Jump to content
MassED MassED (New Member) New Member

FBI reopens its investigation into Hillary

Politics   (5,226 Views 91 Comments)
20,078 Visitors; 438 Posts
If you find this topic helpful leave a comment.

You are reading page 6 of FBI reopens its investigation into Hillary. If you want to start from the beginning Go to First Page.

The FBI stated that they had not yet obtained a search warrant to review the emails until today, this was widely reported Report: FBI Obtains Warrant to Examine Clinton Emails | Fox Business Were you under the impression Comey's announcement came after seeing the emails in question?

What exactly is it you feel I'm not comprehending?

Geez, Muno, gets exhausting having to explain .

There were emails found during the Weiner investigation that led back to Hillary, which required them to go back and open the investigation, now that there is new information. And obviously SOMEONE in the FBI saw SOMETHING that belonged to Hillary, which then prompted all of this. Of course Comey would have been uodated on exactly what those were and the decision to proceed into it. Questions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm all over the place about term limits and can't decide on a stance. One the one hand, they are elected by the people legally. People obviously want them and elect them and we should be free to elect whom we nominate and choose.

This is my position. I've been saying for years, "We have term limits. They're called 'elections.'" If people are unhappy with their representatives, they are free and able to not re-elect them. If they are satisfied with the representatives they have previously elected, why should they not be able to continue having those individuals represent them, just because they have served for some arbitrary amount of time?

And political office has become a skilled occupation. Connections and experience that is formed over time matters a great deal. It takes a long time to become an effective member of Congress. To me, it's no different than saying physicians or lawyers should only be able to work for some specific number of years, and then we have to start over again with neophyte physicians or lawyers. Or what about nurses? How much sense would it make to say that, because some nurses become jaded and complacent over time and that doesn't serve the public interest, you can only be licensed as an RN for six, or twelve, years and then you automatically lose your license and have to find some other occupation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Geez, Muno, gets exhausting having to explain .

Then save yourself the time and effort, and don't bother.

If you actually read the real reporting, instead of the right-wing paranoia websites you apparently prefer to frequent, you would know that nobody at the FBI had seen anything that "belonged to Hillary" in the material found on Weiner's computer, since the FBI had to get a warrant to look at those emails and that had not been done when Comey made his announcement. All they knew were that there were emails belonging to Ms. Abedin on the computer.

And, "it's against the law for the FBI to interfere in a political campaign"? Really?? I guess that settles it, then. 'Cause nobody ever breaks the law, or misunderstands or mistakenly violates the law. I guess that means Clinton hasn't done any of the horrible things the Right is accusing her of, because they are accusing her of breaking the law and, well, it's against the law for her to do that.

Why do you suppose so many prominent Democrats and Republicans are making public their concerns that Comey has done exactly that, violate the Hatch Act? Making irresponsible and unprofessional personal comments about his personal opinions about Clinton, in violation of FBI and Justice Department policy, while working to keep quiet the damaging information about Trump and his connections to Russia that the FBI has uncovered? Of course, I'm sure you have some smooth and illogical explanation for that in which he's not acting as a partisan hack.

And, no, I don't "read WikiLeaks." They are unsubstantiated, unverified information of unknown origin being promulgated by an organization run by an individual who has made no secret over the years of his personal dislike for Clinton and desire to damage her. Of course you believe they're gospel because they reinforce what you already believe. But not everyone here is so gullible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of interesting investigations:

Donald Trump’s Companies Destroyed Emails in Defiance of Court Orders

Over the course of decades, Donald Trump's companies have systematically destroyed or hidden thousands of emails, digital records and paper documents demanded in official proceedings, often in defiance of court orders. These tactics—exposed by a Newsweek review of thousands of pages of court filings, judicial orders and affidavits from an array of court cases—have enraged judges, prosecutors, opposing lawyers and the many ordinary citizens entangled in litigation with Trump. In each instance, Trump and entities he controlled also erected numerous hurdles that made lawsuits drag on for years, forcing courtroom opponents to spend huge sums of money in legal fees as they struggled—sometimes in vain—to obtain records.

