Tuesday, July 5, 2016

BREAKING: FBI Clears Hillary Clinton in Email Investigation


FBI Director James Comey has just announced that "no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case", "we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts", and that "no charges are appropriate in this case".

Developing...
NYT:
The F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, on Tuesday said the F.B.I. is recommending no charges against Hillary Clinton for her use of a personal email server while secretary of state.

Mr. Comey said “no reasonable prosecutor” would bring a case against Mrs. Clinton for her handling of classified information on her private server. But he said Mrs. Clinton and her staff were “extremely careless” in their use of email. 

The F.B.I.’s recommendation to the Justice Department will have an enormous impact on the presidential election. 

 Attorney General Loretta Lynch said on Friday that she would accept whatever recommendation she received from the F.B.I.

13 comments:

  1. What Democrats have Known all Along......NOW....Lets Move On...We have a Woman President that is Waiting to get Into the White House.......And No Not a Friday Night News Dump here...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Now, you are clear madam ,President. let us move on toward White House.

      Delete
  2. nothing new at all about her, she said all along nothing marked classified, but since her aids are also off the hook, that means they didn't take something from classified and remove the designation before sending it to her, so they didn't send anything marked classified either. The idea that referring to non-classifed newspaper reports on drone activity was the same as sending top secret orders, that had nothing to do with State anyway, was as classified is media dreaming. The game the media is playing is not the objective truth game.

    Scolding a woman is a male FBI game.

    If they were going to go there, they ought to have found a few random guys to investigate for comparison purposes. without a reference it's just a smear

    it's a sexist world, we have to be perfect, and they get to be better than we are by phallic definition.

    ReplyDelete
  3. now Andrea says "no likely indictment," Andrea, it's NO indictment.

    they are also saying she sent things that were found to have been classified at the time, and that referring to the reports of drone strikes in newspapers, they were confirming those reports were true, they were referring to them as important to know about when meeting foreign leaders, what had they read before she meets them, are they crazy?

    Andrea says it turns her claim on it's head. It does not. It confirms her claims, her aids didn't take reports of drones from government sites, they sent newspaper articles and shared what was reported to the public, it wasn't even necessarily true, they sent other newspapers reports too, they kept her current with what was being reported to the public.

    Now I really hate Andrea and those women at MSNBC who are so much more than the rest of us regular woman, siding with the phallus each chance they get, phooey on you Andrea Mitchell.

    and now it's all about her judgement, with no comparison to anyone else.

    she's made of steel, she's been taking this forever

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is striking how Andrea Mitchell is doing her damnedest to spin this as horrible news for Hillary. She just got CLEARED!

      As far as what Comey has to say about "carelessness", that's just his assessment and is legally meaningless. Clinton can easily say that she disagrees strongly with that opinion and present evidence to back it up.

      Delete
    2. it's typical for Andrea, and has a flavor of envy. She's married to Greenspan, and he's the one that pushed Bill to reduce the deficit and then gave Bush the green light to return it in tax rebates and then pay for his war on credit. So there was an idea that he suckered Bill, who surely didn't know then as much as he knows now. Bill also blew the welfare reform bill, left too many loopholes. He was a rube back then.

      it's not only that she got cleared, so did all her aids, they sent nothing marked classifed so what they sent was from real non-classifed sources, aka newspaper articles, and they discussed only those sources, not anything that came from a classified source.

      You can't say someone is careless unless you have a comparison with not-careless, careless is neither discreet nor defined, it's a comparison word, more careless than whom, less careless than whom, and so he reveals himself as sexist, a chance to scold a woman.

      And he sure did comb through everything looking for evidence, must have been a big disappointment to him that he could find no evidence of intention and no evidence of hacking. She must be a real threat to his masculinity.

      if her email had been gathered when she was in foreign terrains, and there is no evidence it was, they found nothing they didn't already know, she didn't compromise one thing. It had already been found that she did not compromise national security.

      he claims "extremely careless," he is really a pompous know-it-all who knows nothing but thinks he knows everything. He's not the only career guy who overvalues his prejudices, so I'd say pompous garden variety creep.

