Comey hearings today

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
16,242
14,245
136
He said Huma knowingly emailed Weiner classified info.

Also that he was nauseated that he might have influenced the election. I agree it would have been concealment had he not disclosed the Weiner stuff.

Not a single head is going to roll though.

How is it "concealment?" Why hasn't Comey told the general public about all the evidence they've gathered in the Russia hacking investigation? There was a hearing two months ago and he refused to discuss any of that evidence. Is that concealment too?
 

theeedude

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,198
126
FBI policy is to "conceal' investigations until and unless charges are brought. But Hillary was made an exception to that policy. Comey is still concealing what he knows about Russian collusion with the Trump campaign.
 

trenchfoot

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
16,139
8,733
136
No matter what comes out of Comey's mouth now, from here on in it's going to be for the purpose of covering his own ass. He's already done the dirty deed, he will be richly rewarded for it and Trump has already benefited from Comey's perfectly timed decision to come out with news that very much negatively affected Hillary's campaign.

When considering the chain of events that led to Trump's victory from a wider perspective, Comey's decision on releasing the news that he was reopening the investigation of Hillary's emails came at a point in time which neatly dovetails with all of the other leaks and releases that the Trump campaign was seemingly in control of in order to derail Hillary's run for office.

Something has got to be so wrong about the electoral process and the selection of candidates that made themselves available for the office such that a guy like Trump was able to win.

I hope that when all of the investigating is done (sooner than later) and the results are known that some kind of righteous justice gets meted out against the perps who broke the laws of the land in their efforts to criminally influence the outcome of our elections. Of course, the Repubs will do their utmost best to delay and obstruct any findings that prevent them from destabilizing and reshaping the gov't in the prescribed way that the very wealthy have so decreed.

One can hope, but in the meantime there's already so much damage being done by the Trump administration in regards to how they and the GOP are dismantling the very structure of our gov't piece by piece so as to strip the protections that the masses have to rely on from being exploited and victimized by those with undue power and influence.
 

Azuma Hazuki

Golden Member
Jun 18, 2012
1,532
866
131
If he's only "lightly" nauseated by this, he doesn't understand what kind of blood he has on his head. I am no fan of Hillary Clinton, but she was by far the lesser of two evils, and Comey's horseshit may have dealt the US if not western civilization itself a fatal blow. He's going to pay for this for a long, long, long time after he dies...
 

baydude

Senior member
Sep 13, 2011
814
80
91
Something has got to be so wrong about the electoral process and the selection of candidates that made themselves available for the office such that a guy like Trump was able to win.

Pretty sure it wasn't the electoral procsss and just the Democratic Party rigging the election in favor of such a flawed candidate like Hillary over Bernie.
 
  • Like
Reactions: highland145

trenchfoot

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
16,139
8,733
136
High
CATASTROPHIC!!!

I think he took a drama class in high school and defaulted to it in a panic. Either that or the folks who prepped him for the questioning played a prank on him and laughed their asses off when he coughed up that fat little cheese puff.
 

UglyCasanova

Lifer
Mar 25, 2001
19,275
1,361
126
If he's only "lightly" nauseated by this, he doesn't understand what kind of blood he has on his head. I am no fan of Hillary Clinton, but she was by far the lesser of two evils, and Comey's horseshit may have dealt the US if not western civilization itself a fatal blow. He's going to pay for this for a long, long, long time after he dies...

What blood so far...? Other than Syria strike which the left by and large supported and trumpkins opposed what blood has Trump spilled?
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,994
31,556
146
Pretty sure it wasn't the electoral procsss and just the Democratic Party rigging the election in favor of such a flawed candidate like Hillary over Bernie.

ah yes. because republicans totally would have embraced that commie, Bernie Sanders. The american people have no one to blame but Democrats for having Trump shit upon us. Do you actually believe this, or do you chuckle every time you type that?

get over it: you consort with retards, and you and your pals are responsible for the dissolution of our republic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Azuma Hazuki
Feb 4, 2009
35,862
17,407
136
Concern troll often?

