Comey refuses to say if FBI investigated Clinton Foundation

[hanger4]

"The exchange began with Rep. Chaffetz trying to determine exactly what the FBI had and hot not investigated. “Let’s put the boundaries on this, what you didn’t look at,” Chaffetz said. He then asked a series of question about various aspects of the case. Had the FBI looked at Clinton’s compliance with FOIA? Comey said no. Had they investigated possible perjury in Clinton’s Congressional testimony? Again the answer was no. Is the FBI still investigating Hillary’s top aides? No, the FBI did not recommend prosecution of anyone involved."

"But when Chaffetz came to the topic of the Clinton Foundation, Comey’s answer was different. “Did you look at the Clinton Foundation?” Chaffetz asked. Comey replied, “I’m not going to comment on the existence or non-existence of any other investigations.”

"Chaffetz let that answer hand in the air for a few seconds and then asked, “Was the Clinton Foundation tied in to this investigation?” Comey replied, “I’m not going to answer that.”

http://hotair.com/archives/2016/07/07/director-comey-refuses-to-comment-on-clinton-foundation/

Apparently this is far from over.

[hanger4]

BTW, there is a video at the link to watch the entire exchange.

[Truth Detector]

"The exchange began with Rep. Chaffetz trying to determine exactly what the FBI had and hot not investigated. “Let’s put the boundaries on this, what you didn’t look at,” Chaffetz said. He then asked a series of question about various aspects of the case. Had the FBI looked at Clinton’s compliance with FOIA? Comey said no. Had they investigated possible perjury in Clinton’s Congressional testimony? Again the answer was no. Is the FBI still investigating Hillary’s top aides? No, the FBI did not recommend prosecution of anyone involved."

"But when Chaffetz came to the topic of the Clinton Foundation, Comey’s answer was different. “Did you look at the Clinton Foundation?” Chaffetz asked. Comey replied, “I’m not going to comment on the existence or non-existence of any other investigations.”

"Chaffetz let that answer hand in the air for a few seconds and then asked, “Was the Clinton Foundation tied in to this investigation?” Comey replied, “I’m not going to answer that.”

http://hotair.com/archives/2016/07/07/director-comey-refuses-to-comment-on-clinton-foundation/

Apparently this is far from over.

Chaffetz handed Comey his dumb ass. My favorite exchange was questioning him about her lies.

Chaffetz: "Did Hillary Clinton do anything wrong?"
Comey (partisan dimwit): "And what do you mean by wrong?"
Chaffetz: "It's self-evident,"

It is remarkable to me that the idiot Comey had to ask "what do you mean by wrong" in this case.

The best exchange of the day:

On the question of whether Hillary Clinton lied under oath, Comey (partisan dimwit) said, "Not in a case we're working."

Chaffetz asked, "Did you review the documents where Congressman Jim Jordan asked her specifically, and she said, quote, 'There was nothing marked classified on my emails, either sent of received,' end quote."

"I don't remember reviewing that particular testimony," Comey (partisan dimwit) said.

Now for the really unbelievable part considering the idiotic claim that this was a comprehensive investigation:

"Did the FBI investigate her statements under oath on this topic?" Chaffetz asked.

"Not to my knowledge. I don't think there's been a referral from Congress," Comey (partisan dimwit) responded.

"Do you need a referral from Congress to investigate her statements under oath?," Chaffetz asked.

"Sure do," Comey (partisan dimwit) said.

"You'll have one. You'll have one in the next few hours!" Chaffetz said.

[Common Sense]

Keep hope alive...

[hanger4]

Chaffetz handed Comey his dumb ass. My favorite exchange was questioning him about her lies.

Chaffetz: "Did Hillary Clinton do anything wrong?"
Comey (partisan dimwit): "And what do you mean by wrong?"
Chaffetz: "It's self-evident,"

It is remarkable to me that the idiot Comey had to ask "what do you mean by wrong" in this case.

The best exchange of the day:

On the question of whether Hillary Clinton lied under oath, Comey (partisan dimwit) said, "Not in a case we're working."

