FBI Reviewing Clinton emails news: LATEST - Emails from Weiner investigation

[Likely Voter]

It's important to remember that they found classified material in Clinton's emails before. As Comey noted in his famous press conference and Congressional testimony, the issue of whether or not to indict came down to finding evidence that it was her intent to jeopardize that classified material. Carelessness and negligence were not deemed indictable.

For this new evidence to change the July decision it would have to get through a number of hurdles.

1 Are the emails new or duplicates of previously reviewed emails
2 Are the emails from Clinton herself (not Abedin)
3 Do they contain classified information
4 Do they contain evidence she intended this information to get out of the State Dept.

Then and only then would she be in any legal jeopardy. It is possible Abedin could be in jeopardy, but again there would have to be evidence of intent, not just negligence.   

ABC Legal analyst Dan Abrams talked about this on This Week this morning noting

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/dan-abrams-even-longer-long-shot-that-fbi-finds-anything-serious-in-new-emails/

[Speed of Sound]

Harry Reid informs Comey that he may have violated the Hatch Act via letter today:

https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/792843842479239168

[Hermit For Peace]

Oh what a tangled web we weave.

That's all I can say (at the moment.)

[mark_twain]

Silver's crunched the numbers on polls that have partial post-Comey interviews in them and so far has found........................nothing.

That's because the YouGov polls were 2/3 done before it was announced.

And the trackers are not moving yet either, because only 1 or 2 days are in. This takes longer. It also took longer with Trump's scandal.

That is what the "days post-Comey" column in the table is for.

Though it is impractical to have any of the tracker polls completely done after the release of the news, the list of polls show that they are at least partially taken after the release.

The far-right column shows that some of the those polls suggest a shift towards Clinton, and others for Trump, effectively cancelling any change.

By the way, these numbers are consistent with my idea suggested earlier of Clinton compensating for the news by fighting against it, repairing any damage she may have suffered.

[Alcon]

Harry Reid informs Comey that he may have violated the Hatch Act via letter today:

https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/792843842479239168

lol the Hatch Act? that's tenuous.

[Hydera]

It's important to remember that they found classified material in Clinton's emails before. As Comey noted in his famous press conference and Congressional testimony, the issue of whether or not to indict came down to finding evidence that it was her intent to jeopardize that classified material. Carelessness and negligence were not deemed indictable.

For this new evidence to change the July decision it would have to get through a number of hurdles.

1 Are the emails new or duplicates of previously reviewed emails
2 Are the emails from Clinton herself (not Abedin)
3 Do they contain classified information
4 Do they contain evidence she intended this information to get out of the State Dept.

Then and only then would she be in any legal jeopardy. It is possible Abedin could be in jeopardy, but again there would have to be evidence of intent, not just negligence.  

ABC Legal analyst Dan Abrams talked about this on This Week this morning noting

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/dan-abrams-even-longer-long-shot-that-fbi-finds-anything-serious-in-new-emails/

Thanks so much so basically.


Shes in the clear as long as classified information stays with Huma and Abedin or anybody employed in government related jobs at the time where it was appropriate. ex: state department employees or intelligence agencies.

The only way she's in trouble legally is if Hillary sent classified information to Weiner while knowing that the person she sent it too was Weiner which is unlikely and basically clears her in case Weiner used Huma's email account to somehow obtain classified information. Which means that even if Weiner had access to classified information by using Huma's email account then him not Huma or Hillary that would be in trouble.

[Crumpets]

Harry Reid informs Comey that he may have violated the Hatch Act via letter today:

https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/792843842479239168

lol the Hatch Act? that's tenuous.

An Anti-Trump pac has already filed a complaint against him on these grounds: http://www.snopes.com/2016/10/28/complaint-filed-against-james-comey/

According to Wikipedia:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So, it sounds like it's pretty open to interpretation, unless "interfere" has a very specific legal definition.

