While the FBI can conduct investigations at its initiative, it cannot itself either bring charges or even convene a Grand jury to make such a determination: only the Justice Department can do that. It appears clear that the President and the Attorney General are committed to preventing such an action, and that FBI Director Comey's unusual action of offering the Congress and the public a determination that no charges or a Grand Jury refferal is warranted,was done (perhaps at their urging) to spare the Attorney General and the President of the political cost of such an action.
During his remarkable testimony to the Investigating Congressional Committee Comey recited what was in fact a prima facie case for Hillary's indictment for multiple felonies and then made the astounding (to the assembled Congressmen) declaration that no charges were warranted. Following that, he was asked by several members of the Committee under what circumstances he might reopen the investigation. Comey declined to specify but clearly indicated that very significant new information would be required to justify such a step. It is now reported that both the Attorney General and her deputy objected to Comey's announcement of a reopening based on a vaporous "Department policy" against disrupting elections., however he did so anyway, citing his responsibilities to Congress.
The computer presently under investigation belonged to Huma Addeen - Hillary's personal assistant for all her affairs, including her government duties, the Foundation, Bill's influence peddling and the activites of Teneco. We don't know what's on it or what has so far been discovered, however the possibilities are manifold
It remains fairly clear that "the fix" is still in with the Administration on this matter : they will not likely press either criminal charges or a grand Jury under any circumstances. However the political cost and risk for them for such an action are now much greater. I believe the chief threat to all of these conspirators is for leaks of the new information and/or defections from either the FBI or among Hillary's functionaries. It is worth remembering the final phase of the Watergate investigation when President Nixon ordered Attorney General Elliot Richardson to fire the Special Prosecutor, both Richardson and his deputy resigned rather than do so. I'm not suggesting that AG Lynch would do such a thing - it is clear that she has long since sold out - however others may well come forward.
Hillary will either lose the coming election or see the conclusion of these sordid and far-reaching affairs work out slowly during her presidency - then likely under the aegis of an intependent Special Prosecutor. We and the nation will pay the price for all this.
@DrewDad,
Quote: the GOP has already vowed to make her Presidency a **** show of investigations.
Yeah. Ain't that something. These boys are nothing if not predictable.
@georgeob1,
I put a question to you on the prior page. Any chance you'll answer it?
@DrewDad,
DrewDad wrote:
"She" did not delete the emails. She authorized their deletion,
This remarkably ignorant. Do you honestly believe this?
It's akin to saying "Hitler" did not kill the Jews. He authorized their deaths...
I cannot believe that anyone would actually think that is logical or how things happen.
@McGentrix,
She wiped the server clean with a cloth...
@McGentrix,
McGentrix wrote:
DrewDad wrote:
"She" did not delete the emails. She authorized their deletion,
This remarkably ignorant. Do you honestly believe this?
It's akin to saying "Hitler" did not kill the Jews. He authorized their deaths...
I cannot believe that anyone would actually think that is logical or how things happen.
Sure. Deleting email is totally the same as the Holocaust.
@McGentrix,
Also, you missed the point where I said deleting email is not wrong, but that deleting email that is under subpoena
is wrong.
And she didn't do that.
@McGentrix,
McGentrix wrote:
DrewDad wrote:
"She" did not delete the emails. She authorized their deletion,
This remarkably ignorant. Do you honestly believe this?
It's akin to saying "Hitler" did not kill the Jews. He authorized their deaths...
I cannot believe that anyone would actually think that is logical or how things happen.
What is there to "honestly believe?" It is a FACT that she told her lawyers/staff to turn over state department emails and delete personal emails BEFORE they were under subpeona.
The staff deleted the emails AFTER the subpeona was issued, but the direction was given before.
This is confirmed by what the FBI found and reported on.
Do you think Hillary sat down in her office and personally went through each of the 60,000 emails and checked the little "x" button to delete the personal ones?
@maporsche,
You understand that ordering someone to do something makes you as guilty and liable as the person that actually does it, right?
That's my point. DrewDad seems to imply that because Hillary didn't sit "down in her office and personally ... checked the little "x" button to delete the personal ones?" that she is somehow not guilty of doing it.
You would agree that the person that orders a crime, is just as guilty as those that perform a crime, right?
