News Focus
News Focus
icon url

Hanibal

07/05/16 12:46 PM

#250322 RE: StephanieVanbryce #250320

Conservative reaction: THE FIX IS IN!!!!!1111oneoneoneELEVENTY!!!!1111 ILLUMINATI GEORGE SOROS MICKEY MOUSE ROSWELL AREA 51 FLUORIDE CHEMTRAILS MOON LANDING FAKE CHARLIE CHAPLIN VANILLA ICE KENYA WHAR LONG FORM CERTIFICAT WHAR
icon url

shtsqsh

07/05/16 1:11 PM

#250326 RE: StephanieVanbryce #250320

Hillary Clinton’s email problems might be even worse than we thought


Here's the good news for Hillary Clinton: The FBI has recommended no charges be brought followings its investigation of the former secretary of state's private email server.

Here's the bad news: Just about everything else.

FBI Director James Comey dismantled large portions of Clinton's long-told story about her private server and what she sent or received on it during a stirring 15-minute news conference following which he took no questions. While Comey exonerated Clinton legally speaking, he provided huge amounts of fodder that could badly hamstring her in the court of public opinion.

Most importantly, Comey said the FBI found 110 emails on Clinton's server that were classified at the time they were sent or received. That stands in direct contradiction to Clinton's repeated insistence she never sent or received any classified emails. And, it even stands in contrast to her amended statement that she never knowingly sent or received any classified information.

Comey condemned Clinton and her top aides as "extremely careless" in how they handled classified information during her time as the head of the State Department, adding: "Any reasonable person … should have known that an unclassified system was no place" for that sort of information.

There was more — much more. Comey said Clinton had used not one but multiple private email servers during her time at State. He said Clinton used multiple email devices during that time. (She had offered her desire to use a single device for "convenience" as the main reason she set up the private server.) He noted that the lawyers tasked by Clinton with sorting her private emails from her professional ones never actually read all of the emails (as the FBI did in the course of its investigation). Comey said that while the FBI found no evidence that Clinton's private server was hacked by foreign governments, it was possible that it had been. He argued that the Clinton lawyers had deleted emails they marked as personal that contained professional content, and that while the FBI found some of those emails in its investigation, it was certainly possible more existed that they were unable to track down.

It's worth remembering at this point that Clinton and her team deleted more emails than they turned over to the State Department.

It's hard to read Comey's statement as anything other than a wholesale rebuke of the story Clinton and her campaign team have been telling ever since the existence of her private email server came to light in spring 2015. She did send and receive classified emails. The setup did leave her — and the classified information on the server — subject to a possible foreign hack. She and her team did delete emails as personal that contained professional information.

Those are facts, facts delivered by the Justice Department of a Democratic administration. And those facts run absolutely counter to the narrative put forth by the Clinton operation: that this whole thing was a Republican witch-hunt pushed by a bored and adversarial media.


Now for the key question: How much do the FBI findings hurt her campaign?

Clinton did avoid indictment, a ruling that would have effectively ended her campaign or left it so badly weakened that there would have been a major move within Democratic circles to replace her as the nominee.

That said, campaigns aren't governed by the ultimate legality of what Clinton did or didn't do. So, while dodging an indictment is a good thing — she isn't under criminal investigation and remains a candidate — it's a far different thing from being cleared (or even close to it) in the court of public opinion.

For a candidate already badly struggling on questions of whether she is honest and trustworthy enough to hold the office to which she aspires, Comey's comments are devastating. Watching them, I could close my eyes and imagine them spliced into a bevy of 30-second ads — all of which end with the FBI director rebuking Clinton as "extremely careless."

The best thing Clinton may have going for her at this point is that Republicans are two weeks away from formally picking Donald Trump as their party's presidential nominee. Trump has shown a unique ability to hog the national spotlight and make comments that make people wonder whether he is fit to be president. While Clinton's image numbers are bad, Trump's are worse.

By Chris Cillizza July 5 at 12:08 PM @ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/07/05/hillary-clintons-email-problems-might-be-even-worse-than-we-thought/?postshare=1961467736093579&tid=ss_tw
icon url

StephanieVanbryce

07/05/16 2:16 PM

#250333 RE: StephanieVanbryce #250320

Hillary Clinton Isn’t Getting Indicted. Here’s Why.

by Ian Millhiser Jul 5, 2016 11:15 am



Tuesday morning, FBI Director James Comey announced that his agency’s investigation into Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s handling of a private email server while she was Secretary of State has come to a close. He also added that the FBI will recommend against criminal charges for Secretary Clinton, stating that “no reasonable prosecutor” could determine that charges were warranted here. It’s an announcement that will surprise no one who is familiar with the underlying law and ordinary Justice Department practices in a case such as this one.

Nevertheless, in part because calls for a Clinton indictment were amplified by Republicans at the highest levels, [ http://www.wsj.com/articles/clintons-emails-a-criminal-charge-is-justified-1453419158 ] and in part because of what Josh Marshall described as the media-industrial complex’s quest for “wingnut page views,” [ http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/the-wages-of-derp-are-derp-lots-of-it ] the idea that Clinton may face criminal charges has lingered for months. Here’s what you need to know about why such charges were never a realistic possibility.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/07/05/3795414/hillary-clinton-isnt-getting-indicted-heres/

I hate to say it but I must, :-) ... I told YOU so!