I know I love those guys. They're super concerned about how Democrats pick their nominee(s) but yet they never vote Democrat. I think they believe that a party is part of Government when in reality they are not. Hell I could start my own party and say I'm going to have votes to judge interest but ultimately I'll pick a random name to nominate.

*I don't think the Russian Trolls were taught that the parties are not part of Government.
 

pauldun170

Diamond Member
Sep 26, 2011
9,559
5,808
136
Never ends

https://www.propublica.org/article/comeys-testimony-on-huma-abedin-forwarding-emails-was-inaccurate
https://www.yahoo.com/news/fbi-officials-want-correct-james-144400208.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...tepped-in-it-big-time/?utm_term=.83bcdbc53db7

FBI Director James B. Comey said at a hearing last week that it made him “mildly nauseous” to think that he may have influenced the outcome of the 2016 campaign.

New revelations about his apparently botched testimony are liable to make Democrats — and Comey — a little more than mildly nauseous. And they are going to damage Comey's best defense of his actions.

The Post's Devlin Barrett has confirmed ProPublica's reporting that Comey misstated key details of an investigation into Hillary Clinton at a hearing last week.

Specifically at issue are Comey's statements that:

  1. Top Clinton aide Huma Abedin “forwarded hundreds and thousands of emails” from Clinton's private email server to her husband, former congressman Anthony Weiner, as part of a “regular practice” of forwarding emails for Weiner to print out for Clinton, and …
  2. These emails contained classified information.
Barrett reports that this first claim is just not true and the second one obscures the fact that the few classified emails weren't marked classified at the time:

Neither of those statements is accurate, according to people close to the investigation. The investigation found that Abedin did occasionally forward emails to her husband for printing, but it was a far smaller number than described by Comey, and it wasn’t a “regular practice,’’ these people said. None of the forwarded emails were marked classified but a small number — a handful, according one person said — contained information that was later judged to contain classified information, these people said.

To be clear, these weren't just small details that emerged from Comey's testimony on Wednesday; they were the headline for many new outlets that covered Comey's visit to the Senate Judiciary Committee, including The Post.

They were also key to Comey's testimony, in that he used them to defend his decision to disclose the new Clinton emails just 11 days before Election Day. Facing questions from Democrats about why he did what he did, Comey cited these facts as proof of the seriousness of the email discovery and the need to say something.

Democrats, including Clinton, have decried Comey's decision to offer details of an incomplete investigation so late in the election as pointless, extraordinary and even the difference between Clinton and Donald Trump winning the election. In candid remarks last week, Clinton posited that she would have been elected president if the election had been held Oct. 27 — the day before Comey's announcement.

The reason this is so troubling for Comey is because it calls into question his saving grace in this entire situation: his reputation as a nonpartisan, highly competent top law enforcement official.

Comey's first turn in the national spotlight came in 2007, when he delivered gripping testimony about a scene straight out of a movie. With Attorney General John Ashcroft confined to a bed in the intensive-care unit in 2004, Comey, his deputy, received a call that White House counsel Alberto Gonzales and Chief of Staff Andy Card were on the way to the hospital to persuade the ill Ashcroft to reauthorize President George W. Bush's domestic surveillance program. Comey beat them there, and Ashcroft didn't sign the document.
“I was angry,” Comey testified. “I thought I just witnessed an effort to take advantage of a very sick man, who did not have the powers of the attorney general because they had been transferred to me.”

It was a moment of principle over politics, it seemed, and it has been cited as a key part of Comey's bio ever since.
Comey would go on to be a bipartisan top political appointee when President Barack Obama picked him as FBI director in 2013. Over the course of the 2016 election, Comey found himself drawing huge amounts of criticism from both Republicans (for not recommending charges against Clinton in summer 2016) and then Democrats (for his late disclosure about the Abedin-Weiner emails). More recently, President Trump seems to have oscillated on how he feels about Comey, with Comey announcing that the FBI is investigating alleged contacts between the Trump campaign and Russia.
Through it all, there has always been an underlying belief among those who pay close attention to these things that Comey is a serious, apolitical public servant who may have made questionable decisions but whose heart was in the right place.

