DOJ employees donate $75,000 to Hillary, agency that supposed to work with FBI

Is this not a conflict of interest? There'll be lots of FBI resignations if they decide to indict and the DOJ drags it's feet. What a disgrace.

Hillary Clinton has received nearly $75,000 in political contributions from employees at the Department of Justice, the agency that would decide whether or not to act if the FBI recommended charges against Clinton or her aides following its investigation into her private email server.

“I’m not surprised in the least to see more evidence that shows the politicization of the Justice Department,” Bossie said in a statement to the Free Beacon. “How can Democrat political appointees fairly investigate someone who is about to become their nominee for president? That’s why last July I called on Attorney General Lynch to appoint an impartial special counsel to investigate the private Clinton email server.

freebeacon.com...

Why do people think that obessing over these emails is going to cause the FBI or anyone else to prosecute Clinton?

It's not happening. Period.

Just like how Obama isn't a gay, Kenyan-born Muslim. That obsession didn't end up amounting to anything then, and all this obsessing about Clinton's emails isn't going to motivate the FBI or DOJ to do anything either.

The very people who decide the FBI's budget (and how much the directors get paid) are bought and paid for senators and congressmen on the side of Clinton. The FBI and DOJ are both bought and paid for.

I think people just can't seem to understand, or live in total denail that their government doesn't listen to them anymore due to corruption. Maybe people think if they scream and carry on enough they'll get their way?

Princeton University already concluded that the population of the USA has "statistically zero impact on public policy". Congress does what the richest individuals, companies and corporations tell them to do. They don't and won't listen to the people...no matter how loud the rabble gets.

"Your dose of Tuesday Truth is now complete!"

a reply to: UnBreakable

Just to add to the conflict of interest point:

Clinton aide leaves interview briefly when the FBI broaches an off-limits topic

Near the beginning of a recent interview, an FBI investigator broached a topic with longtime Hillary Clinton aide Cheryl Mills that her lawyer and the Justice Department had agreed would be off limits, according to several people familiar with the matter.

The questions that were considered off limits had to do with the procedure used to produce emails to the State Department so they could possibly be released publicly, the people said. Mills, an attorney herself, was not supposed to be asked questions about that — and ultimately never was in the recent interview — because it was considered confidential as an example of attorney-client privilege, the people said.

source

it was considered confidential as an example of attorney-client privilege,

WTF?

a reply to: MystikMushroom

I know it won't happen. Even if the FBI decides too. Hillary is the anointed one. It's just so out-in-the-open dirty and no one gives a damn that drives me nuts.

originally posted by: UnBreakable
a reply to: MystikMushroom

I know it won't happen. Even if the FBI decides too. Hillary is the anointed one. It's just so out-in-the-open dirty and no one gives a damn that drives me nuts.

Um, do you come here often? LOL

Do you not see how many NEW threads are posted here about this? There are a ton of people (apparently) that are up in arms over this.

Or maybe there are only a few and they just scream 10 times louder than everyone else.

a reply to: UnBreakable

Hillary Clinton has received nearly $75,000 in political contributions from employees at the Department of Justice

Is there a law against making personal donations to political campaigns from those who work for the DOJ?

a reply to: Grimpachi

No, but it does suggest a conflict of interest exist between indicting HRC and those Justice Department employees donating to her campaign, and as such it deserves further investigation.

So are individuals not allowed to donate to their campaign of choice anymore?

Quick, hunt the witch!!!

I don't like Hillary as much as the next person, but this is just a hit piece.

~Tenth

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
So are individuals not allowed to donate to their campaign of choice anymore?

Quick, hunt the witch!!!

I don't like Hillary as much as the next person, but this is just a hit piece.

~Tenth

Everyone keeps on saying that "bad press," towards Trump is "positive towards his numbers."

I wonder if this holds true to Hilary because there are some who cheerlead her name around here more than the people who (for some reason) actually support her.

Gunslinger fallacy, collecting as many blog/editorial pieces as possible and creating a new thread for each.... it gets stale.

