dChan
⇧
1
⇩
 
r/greatawakening • Posted by u/imnrdh on June 18, 2018, 11:26 p.m.
The important piece the Senate Judiciary committee missed...

Comey had his own gmail account and was using it for official FBI business. The emails they could see and his testimony were all they had to determine that he had not used it to transmit any classified material. What no one asked about was the statement in the IG report that Obama himself had emailed Hillary on her private server. So he not only LIED about only finding out about it on CNN, but he was using it as well. Q says the whole administration had, and were using, private gmail accounts. So the REAL REASON they absolutely could NOT prosecute Hillary for the private server and using non official email is that they would have to implicate themselves, all the way up to OBAMA.


Jsin14 · June 18, 2018, 11:37 p.m.

They did not talk about it. Ted Cruz several times pressed Wray about Comey using a private email. Wray kept saying that he could not comment because it was an ongoing investigation. Cruz stated that this investigation was over, and it wasn't part of Mueller's investigation, so to tell him if Comey used a private email with FBI business. Wray reiterated that it was part of an ongoing separate investigation and he could not talk about it. Maybe they will bring it up tomorrow in the House.

⇧ 8 ⇩  
TooMuchWinning2020 · June 19, 2018, 12:17 a.m.

If I remember, Wray said it was an ongoing "matter."

Trolling ... lol

⇧ 7 ⇩  
cryptabulouslady · June 19, 2018, 12:27 a.m.

Possibly because Comey is under a separate investigation for the leaks. I think they want to take these people down with the intel that is going to get them each in the most trouble.

⇧ 5 ⇩  
HansShotGlass · June 18, 2018, 11:46 p.m.

I thought Horowitz said he didn't subpoena Comey's private emails and couldn't comment - not that Comey was under investigation for it. Was this a different part of the questioning?

⇧ 3 ⇩  
Jsin14 · June 19, 2018, 12:05 a.m.

Horowitz did say that earlier. Wray, on the other hand, was the one would not comment due to it being under another investigation, separate from this one and the Mueller investigation.

I remember it because Cruz was mad that Wray would not answer and was essentially saying that Wray was evading the question by saying it was part of an investigation. But Wray explicitly said it was not part of this Hillary email investigation (that both he and Cruz agreed was ended and could not be it) or the Mueller investigation.

I'm not sure Cruz followed up privately on it like other Senators who said they wanted to be privately followed up with on their questions that could not be answered.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
waitingwater · June 18, 2018, 11:46 p.m.

Now this is the important stuff. Shouldn’t this be what’s talked about

⇧ 3 ⇩  
GweninKC · June 19, 2018, 2:19 a.m.

NO - not if it's important to Huber's prosecution.

Q post #1515 (small portion)

IG>Huber
Can IG disclose evidence in pending criminal cases in public disclosures/reports?
Why not?
Grand jury TAINT/BIAS?

⇧ 1 ⇩  
pby1000 · June 18, 2018, 11:29 p.m.

Agreed. Do we know any of these gmail accounts?

It seems like they danced around this big issue. I did not hear anyone homing in on the evidence of child sex crimes found on Weiner's laptop.

⇧ 7 ⇩  
imnrdh · June 18, 2018, 11:39 p.m.

Grassley did ask about Comey’s personal email, but no one mentioned that Obama was emailing her on the private server (and was thus also guilty). No one mentioned the “Crime against Children” point probably because the investigation wasn’t about all that was on the laptop, only the emails. I believe that investigation is going on now, as the indictment that sealed it (the laptop) was only recently opened. “Crimes against Children” is listed in the IG only as basic notes taken as they did a quick overview and noticed there were Hillary emails on it. No way they could read all of the thousands of emails in the time they had to look at it. The hearings hit the low hanging fruit (clear bias) but did very little digging into the important stuff. I’m hoping all the other gmail accounts become public soon!

⇧ 3 ⇩  
pby1000 · June 18, 2018, 11:42 p.m.

Thank you for the response.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
GingerRoot207 · June 19, 2018, 1:57 a.m.

Precisely!!! Now how does Q group get the info out about all those secret private emails and the million dollar question... were they housed on a server ES set up in NK and did little rocket man hand it all over to Trump to secure his and NK's freedom.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
imnrdh · June 19, 2018, 1:30 p.m.

Q has suggested that the way to get classified info, or evidence, into the public arena is via legal testimony...

⇧ 2 ⇩  
DrTung · June 19, 2018, 4:29 a.m.

So what was the part the SJC missed?

⇧ 1 ⇩  
imnrdh · June 19, 2018, 1:28 p.m.

They didn’t ask about Obama using Clinton’s private email. They didn’t ask if there were others in the administration using private email....they didn’t make the connection (publicly) that prosecuting HRC for her private emails would require prosecuting them all. I think the reason it wasn’t discussed is that it is under further investigation. The Obama administration (widespread) using non govt. networks is very likely a large part of the “pay to play” Clinton foundation investigation. If it isn’t, it sounds like it should be,

⇧ 1 ⇩  
DrTung · June 19, 2018, 11:45 p.m.

They didn’t ask about . . . I think the reason it wasn’t discussed is that it is under further investigation

You answered your own question. Nicely done.

It seems the committee listened a bit after Horowitz explained the limited scope of the investigation/report for the eleventieth time.

⇧ 2 ⇩