[‼realJohnEwards‼]

To anyone insisting that this is standard operating procedure:

[Person Man]

Harry Reid informs Comey that he may have violated the Hatch Act via letter today:

https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/792843842479239168

I had to do a PowerPoint for work on this once.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

btw...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.redstate.com/jimjamitis/2016/10/30/trump-campaign-manager-drops-p-word-anthony-weiner/


wasn't she suppoed to be the cool-headed one?

Are you saying Weiner is not a disgusting pedophile who sent dick pics to a girl in High School?

And he is being condemned by a guy who ogled 15-year old girls while changing clothes.

Remember one is Trump, so it is excused.

In defense of Weiner and Trump, at least they never settled a rape case for millions of dollars.

It wasn't millions and at a certain point I would pay a person to just go away even if I did nothing wrong.

But what say you over the rape trial in December?

So, in other words, you are saying that you'd compromise and admit culpability too for such a crime. Ok. I guess I admire Bill for admitting that he did in fact rape someone, but is is a shame that he didn't face the full weight of justice. Oh well, at least that pesky rape victim "went away."

The trial where the girl who is accusing him, Bill Clinton, and Prince Andrew of raping her on Jeffrey Epsteins jet and rape island? I could ask you the same question. Why did Bill take 32 flights to his private island? Wanna talk about that?

Only places I have seen who are running with that are the rightwing websites you like to frequent, and I really don't care at the same time. 

A Fascist can just say Alex Jones three times and you can win any argument when you are in a corner!

When you don't want to deal with the delusion, I'll let go of it.  It is the best way for them to win, bog the other person down in a conspiracy until they give up, which I am.

You can't refute easily refutable Breitbart nonsense? Well then maybe it isn't Breitbart nonsense after all then.

[IceSpear]

Harry Reid informs Comey that he may have violated the Hatch Act via letter today:

https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/792843842479239168

#LockHimUp

[Hermit For Peace]

Harry Reid informs Comey that he may have violated the Hatch Act via letter today:

https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/792843842479239168

#LockHimUp

[Antonio the Sixth]

Harry Reid informs Comey that he may have violated the Hatch Act via letter today:

https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/792843842479239168

#LockHimUp

[Speed of Sound]

And how is that news being taken? Like literally everything piece on everything so far. An example:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Dr. Arch]

The closing statement from Senator Reid's notice letter to Comey. Powerful.

[GeorgiaModerate]

PPP says they're not seeing much effect from this so far:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Virginiá]

Harry Reid informs Comey that he may have violated the Hatch Act via letter today:

https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/792843842479239168

lol the Hatch Act? that's tenuous.

Either way, Reid has a very good point there. Maybe to prove motive here would be very difficult, but what Comey has done in this case has been unnecessary and certainly looks like he is trying to help Republicans (even if he truly isn't). He is not required to keep Chaffetz informed of every little development - any "obligation" Comey thinks he has is entirely of his own doing.

[JerryArkansas]

btw...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.redstate.com/jimjamitis/2016/10/30/trump-campaign-manager-drops-p-word-anthony-weiner/


wasn't she suppoed to be the cool-headed one?

Are you saying Weiner is not a disgusting pedophile who sent dick pics to a girl in High School?

And he is being condemned by a guy who ogled 15-year old girls while changing clothes.

Remember one is Trump, so it is excused.

In defense of Weiner and Trump, at least they never settled a rape case for millions of dollars.

It wasn't millions and at a certain point I would pay a person to just go away even if I did nothing wrong.

But what say you over the rape trial in December?

So, in other words, you are saying that you'd compromise and admit culpability too for such a crime. Ok. I guess I admire Bill for admitting that he did in fact rape someone, but is is a shame that he didn't face the full weight of justice. Oh well, at least that pesky rape victim "went away."

The trial where the girl who is accusing him, Bill Clinton, and Prince Andrew of raping her on Jeffrey Epsteins jet and rape island? I could ask you the same question. Why did Bill take 32 flights to his private island? Wanna talk about that?

Only places I have seen who are running with that are the rightwing websites you like to frequent, and I really don't care at the same time. 

A Fascist can just say Alex Jones three times and you can win any argument when you are in a corner!

