Breaking: Senate Judiciary Committee Opens Investigation Into Loretta Lynch DOJ, FBI, & Clinton!

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: burntheships

Here comes the Lynch Mob , Look Out Loretta........

A poll out today shows immense support for this investigation.

So now we can be sure two things are clear.

Comey was correct in saying that Lynch's actions were of great concern and Trump is now under investigation for potential obstruction of justice.

originally posted by: burntheships

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: burntheships

Here comes the Lynch Mob , Look Out Loretta........

A poll out today shows immense support for this investigation.

It should be supported. If Lynch did try to affect any investigation or impede any other official act, she should be held accountable.

originally posted by: UKTruth
Oh look - an investigation that has been opened with actual confirmation said investigation has been opened. How novel.
I wonder will WaPo run the story...

Nope! Just check, WA Po has not and is full of fake news!

a reply to: introvert

No! Not true! why are you twisting these investigations,
look to The Senate Committee for the truth!!

Here is a breaking report with sources that says point blank:
The Senate Judiciary will not be probing Trump!

talkingpointsmemo.com...After Meeting With Mueller Senate Committee Will Not Probe Trump

originally posted by: burntheships
a reply to: introvert

No! Not true! why are you twisting these investigations,
look to The Senate Committee for the truth!!

Here is a breaking report with sources that says point blank:
The Senate Judiciary will not be probing Trump!

talkingpointsmemo.com...After Meeting With Mueller Senate Committee Will Not Probe Trump

Again, it says the intel committee will not investigate it, but the Judiciary will.

The Senate Judiciary Committee chair, meanwhile, indicated Thursday morning in a letter to the committee’s ranking member that the committee would look into “improper partisan interference in law enforcement investigations.” Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley (R-IA) had acknowledged Tuesday that the committee’s ranking member, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), asked that the committee look into potential obstruction of justice in a letter to him on Friday.

originally posted by: introvert


Again, it says the intel committee will not investigate it, but the Judiciary will.

It says that The Senate Judiciary is looking into Lynch.

They are not looking intoTrump as your still trying to twist it.

The Senate Judiciary Committee chair, meanwhile, indicated Thursday morning in a letter to the committee’s ranking member that the committee would look into “improper partisan interference in law enforcement investigations.” Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley (R-IA) had acknowledged Tuesday that the committee’s ranking member, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), asked that the committee look into potential obstruction of justice in a letter to him on Friday.

originally posted by: burntheships

originally posted by: introvert


Again, it says the intel committee will not investigate it, but the Judiciary will.

It says that The Senate Judiciary is looking into Lynch.

They are not looking intoTrump as your still trying to twist it.

The Senate Judiciary Committee chair, meanwhile, indicated Thursday morning in a letter to the committee’s ranking member that the committee would look into “improper partisan interference in law enforcement investigations.” Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley (R-IA) had acknowledged Tuesday that the committee’s ranking member, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), asked that the committee look into potential obstruction of justice in a letter to him on Friday.

Raju was asking about a letter from Feinstein to Grassley on Friday, in which the ranking member urged that the committee “investigate all issues that raise a question of obstruction of justice. These issues should be developed by our legal staff, presented to us, and be subject to full Committee hearings.” Feinstein focused specifically on fired Acting Attorney General Sally Yates — who warned White House counsel on Jan. 26 and 27 that then-National Security Adviser Michael Flynn had lied about his contacts with the Russian ambassador to the United States and could be blackmailed — and Flynn’s forced resignation on Feb. 13. On Jan. 27 and Feb. 14, Feinstein noted, citing recent testimony by fired FBI Director James Comey, Trump met with Comey privately to first ask for his loyalty and then to ask him to drop the federal probe into Flynn.

talkingpointsmemo.com...

a reply to: introvert

And as I have said three times, Grassley will not
Be looking into Trump obstruction,
He is looking into Lynch obstructing/influencing
the FBI investigation into Clinton's emails.

“Mr. Comey’s statement is extremely troubling. There should be no improper interference with FBI investigations to favor any elected official or candidate of either party. The Committee has an obligation to pursue all evidence of such misconduct,” Grassley said in the letter

www.grassley.senate.gov...

originally posted by: burntheships
a reply to: introvert

And as I have said three times, Grassley will not
Be looking into Trump obstruction,
He is looking into Lynch obstructing/influencing
the FBI investigation into Clinton's emails.

“Mr. Comey’s statement is extremely troubling. There should be no improper interference with FBI investigations to favor any elected official or candidate of either party. The Committee has an obligation to pursue all evidence of such misconduct,” Grassley said in the letter

www.grassley.senate.gov...

Wrong. From the same letter:

It is my view that fully investigating the facts, circumstances, and rationale for Mr. Comey’s removal will provide us the opportunity to do that on a cooperative, bipartisan basis,” Grassley said in the letter.

Grassley’s letter responds to a recent note from Sen. Feinstein requesting that the committee seek details from senior FBI leadership regarding Comey’s interactions with President Trump prior to being fired.

a reply to: introvert

Twist is however you wish, as I said THIS investigation
is not into Trump Obstuction.

Done with your nonsense.

