FBI reopens probe into Hillary Clinton's emails

[Prbkk]

Watergate was dirty tricks, criminal in nature, perpetrated by individuals close to Nixon on The Democrats. This case involves national security, obfuscation, lies...perpetrated by a candidate on the people. 

How on earth could she be naive to trust anyone associated with the sexting creep. Defies belief. 

[Si Thea01]

3 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Pay attention dude.

 

 

 

 

I regret my loss of attention but I'd rather have one momentary loss than completely fail to acknowledge all the rising problems that surrounds HRC. 

[Boon Mee]

8 minutes ago, Prbkk said:

Watergate was dirty tricks, criminal in nature, perpetrated by individuals close to Nixon on The Democrats. This case involves national security, obfuscation, lies...perpetrated by a candidate on the people. 

How on earth could she be naive to trust anyone associated with the sexting creep. Defies belief. 

Gangster Government.

They thought they were all above the fray - no accountability.  Blows one's mind how a bunch a amateurs like these were in Washington last eight years. 

[CWMcMurray]

May be interesting to see what emails are on Weiner's
Computer

Understand that for all of the other devices Abedin turned over to FBI were first given to her lawyers to review the emails before they gave them to the FBI

Don't believe Weiner's computer was first cleared by his lawyer before given to the FBI


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[Publicus]

2 hours ago, balo said:

I just want the election to be over with. I hope the Americans deep down understand that Trump is a madman whatever happens . Clinton is not perfect but she is a politician. 

 

Agreed!

 

So here's the early good news as early voting is already underway....

 

A new Reuters/Ipsos poll finds Hillary Clinton leads Donald Trump by 15 percentage points among early voters surveyed in the past two weeks.

 

An estimated 19 million Americans have voted so far in the election, accounting for as much as 20 percent of the electorate.

 

 

Er, point of fact here, which is that 19 million voters are not 20% of the general electorate. The general electorate is around 170 million, of which 125m to 130m typically vote.

 

All the same, HRC being ahead by 15 points among the 19 million early voters who have in fact cast their ballots establishes a baseline that suggests that on Election Day Trump will need twice that margin to win. It's also called busing your balls.

[Publicus]

2 hours ago, Chicog said:

As an outsider, Comey seems to be to have been between a rock and a hard place.

By announcing what he did, he's definitely given the Republicans hope, and could be in breach of the Hatch Act.

But imagine if he'd stayed quiet and not mentioned it, and something of any value actually emerged? Would he not be guilty of influencing an election by omission?

 

Fortunately it's the Republicans that usually launch witch hunts and kangaroo courts, so he's probably taken the path of least resistance.

 

 

 

But imagine if he'd stayed quiet and not mentioned it, and something of any value actually emerged? Would he not be guilty of influencing an election by omission?

 

Nope.

 

Had J. Brien Comey stayed silent for the moment he'd have been observing and respecting decades of Justice Department practice to not do anything political from 60 days to the election.

 

After which point and time the focus of rightwhinge flapping up and down hollering would have been on the effective policy that had been practiced since the death of J. Edgar Hoover.

 

Yes Comey would have caught flack had he observed and respected DoJ practice, standards, ethics, expectations and the like to speak after the election only. And it would have fed the creatures about rigged elections etc etc.

 

But it would be an institutional policy that would have stood between Comey and the raging whingenuts. By his present course of action, however, Comey looks like he's thrown himself in with the rightwing email junkies on the political skid row over in the House who are thrilled to have just been provided with another fix by the new dealer on the block.

[CWMcMurray]

 
But imagine if he'd stayed quiet and not mentioned it, and something of any value actually emerged? Would he not be guilty of influencing an election by omission?
 
Nope.
 
Had J. Brien Comey stayed silent for the moment he'd have been observing and respecting decades of Justice Department practice to not do anything political from 60 days to the election.
 

Is there really any such practice?

What about in 1992 Special Prosecutor Lawrence Walsh’s decision to indict former Secretary of Defense Cap Weinberger and others the weekend before the 1992 election between George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton.

So seems this is not the first time ever are you really sure there is some such Policy in DOJ?

Also should there be?

