Alright, well, I am not seeing much love in your post but let's take the most recent comey issue and examine it and use that as an example. Last week or maybe the week before it was revealed that Comey perjured himself before the House Committee when he testified that he had not reached a conclusion that Hillaray was not going to be prosecuted until after he had interviewed the witnesses. I also believe that his actions and words confirm that he committed perjury. Tell me where I am going wrong there.
Not having an official conclusion is not the same as inferring a result on lack of evidence and knowledge of the love DAs have of carrying cases w/o evidence. If anything I'd say Comey is guilty of being a workaholic and doing his HW before it was assigned. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/01/us/politics/trump-comey-firing-letter.html?mcubz=3
I don't actually follow how you laying out your argument here. I was talking about Comey's drafting a letter about Hillary and you posted a link to Trump's drafting a letter about Comey. Either way, Comey drafted a letter about his conclusion that Hillary would not be prosecuted before he had even interviewed the witnesses- even though he stated to the committee that he reached no conclusion until after. That is clear and on the record. Not sure what you are arguing. I guess it is that Comey's draft did not count because it was not the final version and reaching conclusions and drafting letters is just something that presecutor's do for fun and then just coincidently he ended out concluding what was in the letter. And your post accuses me of relying on nonsense?
I don't know if you went to college or not, but drafts are just that. They often get tossed, and are often started due to deadlines that need to be met and not just "for fun". If Comey had an inclination of what was going to happen and what the witnesses would or would not say, it's perfectly reasonable to hypothesize a conclusion. A hypothesis is not reaching a conclusion however as circumstances may change. The link shows you the same scenario, Trump drafting a letter over firing Comey long before it was done, and long before the stated reasons for his firing were given (AG recommendation). Can't believe we're still going on about some emails from someone that should've been long forgotten.
well it wasn't a work product. It was personal notes made after a dinner party. So I guess he's in the clear on that one at least . Whew!
it is just a draft of course before the final product is released. Reminds me of the draft of the Constitution. Got changed plenty between the time it was first drafted and final adoption. I suppose Comey being a lawyer gave him a special advantage when it came to skirting the law. Is that a form of "cheating"?
Correct. He had already started drafting out a letter saying that she was going to skate before he even interviewed the witnesses. Since this was just a mental exercise he was doing, should I be confident that the documents he drafted, also include a draft of a letter stating why Hillary should be prosecueted? Nevermind. That was just a little joke. I am okay letting him re-appear before the House Committee and explain it to the rather large number of congressmen who are former prosecutors- such as Trey Gowdy. In fact, I think it should be pay for view.
No. That would be an FBI work product. He cannot escape government employment just by doing pieces of work at home or at the beach. This is a lesson that Hillary learned the hard way.
Oh, I think I have the college degree thing under control a couple times over but thank you for explaining what a draft is.