FBI director James Comey took millions from Clinton Foundation defense contractor

[AlwaysWrite]

Do you wonder why James Comey opted not to recommend prosecution of Hillary Clinton? Might this have something to do with it?

http://freedomoutpost.com/fbi-direc...s-from-clinton-foundation-defense-contractor/

 

[REVerse °]

This just keeps getting better.

 

[WAMO]

AND BETTER.

 

[Greg T.]

Hopefully Trump will use some of this ammo.

 

[MI2AZ]

And better.

 

[REVerse °]

and better...

 

[MI2AZ]

From a right-wing writer, of course. If you take an article from a site that leans either right or left, you will get a bias that leans in their direction. But the left has been mad at snopes in the past too, which would happen if a site tries to be unbiased:

http://www.snopes.com/info/notes/politics.asp

Similar attacks against snopes from the right:
http://www.factcheck.org/2009/04/snopescom/

More on whether snopes is biased:

https://www.quora.com/Is-Snopes-biased-Why-do-some-people-believe-Snopes-is-biased

A good point was brought up in another very short article not linked that asks if snopes is biased then why haven't the other fact checking sites like factcheck stated that? I tried looking but so far haven't found that so if you do, please post the link.

 

[AlwaysWrite]

In addition to the money angle, perhaps Comey didn't choose to commit "suicide" by three bullets to the back of his head.

 

[MI2AZ]

https://www.truthorfiction.com/clintonfriends/

 

[REVerse °]

I do my own fact checking and do not rely on "fact checking" websites at all. They are too easily swayed.

 

[MI2AZ]

I go to those websites because if I go to the ones that I see posted here, those only seem to lean one way. A site that claims Ann Coulter as a writer can't be considered unbiased nor can that DailyCaller writer after I did a quick background check on him. At least with the fact-checking ones, they have both views represented. And I will ask for a list of unbiased sites if anyone has them because politically, I am a Centrist.

 

[AlwaysWrite]

I go to those websites because if I go to the ones that I see posted here, those only seem to lean one way. A site that claims Ann Coulter as a writer can't be considered unbiased nor can that DailyCaller writer after I did a quick background check on him. At least with the fact-checking ones, they have both views represented. And I will ask for a list of unbiased sites if anyone has them because politically, I am a Centrist.

... but I'm sure you realize (or should realize) that two "fact-finding" Web sites can come to differing conclusions on the same subject(s).

 

[MI2AZ]

... but I'm sure you realize (or should realize) that two "fact-finding" Web sites can come to differing conclusions on the same subject(s).

That's good to hear. Then they can't be working in collusion as some think.

 

[WAMO]

BUT THEN, WHICH ONE IS RIGHT?

 

[AlwaysWrite]

That's good to hear. Then they can't be working in collusion as some think.

Dear MI2AZ:

What? I'm saying that on occasion, one fact-finding group can reach different (or opposite) conclusions than another fact-finding group, even though they are both supposedly dealing with the same fact situations.

 

[AlwaysWrite]

BUT THEN, WHICH ONE IS RIGHT?

Dear WAMO:

They both can't be CORRECT on the FACTS ... but they can come to different CONCLUSIONS regarding the fact(s) at issue.

 

[REVerse °]

You want facts? How much $ you got?

 

[WAMO]

YEP.

 

[AlwaysWrite]

You want facts? How much $ you got?

Dear REVerse:

It certainly appears that the FBI and Attorney General Loretta Lynch were bound and determined to arrive at their "no-charges" prosecutorial decision (discretion) despite the FACTS clearly established against Hillary Clinton.