Posted on 08/01/2019 12:03:50 AM PDT by Segovia
Agreed, the only rationale for this is that Comey may be brought up on charges of being involved in the criminal conspiracy against Trump, which will play out later.
Potentially losing the first case out of the barn on a lesser charge could hurt the prosecution of the entire conspiracy team...
...at least I’m hoping
Nobody intended to do anything,wow that’s great,hopefully they can find something somebody intended to do
I think Barr wants the rats to turn on each other.
ron Milam says: August 1, 2019 at 3:17 am
"Relax, I think this may be part of Barrs strategy. He declines to prosecute in consultation with Huber/Horowitz, thus hes seen as being fair minded .THEN BOOM, Comey gets charged on the FISA abuses and Barr and team can cite his Memo saga for reference to him being a shady character. He bends the rules, but we gave him the benefit of the doubt on that ordeal, but he tried to frame Trump and knew the Dossier was a paid for political hit job. Also, the memo fiasco would have been tried in New York, whereas the other case can be tried in the DC Area .Virginia."
****
What do you think?
Proverbs 24:23-25 (NIV2011)
23 These also are sayings of the wise: To show partiality in judging is not good:
24 Whoever says to the guilty, You are innocent, will be cursed by peoples and denounced by nations.
25 But it will go well with those who convict the guilty, and rich blessing will come on them.
No one will be prosecuted for any crimes committed during the Obama admin.
Why did mueller never care WHERE or WHY or WHO or WHEN he attacked someone?
This is another “blockbuster”.
SMH
I had hopes but how many months did we act like a@@holes talking about Sessions BIG PLAN?
Come on
I at first thought the charge, “lack of candor”, was REALLY LAME. But,it appears it is as serious a charge as perjury.
What? No BOMBSHELL or TICK TOCK!?
yep....
Kind of not minding your own farts? And the worse they are the better you like them?
The last paragraph of the excerpt:
Although prosecutors found the watchdog’s findings compelling, they decided against prosecution under classified information protection laws because of there being too much uncertainty surrounding Comey’s intent, according to the Hill. A month after he was fired, Comey testified to Congress he had leaked his notes to a friend to give to the media, hoping that it would spark a special counsel investigation.
In the article it is stated (supposedly by the prosecutors): determining comey’s intent is too uncertain, then in the very next sentence it states exactly what his intent was. How could that possibly be more contradictory?
Good attempt at spin. The little smart ass traitor was ripping into Trump as recently as last week. He’s above the law and he knows it.
Comey’s acts are covered by the same laws that should have landed Hillary Clinton in prison. There is no intent requirement. The law was changed to a standard of gross negligence.
I’m holding out hope that Barr is going for much bigger charges against Comey, but we’ll see.
So bill Barr is not going to hold this lying sack of leaking shit accountable for putting this country through this BS garbage for the last two years?
That’s great, Bill.
You must be like all of our other Attorneys General.
Corrupt.
Forget a traffic summons controversy, US Attorney John Durham is working on a far bigger, substantial case.
Comey isn’t escaping that gauntlet.
I thought the lack of candor finding often turned on an absence of finding of intent.
Certainly, James Comey knew how to play the system to always create a doubt about his guilty intent so long as he could point plausibly to a proper motive. If someone utters a statement which might be evidence of guilt under one interpretation or quite innocent under another, we have to be careful about imputing intent depending on whether we like the guy. For example, much of what Donald Trump said that has been alleged to be grounds for obstruction could have either a malevolent or an innocent motive.
We want Trump to have the presumption of innocence and to have guilt proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Even a snake like Comey is entitled to the same presumptions. But we are also entitled to understand that this is Comey's lifetime occupation so his experience taught him to be quite ambiguous as he walks the line. Very clever.
Bookmark
Barr does make the optic of himself look like one of us however, he’s been part of the Government of justice for years. If I’m not mistaken his father was in Government as well. He talks the talk like many in government. He knows exactly where’re the skeletons are.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.