Justice Dept. grants immunity for staffer who set up Clinton's email server

[mopar71]

With the past years of justice and reason thwarted constantly I cannot grasp how real justice will be allowed to play out. I cannot comprehend why/how Obama would allow this to play down to the wire risking throwing everything to the GOP. Obama does not hate HRC enough to see Trump in her stead. Obama, who snubs his nose at nearly all laws, could hardly allow this to go to the wire without some mechanization in play. This could have been torpedoed in many ways. It only make sense if the theater of the absurd is considered.

Maybe it is to get Biden in the White House? If Hillary were to drop out before the delegates have all been won, then Bernie would walk away with it. However, if she has already won enough delegates for the nomination then drops out, who gets those delegates? Do they automatically go to Bernie? Or can they choose who they go to, like someone who enters the race very late...Joe Biden.

[Publicus]

Valuable background information about this case by The Judge:

• ... The exposure of state secrets, either intentionally or negligently, constitutes the crime of espionage. For the secretary of state to have committed espionage is, quite simply, scandalous. ...
• ... On her first day on the job, she swore under oath that she recognized and understood that legal obligation and she promised to comply with it. She did not comply. ...
• ... On that road are emails revealing the names of secret undercover intelligence assets, the locations of North Korean nuclear facilities, the transcripts of telephone conversations among foreign intelligence agents, and the travel plans of then-U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens in the days before he was murdered. ...

It looks very bad for Mrs. Clinton, whether she is the Democratic nominee or not.

Full article here: Hillary Clinton's false hopes

Valuable background information about this case by The Judge

The "Judge" is a guy who used to be a judge, Andrew Napolitano of Faux fame notoriety who wrote his rightwing extremist distortions of his rightwing opinion linked in the post at the website of Lew Rockwell who is another crackpot rightwhinger and howler at the moon.

Some people express opinions, others rage on in rightwhinge rhetoric while others present misleading information that is in fact irrelevant to the facts of the situation.

There is no criminal case. No prosecutor. No grand jury. No indictments. No handcuffs. No crime. No felon. No perp and no perpwalk.

No truth coming from the right or Republicans either. Only rightwing wet dreams.

[Publicus]

With the past years of justice and reason thwarted constantly I cannot grasp how real justice will be allowed to play out. I cannot comprehend why/how Obama would allow this to play down to the wire risking throwing everything to the GOP. Obama does not hate HRC enough to see Trump in her stead. Obama, who snubs his nose at nearly all laws, could hardly allow this to go to the wire without some mechanization in play. This could have been torpedoed in many ways. It only make sense if the theater of the absurd is considered.

Maybe it is to get Biden in the White House? If Hillary were to drop out before the delegates have all been won, then Bernie would walk away with it. However, if she has already won enough delegates for the nomination then drops out, who gets those delegates? Do they automatically go to Bernie? Or can they choose who they go to, like someone who enters the race very late...Joe Biden.

More idle and useless speculation, attention getting, inside prattle not to mention continuing fantasising.

The vast right wing conglomerate is conspicuous in its radical campaign to bring down the polling numbers of Hillary Rodham Clinton as per Republican House boss Kevin McCarthy on Faux. The Treyghazi committee found emails so having itself gone bust pushed this political witch hunt.

And listening to the rightwhingers it is as far as they are concerned about a witch and a hunt. Always the witch and always the hunt.

Howling at the moon.

[chuckd]

"The lady doth protest too much, methinks"

[Jingthing]

So when this is investigated and HRC isn't charged, are the people who hate Hillary going to drop this and accept that conclusion?

[chuckd]

Not necessarily. Having been previously employed under the same security conditions she was under, I am aware of the infractions she has carried out.

I am also aware that she was the Secretary of State appointed by Barack Obama and he will make the ultimate decision whether to charge her or not.

At the conclusion of the criminal investigation it will turn into a political game played out by the FBI, AG and the White House.

[lannarebirth]

So when this is investigated and HRC isn't charged, are the people who hate Hillary going to drop this and accept that conclusion?

What's already known and public information is already enough to show she broke the law and conspired to break the law. If she's not charged that simply means she's above the law due to her political connections and the aspirations they have for her. I won't be as upset as many because for my purposes either outcome is OK. Not good for USA though when the system is seen to be so obviously corrupt. It's how you destroy a country from the inside.

[Publicus]

Hillary Clinton will be willingly and cooperatively interviewed by FBI.