Accordingly, in evaluating the circumstances of Mr. Comey’s removal, the Committee will inevitably need to fully investigate all of these issues. Given the high-profile nature of these inquiries, witnesses may be reluctant to participate voluntarily. Still, witnesses must be interviewed.

I agree with you that it is particularly important to talk to those identified by Mr. Comey during the June 8, 2017 Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) hearing and obtain additional information from the government pertaining to these matters.

Mr. Comey testified before this Committee on May 3, 2017, and before SSCI on June 8, 2017, that several incidents occurred during the course of the Clinton investigation that made him question the Department leadership’s independence from political motivations.

He testified that these incidents led to his decision to make a public announcement at the end of the FBI’s investigation because he did not believe that the Department could credibly end it.

Mr. Comey stated at the May 3, 2017 hearing before the Judiciary Committee:

Comey: " The normal way to do it would be have the Department of Justice announce it, and I struggled, as we got closer to the end of it, with—a number things had gone on, some of which I cannot talk about yet, that made me worry that the Department leadership could not credibly complete the investigation and decline prosecution without grievous damage to the American people’s confidence in the justice system."

Mr. Comey’s statement is extremely troubling. There should be no improper interference with FBI investigations to favor any elected official or candidate of either party. The Committee has an obligation to pursue all evidence of such misconduct.

You and I agree that the American people deserve a full accounting of attempts to meddle in both our democratic processes and the impartial administration of justice. The Judiciary Committee has an obligation to fully investigate any alleged improper partisan interference in law enforcement investigations. It is my view that fully investigating the facts, circumstances, and rationale for Mr. Comey’s removal will provide us the opportunity to do that on a cooperative, bipartisan basis.

"My style of deal-making is quite simple and straightforward. I aim very high, and then I just keep pushing and pushing and pushing to get what I'm after. Sometimes I settle for less than I sought, but in most cases I still end up with what I want...." DT

It is called patience. Politicians do not have patience because they do not answer to themselves but those who put them in office. No one put Trump in office but himself. You can apply the above to his campaign also.

Remember when he said they should leave CLinton alone? It was a tactic. He has been dropping hints since he was in office. They lowered their shoulders, attacked him some more and he made moves to make sure they painted themselves into a corner.

Sorry, say what you want, he is a very smart man.

When the plug is pulled on that swamp it is going to get uglier than it is now.

I mean, what happens when they bring in a former POTUS to testify? Has this ever happened? Oh, and I mean O not Bill....

a reply to: burntheships

Don't bother, some people have some weird need for Trump to be under investigation. I think it somehow soothes the embarrassment they must have felt after nearly a year of claiming he was and then looking silly when it turned out he wasn't. Under those circumstances it is pretty obvious why they are looking for scraps.

Grassley's investigation is into the circumstances of Comey's firing and also the troubling interference by Lynch. There is little suggestion that Trump is under investigation by Grassley's team for obstruction of justice... in fact I believe he is referring to the specifics of WHY Comey was fired, stated clearly by Rosenstein - the handling of the Clinton email investigation and problems he had to deal with under Lynch.

There's a loose link to Trump, but scraps are all desperate people need.

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: burntheships

Don't bother, some people have some weird need for Trump to be under investigation. I think it somehow soothes the embarrassment they must have felt after nearly a year of claiming he was and then looking silly...,.,,

There's a loose link to Trump, but scraps are all desperate people need.

Yes, a day after Comey confirms Trump was never
under investigation ....they wipe themselves off and
start a new false narrative.

Laughing at this desperation!

originally posted by: burntheships

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: burntheships

Don't bother, some people have some weird need for Trump to be under investigation. I think it somehow soothes the embarrassment they must have felt after nearly a year of claiming he was and then looking silly...,.,,

There's a loose link to Trump, but scraps are all desperate people need.

Yes, a day after Comey confirms Trump was never
under investigation ....they wipe themselves off and
start a new false narrative.

Laughing at this desperation!

That's about the sum of it. It's a combination of gullible fools seeking confirmation for their bias, and paid internet posters with the job of continuing a narrative online.

a reply to: burntheships

Twist is however you wish, as I said THIS investigation is not into Trump Obstuction.

But the investigation does involve Trump and his actions regarding Comey.

Whether that is obstruction or not is not my call.

a reply to: UKTruth

There's a loose link to Trump, but scraps are all desperate people need.

Loose link?

My how the goal posts are being pushed around.

originally posted by: burntheships

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: burntheships

Don't bother, some people have some weird need for Trump to be under investigation. I think it somehow soothes the embarrassment they must have felt after nearly a year of claiming he was and then looking silly...,.,,

There's a loose link to Trump, but scraps are all desperate people need.

Yes, a day after Comey confirms Trump was never
under investigation ....they wipe themselves off and
start a new false narrative.

Laughing at this desperation!

this/
ll
its like comey never testified
its like comeys boss did not review his performance and recommend he be shown the door

If it is proven that Lynch impeded the Clinton investigation, then the previous investigation should be declared null and void and revoke all immunity clauses that were granted.

I say a fresh investigation of the Clinton email server would bring a different result with a new FBI Director and a new AG.


We shall see what happens.

I still think Comey made a deal with Trump, he is throwing Lynch and Co under the bus and he is not in charge anymore and does not have to worry about a suicide 2 shot to the head. Cut and run.....