...Trump's use of deception and untruthful affidavits, as well as the hiding or improper destruction of documents, dates back to at least 1973, when the Republican nominee, his father and their real estate company battled the federal government over civil charges that they refused to rent apartments to African-Americans. The Trump strategy was simple: deny, impede and delay, while destroying documents the court had ordered them to hand over.

Then there is the highly suggestive question of whether one of Trump's servers has been in regular communication with a Russian bank:

A computer scientist tracking malware and going by the name 'Tea Leaves” claims to have discovered a pattern of conversation that appears to tie a server registered to the Donald Trump organization to two Russian servers registered to "Alfa Bank."

According to a new report from Slate, computer scientists began looking into GOP presidential nominee's servers in the wake of the hack into the Democratic National Committee (DNC) that U.S. intelligence has blamed on Russian actors.

'We wanted to help defend both campaigns, because we wanted to preserve the integrity of the election,” one of the unnamed academics involved said.

Tea Leaves discovered a bank in Moscow that continually contacted a server registered to the Trump Organization. Further research of the pattern of conversations revealed they would occur during office hours in both New York and Moscow, Slate reported.

Report connects Trump organization server to Russian bank | TheHill

The original report:

Was a server registered to the Trump Organization communicating with Russia’s Alfa Bank?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Geez, Muno, gets exhausting having to explain .

There were emails found during the Weiner investigation that led back to Hillary, which required them to go back and open the investigation, now that there is new information. And obviously SOMEONE in the FBI saw SOMETHING that belonged to Hillary, which then prompted all of this. Of course Comey would have been uodated on exactly what those were and the decision to proceed into it. Questions?

The arrogant, hectoring approach can work quite well when one has the facts 100% correct. When one hasn't correctly interpreted what has actually transpired and still use that approach, it falls flat.

If you look at Director Comey's own statement you'll see that investigators hadn't reviewed the emails at the time the statement was made and no one at the FBI had yet had a chance to determine if they were significant in any way, shape or form.

I think that Muno has a pretty good grasp of the situation so please don't feel like you have to waste any time or energy on educational efforts.

Part of Director Comey's statement:

The full text of FBI letter announcing new Clinton email probe

In connection with an unrelated case, the FBI has learned of the existence of emails that appear to be pertinent to the investigation. I am writing to inform you that the investigative team briefed me on this yesterday, and I agreed that the FBI should take appropriate investigative steps designed to allow investigators to review these emails to determine whether they contain classified information, as well as to assess their importance to our investigation.

Although the FBI cannot yet assess whether or not this material may be significant, and I cannot predict how long it will take us to complete this additional work, I believe it is important to update your Committees about our efforts in light of my previous testimony.

(my bold)

Given the lack of any solid, new and relevant information available to the FBI at the time Mr Comey shared the information, I can only draw the conclusion that it was extremely premature. Premature, yet released very close to the election knowing full well that the investigation such as it is, will likely not be concluded before the election. It raised many more questions than it answered. All they've said is we have mail. At this time we don't know what, if anything, it means.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of FBI investigations:

A Veteran Spy Has Given the FBI Information Alleging a Russian Operation to Cultivate Donald Trump | Mother Jones

On Friday, FBI Director James Comey set off a political blast when he informed congressional leaders that the bureau had stumbled across emails that might be pertinent to its completed inquiry into Hillary Clinton's handling of emails when she was secretary of state. The Clinton campaign and others criticized Comey for intervening in a presidential campaign by breaking with Justice Department tradition and revealing information about an investigation—information that was vague and perhaps ultimately irrelevant—so close to Election Day. On Sunday, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid upped the ante. He sent Comey a fiery letter saying the FBI chief may have broken the law and pointed to a potentially greater controversy: "In my communications with you and other top officials in the national security community, it has become clear that you possess explosive information about close ties and coordination between Donald Trump, his top advisors, and the Russian government…The public has a right to know this information."

