FBI reopens Clinton email case

[mdwest]

I think that Hillary's boot licker. Huma Abedin, might end up taking the fall. I hope she lands hard.

Sadly, my guess is that's the most that will come of it...

A friend of mine is sitting in the lounge at O'hare as I type this... there is a large group sitting across from him complaining that this is all a set up, propagated by corrupt Republican Party that has in turn corrupted the FBI...

The truth doesn't really matter.. it doesn't matter what additional information comes from all of this, or whether or not she broke the law.. the people that were going to vote for her a month ago, are still voting for her regardless.. and once she assumes the throne, it will be close to impossible to push her off of it... someone else will have to fall...

I sincerely hope I am wrong.. no one should be above the law...

Even if the case were continued to be pursued.. and even if congress decided to move forward with action..

It wouldn't be like she was the first Clinton that broke the law and was impeached.. that remained in office...

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

I think that Hillary's boot licker. Huma Abedin, might end up taking the fall. I hope she lands hard.

If I remember correctly, Abedin received FBI immunity sometime ago. Latest I'm seeing is the number of Clinton tied emails on her husbands laptop may be as high as 650,000.

Apparently when asked Abedin said she had no idea how any of those emails got there. Yeah right if it really is 650K is my response.

If this number turns out to be accurate, I can't help but think Abedin was storing these emails on another computer for a just in case scenario where she may have needed them to cover her butt. I'm sure she never thought her husband Weiner's weiner being exposed inappropriately would lead to these emails being exposed too.

 

[Brent in Az]

Huma, may or may not, be able to be convicted, depending on applicable immunity policy. She can still be used as the scapegoat, and the FBI can say "oops" we can't convict her, but we tried. This whole thing has a very bad smell.

 

[Brent in Az]

Allen West blog said that the FBI does not have a warrant from the DOJ to view the emails. Loretta Lynch is trying to block that warrant.

 

[LivingTheDream]

Warrant came through. But I heard there is 650k, which going to take some time. It will be interesting how this plays out but it will pretty much render all polls useless for the next week.

 

[wesheltonj]

If I remember correctly, Abedin received FBI immunity sometime ago. Latest I'm seeing is the number of Clinton tied emails on her husbands laptop may be as high as 650,000.

Apparently when asked Abedin said she had no idea how any of those emails got there. Yeah right if it really is 650K is my response.

If this number turns out to be accurate, I can't help but think Abedin was storing these emails on another computer for a just in case scenario where she may have needed them to cover her butt. I'm sure she never thought her husband Weiner's weiner being exposed inappropriately would lead to these emails being exposed too.

Sounds like that was her insurance policy against Hillary.

 

[curtism1234]

If there is new pertinent information specific to the previous investigation, then a further investigation is warranted.

What is a clear violation of the Hatch Act though is (someone in) the FBI holding onto this information for over a month and now telling Comey conveniently a week before the election. Who is all in on this, I don't know; but the timing of this is a highly illegal attempt to influence an election.

Hillary Clinton is no saint and tends to ask for these types of investigations, but the legitimacy of our fair election process must be preserved.

 

[mdwest]

What is a clear violation of the Hatch Act though is (someone in) the FBI holding onto this information for over a month and now telling Comey conveniently a week before the election. Who is all in on this, I don't know; but the timing of this is a highly illegal attempt to influence an election.

That's a pretty big assumption on your part..

How do you know someone in the FBI held this information purposely and then released at an opportune time with the intent of influencing the election?

And how do you know what has occurred is a highly illegal attempt to influence an election..


Those are opinions, that from what I can glean from multiple news sources, to include some very liberal ones, that are not based on any substantiated fact as of yet..

 

[curtism1234]

That's a pretty big assumption on your part..

How do you know someone in the FBI held this information purposely and then released at an opportune time with the intent of influencing the election?

And how do you know what has occurred is a highly illegal attempt to influence an election..


Those are opinions, that from what I can glean from multiple news sources, to include some very liberal ones, that are not based on any substantiated fact as of yet..

Fair enough, but it's no more an assumption than the talking points in this whole thread that these emails actually contain something illegal.

 

[mdwest]

I disagree..

It has already been established that HRC setting up a private server and then using that server to transmit classified information was an illegal act..

Comey when he made his recommendation at the time the investigation was last closed stated there were violations of federal law, but then said "these violations are not normally prosecuted" (which I would say is total BS since there have been several prosecutions for the exact same thing within the military over the last few years.. )..