She will answer FBI questions satisfactorily, more than, in fact.

Think her calm and untouched marathon appearance October 22 before the Treyghazi committee for 11 hours. Chairman Gowdy doody is a former prosecutor in SC and the Republican side had two more former prosecutors; D's on the small committee had one former prosecutor.

FBI will get to the bottom of it and national security matters that might need to be set right by congress and the executive will be rectified.

The burden of proof for the right is that Mrs. Clinton knowingly and actively committed espionage against the United States. The charge not only is laughable, it is contemptible. It could only come from the vast rightwing conglomerate to include the vast intelligence bureaucracy dominated always by rightwing career superpatriots.

One finds a proliferation of 'espionage' on these pages from the far out blackshirt right in its discussions of the United States and President Obama, not in the former SecState. Not in any former SecState or former United States senator as Hillary Rodham Clinton is also.

Not in any former First Lady. Not in any future anyone or anything. It isn't there. Twenty-five years of hunting has found nothing of significance besides. Still, the right does not accept this either.

[Ulysses G.]

So when this is investigated and HRC isn't charged, are the people who hate Hillary going to drop this and accept that conclusion?

What's already known and public information is already enough to show she broke the law and conspired to break the law. If she's not charged that simply means she's above the law due to her political connections and the aspirations they have for her.

Exactly. If there is any REAL justice in America, Hillary Clinton will be indicted, tried and convicted.

[Jingthing]

As I assumed, the actual process is irrelevant to those who have already judged HRC.

[lannarebirth]

As I assumed, the actual process is irrelevant to those who have already judged HRC.

Everyone knows what the ACTUAL process is. There are lots of people in jail now because the ACTUAL process was followed. It's the deviation from the actual process that is holding people's attention. Don't kid yourself that it is only the opposition that is concerned. SMART Democrats are just as concerned.

[Publicus]

Yeah, only the SMART ones.

[Publicus]

So when this is investigated and HRC isn't charged, are the people who hate Hillary going to drop this and accept that conclusion?

What's already known and public information is already enough to show she broke the law and conspired to break the law. If she's not charged that simply means she's above the law due to her political connections and the aspirations they have for her.

Exactly. If there is any REAL justice in America, Hillary Clinton will be indicted, tried and convicted.

It's obvious REAL justice means rightwhinge justice.

Absurd.

The right has been reduced in this to writing in caps.

[keemapoot]

So when this is investigated and HRC isn't charged, are the people who hate Hillary going to drop this and accept that conclusion?

As much as you and Publicus and some others continue to put your heads in the sand on this one (no insult intended), and as much as our other right-wing members continue to act as judge and jury without knowing the evidence presented, it's all just posturing for your sides.

This much is true however. There is most likely a Grand Jury convened, and most likely the staffers who've been granted immunity are not the targets, which is very serious for Clinton, because she is likely the target. Would an Obama-appointed AG Lynch seek an indictment in this election year? Probably not. Probably not because of the political interference aspect, and probably not because this case is not as serious nor does it have the intent we saw in for, example, the General Petreaus case.

Think of it like this. Would you be so cavalier if you knew you were the target in a Grand Jury Investigation? No, you would be sh*tting your pants.

There will be some fall out from this and damage to Clinton, whether she is indicted or not. If indicted, it may be a new ballgame for Sanders.

[lannarebirth]

So when this is investigated and HRC isn't charged, are the people who hate Hillary going to drop this and accept that conclusion?

As much as you and Publicus and some others continue to put your heads in the sand on this one (no insult intended), and as much as our other right-wing members continue to act as judge and jury without knowing the evidence presented, it's all just posturing for your sides.

This much is true however. There is most likely a Grand Jury convened, and most likely the staffers who've been granted immunity are not the targets, which is very serious for Clinton, because she is likely the target. Would an Obama-appointed AG Lynch seek an indictment in this election year? Probably not. Probably not because of the political interference aspect, and probably not because this case is not as serious nor does it have the intent we saw in for, example, the General Petreaus case.

Think of it like this. Would you be so cavalier if you knew you were the target in a Grand Jury Investigation? No, you would be sh*tting your pants.

There will be some fall out from this and damage to Clinton, whether she is indicted or not. If indicted, it may be a new ballgame for Sanders.

