Quote:You've got to admit that there appears to be some impropriety there. I mean, hell, if nothing else read Comey's statement again. He lays out a solid case as to why he should indict Clinton, then throws a curveball by saying that even though there's more than enough to indict (paraphrasing here), Clinton's incompetence in handling State Department material is not something he'd indict over. I mean, you have to raise an eyebrow at that plus Bill Clinton's meeting with Loretta Lynch in the days prior. What were they discussing? Golf? Tea? Where the pluckiest interns can be found?

 

I have no idea what they talked about? Do you? Does it look good? Heck no. But to pretend there was some "deal" or whatever with no proof is just stupid and makes anyone saying so look foolish. 

 

Are you (or whomever) saying Comey was told to do something he didn't want to do? Show me one piece of proof. If you saw his testimony and know his record and reputation I think you'd highly doubt it.

 

For for all the people with no record or reputation throwing around terms like "sell out" makes them look desperate and partisan.

---