Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
Whether they are or not, special counsels are not ostensibly politically driven. Congressional investigations are. That's why, as in Benghazi, the opinions of what was "found" were quite contrary. And Hillary's failure in Benghazi was not a crime, nor treason, nor conspiracy, but just plain incompetence. Incompetence is not an indictable offense. And neither investigation, Benghazi nor the emails, required under oath interviews subject to perjury traps. The lenience given to Hillary and those around her in the email investigation was not afforded in Mueller's investigation. People like Flynn and Papadopoulos were convicted of silly process crimes that Hillary's people were spared from being subjected to. In the email investigation there was no attempt to squeeze witnesses into "singing" and "composing" or facing criminal charges or worse convictions .
Comparing the thoroughness, intensity and strictness of Mueller's investigation to the laxity of the email scandal "investigation" is a farce.
|
Benghazi was investigated by a Republican Congress for a cost of 7 million and yielded a bunch of footstomping, it did later downstream result in Comey's announcement during the campaign of continuing investigation into her emails. Some here would claim this was an FBI plot to somehow aid her campaign.
Perhaps you feel that the rule of law only applies in some cases and white lies don't count, since they didn't hurt anyone. Flynn and Papadopulos both plead guilty, didn't they?
Perhaps the danger of leaking emails pales in comparison to Russian interference in our elections and therefor needed a different level of investigation in comparison to Benghazi.
Mueller is likely the most qualified and competent investigator in this country.
I want to see his report, not the parsed comments of a political appointee.
Threaded Mode