On the one hand I find Sanders discipline and decorum admirable. No one could ever say he has not taken the "high road". On the other hand there is just so much about Clinton that is legitimately worthy of attack. Its not like a candidate Trump is going to take a pass in pointing out all her transgressions, both real and imagined.

Bernie may just be too good to be president. He's looking more like a stalking horse than an opponent to me right now. If she wins the nomination he will likely support her and that's just not going to sit well with me.

edit: Lynch could appoint a Special Prosecutor if a Grand Jury finds sufficient evidence to bring charges.

Edited March 6, 2016 by lannarebirth

[keemapoot]

^Clinton is a clever, highly intelligent, and legally trained "transgressor." She is a piece of work for sure, but because of her intelligence and legal training she knows where those legal boundaries are and how far to push it. For example, she would never lie under oath, or do obviously erroneous things like Petreaus did. And, her sins were those of oversight and omission, rather than evil intent.

[helpisgood]

So when this is investigated and HRC isn't charged, are the people who hate Hillary going to drop this and accept that conclusion?

As much as you and Publicus and some others continue to put your heads in the sand on this one (no insult intended), and as much as our other right-wing members continue to act as judge and jury without knowing the evidence presented, it's all just posturing for your sides.

This much is true however. There is most likely a Grand Jury convened, and most likely the staffers who've been granted immunity are not the targets, which is very serious for Clinton, because she is likely the target. Would an Obama-appointed AG Lynch seek an indictment in this election year? Probably not. Probably not because of the political interference aspect, and probably not because this case is not as serious nor does it have the intent we saw in for, example, the General Petreaus case.

Think of it like this. Would you be so cavalier if you knew you were the target in a Grand Jury Investigation? No, you would be sh*tting your pants.

There will be some fall out from this and damage to Clinton, whether she is indicted or not. If indicted, it may be a new ballgame for Sanders.

I have to agree with Keemapoot on his point that neither side should be so sure as to what will happen or has secretly happened. All we do know now is that the investigation is being taken seriously.

I normally roll my eyes when I hear about yet another scandal about the Clintons. Yet, this is not just Rush Limbaugh talking and making accusations.

What bothers me is why she decided and bothered as the Secretary of State, and on her own as I understand it, to put a private server in her own house. She's very smart and at an important job, so there must be a very thought out reason.

Also, she mixed personal emails with her business emails. As an attorney, you'd think she would find this analogous to the professionally unethical mixing of funds by a law firm. This gave her an excuse to delete very many of her emails. One reason may be that she's concerned about giving her right-wing critics certain emails to scrutinize and use against her somehow, fairly or unfairly, when she'd eventually run for president. Maybe she made some bad calls that she'd like to bury. Also, I think it does not look good that Bill was traveling around the world asking for money for the Clinton Foundation or whatever it is called.

A reasonable person must ask if she is hiding anything.

Of course, there could be nothing. Maybe she's a bit paranoid after all the flak she's taken from her strident right-wing critics. Or, maybe she did commit some some minor violations. Or, maybe it's worse, which I hope is not true. However, the point is that we do not know yet. And, I think there's a good reason for an investigation to try to find out what happened.

Finally, I do not know if placing that server was legal or not, but even someone as "non-techie" as me knows that at least pushes the envelope on ethical behavior by any professional in the field of foreign affairs.

[metisdead]

An off topic deflection post has been removed. This is not about Snowden or Gen. Petraeus.

[Publicus]

So when this is investigated and HRC isn't charged, are the people who hate Hillary going to drop this and accept that conclusion?

As much as you and Publicus and some others continue to put your heads in the sand on this one (no insult intended), and as much as our other right-wing members continue to act as judge and jury without knowing the evidence presented, it's all just posturing for your sides.

This much is true however. There is most likely a Grand Jury convened, and most likely the staffers who've been granted immunity are not the targets, which is very serious for Clinton, because she is likely the target. Would an Obama-appointed AG Lynch seek an indictment in this election year? Probably not. Probably not because of the political interference aspect, and probably not because this case is not as serious nor does it have the intent we saw in for, example, the General Petreaus case.

Think of it like this. Would you be so cavalier if you knew you were the target in a Grand Jury Investigation? No, you would be sh*tting your pants.

There will be some fall out from this and damage to Clinton, whether she is indicted or not. If indicted, it may be a new ballgame for Sanders.

On the one hand I find Sanders discipline and decorum admirable. No one could ever say he has not taken the "high road". On the other hand there is just so much about Clinton that is legitimately worthy of attack. Its not like a candidate Trump is going to take a pass in pointing out all her transgressions, both real and imagined.

