Clinton emails

[flfmrredfan]

Oops. My bad.

 

Not only were the emails found on Huma's cell phone, but her husband's (the weiner) too. And he has no security clearance whatsoever.

 

Pardon the interruption. Continue with the excuses please. They are hilarious.

[BigRedBuster]

Sheesh. Because they came from Huma Abedin's cell phone!

 

Good grief! The amount of excuses made for a felon around here is beyond the pale.

WTF???

 

You must not understand my dislike for this woman. I'm not going to be making excuses.

[NM11046]

Oops. My bad.

 

Not only were the emails found on Huma's cell phone, but her husband's (the weiner) too. And he has no security clearance whatsoever.

 

Pardon the interruption. Continue with the excuses please. They are hilarious.

I guess my question would be how things Weiner or his wife were writing would impact an investigation into Hillary Clinton.

[NM11046]

Oops. My bad.

 

Not only were the emails found on Huma's cell phone, but her husband's (the weiner) too. And he has no security clearance whatsoever.

 

Pardon the interruption. Continue with the excuses please. They are hilarious.

And who is making excuses here?

[Moiraine]

 

 

Oops. My bad.

 

Not only were the emails found on Huma's cell phone, but her husband's (the weiner) too. And he has no security clearance whatsoever.

 

Pardon the interruption. Continue with the excuses please. They are hilarious.

I guess my question would be how things Weiner or his wife were writing would impact an investigation into Hillary Clinton.

What if Weiner was like "Yo Huma, remind me what time that drone strike at lat-long X that Hills e-mailed you about yesterday is gonna be. I have someone I need to warn." ?

 

 

But seriously, maybe Huma borrowed his phone and logged into her own e-mail account with it to receive e-mails from Clinton. Can't imagine she'd do something as dumb as forward an e-mail to him that she shouldn't...

[NM11046]

 

 

Oops. My bad.

 

Not only were the emails found on Huma's cell phone, but her husband's (the weiner) too. And he has no security clearance whatsoever.

 

Pardon the interruption. Continue with the excuses please. They are hilarious.

I guess my question would be how things Weiner or his wife were writing would impact an investigation into Hillary Clinton.

What if Weiner was like "Yo Huma, remind me what time that drone strike at lat-long X that Hills e-mailed you about yesterday is gonna be. I have someone I need to warn." ?

 

 

But seriously, maybe Huma borrowed his phone and logged into her own e-mail account with it to receive e-mails from Clinton. Can't imagine she'd do something as dumb as forward an e-mail to him that she shouldn't...

 

If she was borrowing his cell you'd hope she was checking out his "sent items" box. I felt sorry for her after the initial accusations against him and after seeing all the photos, but not after she stayed with him and then when the behavior didn't just continue but escalated into contact with teenagers.

[knapplc]

[onlyHskrfaninIL]

 

 

 

Basically, if she wasn't Hillary Clinton, she'd have been nailed for it.

Or if she was Colin Powell.

 

Or Condoleezza Rice.

"But he did it too" is a poor defense for what happened.

 

Besides, those aren't apples to apples comparison's, but I'd be fine with going after them too.

Most republicans aren't fine with it. Otherwisw they'd be going after them too.

 

their situations weren't even the same that's already been debunked. and they aren't running for president. they aren't even in public service any more. the democrats are free to start up an investigation on them if they want. what a terribly weak deflection from the real issue. some of you just embarrass yourselves with the msnbc/huffpost scripted defenses of hillary. i know you are more intelligent than that.

[Moiraine]

 

 

 

 

Basically, if she wasn't Hillary Clinton, she'd have been nailed for it.

Or if she was Colin Powell.

 

Or Condoleezza Rice.

"But he did it too" is a poor defense for what happened.

 

Besides, those aren't apples to apples comparison's, but I'd be fine with going after them too.

Most republicans aren't fine with it. Otherwisw they'd be going after them too.

 

their situations weren't even the same that's already been debunked. and they aren't running for president. they aren't even in public service any more. the democrats are free to start up an investigation on them if they want. what a terribly weak deflection from the real issue. some of you just embarrass yourselves with the msnbc/huffpost scripted defenses of hillary. i know you are more intelligent than that.

