Clinton pushes back against 'unprecedented' new FBI review

JULIE PACE, Associated Press
KEN THOMAS, Associated Press

 

DAYTONA BEACH, Fla. (AP) — Hillary Clinton lashed out Saturday at the FBI's handling of a new email review, leading a chorus of Democratic leaders who declared the bureau's actions just days before the election "unprecedented" and "deeply troubling." Emboldened Republican rival Donald Trump seized on the reignited email controversy, hoping to raise new doubts about Clinton's trustworthiness.

 

Rallying supporters in Florida, Clinton pressed FBI Director James Comey to put out the "full and complete facts" about the review into a cache of recently discovered emails. Clintonbackers panned Comey's letter to Congress about the new emails as severely lacking crucial details.

 

"It is pretty strange to put something like that out with such little information right before an election," Clinton said. She accused Trump of using the issue to confuse and mislead voters in the final leg of the campaign for the Nov. 8 election.

 

The controversy over Clinton's email practices at the State Department has dogged her for more than a year. The former secretary of state has often been reluctant to weigh in on the matter — and defensive when she's been pushed to do so.

 

But Clinton's approach to this latest flare-up is markedly different, underscoring worries that the matter could damage her standing with voters in the election's final days. Clinton advisers have been rallying Democratic lawmakers and other supporters to her defense, including members of the Congressional Black Caucus.

 

Earlier Saturday, Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta said there was "no evidence of wrongdoing" in the new email review and "no indication this is even about Hillary." But Comey, who enraged Republicans in the summer when he announced the FBI would not prosecute Clinton for her loose handling of official email, in fact said the new trove appeared to be "pertinent" to the Clinton email investigation. He did not explain how.

 

A government official told The Associated Press on Saturday that the Justice Department had advised the FBI against telling Congress about the new developments in the Clintoninvestigation because of the potential fallout so close to the election. The official was not authorized to speak publicly about the matter and discussed it on condition of anonymity.

 

Justice officials concluded the letter would be inconsistent with department policy that directs against investigative actions that could be seen as affecting an election or helping a particular candidate, the official said.

 

Landing with a thud, the email issue again threatened to undermine an advantage built byClinton, the Democratic nominee, over Trump and raised the possibility that the Republican might be able to seize late momentum.

 

Trump told a crowd in Golden, Colorado, on Saturday that the FBI's review of Clinton email practices raises "everybody's deepest hope that justice, as last, can be properly delivered." His crowd cheered Clinton's email woes, which Trump has taken to calling the biggest political scandal since Watergate.

The FBI is looking into whether there was classified information on a device belonging to Anthony Weiner, the disgraced ex-congressman who is separated from longtime Clinton aide Huma Abedin. Comey, in his letter to Congress on Friday, said the FBI had recently come upon new emails while pursuing an unrelated case and was reviewing whether they were classified.

 

A person familiar with the investigation, who lacked authority to discuss the matter publicly and insisted on anonymity, said the device that appears to be at the center of the new review was not a computer Weiner shared with Abedin.

 

As a result, it was not a device searched for work-related emails at the time of the initial investigation. The person said "this is news to (Abedin)" that her emails would be on a computer belonging to her husband.

 

The person added that if the emails included those related to Abedin's work with Clinton at the State Department, they are expected to be duplicates of what she had already turned over as part of the initial investigation.

 

Trump mused aloud during his rally about whether Clinton was "going to keep Huma," adding that Abedin has "been a problem." He hurled insults at Weiner, warning again that the former congressman posed a national security risk because of his access to information through his estranged wife. Abedin, a close Clinton confidant who is a near constant presence in the campaign, was not traveling with Clinton on Saturday.

 

New York Rep. Gregory Meeks suggested the FBI chief might be trying to sway the election and called for him to disclose what he knows. Clinton herself said of Comey: "Put it all out on the table."

 

Long term, the development all but ensured that, even should Clinton win the White House, she would celebrate a victory under a cloud of investigation. Comey, who was appointed in 2013 to a 10-year term as FBI director, would still be on the job if Clinton wins the White House.

 

Congressional Republicans have already promised years of investigations into Clinton'sprivate email system. And that's only one of the email-related episodes facing her in the campaign's closing days. The tens of thousands of confidential emails from Clinton campaign insiders that were hacked — her campaign blames Russia — and then released by WikiLeaks have provided a steady stream of questions about her policy positions, personnel choices and ties with her husband's extensive charitable network and post-presidential pursuits.

 

In his letter to congressional leaders Friday, Comey wrote only that new emails have emerged, prompting the agency to "take appropriate investigative steps" to review information that appeared pertinent to its previously closed investigation into Clinton private email system.