Reid's missive set off a burst of speculation on Twitter and elsewhere. What was he referring to regarding the Republican presidential nominee? At the end of August, Reid had written to Comey and demanded an investigation of the "connections between the Russian government and Donald Trump's presidential campaign," and in that letter he indirectly referred to Carter Page, an American businessman cited by Trump as one of his foreign policy advisers, who had financial ties to Russia and had recently visited Moscow. Last month, Yahoo News reported that US intelligence officials were probing the links between Page and senior Russian officials. (Page has called accusations against him "garbage.") On Monday, NBC News reported that the FBI has mounted a preliminary inquiry into the foreign business ties of Paul Manafort, Trump's former campaign chief. But Reid's recent note hinted at more than the Page or Manafort affairs. And a former senior intelligence officer for a Western country who specialized in Russian counterintelligence tells Mother Jones that in recent months he provided the bureau with memos, based on his recent interactions with Russian sources, contending the Russian government has for years tried to co-opt and assist Trump—and that the FBI requested more information from him.

Does this mean the FBI is investigating whether Russian intelligence has attempted to develop a secret relationship with Trump or cultivate him as an asset? Was the former intelligence officer and his material deemed credible or not? An FBI spokeswoman says, "Normally, we don't talk about whether we are investigating anything." But a senior US government official not involved in this case but familiar with the former spy tells Mother Jones that he has been a credible source with a proven record of providing reliable, sensitive, and important information to the US government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FBI examining fake documents targeting Clinton campaign: sources

| Reuters

The FBI and U.S. intelligence agencies are examining faked documents aimed at discrediting the Hillary Clinton campaign as part of a broader investigation into what U.S. officials believe has been an attempt by Russia to disrupt the presidential election, people with knowledge of the matter said.

U.S. Senator Tom Carper, a Democrat on the Senate Homeland Security Committee, has referred one of the documents to the FBI for investigation on the grounds that his name and stationery were forged to appear authentic, some of the sources who had knowledge of that discussion said.

In the letter identified as fake, Carper is quoted as writing to Clinton, 'We will not let you lose this election,” a person who saw the document told Reuters.

The fake Carper letter, which was described to Reuters, is one of several documents presented to the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the U.S. Department of Justice for review in recent weeks, the sources said.

... As part of an investigation into suspected Russian hacking, FBI investigators have also asked Democratic Party officials to provide copies of other suspected faked documents that have been circulating along with emails and other legitimate documents taken in the hack, people involved in those conversations said.

... In addition to the Carper letter, the FBI has also reviewed a seven-page electronic document that carries the logos of Democratic pollster Joel Benenson's firm, the Benenson Strategy Group, and the Clinton Foundation, a person with knowledge of the matter said.

The document, identified as a fake by the Clinton campaign, claims poll ratings had plunged for Clinton and called for 'severe strategy changes for November” that could include 'staged civil unrest” and 'radiological attack” with dirty bombs to disrupt the vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kurt Eichenwald has written a review of the Trump-Russia connection. It's a bit of a long read, but it widens the context and connects some of the provocative dots that I've been seeing since the beginning of Trump's campaign. The piece focuses mainly on the foreign policy concerns around Trump's candidacy and includes a description of the disinformation network run by Russia worldwide.

... Trump has been surrounded by advisers and associates with economic and familial links to Russia. The publicized connections and contacts between former campaign manager Paul Manafort with Ukraine have raised concerns. Former Trump adviser Carter Page is being probed by American and European intelligence on allegations that he engaged in back-channel discussions with Russian government officials over the summer. Page did travel to Moscow, but he denies any inappropriate contact with Russian officials. The allies are also uneasy about retired Lieutenant General Michael Flynn, a Trump adviser who was reportedly considered a possible running mate for the GOP nominee. Last December, Flynn attended a dinner at the Metropol Hotel in honor of the 10th anniversary of RT, a Russian news agency that has been publicly identified by American intelligence as a primary outlet for Moscow's disinformation campaigns. Flynn, who was two seats away from Russian President Vladimir Putin at the dinner, has frequently appeared on RT, despite public warnings by American intelligence that the news agency is used for Russian propaganda.

