Time for a full scale investigation-special counsel on Hillary, Obama and Comey

[StLucieBengal]

http://www.dailywire.com/news/20598/time-full-scale-investigation-maybe-even-special-ben-shapiro

Seems about time to have a special counsel at least. Let them dig.

Quote:Time For A Full-Scale Investigation — Maybe Even A Special Counsel — On Hillary, Obama, and Comey

September 4, 2017 21.7k views
Democratic presidential candidate former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton looks on during a 'Get Out The Caucus' at the Clark County Government Center on February 19, 2016 in Las Vegas, Nevada.
Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images
Last week, Senators Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) released news that they’d found evidence that in April and May 2016, then-FBI Director James Comey prepared a statement letting former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton off the hook for her alleged mistreatment of classified information. As the senators noted, “As of early May 2016, the FBI had not yet interviewed Secretary Clinton. Moreover, it had yet to finish interviewing sixteen other key witnesses, including Cheryl Mills, Bryan Pagliano, Heather Samuelson, Justin Cooper and John Bentel. These individuals had intimate and personal knowledge relating to Secretary Clinton’s non-government server, including helping her build and administer the device.”

This is patently insane.

It’s particularly insane given the fact that Comey posed for years as a by-the-book, no-nonsense advocate for the law. But the fact is that Comey knew that no matter what happened, Attorney General Loretta Lynch would exonerate Hillary Clinton, and so he decided to take the heat off of Lynch and President Obama by putting his reputation on the line on their behalf. As Andy McCarthy puts it at National Review, this was exactly the same time period in which President Obama was publicly attempting to brush off the Hillary accusations. McCarthy writes:

The decision not to indict Hillary Clinton was not made by then-FBI Director Comey. It was made by President Obama and his Justice Department — Comey’s superiors. If you want to say Comey went along for the ride rather than bucking the tide (as he concedes doing when Lynch directed him to call the Clinton probe a “matter,” not an “investigation”), that’s fair. But the fact that Comey already knew in April what he would say in July has long been perfectly obvious. The Obama administration was going to follow its leader. What Comey ultimately stated was just a repeat of what Obama was openly saying in April, and what Obama’s Justice Department was leaking to the press in May.

This certainly calls for a full-scale investigation from the Justice Department. The media are consumed, day in and day out, with the possibility of quasi-obstruction of justice from the Trump administration regarding the Russia investigation; they’re speculating that Trump must have fired Comey to protect himself, that he’s impeding the investigation into former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, that his former campaign manager Paul Manafort might be pardoned by Trump in order to protect the president. But we saw activity at least as nefarious with President Obama and Hillary Clinton. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. If Attorney General Jeff Sessions isn’t capable of taking on this investigation into Hillary and Obama and Comey, a special prosecutor should be appointed. It’s past due.

[BmorePat87]

http://thebengalsboard.com/Thread-Political-Comics-Memes-Jokes-etc?page=417

[Belsnickel]

Yeah, this is a mountain out of a mole hill situation. A lot depends on what the actual content of the statement is; context is key. I get that is an attempt by those on the right to paint Comey in a bad light, but the statement from these legislators was intentionally light on facts for this reason. If the statement was actually damning, then more of the actual content would be released. The fact that they are so light on the details means that leaving it up to the imagination will make it far worse in the minds of the public than it actually is.

[StLucieBengal]

(09-04-2017, 05:43 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Yeah, this is a mountain out of a mole hill situation. A lot depends on what the actual content of the statement is; context is key. I get that is an attempt by those on the right to paint Comey in a bad light, but the statement from these legislators was intentionally light on facts for this reason. If the statement was actually damning, then more of the actual content would be released. The fact that they are so light on the details means that leaving it up to the imagination will make it far worse in the minds of the public than it actually is.

Trump/Russia has also been light on details yet here we are saddled with a special counsel. We should let one go on this as well. See what comes up.

