Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
FBI Reviewing New Evidence in Hillary Email Scandal
Bad news for Hillary from the FBI:
Published in GeneralThe FBI on Friday dropped a bombshell on Hillary Clinton’s campaign less than two weeks before Election Day, announcing that it is reviewing new evidence in its investigation into her use of a private email server as secretary of state.
In a letter to several congressional committee chairmen, FBI Director James Comey wrote that, “In connection with an unrelated case, the FBI has learned of the existence of emails that appear to be pertinent to this investigation.”
Comey said he was briefed on those emails on Thursday and that he “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.”
He did not specify where the additional emails came from.
Comey wrote that the FBI does not yet know if the new material is “significant” and did not provide a timeframe for investigating.
My apologies.
Columbo,
Intent is Comey’s fig leaf for letting her off the hook. If just one email, and it doesn’t matter to who, shows in black & white that she intended to break the law then Comey’s fig leaf is removed and she is exposed (well they’d both be exposed, never mind). At this point, Comey may just be playing the game but if Assange drops the bomb for everybody to see Comey would be stuck with it.
Regards,
Jim
Agreed with those who think this is just Comey trying to placate FBI staff.
Or he is buying political capital against Clinton for either administration. He could either impede President Clinton by keeping scandal a persistent distraction from her initiatives or Comey could win President Trump’s favor by harrassing a vindictive rival (who would exert influence even without the Oval Office).
Prosecution would be unlikely under any president, but impossible under Clinton. Democrats no longer have to hide corruption of the Department of Justice.
This is the NYT’s attempt to “make it about sex,” ala Lewinsky scandal?
Funniest headline of day!
New Info For FBI Probe Came From Weiner’s Device …
heh. heh. heh. You said “Device”.
Note the very specific language used by the FBI. They aren’t “reopening the investigation”. They’re “reviewing new evidence”.
http://thelibertarianrepublic.com/fbi-not-reopening-clinton-email-case/
Mark,
Your tack is fine with me but Ryan & McConnell don’t have the stones to do it. If Assange drops the intent bomb then we can convict her in the press with it. Comey can’t say a thing because he’s the one that made intent the lynchpin (excuse the expression).
Regards,
Jim
This whole election is like watching a race between an old woman using a walker who periodically faints, struggles to her feet, and resumes her painfully slow advance towards the finish line vs. a man running blindfolded who keeps barging headlong into trees, getting turned around, and running the wrong way.
It would be comedy gold if there weren’t so much at stake…
That Fact-Checker is having a breakdown.
I think the main reason the case isn’t “reopened” is because it was never actually closed.
Well, that all depends upon what the the meaning of the word “meaning” means.
I have to keep reminding myself that Comey’s use of the words “extremely careless” refer to Clinton’s handling of classified material rather than the FBI’s investigation into Clinton.
Oh. My. Poor Anthony. If this goes badly for Hillary, he had better fear for his life. Or for his little weiner. Huma might just be an expert in some secret middle eastern technique of Male Genital Mutilation.
I read the news today, oh boy
About a lucky man who made the grade
And though the news was rather sad
Well, I just had to laugh
I saw the photograph
Of Carlos Danger’s weiner.
You criticize Trump for your expectation that he will make this about Trump, thereby diverting this thread by making it about Trump. Have to love the irony.
Although it would be fitting to see her undone by Anthony’s Weiner, I don’t see it happening.
As for him, well if they can’t prove she knowingly sent classified information, I don’t see how they are up to the task of proving he knew he was sending Weiner pics to underage girls.
It was the Anthony Wiener sexting case.
Too. Effing. PERFECT!!!
Well, it may not be directly related in terms of potential defendants. What sort of case would the FBI be looking at against these two? It’s possible they’re looking at the transmission and unauthorized handling of classified data from one to the other? Certainly, Anthony Weiner would have no sort of clearance. So Huma sent some stuff to her husband? That seems a sensible explanation.
It’s not unrelated, but from a legal standpoint, you’re examining a different subject and series of facts.
If there wasn’t a 15-year-old girl involved in the scandal then I could almost buy that, this just brings up the fact that the Clinton campaign is surrounded by pedophiles in addition to all the other sleaze.
If she was looking at naked pics of Carlos Danger that’s worse than anything Trump did.
From the content of the communications he had with the underage girl it is clear he was aware of that fact. Not that I discount the possibility of the FBI messing up even a slam dunk such as that.
Hope . . .
I’m an ER doc. That was a reflex.
Chris,
What if the emails originally turned over have been redacted enough to block any proof of intent (Comey’s extra special definition of intent). Let’s say that the Weiner-Abedin emails were checked out without the redacting by a different group inside FBI and have just one email showing Hillary fully aware of classified material being mishandled thus proving intent.
What if the different group of investigators inside the FBI won’t let go and refuse to let Comey redact the emails?
Regards,
Jim
Yuk, yuk…or should I say: Yuch, yuch?
If for nothing else… the press (I use that term loosely) jumped at her for a response to the news and she refused to verbalize anything. I am all for what makes her look bad..
Kozak,
I think if you wacked Weiner in the knee with the hammer it wouldn’t be his leg that jerked up. (I get extra points for this one.)
Regards,
Jim
They were heavily edited.
Addiction,
Damn it, you didn’t make enough popcorn for everyone.
Regards,
Jim