Chaffetz asked, "Did you review the documents where Congressman Jim Jordan asked her specifically, and she said, quote, 'There was nothing marked classified on my emails, either sent of received,' end quote."

"I don't remember reviewing that particular testimony," Comey (partisan dimwit) said.

Now for the really unbelievable part considering the idiotic claim that this was a comprehensive investigation:

"Did the FBI investigate her statements under oath on this topic?" Chaffetz asked.

"Not to my knowledge. I don't think there's been a referral from Congress," Comey (partisan dimwit) responded.

"Do you need a referral from Congress to investigate her statements under oath?," Chaffetz asked.

"Sure do," Comey (partisan dimwit) said.

"You'll have one. You'll have one in the next few hours!" Chaffetz said.

I don't believe Comey is playing partisan games. I believe the OIG referrial to the FBI was quite narrow in scope. The FBI investigation was strictly within the confines of whether or not HC's email system itself rose to the level of felony status.

[Truth Detector]

Trey Gowdy hands Comey (the partisan twit) his azz:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Z8pnk2rvYo

It is abundantly clear that the American people are not being served by this President, his Administration nor this unaccomplished, incredibly incompetent, corrupt former Secretary of State who is a proven sociopathic liar and now becoming the Democratic Party Leader and candidate for President. It is absolutely stunning.

[Truth Detector]

I don't believe Comey is playing partisan games. I believe the OIG referrial to the FBI was quite narrow in scope. The FBI investigation was strictly within the confines of whether or not HC's email system itself rose to the level of felony status.

I think Comey is acting on behalf of his boss and a party so disconnected from reality as to believe that it is above our laws. How else can anyone explain the complete LACK of effort on the part of Comey to even admit that his claim there was no intent is so specious as to defy gravity??

[Truth Detector]

Keep hope alive...

Keep those lemming like leftist eyes tightly closed. :rofl:

[Subdermal]

Both Gowdy and Chaffetz completely cored this apple. I'm not sure what is taking place here, but there are a couple of possibilities:

1. This is a full and complete attempt to cover up Hillary's crimes. The only possible explanation of that, therefore, is that it is an Establishment effort, which fits into the narrative that they don't really care which party is POTUS, as long as the POTUS is Establishment;

2. Comey knew that Lynch/Obama would never prosecute, regardless his referral. This is his way of keeping this topic open and discussed, and the evidence from being referred to the AG, and then sealed and abandoned. This is the best he could do to explain the American People that this is a bad woman.

3. Comey knows the above, but also knows that the investigation is more broad than simply the email scandal; that it overlaps into (possible) misdeeds funneled through the Clinton Foundation - which (if true) would certainly be a MUCH larger story. The reason to publicize their recommendation now would, therefore, be three-fold:

• Comey's more broad reaching investigation(s) (as alluded to above in the Gowdy interview) is going to take longer than several months, which means that - if Hillary would win - the POTUS would be the target of the investigation, and;

• this is Comey's attempt to get out in front of the American Public enough information to derail a Clinton candidacy, before the real anvil drops.

• I would assume that this present political climate would make it much easier to go after the Clintons if they were no longer running for office.

Obviously, I'm hoping for #3.

[hanger4]

I think Comey is acting on behalf of his boss and a party so disconnected from reality as to believe that it is above our laws. How else can anyone explain the complete LACK of effort on the part of Comey to even admit that his claim there was no intent is so specious as to defy gravity??
How else can anyone explain the complete LACK of effort on the part of Comey to even admit that his claim there was no intent is so specious as to defy gravity??"

Maybe the INTENT was in relation to the Espionage Act. Comey found no evidence HC was "spying" as it were. She was, as I believe, more intent on hiding from public scrutiny and not espionage. Again the OIG referrial was probably very narrow in scope and dealt with only what's in their from.

[Peter1469]

The investigation into the Clinton Foundation is separate. And who knows how long it will last. It has serious public corruption implications.