Bernie may just be too good to be president. He's looking more like a stalking horse than an opponent to me right now. If she wins the nomination he will likely support her and that's just not going to sit well with me.

edit: Lynch could appoint a Special Prosecutor if a Grand Jury finds sufficient evidence to bring charges.

FBI has said repeatedly from the outset to the present there is no "target" to its inquiry. This means no person is the object of the FBI inquiry. FBI has said they are conducting an inquiry. FBI official statements describing their work do not use the word "investigation."

FBI is responding to the request of the IG of the intellengence bureaucracies and career bureaucrats to determine if classified information was revealed or exposed in certain instances of then SecState Clinton receiving emails.

Former SecState Clinton will willingly and cooperatively meet with FBI when the agency sets a specific date and place. She will answer all questions. It won't make any difference however to the 30 percent or so of the population that say openly they hate her guts. Or to the other 12 percent or so who while standing amidst blue smoke and mirrors say they can't vote for her because they see her as blah blah blah.

Again FBI is not pursuing any particular person. It is pursuing a mission.

The government starting long ago confused itself across the board in this stuff. There are always unconfirmed reports of as many as 150 FBI personnel involved. Rightwhingers are trotting out the Espionage Act as if it applied in this inquiry, which it does not. Americans themselves are as a consequence confused and unclear.

The vast rightwing conglomerate has taken considerable advantage of the confusion to compound it. It has in fact confounded everything and almost everyone. The reason is more than obvious because the right won't accept anything less than former SecState Clinton being incarcerated as a felon no matter what. The right's rhetoric and unrelentingly fierce determination reveals the fact.

No more blue smoke and mirrors either.

Edited March 6, 2016 by Publicus

[Publicus]

The Treyghazi committee...

<snip>

Yay! Trey Gowdy for president!

Chairman Gowdy doody has endorsed Marco Rubio.

It wuz a small handshake after which Trump blew out The Rube in South Carolina. Trump's hovering for the political kill in Florida Tuesday next.

Gowdy is a compulsive loser starting with the emails his committee of clowns came up with right through to the hearing October 22nd during which former SecState Clinton deflected all irrelevant and immaterial questions that had nothing to do with anything.

[chuckd]

The target was identified on 8 February as "former Secretary Clinton's use of a private email server".

The link provided below is MSNBC which is 100% in the Clinton camp.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

FBI formally confirms its investigation of Hillary Clinton’s email server

02/08/16 05:30 PM—UPDATED 02/08/16 06:58 PM

By Pete Williams

In a letter disclosed Monday in a federal court filing, the FBI confirms one of the world’s worst-kept secrets: It is looking into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server.

Why say this at all, since it was widely known to be true? Because in August in response to a judge’s direction, the State Department asked the FBI for information about what it was up to. Sorry, the FBI said at the time, we can neither confirm nor deny the existence of any investigation.

Now, in a letter dated February 2 and filed in court Monday, the FBI’s general counsel, James Baker, notes that in public statements and congressional testimony, the FBI “has acknowledged generally that it is working on matters related to former Secretary Clinton’s use of a private email server.”

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/fbi-formally-confirms-its-investigation-hillary-clintons-email-server

Edited March 6, 2016 by chuckd

[Publicus]

This poster has stated in numerous threads the FBI has not used the word "investigation" in this matter.

Again, I state the IG of the intelligence bureaucracy requested an inquiry by DoJ, i.e., the FBI in respect of classified information. Different Agencies and Departments of the federal bureaucracy have different approaches to communicating classified information, all within the requirements of specific statutes that govern the info and those who use it.

So I quote from the NBC news story that someone obviously worships, in respect of the FBI statement. NBC News reported as follows: ...in a letter dated February 2 and filed in court Monday, the FBI’s general counsel, James Baker, notes that in public statements and congressional testimony, the FBI “has acknowledged generally that it is working on matters related to former Secretary Clinton’s use of a private email server.”

The NBC story put the word "Investigation" into its headline, which all kinds of media erroneously do. The FBI does not use the word in its official statements.

Again again, the quote from the NBC news article is: the FBI “has acknowledged generally that it is working on matters related to former Secretary Clinton’s use of a private email server.”

Working on matters related to

Generally.

Produce an official FBI statement in this matter that uses the word "investigate" or "investigation" to include "investigating." the matters related to former Secretary Clinton's use of a private email server.