      Delete
  4. https://www.facebook.com/notes/james-rogers-bush/democrats-unite-for-hillary-clinton/1047164842006518

    ReplyDelete
  5. 1-7.401 - Guidance for Press Conferences and Other Media Contacts

    The following guidance should be followed when Department of Justice components or investigative agencies consider conducting a press conference or other media contact:

    The use of a press release which conforms to the approval requirements of USAM 1-7.400 is the usual method to release public information to the media by Department of Justice components and investigative agencies. Press conferences should be held only for the most significant and newsworthy actions, or if a particularly important deterrent or law enforcement purpose would be served. Prudence and caution should be exercised in the conduct of any press conference or other media contact.


    Any public communication by any Department component or investigative agency or their employees about pending matters or investigations that may result in a case, or about pending cases or final dispositions, must be approved by the appropriate Assistant Attorney General, the United States Attorney, or other designate responsible for the case. In joint or multi-district cases, the approving official should consult with other districts or divisions affected. If it is a national case, press conferences must be approved by the Director, Office of Public Affairs.

    Did Melanie Newman, the Director of Public Affairs, approve his public statement?


    Only "The Office of Inspector General is exempt from any approval requirement for media contacts. However (even), the Office of Inspector General should inform the Office of Public Affairs on public or other media issues.

    https://www.justice.gov/usam/usam-1-7000-media-relations#1-7.530

    ReplyDelete
  6. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I wrote:


    subject: did Director Melanie Newman approve FBI Director James Comey's press conference statements?

    Dear Director Newman,

    It seems to me that Director Comey made an indefensible statement, since only presidential candidate Hillary Clinton was investigated, how could he conclude she was "extremely careless," compared to whom?

    He said "not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information."

    There was no evidence, not unclear evidence. Evidence of extreme carelessness is nonsense.

    He claims he didn't get prior approval:

    "Second, I have not coordinated or reviewed this statement in any way with the Department of Justice or any other part of the government. They do not know what I am about to say."

    Is this not admission of a clear violation?

    and yet he was required to get permission:

    "Press conferences should be held only for the most significant and newsworthy actions, or if a particularly important deterrent or law enforcement purpose would be served. Prudence and caution should be exercised in the conduct of any press conference or other media contact."

    "There are also circumstances involving substantial public interest when it may be appropriate to have media contact about matters after indictment or other formal charge but before conviction. In such cases, any communications with press or media representatives should be limited to the information contained in an indictment or other charging instrument, other public pleadings or proceedings, and any other related non-criminal information, within the limits of USAM 1-7.520, .540, .550, .500 and 28 C.F.R. 50.2."

    "If it is a national case, press conferences must be approved by the Director, Office of Public Affairs."

    "Prior to conducting a press conference or making comments on a pending investigation regarding another DOJ component, the U.S. Attorney shall coordinate any comments, including any written statements, with the affected component."

    https://www.justice.gov/usam/usam-1-7000-media-relations#1-7.530

    I see this as sexist, a man scolding the woman who is running for the highest office is more than offensive, it is prejudicial. Right now the names of the un-indicated co-conspirators from the New Jersey Bridge closing are kept confidential because one might have be subject to an adverse affect.

    Please do something about this violation of public trust and interference in an election.

    Thank you,



    https://www.justice.gov/doj/webform/your-message-department-justice/done?sid=1465591&token=bed5923d28f8f2803d5e19852f496e26

    ReplyDelete
  8. Boom! She's done it again - the woman is invincible! (EDITORIAL CARTOON) http://chavahbillin.blogspot.com/2016/07/fbi-clears-hillary-clinton-in-email.html

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anyone who leaves a review will need a gmail account. Most likely, the majority of seniors do not have a gmail account. You may have to create an account for residents and customers and have them leave a review for the community.
    http://suportdirecotry.podomatic.com/entry/2016-07-02T04_59_39-07_00

    ReplyDelete