (who was a potential Republican primary candidate) off instead of bringing charges against him Again, that's Justice Department prosecutors, not the FBI. Plus, that kind of blatant political manipulation that is likely to get you fired or forced to resign is a one-time-only thing that only works well if you do it right before the election. If a partisan Republican -- especially working in a Democratic Administration -- was going to do it, they do just what Comey did, do it close enough to the general election that it would have an effect, but not so close that it wouldn't have time to get plenty of play in the media and magnification through partisan propaganda outlets.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]