By the FBI.

Thanks in advance for your assistance.

Edited March 6, 2016 by Publicus

[keemapoot]

^ You can continue to dance, weave and bob around this issue, but here is the opinion offered by the CNN (not exactly a far right attack dog organization) legal analyst:

The big question is whether there is a grand jury convened. The smart bet is yes. After all, the fact that there are immunity agreements logically means there's a grand jury investigation in some district. The grand jury is typically the genesis of the government's subpoena power. The next, bigger question, is whether anyone will be indicted.

The mere fact that the DOJ wants to talk to Pagliano does not mean anyone will be indicted. But if the DOJ is investigating criminal activity, they tend to find criminal activity.

Next, you might say just because the grand jury might have convened, doesn't mean Mrs. Clinton is a or THE target, but merely her email server is the target. Get real.

You are running out of shuck and jive moves my friend.

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/03/05/opinions/clinton-staffer-email-immunity-cevallos/index.html

[helpisgood]

This poster has stated in numerous threads the FBI has not used the word "investigation" in this matter.

Again, I state the IG of the intelligence bureaucracy requested an inquiry by DoJ, i.e., the FBI in respect of classified information. Different Agencies and Departments of the federal bureaucracy have different approaches to communicating classified information, all within the requirements of specific statutes that govern the info and those who use it.

So I quote from the NBC news story that someone obviously worships, in respect of the FBI statement. NBC News reported as follows: ...in a letter dated February 2 and filed in court Monday, the FBI’s general counsel, James Baker, notes that in public statements and congressional testimony, the FBI “has acknowledged generally that it is working on matters related to former Secretary Clinton’s use of a private email server.”

The NBC story put the world "Investigation" into its headline, which all kinds of media erroneously do. The FBI does not use the word in its official statements.

Again again, the quote from the NBC news article is: the FBI “has acknowledged generally that it is working on matters related to former Secretary Clinton’s use of a private email server.”

Working on matters related to

Generally.

Produce an official FBI statement in this matter that uses the word "investigate" or "investigation" to include "investigating." the matters related to former Secretary Clinton's use of a private email server.

By the FBI.

Thanks in advance for your assistance.

Yes, a spirited defense. Good job!

Maybe this whole thing will not turn up anything worthwhile or maybe it will. I don't know.

However, I think we all already know that the FBI is just being very careful what they say publicly for obvious reasons. Yeah, maybe they do not want to publicly use the word "investigation" right now. And, if that's true, I can see how the paper should have made that distinction for its readership.

Still, all that proves is that the FBI is being, not surprisingly, very careful with its public statements on such a sensitive matter, and maybe they do not have anything solid yet. Or, maybe they have something but feel they should not release it yet for the sake of the investigation, or whatever you want to call it.

Nevertheless, if the very busy FBI is "working on matters" regarding someone for a while and they have given immunity to a person who had worked with that someone, then there should be a really good reason for an investigative agency to be working on such matters.

Yeah, I get it that some people are prematurely pillorying Hillary on this. You're right! But, it's still a matter of much concern, especially considering her status.

Edited March 6, 2016 by helpisgood

[Pinot]

Lotta speculation, assumptions, presumptions, forecasts, predictions, unnamed sources, claims, supposition, accusations, strong language about a felon and criminal.....the wailing and whinging goes on interminably.

Hillary Clinton will answer questions in this before it is over and it will be over no problem. Just as former SecState Clinton camly ran circles around the Treyghazi committee for 11 hours, she will respoond to the questions coming to her. The right will of course refuse to accept the outcome.

Same-o same-o.

There is nothing there. Let's not forget Colin Powell did the same thing. In retrospect probably a mistake but criminal? Come on....

It's hilarious. The wingnuts are hanging their hats on Hillary going to prison. It ain't going to happen.

It's just nonsense. BENGHAZI!!! The Republican party is so screwed up, they're grasping at straws. Same-o is right.

Get used to "Madame President" for the next 8 years.

[chuckd]

Lotta speculation, assumptions, presumptions, forecasts, predictions, unnamed sources, claims, supposition, accusations, strong language about a felon and criminal.....the wailing and whinging goes on interminably.

Hillary Clinton will answer questions in this before it is over and it will be over no problem. Just as former SecState Clinton camly ran circles around the Treyghazi committee for 11 hours, she will respoond to the questions coming to her. The right will of course refuse to accept the outcome.