Getting details of such import wrong in his much-watched testimony to Congress certainly doesn't help him on the competence front; indeed, it's difficult to see how he could get them so wrong.

And for Democrats looking for reasons to believe that Comey was out to get them late in 2016, this will only feed the beast — fairly or unfairly.
 
Feb 4, 2009
35,862
17,407
136
Just heard per Spicers conference the question asked were any limitations put on Flynns security clearance during the 18 days between notice & his firing. Spicer said "none the President made the right decision on this matter" then stuff about Flynns 30 years of service.
 

interchange

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
8,031
2,886
136
At this point, someone needs to be criminally charged (e.g. with perjury). All of these hearings and allegations are adding blood in the water, but in the end no one will be able to tell where it was coming from. Politicians are busy politicizing and diverting attention from the relevant facts and purposes of these hearings. It is doing nothing good for the nation. It is going to need to be a lot more important to be selective about what is said in these congressional investigations. I don't think that will happen until someone faces real heat in a legitimate court on the basis of this fiasco.
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
16,242
14,245
136

For those who have not read these links, it's kind of a bombshell. Basically, Comey testified that Abedin had forwarded "hundreds and thousands of e-mails" to Weiner, but according to FBI sources, it was far fewer than that. I'm guessing the number was in the dozens. Not only was Comey's testimony not accurate, but to think that this election turned on a few dozen e-mails which may have been sent to Weiner's computer simply because it was hooked up to a printer and Abedin wanted to print them out?

The reason the number of e-mail is so important is because the question here is, if there were so few e-mails, why couldn't they all have been reviewed prior to making a determination to inform Congress and hence the public about them?

Anyway, the FBI may be issuing a letter to Congress to "clarify" Comey's inaccurate testimony.
 

Blackjack200

Lifer
May 28, 2007
15,995
1,688
126
Under Trump, both the AG and FBI director both have now lied under oath.

That's only a big deal when Democrats do it.

It really is astounding to watch how the government functions at this point. Along with Kushner's lying on his disclosures (a felony) and his family getting caught selling access in China. I think it demonstrates just how illusory a lot of the protections in our government are. It will be interesting to see if the Democrats get a majority if they can put a stop to some of this stuff. My guess is no.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Azuma Hazuki

Azuma Hazuki

Golden Member
Jun 18, 2012
1,532
866
131
Can we please run some of these people through an industrial shredder on live TV? Maybe that will send the proper message. Blood, screaming, flying bone shrapnel...
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
-snip-
The reason the number of e-mail is so important is because the question here is, if there were so few e-mails, why couldn't they all have been reviewed prior to making a determination to inform Congress and hence the public about them?

Yes, and I wondered about that as soon as he announced that the FBI finished examining Weiner's lappy. If the FBI was able to clear it that fast why bother to even make an announcement? If he knew there was a reasonable expectation to complete the examination before the election just follow FBI procedure and keep your mouth shut.

I find this guy to be terribly incompetent and continually exhibit extremely poor judgment. He needs a new career.

Fern
 
  • Like
Reactions: ivwshane

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
Time for Comey to go. It's now obvious who's "side" he was on, and is still on, when he should have no side.

Edited for clarity

I do not see him as being on any side. Why did he break with FBI policy and announce that the FBI was investigating some Trump campaign personnel for ties to Russia when FBI policy says no commenting on investigations?

I'll point out in that same testimony he refused to comment on any FBI investigation into the leaking of Flynn's data citing standard FBI policy.

I can make no sense of what this guy has done. He claims he's trying to ensure that Americans maintain their respect for the FBI and LE institutions. Fvcker's done the opposite.

Fern
 
  • Like
Reactions: ivwshane