I have no problem with the indictment in 1992 and don't really on this one either

Although do not think it will change the election


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[attrayant]

Seems that some people may have forgotten what happened in the Watergate scandal.  Let's have a quick history lesson:
 

Burglars connected to President Richard Nixon’s reelection campaign were arrested for breaking into Democratic National Committee offices while trying to steal documents and wiretap phones.

 

Nixon himself attempted to cover up the operation and stop the FBI investigation, including:

• paying off the people who were arrested so they wouldn’t talk
• destroying evidence
• firing staff who wouldn’t cooperate

 

The incident eventually brought to light a much larger campaign of espionage and sabotage that Nixon had waged against his political opponents, deploying illegal FBI surveillance, forging and manufacturing stories, stealing documents, and planting provocateurs and other actors in their midst.  When the full extent of the scandal became public, Nixon became the first and only U.S. president to resign.

 

It’s difficult to see how the new FBI revelation about Clinton’s emails could compare to those events.

 

Trump earns yet another four pinoccios for this whopper.

 

Edited October 30, 2016 by attrayant
added cite

[sirineou]

4 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Shouldn't the Director of The FBI and the Department of Justice be pursuing evidence and seeking the truth to ensure justice is done? And doing this regardless of political considerations, favor or affect? And whether it inconveniences someone or not?

 

If I were an American I'd want to know all these details quickly and to know if a serious contender to be my next President is about to be prosecuted. If not, I'd like to know why the FBI didn't do a good job and put it to bed properly before. The last thing the law needs is to have "political considerations" dictating it's course. That's banana republic stuff.

He should absolutely pursue evidence of wrong doing and when he such evidences discovered, such evidence should be presented to the justice department for criminal prosecution.

There are rules concerning the announcements of such investigations as to not   harm innocent participants.And even more important when it involves a presidential election, and on how such announcements will affect the outcome.

" Justice traditionally bends over backward to avoid taking any action that might be seen by the public as influencing an election, often declining to even take private steps that might become public in the 60 days leading up to an election.  "

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/james-comey-fails-to-follow-justice-department-rules-yet-again/2016/10/29/3a2fad58-9ddd-11e6-b3c9-f662adaa0048_story.html?utm_term=.02069ba6c7e3

 

I agree with you, This is certainly "Banana Republic stuff"

 

Edited October 30, 2016 by sirineou

[Anthony5]

[Anthony5]

https://twitter.com/hectormorenco

 

Soon the world will discover HRC & Obama are at the center of the Syrian conflict, profited from the Clinton foundation, & ignored ISIS.

 

[sirineou]

3 minutes ago, Anthony5 said:

If that's the case then NSA has everyone's emails not only the democrats. 

Ofcource Trump has never done anything wrong so nothing to worry about there

[Anthony5]

Just now, sirineou said:

If that's the case then NSA has everyone's emails not only the democrats. 

Ofcource Trump has never done anything wrong so nothing to worry about there

 

I'm sure he never was a threat to national security

[Publicus]

19 minutes ago, CWMcMurray said:

 

Is there really any such practice?

What about in 1992 Special Prosecutor Lawrence Walsh’s decision to indict former Secretary of Defense Cap Weinberger and others the weekend before the 1992 election between George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton.

So seems this is not the first time ever are you really sure there is some such Policy in DOJ?

Also should there be?

I have no problem with the indictment in 1992 and don't really on this one either

Although do not think it will change the election


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

 

 

Is there really any such practice?

 

Yes my little waif there is such a practice. It is cited throughout this thread and anywhere one wants to look in gathering information about this Comey Election Coup Attempt. (Except in the mass of highly funded rightwhinge media.)

 

 

Also should there be?

 

There should be a law.

 

What about in 1992 Special Prosecutor Lawrence Walsh’s decision to indict...the weekend before the 1992 election

 

Good point because that didn't go over well either in the Republican or the Democratic party, respectively...