Same-o same-o.

There is nothing there. Let's not forget Colin Powell did the same thing. In retrospect probably a mistake but criminal? Come on....

It's hilarious. The wingnuts are hanging their hats on Hillary going to prison. It ain't going to happen.

It's just nonsense. BENGHAZI!!! The Republican party is so screwed up, they're grasping at straws. Same-o is right.

Get used to "Madame President" for the next 8 years.

"Sir, Private Jones ain't going to get any smarter."

As has been told to you many times before, General Powell had a total of 12 State Department messages sent to his private email account, two of which were marked at the lowest level of "confidential". When he learned of it, he immediately turned the account and the emails over to the State Department. End of story.

Secretary Clinton had nearly 60,000 State Department messages sent to and from her private server email account, housed in the basement of her home in NY, of which over 2,000 were listed as Classified with 22 of them being "Top Secret".

She only turned them over to the State Department after the Benghazi Select Committee discovered her private account and it was published in the NY Times, some two years AFTER she left the State Department. There were an additional 30,000 that she and her lawyer deleted as being "personal" in nature.

Surprisingly there is only one email that has surfaced concerning her actions or any decision she made during or after the Benghazi attack. That email was a message sent on the night of the attack to her daughter, Chelsea, telling her the attack was by an Al Qaeda like organization. Amazingly that information did not become public but, rather, blaming the attack on the video become the choice of the day during Obama's reelection campaign.

Coincidence? I think not. You?

[Publicus]

^ You can continue to dance, weave and bob around this issue, but here is the opinion offered by the CNN (not exactly a far right attack dog organization) legal analyst:

The big question is whether there is a grand jury convened. The smart bet is yes. After all, the fact that there are immunity agreements logically means there's a grand jury investigation in some district. The grand jury is typically the genesis of the government's subpoena power. The next, bigger question, is whether anyone will be indicted.

The mere fact that the DOJ wants to talk to Pagliano does not mean anyone will be indicted. But if the DOJ is investigating criminal activity, they tend to find criminal activity.

Next, you might say just because the grand jury might have convened, doesn't mean Mrs. Clinton is a or THE target, but merely her email server is the target. Get real.

You are running out of shuck and jive moves my friend.

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/03/05/opinions/clinton-staffer-email-immunity-cevallos/index.html

An unbiased lawyer would be hard to find so thx all the same. I hadn't been looking btw.

A lawyer who gives free legal advice is impossible to find (outside of a pro bono setting or circumstance). A citizen with an opinion is the same as the rest of us.

Anyone with a dose of legal knowledge can infer a grand jury here and now, however, for any lawyer it would be little more than a personal inference based on a professional slant infused by a political point of view. If a grand jury might be convened it is not necessarily a given they would be served some count of ham sandwiches. Prosecutors not to mention judges have their discretionary impulses and authority also. (Rate of runaway grand juries??)

The FBI director says Potus is not being informed or kept abreast. Whatever that might mean in the here and now. One suggests nothing more by pointing this out than to imply tall tales are not restricted to the vast rightwing conglomerate. VRWC is greatly more interested in winning an election than in any rule of law.

One also presumes the FBI director would not lie to aninvestigator conducting a live ongoing investigation of a serious matter.

[Publicus]

Lotta speculation, assumptions, presumptions, forecasts, predictions, unnamed sources, claims, supposition, accusations, strong language about a felon and criminal.....the wailing and whinging goes on interminably.

Hillary Clinton will answer questions in this before it is over and it will be over no problem. Just as former SecState Clinton camly ran circles around the Treyghazi committee for 11 hours, she will respoond to the questions coming to her. The right will of course refuse to accept the outcome.

Same-o same-o.

There is nothing there. Let's not forget Colin Powell did the same thing. In retrospect probably a mistake but criminal? Come on....

It's hilarious. The wingnuts are hanging their hats on Hillary going to prison. It ain't going to happen.

It's just nonsense. BENGHAZI!!! The Republican party is so screwed up, they're grasping at straws. Same-o is right.

Get used to "Madame President" for the next 8 years.

"Sir, Private Jones ain't going to get any smarter."

As has been told to you many times before, General Powell had a total of 12 State Department messages sent to his private email account, two of which were marked at the lowest level of "confidential". When he learned of it, he immediately turned the account and the emails over to the State Department. End of story.