 

Clinton's campaign is hoping the issue will fire up its base of voters who feel the secretary has been unfairly targeted in a litany of investigations, but it could also revive some Clintonfatigue.

 

Given a political gift from the FBI, Trump's challenge now becomes avoiding any big missteps that might overshadow Clinton's troubles over the campaign's final days. If history is a guide, that won't be easy.

 

Inside Trump's Colorado rally, his supporters worried whether he could stick to his message about the emails.

 

"It scares me," Howard Sanger, 56, of Parker, Colorado said of the prospect of another Trump gaffe. "But I feel like his inner circle will stop him."

 

 

-- © Associated Press 2016-10-30

About time. She should have been in front of a Grand Jury already. Maybe justice will finally be served!

2 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

About time. She should have been in front of a Grand Jury already. Maybe justice will finally be served!

The outrage from the Left is simply fallout from Comey bending the rules in the first place. 

Lock her up! Lock her up!

50 minutes ago, rooster59 said:

Long term, the development all but ensured that, even should Clinton win the White House, she would celebrate a victory under a cloud of investigation.

 

Som Nom Naa 

I am happy that the FBI Director had enough courage and guts to not cave in to Loretta Lynch and her cronies at the DOJ who were trying to silence him. Good for him and the FBI agents for the courage and intestinal fortitude in the face of extreme pressure from those who want to maintain the status quo of corruption and deceit and lies.

 I have a security clearance and have had one for 35 years and work in the defense industry.  If anybody had done any little piece of what she had done, they would have been stripped of their security clearance, fired, and most likely prosecuted.  The arrogance to even consider using ones own mail server and email address is still to me un fathomable.  Not to mention that all government employees are given security briefings, and email accounts.  Her motives, while not necessarily criminal in nature, show ridiculous judgement.  Her actions certainly were criminal and she should be prosecuted.  Sentencing may be light but she should be prosecuted.

Why now? It must be a decoy the get the ppl's attention away from the Wikileaks email revalations. And what about those accusations w/o any shred of proof that the Russians hacked her email?

"Wag the dog" in progress ... jmo.

 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120885/

 

It just validates the idea that both candidates are a complete joke and that neither of them have any business running for President.

1 minute ago, KarenBravo said:

It just validates the idea that both candidates are a complete joke and that neither of them have any business running for President.

what's the old term:  "Hobson's choice"?  No, that is when one only had one choice or to refuse.  I guess we need a new term for two poor choices.

1 minute ago, gk10002000 said:

what's the old term:  "Hobson's choice"?  No, that is when one only had one choice or to refuse.  I guess we need a new term for two poor choices.

 

There is already one; Sophie's choice.

 

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Sophie's choice

6 minutes ago, KarenBravo said:

 

There is already one; Sophie's choice.

 

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Sophie's choice

Haha,  Thanks.  Over the years I never saw the movie but of course knew of it.

          One former senior DOJ official, told NPR that Comey's first mistake came in July, when he held a press conference to announce the findings of the FBI's investigation into Clinton's email use.

"You don't hold press conferences to announce that someone should not be charged with a crime and then proceed to dump all over that person and to publicly discuss the evidence against them," he said. "That's kind of one of the 10 commandments for being a federal law enforcement officer."

 

   "And another commandment would be — you don't publicly announce that you're conducting a criminal investigation against someone. And you especially don't do it if that person is a candidate, 11 days before an election. That's true whether it's a presidential election or an election for dog catcher."

 

source

She's not a fit person to be president is she, but then neither is he really, poor America 

He was a left wing hero when he announced no charges against Hillary. Not so much when he decides the case is still in progress. 

2 minutes ago, thai3 said:

She's not a fit person to be president is she, but then neither is he really, poor America 

A challenging year and years for governmental elections both in the USA and Thailand

What an awful prez crooked hillary will make....she'll be mired in investigations for so long you have to wonder who will run the country. 

 

Time to dump her sorry ass. 

 

 

The roof is due to finally collapse on crooked Hillary on 1st November, unless she and Barry can start a war with Russia before then.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/fgbEj-YyEIQ


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

3 minutes ago, Steely Dan said:

The roof is due to finally collapse ...

Did they use Thai builders?

1 hour ago, Ulysses G. said:

He was a left wing hero when he announced no charges against Hillary. Not so much when he decides the case is still in progress. 

 

These are separate tranches of emails, so it's not the same case.  Also, there was no indication that this new collection of emails have anything incriminating.  Right now, it's only an announcement of a planned review.  Have you heard of presumption of innocence (until proven guilty)?