 

Clinton administration attorney Lanny Davis called the decision to indict a week before the election rather than after the election "bizarre."[3]  Walsh steadfastly denied that the investigation was politically motivated, while Bush and others criticized it as "the criminalization of policy differences."[1]

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Walsh

 

Sounds precisely accurate to this very instance of J. Brien Comey trying to criminalise the Democratic Party nominee for Potus some 11 or 10 days before the general election, and by Comey's trying to do it by issuing to House Republicans only vague and broad non-specific statements that Comey admits are indeed nothing more than that.

 

 

I have no problem with the indictment in 1992 and don't really on this one either

 

Well then you in fact have a serious problem which may eventually come to be called the James Comey Election Coup and Anti-Constitution Syndrome.

 

 

(It might be past someone's bedtime.)

[Steely Dan]

Hillary's boat has been torpedoed, not by Bills Weiner but by Huma's. Now the rats are bailing out of a sinking ship.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/kass/ct-hillary-clinton-emails-kass-1030-20161028-column.html


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

[JLCrab]

Hillary's (maybe) answer to calls for her to withdraw:

“I’d never withdraw. I’ve never withdrawn in my life,” ... “No, I’m not quitting this race. I have tremendous support.” 

Then we could all razz Hillary for stealing you-know-who's lines

 

 

[Chicog]

39 minutes ago, Publicus said:

 

Is there really any such practice?

 

Yes my little waif there is such a practice. It is cited throughout this thread and anywhere one wants to look in gathering information about this Comey Election Coup Attempt. (Except in the mass of highly funded rightwhinge media.)

 

 

Also should there be?

 

There should be a law.

 

What about in 1992 Special Prosecutor Lawrence Walsh’s decision to indict...the weekend before the 1992 election

 

Good point because that didn't go over well either in the Republican or the Democratic party, respectively...

 

Clinton administration attorney Lanny Davis called the decision to indict a week before the election rather than after the election "bizarre."[3]  Walsh steadfastly denied that the investigation was politically motivated, while Bush and others criticized it as "the criminalization of policy differences."[1]

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Walsh

 

Sounds precisely accurate to this very instance of J. Brien Comey trying to criminalise the Democratic Party nominee for Potus some 11 or 10 days before the general election, and by Comey's trying to do it by issuing to House Republicans only vague and broad non-specific statements that Comey admits are indeed nothing more than that.

 

 

I have no problem with the indictment in 1992 and don't really on this one either

 

Well then you in fact have a serious problem which may eventually come to be called the James Comey Election Coup and Anti-Constitution Syndrome.

 

 

(It might be past someone's bedtime.)

 

Is it this one?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatch_Act_of_1939

 

 

[Asiantravel]

4 hours ago, Steely Dan said:

Incidentally, bring up Google and type in Hillary is. The suggestions show she's finished, even google has bailed on her.


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

 

my results were " sick " and " toast " 

[Asiantravel]

48 minutes ago, Steely Dan said:

Hillary's boat has been torpedoed, not by Bills Weiner but by Huma's. Now the rats are bailing out of a sinking ship.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/kass/ct-hillary-clinton-emails-kass-1030-20161028-column.html


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

 

this passage is from that article

 

" What if she is elected? Think of a nation suffering a bad economy and continuing chaos in the Middle East, and now also facing a criminal investigation of a president. Add to that congressional investigations and a public vision of Clinton as a Nixonian figure wandering the halls, wringing her hands."

 

so just as Donald Trump predicted just based on her history she won't get anything done if she was in office and this time she will blame it on all the distractions that she will claim would have stopped from doing anything

[Asiantravel]

8 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

They will get them. No way the Justice department can refuse now. 

 

 

provided nobody used bleach bit on them over the weekend

[keemapoot]

Comey's strategy seems to be getting a bit clearer. He knew that by releasing this information 11 days before the election, the implications would be enormous in voter opinion on Clinton. At the same time, he admitted he had no knowledge of what, if anything other than pictures of Weiner's weiner, were in those emails. They could have been completely inert and non-related to the allegations against Clinton.