Secretary Clinton had nearly 60,000 State Department messages sent to and from her private server email account, housed in the basement of her home in NY, of which over 2,000 were listed as Classified with 22 of them being "Top Secret".

She only turned them over to the State Department after the Benghazi Select Committee discovered her private account and it was published in the NY Times, some two years AFTER she left the State Department. There were an additional 30,000 that she and her lawyer deleted as being "personal" in nature.

Surprisingly there is only one email that has surfaced concerning her actions or any decision she made during or after the Benghazi attack. That email was a message sent on the night of the attack to her daughter, Chelsea, telling her the attack was by an Al Qaeda like organization. Amazingly that information did not become public but, rather, blaming the attack on the video become the choice of the day during Obama's reelection campaign.

Coincidence? I think not. You?

The right that supports Donald Trump or Cruz is running harder than ever on the third point below especially and with an unrelenting purpose....

The media’s coverage of Hillary Clinton’s emails reflects a double standard.

• Colin Powell used personal email and unlike Hillary Clinton, Powell did not keep or turn his personal emails over to the State Department.
• Jeb Bush broke the law with his email use, unlike Hillary Clinton. Jeb was required to release his emails when he left office, but delayed for seven years.
• As one reporter wrote on covering Clinton, “every allegation, no matter how ludicrous, is believable until it can be proven completely and utterly false,” and it is assumed that, “Clinton is acting in bad faith until there’s hard evidence otherwise.”

http://correctrecord.org/five-things-you-need-to-know-about-hillary-clintons-emails/

Edited March 6, 2016 by Publicus

[Chicog]

I don't think there is anything wrong with sending emails to the people that are supposed to receive them.

The question is did anyone with no clearance get classified information.

I'm amazed at how many people keep talking about Clinton "leaking" information.

Server being vulnerable is not the same as emails being stolen or leaked.

[Publicus]

This poster has stated in numerous threads the FBI has not used the word "investigation" in this matter.

Again, I state the IG of the intelligence bureaucracy requested an inquiry by DoJ, i.e., the FBI in respect of classified information. Different Agencies and Departments of the federal bureaucracy have different approaches to communicating classified information, all within the requirements of specific statutes that govern the info and those who use it.

So I quote from the NBC news story that someone obviously worships, in respect of the FBI statement. NBC News reported as follows: ...in a letter dated February 2 and filed in court Monday, the FBI’s general counsel, James Baker, notes that in public statements and congressional testimony, the FBI “has acknowledged generally that it is working on matters related to former Secretary Clinton’s use of a private email server.”

The NBC story put the world "Investigation" into its headline, which all kinds of media erroneously do. The FBI does not use the word in its official statements.

Again again, the quote from the NBC news article is: the FBI “has acknowledged generally that it is working on matters related to former Secretary Clinton’s use of a private email server.”

Working on matters related to

Generally.

Produce an official FBI statement in this matter that uses the word "investigate" or "investigation" to include "investigating." the matters related to former Secretary Clinton's use of a private email server.

By the FBI.

Thanks in advance for your assistance.

Yes, a spirited defense. Good job!

Maybe this whole thing will not turn up anything worthwhile or maybe it will. I don't know.

However, I think we all already know that the FBI is just being very careful what they say publicly for obvious reasons. Yeah, maybe they do not want to publicly use the word "investigation" right now. And, if that's true, I can see how the paper should have made that distinction for its readership.

Still, all that proves is that the FBI is being, not surprisingly, very careful with its public statements on such a sensitive matter, and maybe they do not have anything solid yet. Or, maybe they have something but feel they should not release it yet for the sake of the investigation, or whatever you want to call it.

Nevertheless, if the very busy FBI is "working on matters" regarding someone for a while and they have given immunity to a person who had worked with that someone, then there should be a really good reason for an investigative agency to be working on such matters.

Yeah, I get it that some people are prematurely pillorying Hillary on this. You're right! But, it's still a matter of much concern, especially considering her status.

Of course it is.

So thx for the kind word concerning my post. You might want to say something to the other side too in some substantive respect.

The whingenuts have their self-appointed sacred purpose unrelentingly pursued to save the world from the evil progressives who are leading the world to Hades in a handbasket. They never quit even when they have lost. They're certainly never ahead.

This issue remain open so they are continuing to party on. Whether you're in the party or a neighbor lying awake late as the party continues interminably, you might also find something to say about the noisemakers.

Edited March 6, 2016 by Publicus