Comey also stated “To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.”.. So he basically admitted that others that have done the same thing have faced consequences.. and that in the future if others did the same thing, they would face consequences.. but he was choosing NOT to recommend consequences for HRC.. which is what pisses people off..

the FBI basically said if curtism1234 or mdwest else did this, we would do something about it.. but because HRC did it, we're going to do nothing...

 

[curtism1234]

There's a difference between "illegal" and "against department policy" and that is what Comey's report stated. They could not find violation of the law that the FBI felt could be prosecuted effectively. As correctly stated by Comey, there should be disciplinary action by the State Dept. It's like telling your boss to get screwed - not illegal but it's not going to end favorably for you.

Clinton's case is completely different than a general sharing classified information with a sugar baby.

 

[BWH]

What is funny is that HRC praised Assange years ago for Wikileaks "exposing" the truth. LOL!!!!! Stupid bitch.....

 

[mdwest]

First, can we agree that NPR is a pretty liberal news source?

If so, read this:

http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallp...heck-hillary-clinton-those-emails-and-the-law

The Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee stated "Hillary Clinton likely broke the law".

The point of a trial is to determine if the law was broken.. to review the facts, and then make a determination..

What we do know is that the Federal Records Act requires that government communications (to include email) not be destroyed or removed.

We know that Section 1924, Title 18 US Code says that knowingly removing or housing classified information at an unauthorized location is a felony subject to fines/and or prison.

What we also know is that Clinton did in fact delete government communications from her server, and that she did in fact transfer at least 4 highly classified communications to an unauthorized location.

The FBI just chose not to recommend prosecution...

You may get pulled over for speeding.. and the cop may chose to simply give you a warning... you wont go to trial.. and you wont pay a fine...

but.. that doesn't mean you didn't break the law..

What we KNOW HRC did is not a mere violation of department policy.. If she did what most believe she did, it was a violation of US Code..

We also know that if YOU violated the same code, you would likely be prosecuted and would be facing felony charges.. just like several others have been for the same type of acts..


Edited to add: The NPR article quotes Clinton stating she did not email anything classified, etc..etc...

http://www.factcheck.org/2016/07/revisiting-clinton-and-classified-information/

This article from the same Fact Check organization that NPR used in the original article cited states otherwise however.. .

The WSJ also has a fairly recent article about the whole "classified email" discussion..

http://www.wsj.com/articles/fbi-doc...t-classification-of-clinton-emails-1476724447

 

[BWH]

The trail to this waste site goes right through the White House, Loretta Lynch, Eric Holder, Bill Clinton, Hillary & Wiener's House. It all stinks to high heaven!!!!

 

[charleslabounty]

Lock HER Up!
and bury the key -----

 

[charleslabounty]

Comey said "extreme carelessness"
Look up the definition of "gross negligence".
Sounds a lot like "extreme carelessness".
"Gross negligence" is a crime and does not require the element of intent.
SHE committed a crime.

So to my fellow gun owners and hunters, we have one week.
Please get out there in your communities and support Trump.
Wave signs, go to your local Trump campaign office and make calls, or knock on neighbors doors.
Save our Republic and our gun rights, (aka "freedom"). Really, she will come after them!

 

[Wheels]

If there is new pertinent information specific to the previous investigation, then a further investigation is warranted.

What is a clear violation of the Hatch Act though is (someone in) the FBI holding onto this information for over a month and now telling Comey conveniently a week before the election. Who is all in on this, I don't know; but the timing of this is a highly illegal attempt to influence an election.

Hillary Clinton is no saint and tends to ask for these types of investigations, but the legitimacy of our fair election process must be preserved.

Lets rewind to 1992. Lawrence Walsh indicts Casper Weinberger and a judge throws the case out. Lawrence Walsh waits until a week before the election and indicts Weinberger again. Bill Clinton defeats the incumbent Bush. Was this a highly illegal attempt to influence an election?

 

[BWH]

Whitewater, Webster Hubble, Vincent Foster, Monica Lewinsky, Gennifer Flowers, Paula Jones, Lied to the US on TV, Lied under oath, Impeachment, Clinton Foundation, Donna Brazile, Loretta Lynch, Emails, Personal server, etc...... Where there is smoke there is fire folks. The Clinton's are criminal trash!

 

[charleslabounty]

Whitewater, Webster Hubble, Vincent Foster, Monica Lewinsky, Gennifer Flowers, Paula Jones, ?......... The Clinton's are criminal trash!

And now they are rich criminal trash!

 

[BWH]

There is no arguing any of those adjectives