Hmmmm. A torch. That’s a good start.
“Torched In The Department Of Justice’s IG Report On Obama-Era FISA Abuses’
So what? Not arrested. No problem.
Wait. This guy’s read the report? If not its just conjecture to get hits.
Torched maybe but no charges. A fat pension, getting rich for appearances and speaking fees all while trashing our President.
Considering the great men who have died for this republic, jimmiecommie deserves worse than torching.
Lock him up!
"INTENT" is IRRELEVANT and NOT in the law!
Here's that word again, 'intent.'
I'm not aware of any statute in the USA, especially those regarding national security, that requires a test for 'intent.'
Didn’t they say in stories in various places “IG report coming any day now” in Jan-April. Then by June. Now supposedly September. We should ask “of what year?”
The good old days of FR in the 1990s had “Explosive new report on Clintons will land them both in jail within two weeks....” “Arkansas State Troopers bombshell revelations coming soon....” “Clinton insider will tell all....”
I used to read those with increasing anticipation.
It’s a joke. The IG can puff and snort and pound his chest, but can’t prosecute anybody. Barr had a written recommendation to do it, but finnessed his way out of it. I’ve given up on equal justice before the law. The “lawmen” themselves have made it a joke. How do they look at their eyes in the mirror?
More of a tick...tick...tick. Will the mainspring have any spring in it when the alarm goes off.
No jail? Meaningless.
Big deal.......not. Comey will laugh it off and so will the left (my opinion). He should lose his pension at least
I’m sure he’s losing a lot of sleep over it.
Torched?
Yet another dopey Townhall article.
They are using this word ‘intent’ deliberately to remind us of the Clinton email decision Comey made. I don’t think ‘intent’ is the real reason they declined prosecution. I think it is more to do with the fact that 1) these memos were classified after the fact and 2) that he shared them with his lawyer (making it privileged in some ways, even though this ‘lawyer’ was really a friend he used to leak the memos) — and while these and other arguments may be irrelevant to the statute, it does make the prosecution of the case more difficult.
And if they suspect they will be filing other charges, they can always resurrect this issue or feel justice will be adequately served with a more solid case to prosecute. Why bring a weak case into a strong one?
Torched? As in burned at the stake? Okay. I can live with that.
Now there is an example of primo, top quality, bureaucratic, ass kissing to retain status within the Deep State machinery.
To the best of my knowledge
a) the law says nothing about intent being required, and without a doubt
b) the bastard in question was part of a coup to unseat a legally elected President of the United States elected by "deplorables" unacceptable to the Deep State which is by definition is a blatantly vindictive act
Nothing will happen. He’s a swamp eel Democrat.