Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Alighieri who wrote (951890)	7/30/2016 2:25:36 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578131

>> He did not prove intent Why is precisely what Gowdy called him out about. Clearly, you haven't bothered to listen to Gowdy interrogation of Comey. Or perhaps it sailed right over your head. Gowdy specifically asked at least 7 questions which Hillary Clinton lied about. Then he said he would just stop in the interest of time. Gowdy: "False exculpatory statements, they are used for WHAT?" Comey: "For substantive prosecution or for evidence of intent in a criminal prosecution." Gowdy: "Exactly. Intent and Consciousness of guilt, right?" PLEASE READ THE ABOVE STATEMENTS MULTIPLE TIMES IF NECESSARY. Now, it is true, this was not a court of law, so no one was being asked to "prove" anything. But it is just a simple fact that with evidence SO STRONG any other person would have been tried with such overwhelming evidence. It is not even mildly conceivable some PFC somewhere or even an officer in the military would have walked scot free on this. It was clearly a situation where Comey said, "I don't want to make this decision. I want the voters to make it." I'm not even knocking it, really. It seems like a reasonable think for him to have done. Unfortunately, some voters are too stupid to make a competent decision about it. But I don't blame him for that. youtube.com