[Belsnickel]

(09-04-2017, 05:47 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Trump/Russia has also been light on details yet here we are saddled with a special counsel. We should let one go on this as well. See what comes up.

I'm sure it's going to be covered, because Mueller's role was really to investigate Russian interference in the election, overall. Because of Trump's actions with Comey, it is also a criminal investigation into obstruction of justice. Because Comey's actions in this would be relevant, it could fall under the Mueller investigation as well. This won't make all of those that praised Mueller at first and then saw him getting too close to home and started hating on him happy, but still.

[StLucieBengal]

(09-04-2017, 05:55 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I'm sure it's going to be covered, because Mueller's role was really to investigate Russian interference in the election, overall. Because of Trump's actions with Comey, it is also a criminal investigation into obstruction of justice. Because Comey's actions in this would be relevant, it could fall under the Mueller investigation as well. This won't make all of those that praised Mueller at first and then saw him getting too close to home and started hating on him happy, but still.

Special counsels are the worst. They are not bound by any guidelines. They can just investigate until they find anything. Doesn't matter if it's Germane to the original investigation.

[hollodero]

(09-04-2017, 06:22 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Special counsels are the worst.   They are not bound by any guidelines.  They can just investigate until they find anything.  Doesn't matter if it's Germane to the original investigation.

But who would have a problem with that? If Russia really is all nothing, but they catch Trump in massive tax fraud instead, it's still criminal activity brought to light. Which I guess would be good; isn't it always?

[BmorePat87]

(09-04-2017, 07:05 PM)hollodero Wrote: But who would have a problem with that? If Russia really is all nothing, but they catch Trump in massive tax fraud instead, it's still criminal activity brought to light. Which I guess would be good; isn't it always?

There's no reason to be upset with oversight, accountability, and transparency.

[BigPapaKain]

Because if we're gonna waste tax dollars, it might as well be on people who aren't in office. Wouldn't want the skeletons in the CURRENT administration's office checked up on.

[Griever]

(09-04-2017, 06:22 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Special counsels are the worst.   They are not bound by any guidelines.  They can just investigate until they find anything.  Doesn't matter if it's Germane to the original investigation.

again, if trump has nothing to hide, he shouldn't be concerned about any of this

[StLucieBengal]

(09-04-2017, 08:10 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: There's no reason to be upset with oversight, accountability, and transparency.

(09-04-2017, 10:01 PM)Griever Wrote: again, if trump has nothing to hide, he shouldn't be concerned about any of this

Then let's open up a special counsel on Hillary, Obama, and comey. Let's see what he/she comes up with afterall.... no reason to be upset with accountability.

[Benton]

(09-04-2017, 10:25 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Then let's open up a special counsel on Hillary, Obama, and comey. Let's see what he/she comes up with afterall.... no reason to be upset with accountability.

Why?

There have been investigations. Nothing has come of them. We're going to waste more money for...?

If the GOP is going to prove they can govern, they're going to have to stop wasting time and money being the opposition party. You've got the helm, lead. Stop wasting resources saying bill Clinton is ruining your life.

[hollodero]

(09-04-2017, 10:25 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Then let's open up a special counsel on Hillary, Obama, and comey.   Let's see what he/she comes up with afterall....  no reason to be upset with accountability.

Yeah isn't that clever, how you slyly turned it around... but indeed, no reason. The main problem seems to be that this whole Hillary, Obama, Comey story hasn't much substance to it. You could investigate anyone, sure, including Deflategate and who named the hurricane Harvey. But for the sake of rationality, there needs to be good reason and a bit more than some people connecting imaginary dots for an investigation. The republican party, which is in power, seems to agree, and they followed an investigation right into Bills pants and initiated 1.364 Benghazi investigations, so it's not like they waste an opportunity easily.