 

But the key is that the FBI has not yet obtained a warrant to even look at the emails, and as this drags out, there is no way the contents can be read by anyone at FBI or disclosed to anyone. So, he has created the perfect trap. A powerful mustard bomb lobbed at the Clinton campaign days before the election, which cannot be unwrapped until a warrant is obtained, thereby prolonging the negative effects to Clinton.  I assume he is probably dragging his feet on obtaining such a warrant, and that once he does obtain it, he will drag his feet in assigning agents to read these, and probably nothing will  be disclosed until after November 8.  

 

A perfect October gift to the GOP.  Not enough to save Trump, but maybe enough to keep the Senate control and limit house losses by the GOP candidates.

 

He knew before he released this that Clinton was going to win in a huge way, and likely control of the Senate would be lost, so he has maybe been very effective as the secret GOP October weapon. He will take a bullet in the process, because he knows Clinton and the Dems will skin him alive and boil him in oil, but he will land on his feet due to pre-arranged promises by the GOP large donors and/or other GOP interests.

[Dagnabbit]

Comey's strategy seems to be getting a bit clearer. He knew that by releasing this information 11 days before the election, the implications would be enormous in voter opinion on Clinton. At the same time, he admitted he had no knowledge of what, if anything other than pictures of Weiner's weiner, were in those emails. They could have been completely inert and non-related to the allegations against Clinton.
 
But the key is that the FBI has not yet obtained a warrant to even look at the emails, and as this drags out, there is no way the contents can be read by anyone at FBI or disclosed to anyone. So, he has created the perfect trap. A powerful mustard bomb lobbed at the Clinton campaign days before the election, which cannot be unwrapped until a warrant is obtained, thereby prolonging the negative effects to Clinton.  I assume he is probably dragging his feet on obtaining such a warrant, and that once he does obtain it, he will drag his feet in assigning agents to read these, and probably nothing will  be disclosed until after November 8.  
 
A perfect October gift to the GOP.  Not enough to save Trump, but maybe enough to keep the Senate control and limit house losses by the GOP candidates.
 
He knew before he released this that Clinton was going to win in a huge way, and likely control of the Senate would be lost, so he has maybe been very effective as the secret GOP October weapon. He will take a bullet in the process, because he knows Clinton and the Dems will skin him alive and boil him in oil, but he will land on his feet due to pre-arranged promises by the GOP large donors and/or other GOP interests.

That's one hell of a vivid imagination.

Occam's razor provides a different scenario; she broke the law, he now has what he needs to get a conviction.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[keemapoot]

1 minute ago, Dagnabbit said:

 

That's one hell of a vivid imagination.

Occam's razor provides a different scenario; she broke the law, he now has what he needs to get a conviction.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

Let's get this straight. He now has what he needs to get a conviction based on possibly unrelated, irrelevant emails that neither he nor any of his staff has read or screened?  Ok, got it.

[Publicus]

34 minutes ago, Chicog said:

 

Is it this one?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatch_Act_of_1939

 

 

 

Hatch Act would be fine if it applies, which is dubious given Comey is not active in a political campaign in any way, to include money, operations, attendance, work performed as a volunteer or for pay, being physically present, using government funds for the campaign or promises of government funds and so on and son on etc etc.

 

Some sharp lawyers might be able to pin something in the Hatch Act on Comey but one should keep the farm off the risk taking table on this point. If anyone can connect the Hatch Act to Comey, that would be great, super, terrific -- nail the sucker.

 

In the meantime, you my friend need to read the posts between myself and the long-time TV member McMurray. He and I specifically and only discuss the DoJ 60 day practice of not doing anything political within 60 days of an election. When I said in reply to the poster's question, there should be a law, I was specifically referring to this DoJ practice becoming encoded as law.

 

Sixty days, ninety days, either would be fine. Something specific that applies specifically and precisely to the Department of Justice (as well as other agencies). This kind of law would be clear, direct, simple. Hatch Act is old, thick, complicated and convoluted.

 

If anyone has looked at the filing of complaints today at DoJ against Comey on the basis of the Hatch Act, one can see that the many organisations bringing the complaint have a lot of work to do to try to connect Comey's letter to the Hatch Act, for only some of the reasons I stated in the opening graf of this post. An x number of days before an election law could get pretty specific and clear, so that in the instance of Comey, who is not working a campaign, or affiliated with one, not only could be called to account, but directly and specifically so.