Western intelligence has also obtained reports that a Trump associate met with a pro-Putin member of Russian parliament at a building in Eastern Europe maintained by Rossotrudnichestvo, an agency under the Ministry of Foreign Affairs that is charged with administering language, education and support programs for civilians. While the purpose of that meeting is unclear, and there is no evidence that Trump was aware it took place, it has become another fact that has alarmed officials from at least one NATO ally.

Finally, Trump's repeated glowing statements about Putin throughout the campaign—and his shocking comment that the Russians were not in Crimea—have perplexed some foreign officials, who fear that under a Trump presidency, the United States would no longer stand with Western Europe in regard to Moscow.

Trump and his campaign have also spread propaganda created as part of the Kremlin's effort, relying on bogus information generated through traditional Russian disinformation techniques. In one instance, a manipulated document was put out onto the internet anonymously by propagandists working with Russia; within hours, Trump was reciting that false information at a campaign rally. The Trump campaign has also spread claims from Sputnik, another news outlet identified by American intelligence as part of the Russian disinformation campaign. For example, almost immediately after the posting of an article by Sputnik attacking this Newsweek reporter, the Trump campaign emailed a link to the piece to American reporters, urging them to pursue the same story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Really? Re-opened case today. Unprecedented. None of us, obviously, know what the FBI will divulge and there are plenty of talking heads giving their opinions.

Does anyone think Comey would go through reopening his investigation if what he and his team HAD found was nothing?

It is a reopening of the case. We shall see what happens.

Now we know.

No criminality in Clinton emails - FBI - BBC News

The FBI has found no evidence of criminality in the new batch of Hillary Clinton emails.

"Based on our review, we have not changed our conclusions that we expressed in July with respect to Secretary Clinton," said Mr Comey in Sunday's letter to Congress.

FBI: Review of new emails doesn't change conclusion on Clinton - CNNPolitics.com

FBI Director James Comey told lawmakers Sunday the agency hasn't changed its opinion that Hillary Clinton should not face criminal charges after a review of new emails.

This shows why it's important to not jump to conclusions prematurely. At the time of Director Comey's first letter the FBI had not yet even read the new emails. Now that they have reviewed them they've drawn the conclusion that the emails didn't contain anything that warrants criminal charges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE=macawake;9242732]Now we know.

No criminality in Clinton emails - FBI - BBC News

FBI: Review of new emails doesn't change conclusion on Clinton - CNNPolitics.com

This shows why it's important to not jump to conclusions prematurely. At the time of Director Comey's first letter the FBI had not yet even read the new emails. Now that they have reviewed them they've drawn the conclusion that the emails didn't contain anything that warrants criminal charges.

Jumping to conclusions:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9DVhl5wRjc REPORTING:

Trump hustled offstage in Nevada after security scare, returns shortly thereafter

The agency said in a statement that Trump was removed from the stage at the Reno-Sparks Convention Center after someone shouted "Gun!", causing a commotion. The Secret Service said that one person was apprehended and no weapon was found after a search of the surrounding area...

... A source told Fox News that someone in the crowd saw another attendee reach around his back and toward his waistband. The first person shouted "Gun!" several times, sparking panic right in front of the stage where Trump was speaking...

Trump hustled offstage in Nevada after security scare, returns shortly thereafter | Fox News

Edited by herring_RN
the quote didn't work. Edited for clarity regarding who posted what.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't matter. Mission accomplished, damage done. People believe the FBI is wrong, is covering up for Mrs. Clinton and that she's the most dreadful criminal since Manson and that when Trump is elected she will go to prison. I read somewhere too that Obama is also going to prison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Republicans have already said that they are going to impeach Hillary, should she be elected. I'm not sure for what.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
×