We're all aware Hillary is corrupt. We're all aware that the voting/system is rigged in her favor. Not all of us are aware that "voting," in another "insert campaign promise here," isn't going to do a damn thing.

It's remarkable, truly.

a reply to: UnBreakable

I will only say that people, regardless of where they work, should be free to donate to whomever they want.

Even people in the government.

As long as they aren't using their positions to endorse or condemn a person, then they should be free to do so.

originally posted by: AlaskanDad
a reply to: Grimpachi

No, but it does suggest a conflict of interest exist between indicting HRC and those Justice Department employees donating to her campaign, and as such it deserves further investigation.

That seems like a witch hunt to me. As citizens they should be able to support whoever they want without fear of retribution from the government such as investigations.

Donations are considered free speech investigating those who make those contributions would violate the their first amendment rights.

So I ask you do you think their freedom of speech rights should be violated?

"" DOJ employees donate $75,000 to Hillary, agency that supposed to work with FBI ""

Chalk-up another 500,000 votes for Trump !!

a reply to: DBCowboy

I agree with you 100%

As long as they aren't using their positions to endorse or condemn a person, then they should be free to do so.

And

a reply to: Grimpachi

So I ask you do you think their freedom of speech rights should be violated?

I would hope that those who support her candidacy would also honor their oaths (if taken) to administer the law justly and fairly and if they felt that their support of a candidate would interfere with their ability to objectively perform their lawful function, they would recuse themselves from the investigation.

Just as I would feel that those who are opposed to any such candidate would also be able to do the same.

Will that happen in reality?

I do not know.

a reply to: Grimpachi

Simply put, they should step aside if there is a conflict of interest. IMHO It seems that the JD has several people who should be dismissing themselves from anything involving Hilley.

I would ask would you want me as having donated and supported Sen Sanders to be in a position to decide if he was to be indicted?


Myself in such a situation, I would have to disqualify myself on the grounds of a conflict of interest.

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: UnBreakable

Hillary Clinton has received nearly $75,000 in political contributions from employees at the Department of Justice

Is there a law against making personal donations to political campaigns from those who work for the DOJ?

Law? No.
Reeks of political influence? Yes.

originally posted by: AlaskanDad
a reply to: Grimpachi

Simply put, they should step aside if there is a conflict of interest. IMHO It seems that the JD has several people who should be dismissing themselves from anything involving Hilley.

You can still support a candidate and do your job. Hopefully professional people are professional. Regardless of their political leanings.

a reply to: UnBreakable

I dislike being flippant but although $75,000.00 is a decent amount of change and most folks could make many changes with that $$$ but that is "Ashtray change" especially to The Clinton Cabal.. $6B went "missing" when She was the Head of State but what was the big news?? deleted fart jokes that She 'may' have forwarded.. How many people can You feed on e-mails? "Don't pay attention to the Zionist™ and Saudis pulling the strings o'er there... Just pat Israel™ a bunch of $$$..." or words to that effect.

truthstreammedia.com...

www.judicialwatch.org...

rickwells.us...

www.washingtontimes.com...

DOJ™ would eat through $75k in 1 case, may as well be a big to do fumbling w/their Johnsons looking as if they're doing something...

namaste

P.S. Lets look into anything but the $6B that went "missing" or the $2B USD that the Saud Roi kicked into The Clinton Fraudation™..

a reply to: UnBreakable

There are ‎114 thousand employes in the DOJ there are 75 thousand dollars in contributions that have been made to her campaign by employees so trying to make an issue out of that is simply ridiculous.

If people are claiming those who support her should be dismissed from the investigation because of conflict of interest then those who support other candidates need to be dismissed as well for the same reason which would leave only the undecided qualified for the investigation which would also be ridiculous.

The people that have a legitimate conflict of interest should be excused from the investigation, but this is just being petty and I am saying this as a person that can't stand Clinton.

I'd be interested to know if any of those whom have given donations have since decided over the course of the investigation that they'd rather have their money back?

I know they'll never get it since a donation is a gift and you don't get to ask for them back if you change your mind, but I could imagine someone starting out as a supporter, but changing their mind as a result of the findings of the investigation...