When even those guys agree it's a bit thin, that should tell you something. At least, that it is way thinner as a current president having had advisers that actually were (secret) foreign agents, a president firing an FBI director because of an investigation he didn't like, business deals en masse that all were strongly denied before, Russian hacking and Email releases to aid Donald Trump, mails and meetings from Trump sons, son-in-laws and roughly 13.000 associates with Russians of all sorts of ties to Putin swirling that date. And, of course, the whole this being the current administration, so they actually can do further harm thing.

The current investigation is way more legit than the proposed other one. To weigh it any different, you have to add a real heavy piece of partisanship into the balance. 
If you're against special counsel in principle, I could at least some logic behind that. But actually saying special counsels are the worst and then that there should be a special counsel investigating Obama, no matter your intentions that doesn't sound inspiring to my intellect.

[StLucieBengal]

(09-04-2017, 10:50 PM)Benton Wrote: Why?

There have been investigations. Nothing has come of them. We're going to waste more money for...?

If the GOP is going to prove they can govern, they're going to have to stop wasting time and money being the opposition party. You've got the helm, lead. Stop wasting resources saying bill Clinton is ruining your life.

Let me be clear. I would never have a special counsel. I think they should not be open ended to just find something. That is a waste.

[Matt_Crimson]

(09-04-2017, 07:05 PM)hollodero Wrote: But who would have a problem with that? If Russia really is all nothing, but they catch Trump in massive tax fraud instead, it's still criminal activity brought to light. Which I guess would be good; isn't it always?

Good because why?

[Belsnickel]

(09-04-2017, 11:15 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Let me be clear. I would never have a special counsel. I think they should not be open ended to just find something. That is a waste.

In all seriousness, there would not be support for it. If the administration and/or Congress were to open an investigation into Clinton and/or Obama, the public backlash would be immense. That is the move of an authoritarian state, a move taken by dictators to start investigations into their opposition. When you have all of the power, initiating political investigations into those that don't is not something that is popular. We see those sorts of things happen and then a few years later there is an armed revolution in the country leading to a civil war.

I want oversight, I want accountability, but tensions are too high right now in this country to start a partisan investigation like that. There are too many groups on the right and the left that are ready to start a revolution by bullet instead of ballot box.

[hollodero]

(09-05-2017, 08:40 AM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: Good because why?

Because overall it's a good thing when criminal activities would come to light. Who would opt against that? I know FOX brought a story that was like "So would you care if Trump's a criminal", to which I would say yes. No matter if the president were Trump or Obama or whoever, if he/she did something criminal, I wouldn't be against it getting out.

[BmorePat87]

(09-04-2017, 10:25 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Then let's open up a special counsel on Hillary, Obama, and comey.   Let's see what he/she comes up with afterall....  no reason to be upset with accountability.

Sure, I just don't see what requires a special counsel. Historically, special counsels have existed to independently investigate issues where major executive figures (whether the AG, President, or other DOJ leaders) must recuse themselves as they have some vested interest or involvement. This would be an investigation by one administration's DOJ over the actions of a past administration's DOJ. 

Reno had an independent counsel look into Waco because she was the responsible party. Ashcroft had an independent counsel to look into the Valerie Plame leak after close political allies were involved. Clinton had an independent counsel for Whitewater because it was investigating himself. Mueller was brought into the Russian interference investigation because Jeff Sessions recused himself because he had contacts with Russian diplomats during the campaign. 


The Daily Wire either doesn't understand what the point of a special counsel is or they are just writing this drivel to get ignorant people who are enraged at the Russian probe to react. 

[CKwi88]

(09-05-2017, 10:57 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: The Daily Wire either doesn't understand what the point of a special counsel is or they are just writing this drivel to get ignorant people who are enraged at the Russian probe to react. 

Well, we know they got at least one hook, line, and sinker.

[Griever]

(09-05-2017, 11:24 AM)CKwi88 Wrote: Well, we know they got at least one hook, line, and sinker.

they got him multiple times on the same bait