 

 

 

I haven't watched msnbc or visited msnbc's website (if they have one?) in at least 10 years, nor do I read huffington post unless it's posted here or on very rare occasions when I run across a story that happens to have them as a source. Also, I don't feel embarrassed. Are you saying we should only try to investigate people who are running for president?

[Danny Bateman]

 

 

 

 

 

Basically, if she wasn't Hillary Clinton, she'd have been nailed for it.

Or if she was Colin Powell.

 

Or Condoleezza Rice.

"But he did it too" is a poor defense for what happened.

 

Besides, those aren't apples to apples comparison's, but I'd be fine with going after them too.

Most republicans aren't fine with it. Otherwisw they'd be going after them too.

 

their situations weren't even the same that's already been debunked. and they aren't running for president. they aren't even in public service any more. the democrats are free to start up an investigation on them if they want. what a terribly weak deflection from the real issue. some of you just embarrass yourselves with the msnbc/huffpost scripted defenses of hillary. i know you are more intelligent than that.

 

 

 

I haven't watched msnbc or visited msnbc's website (if they have one?) in at least 10 years, nor do I read huffington post unless it's posted here or on very rare occasions when I run across a story that happens to have them as a source. Also, I don't feel embarrassed. Are you saying we should only try to investigate people who are running for president?

 

 

 

That seems kind of silly. If we were to only investigate people who ran for president, we'd never have nailed people like Scooter Libby, Newt, Rod Blagojevich, Crispy Creme Christie (the investigation started prior to his presidential campaign)... the list goes on and on and on.

 

How about we just apply scrutiny whenever and wherever it's due? Not on witch hunts. Not to score partisan points. But because it's deserved and may help root out people who don't belong in our government.

 

With Clinton, some of it is legitimate and some of it is not. I've been super supportive of Comey throughout this email thing. I think he's a man of standup character who is an effective leader of one of our most important federal institutions. So, naturally, I accepted his announcement to not charge Clinton with anything a few months ago. If he says they've found new emails that may be pertinent and need to look at them, I take him at his word.

 

But what the hell was he thinking sending out a vaguely worded letter like that to the weasels in Congress? These are the same idiots that headed up HOW many Benghazi investigations? How many millions of our money did they waste on that crap, all to find out what we pretty much knew in the first place? THAT is a perfect example of investigations and scrutiny for the wrong reasons.

 

Now he's forked over a weapon for this chuckleheads to use for the next week and half. In addition to King Chucklehead of the Horrible Hairdo. Yes, it's entirely Clinton's fault in the first place, and she'll never get away from that. Horrible, horrible decision on her part, even though I understand how she arrived at it.

 

Here's hoping they've got some oppo bomb to drop on Trump next week. I want to flush out as many ineffective Republican Senators and Reps as possible. It makes me sad, because these people seem less concerned with governing and more with obstructing and taking shots at any available opportunity. And now they've gotten a gift that may help keep many of them in power.

 

Another wonderful day in the life of a Clinton supporter.

[teachercd]

"But but...he was talking too...why are you yelling at me?"

[whateveritis1224]

I'm going to drop this here: https://thinkprogress.org/the-fbi-directors-letter-about-the-clinton-emails-says-a-lot-less-than-the-media-wants-you-to-aa61e81e5a97#.trlw07hql

 

No clue what type of site Think Progress is, but I feel it reviews exactly what went on today.

 

Something is there that needs to be reviewed, but probably not something to "nail" Clinton with.

[Moiraine]

 

There were a "considerable number" of emails being reviewed from at least one device shared by Abedin and Weiner, the official said. A separate official described it as thousands of messages.

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/28/politics/fbi-reviewing-new-emails-in-clinton-probe-director-tells-senate-judiciary-committee/index.html

 

 

 

So these could either be duplicates of the thousands of e-mails we've seen before, or maybe they're e-mails that Clinton deleted and they're actually new.

 

I probably shouldn't say this given the idiocy of what Clinton did, but I wouldn't think Abedin would be stupid enough to send or receive classified info on a shared phone.

 

There were 30 "brand new" e-mails everyone got all excited about 3 months ago. They turned out to all be repeats of what was already out there.

[Red Five]

Debacle

 

[Moiraine]

Debacle

 

 

 

 

 

If Clinton wins after this I don't want to hear any sh#t about election rigging from the right.

 

Also, I'm not buying Comey's claim that he did this because he said under oath the investigation was over. The situation changes doesn't automatically make him a liar 4 months ago.