All of this is really besides the point. Did Clinton intend to release classified information. No. Did Clinton's actions actually result in the release of classified information. No. (For those who say I can't prove that, the burden of proof in on the accusers and we certainly aren't reading State Department emails on Wikileaks which we would be doing if she'd been hacked.) That is why the FBI did not move forward with charges - no intent, no harm. None of that has changed. Was the FBI out of line speculating about this before the election? Probably, but I feel for Comey. He's in a lose/lose situation. Either he says nothing (which was probably the correct action) and someone leaks that Comey knew something definitive and he is an administration tool or he tells Congress and is left holding nothing when asked and he has poisoned the relationship with the likely next President who will be his boss. Complete no-win for him.
@McGentrix,
McGentrix wrote:
You understand that ordering someone to do something makes you as guilty and liable as the person that actually does it, right?
That's my point. DrewDad seems to imply that because Hillary didn't sit "down in her office and personally ... checked the little "x" button to delete the personal ones?" that she is somehow not guilty of doing it.
You would agree that the person that orders a crime, is just as guilty as those that perform a crime, right?
Of course I understand that she ordered the emails to be deleted and that is on her.
MY point is that the order came from Clinton BEFORE the subpoena was issued, not after. And that deleting personal emails that are not under investigation at the time, is not illegal. Therefore no crime.
@engineer,
engineer wrote:
All of this is really besides the point. Did Clinton intend to release classified information. No. Did Clinton's actions actually result in the release of classified information. No. (For those who say I can't prove that, the burden of proof in on the accusers and we certainly aren't reading State Department emails on Wikileaks which we would be doing if she'd been hacked.) That is why the FBI did not move forward with charges - no intent, no harm. None of that has changed. Was the FBI out of line speculating about this before the election? Probably, but I feel for Comey. He's in a lose/lose situation. Either he says nothing (which was probably the correct action) and someone leaks that Comey knew something definitive and he is an administration tool or he tells Congress and is left holding nothing when asked and he has poisoned the relationship with the likely next President who will be his boss. Complete no-win for him.
I feel sorry for Comey too; he had no good options here.
@maporsche,
maporsche wrote:And that deleting personal emails that are not under investigation at the time, is not illegal.
Which is a shame, really; we could learn new recipes on how to cook up the big load of nothing the Republicans reel in from their fishing expedition....
@maporsche,
Was it really just happenstance that she "ordered" the emails deleted just days before the subpoena? I wonder who let it slip to the Hillary camp that it was coming?
@Baldimo,
Baldimo wrote:Was it really just happenstance that she "ordered" the emails deleted just days before the subpoena? I wonder who let it slip to the Hillary camp that it was coming?
Add it to the list of conspiracies to whine about the next 4 years.
@DrewDad,
DrewDad wrote:
The point is that her actions, in relation to the deletions, were prior to the subpoena being served.
Everybody who believes that stand on their head...
@maporsche,
If the Clinton's were honest and not crooked, there would be no need for conspiracies. After all, it was Clinton who used the phase to address all their wrong doings. They got you fooled with the "Vast Rightwing Conspiracies" and you have been hooked ever since. BTW, when I say you, I mean as a general leftwing group think.
@Baldimo,
Baldimo wrote:
If the Clinton's were honest and not crooked, there would be no need for conspiracies. After all, it was Clinton who used the phase to address all their wrong doings. They got you fooled with the "Vast Rightwing Conspiracies" and you have been hooked ever since. BTW, when I say you, I mean as a general leftwing group think.
Have you ever heard or met an honest politician...especially one who's risen to the level of candidate for president?
Saying a politican is dishonest is like saying water is wet. We all know.
I don't require a politican to be honest about everything. I require them to announce what the intend to do while in office and to get as much of that done as possible.
@Baldimo,
The Clintons are such evil masterminds, of course I want them in the White House. They have spent 40 years committing crimes and no one has ever found any actual evidence.
Why would I vote for politicians like the GOP who are so incompetent they can't find evidence that is so obvious to so many people?
I'm loving all this back peddling, equivicating, and prevaricating bordering on apoplexy on the part of the resident leftist Clinton apologists...it is comically entertaining!