 

      Also, it's interesting that in criminal and civil courts, a person can't be tried a second time for the same crime.  Yet, there are different rules with government and congress.  For example, Congress (with Republican majorities in both houses) has tried over 30 separate times to repeal Obamacare, and failed every time.   There have been several different Republican-led commissions to try and criminalize HRC re; Bengazi - and all of them failed.   When HRC is prez-elect and prez, will Congress continue appointing committees every few months for the next 8 years to re-litigate the same sorts of issues?  Perhaps with a Greek Chorus of Loser Trump supporters shouting from the sidelines "lock he up" and "Hey Putin, scrutinize her emails, will ya?!?"

 

        Now it appears to be happening with the email issue:  HRC was cleared of illegal activity in July.  Will Congress and other Republicans continue to exhume this corpse of an issue every few months, and beat it again?

2 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

Have you heard of presumption of innocence (until proven guilty)?

Not on TV, baby, not on TV

7 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

 

HRC was cleared of illegal activity in July.  

 

She was not cleared of anything. The FBI did not recommend that she be charged, but the case was never closed. Now that new evidence has surfaced, the result may be quite different. 

3 hours ago, nottocus said:

Lock her up! Lock her up!

Is that the new form of democracy (under a President Trump)? Lock up before a legal conviction? What about the most sacred principle of democracy, everybody is innocent until proven guilty (in a court of justice)???

1 hour ago, boomerangutang said:

          One former senior DOJ official, told NPR that Comey's first mistake came in July, when he held a press conference to announce the findings of the FBI's investigation into Clinton's email use.

"You don't hold press conferences to announce that someone should not be charged with a crime and then proceed to dump all over that person and to publicly discuss the evidence against them," he said. "That's kind of one of the 10 commandments for being a federal law enforcement officer."

 

   "And another commandment would be — you don't publicly announce that you're conducting a criminal investigation against someone. And you especially don't do it if that person is a candidate, 11 days before an election. That's true whether it's a presidential election or an election for dog catcher."

 

source

 

James Comey seems to want to cover his behind in both instances. After the first press conference he got fairly beat up by the Republicans so now he feels he needs to kowtow to them by offering up this one-off public announcement on an on-going investigation. For an FBI Director he seems rather insecure and inconsistent. I think Comey needs to realize that he isn't cut out for the FBI Director's job.

8 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

 

 Have you heard of presumption of innocence (until proven guilty)?

 

 

Like the left give to Trump? What utter hypocricy. 

19 hours ago, gk10002000 said:

 I have a security clearance and have had one for 35 years and work in the defense industry.  If anybody had done any little piece of what she had done, they would have been stripped of their security clearance, fired, and most likely prosecuted.  The arrogance to even consider using ones own mail server and email address is still to me un fathomable.  Not to mention that all government employees are given security briefings, and email accounts.  Her motives, while not necessarily criminal in nature, show ridiculous judgement.  Her actions certainly were criminal and she should be prosecuted.  Sentencing may be light but she should be prosecuted.

I am curious as to which federal statutes you believe she transgressed which would justify prosecution.

Edited October 30, 20169 yr by metisdead
Please do not modify someone else's post in your quoted reply, either with font or color changes or wording.

Just now, WaywardWind said:

I am curious as to which federal statutes you believe she transgressed which would justify prosecution.

18 U.S. Code § 798 - Disclosure of classified information

You can read all the details as needed, wiki pages, etc.

In addition to that, numerous government policies on email use of, maintenance of and transmission of.  Violation of any of those are punishable.

Love the headline "Clinton Pushes Back Against Unprecedented FBI Review". There's nothing about this election that isn't unprecedented. From the low caliber of the candidates, to the stupidity of those who would support either one. Truth is, if any of you had ever done half of what either one of them had done you'd be in jail now.

1 hour ago, Jack Mountain said:

Why now? It must be a decoy the get the ppl's attention away from the Wikileaks email revalations. And what about those accusations w/o any shred of proof that the Russians hacked her email?

"Wag the dog" in progress ... jmo.

 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120885/

 

Please get your facts straight .  Hillary's email server was not hacked and the FBI investigation into classified material in her email system made it explicit that there was no evidence that any of the "very small number of emails had classified markings when they were sent" (Comey's words) or the 2,000 that were  classified confidential information a subsequent review were ever available outside the system. None of those emails were included in the emails published as required by a court order in a law suit by Judicial Watch .  Those publicly available mails have been published by Wikileaks and other organizations . 

 

The DNC's email system was hacked and Podesta's private gmail account was also hacked. Those emails contained no classified material as well as no admissions of any criminal behavior .  They were purely political discussions between various Democratic officials and members of Hillary's staff.  Evidence, including Cyrillic header information and similar tools used, point towards Russian Intelligence service involvement in the hacks.   

 

Suggest you look at this link for a review of the entire saga.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/05/27/us/politics/what-we-know-about-hillary-clintons-private-email-server.html

TH 

 

 

Hang her.