Posted on Oct 30, 2016
DC Attorney: FBI Never Destroyed Laptops Of Clinton Aides
587
5
5
3
3
0
Posted 8 y ago
Responses: 4
Two things. One the FBI is full of professional law enforcement officers. Just like me and you they know when something ain't right so they got saved.
Also, maybe they Hillary'ed the negotiations. You know they said they would destroy them, but not WHEN they would destroy them. Right out of the Clinton playbook. Somebody could have fell down hit their head and forgot that they were to destroy evidence. I mean what is good for the goose......
Also, maybe they Hillary'ed the negotiations. You know they said they would destroy them, but not WHEN they would destroy them. Right out of the Clinton playbook. Somebody could have fell down hit their head and forgot that they were to destroy evidence. I mean what is good for the goose......
(1)
(0)
"According to the agreement reached with the attorneys who handed over their laptops, the laptops were to be destroyed per the agreement after the testimony was given –the interviews were given – – by the attorneys. The bureau and the department agreed to that,” DiGenova said. “However the laptops contrary to published reports were not destroyed and the reason is the agents who are tasked with destroying them refused to do so. And by the way the laptops are at the FBI for inspection by Congress or federal courts"
I have no doubt there is a mutiny in the FBI. It's been on the news for a minute here. They're even saying there are record resignations from the Agency in response to this. I wonder would these same agents be "holier than thou" when Hoover was in charge and quit. My question now is a legal one. The FBI was tasked with the destruction of evidence once it was no longer needed. They reigned on their agreement that was signed and agreed upon. Does Congress or any other entity have the legal standing to take that evidence and reintroduce it? Does this invalidate the evidence since the chain of custody might've been broken, and those agents charged personally with the proper disposal of the laptops be charged themselves? Your personal feelings of justice mean nothing when now you are on the chopping block. I can see why Clinton wants the FBI to release everything. It'll burn them way more than her especially once they have to testify to congress that there was an agreement in place that was disregarded for whatever motive, and if that motive comes at the behest of someone on that panel looking into her.
I have no doubt there is a mutiny in the FBI. It's been on the news for a minute here. They're even saying there are record resignations from the Agency in response to this. I wonder would these same agents be "holier than thou" when Hoover was in charge and quit. My question now is a legal one. The FBI was tasked with the destruction of evidence once it was no longer needed. They reigned on their agreement that was signed and agreed upon. Does Congress or any other entity have the legal standing to take that evidence and reintroduce it? Does this invalidate the evidence since the chain of custody might've been broken, and those agents charged personally with the proper disposal of the laptops be charged themselves? Your personal feelings of justice mean nothing when now you are on the chopping block. I can see why Clinton wants the FBI to release everything. It'll burn them way more than her especially once they have to testify to congress that there was an agreement in place that was disregarded for whatever motive, and if that motive comes at the behest of someone on that panel looking into her.
(1)
(0)
CPT Jack Durish
Excellent questions. Generally, agreements for immunity from prosecution are invalidated if the witness does not testify in exchange for the promises rendered. In this case, none of the witnesses testified and I can see no basis for them to complain that their laptops were not destroyed.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next