 

Hatch Act in this kind of instance is dense to try to apply. As I say, if some lawyers can find some way(s) to apply it, then more power to 'em. 

[Dagnabbit]

 

Let's get this straight. He now has what he needs to get a conviction based on possibly unrelated, irrelevant emails that neither he nor any of his staff has read or screened?  Ok, got it.

A lass crazy possibility than your wild conspiracy theory is that he knows full well what is there but can't disclose because:

- they don't have the correct warrants in place

- they don't want to alert the suspect who has a record of tampering with evidence and bumping into the AG for chats

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[keemapoot]

3 minutes ago, Dagnabbit said:

A lass crazy possibility than your wild conspiracy theory is that he knows full well what is there but can't disclose because:

- they don't have the correct warrants in place

- they don't want to alert the suspect who has a record of tampering with evidence and bumping into the AG for chats

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

My wild conspiracy theory was just confirmed by the FBI themselves, that they do not have a warrant yet.  And, if Comey knows what's in the emails he has broken the law himself and can be criminally prosecuted, so that doesn't wash either.

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/comey-wrote-bombshell-letter-to-congress-before-fbi-had-reviewed-new-emails-220219586.html

Edited October 30, 2016 by keemapoot

[Asiantravel]

go back in time just a few months and President Obama said this about FBI Director Comey   "He's got the resume, but more importantly, a strong sense of right and wrong."

 

A few months later and The Democratic Coalition Against Trump filed a complaint with the Department of Justice Office of Professional Responsibility ( on Friday) against FBI Director.

 

“It is absolutely absurd that FBI Director Comey would support Donald Trump like this with only 11 days to go before the election,” said Scott Dworkin, Senior Advisor to the Democratic Coalition Against Trump. “It is an obvious attack from a lifelong Republican who used to serve in the Bush White House, just to undermine her campaign. Comey needs to focus on stopping terrorists and protecting America, not investigating our soon to be President-Elect Hillary Clinton.”

 

 

http://www.keepamericagreat.us/comeydojcomplaint

[Dagnabbit]

 
My wild conspiracy theory was just confirmed by the FBI themselves, that they do not have a warrant yet.  And, if Comey knows what's in the emails he has broken the law himself and can be criminally prosecuted, so that doesn't wash either.
 
https://www.yahoo.com/news/comey-wrote-bombshell-letter-to-congress-before-fbi-had-reviewed-new-emails-220219586.html

So he's confirmed that he's taking a bribe from the GOP to do this?

Your comprehension skills are sorely lacking.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dagnabbit]

go back in time just a few months and President Obama said this about FBI Director Comey   "He's got the resume, but more importantly, a strong sense of right and wrong."
 
A few months later and The Democratic Coalition Against Trump filed a complaint with the Department of Justice Office of Professional Responsibility ( on Friday) against FBI Director.
 
“It is absolutely absurd that FBI Director Comey would support Donald Trump like this with only 11 days to go before the election,” said Scott Dworkin, Senior Advisor to the Democratic Coalition Against Trump. “It is an obvious attack from a lifelong Republican who used to serve in the Bush White House, just to undermine her campaign. Comey needs to focus on stopping terrorists and protecting America, not investigating our soon to be President-Elect Hillary Clinton.”
 
 
http://www.keepamericagreat.us/comeydojcomplaint

If that was a shoe it'd be a flip flop


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[boomerangutang]

        Comey was appointed AG by Obama in 2013.  Obama, among other things, wanted to show fairness in appointing a Republican to an important position.   Now the Republican is biting the Dems on the butt.  

As Keemapoot pointed out, it's doubtful that the AG or his staff have yet read the emails.  

 

        Note, even if there was anything important (state secrets, strategies, undercover agents' names, etc) in the emails, the longer the time that passes, the less important those details become.  But it's plain that mere suggestions of impropriety are what's playing out here.    

 

        If I'm invited to a large family dinner, and all of a sudden point at a man and shout repeatedly; "There. That man is a pedophile!!!!"   I may have no basis for my accusation, but the mere mention is enough to sow doubts & rumors about that man, for everyone in the room.