When you don't want to deal with the delusion, I'll let go of it.  It is the best way for them to win, bog the other person down in a conspiracy until they give up, which I am.

You can't refute easily refutable Breitbart nonsense? Well then maybe it isn't Breitbart nonsense after all then.

Or I don't care enough to delve into the conspiracy's you like to peddle to do so. 

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

The closing statement from Senator Reid's notice letter to Comey. Powerful.

I wouldn't associate the word "powerful" with a man who got beat up by his Boflex home gym.

[Alcon]

Harry Reid informs Comey that he may have violated the Hatch Act via letter today:

https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/792843842479239168

lol the Hatch Act? that's tenuous.

An Anti-Trump pac has already filed a complaint against him on these grounds: http://www.snopes.com/2016/10/28/complaint-filed-against-james-comey/

According to Wikipedia:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So, it sounds like it's pretty open to interpretation, unless "interfere" has a very specific legal definition.

OK, I agree the Hatch Act is vague.  But do you want to construe its vagueness this way?  This would basically be saying that, if in the course of someone's job conduct, they did something as part of the regular course of their job that affected the perception of someone running for partisan office, it could be a Hatch Act violation.  Right now, the Hatch Act generally just prohibits campaigning in partisan races.  This would take any action that could affect a partisan race, even if the effect is incident to normal job conduct, and apply some kind of subjective test about whether the job conduct is intended to influence the election or whether it's genuine conduct.

The rationale behind that standard would be to prohibit governmental job conduct from being influenced by partisan considerations.  But, paradoxically, it would intensely politicize that kind of conduct.  Can you imagine that a decision like Comey's could possibly be evaluated apolitically, when the standard is whether it's justified enough to not be presumed politically motivated?  That's an incredibly politically-loaded question.

[Landslide Lyndon]

The closing statement from Senator Reid's notice letter to Comey. Powerful.

I wouldn't associate the word "powerful" with a man who got beat up by his Boflex home gym.

Stay classy non-Trump supporter.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

The closing statement from Senator Reid's notice letter to Comey. Powerful.

I wouldn't associate the word "powerful" with a man who got beat up by his Boflex home gym.

At least he clearly exercises.

[Dr. Arch]

The closing statement from Senator Reid's notice letter to Comey. Powerful.

I wouldn't associate the word "powerful" with a man who got beat up by his Boflex home gym.

What a stupid response.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

btw...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.redstate.com/jimjamitis/2016/10/30/trump-campaign-manager-drops-p-word-anthony-weiner/


wasn't she suppoed to be the cool-headed one?

Are you saying Weiner is not a disgusting pedophile who sent dick pics to a girl in High School?

And he is being condemned by a guy who ogled 15-year old girls while changing clothes.

Remember one is Trump, so it is excused.

In defense of Weiner and Trump, at least they never settled a rape case for millions of dollars.

It wasn't millions and at a certain point I would pay a person to just go away even if I did nothing wrong.

But what say you over the rape trial in December?

So, in other words, you are saying that you'd compromise and admit culpability too for such a crime. Ok. I guess I admire Bill for admitting that he did in fact rape someone, but is is a shame that he didn't face the full weight of justice. Oh well, at least that pesky rape victim "went away."

The trial where the girl who is accusing him, Bill Clinton, and Prince Andrew of raping her on Jeffrey Epsteins jet and rape island? I could ask you the same question. Why did Bill take 32 flights to his private island? Wanna talk about that?

Only places I have seen who are running with that are the rightwing websites you like to frequent, and I really don't care at the same time. 

A Fascist can just say Alex Jones three times and you can win any argument when you are in a corner!

When you don't want to deal with the delusion, I'll let go of it.  It is the best way for them to win, bog the other person down in a conspiracy until they give up, which I am.

You can't refute easily refutable Breitbart nonsense? Well then maybe it isn't Breitbart nonsense after all then.

Or I don't care enough to delve into the conspiracy's you like to peddle to do so. 

Or you label anything you don't like to hear as conspiracy. Are you going to say CNN is pushing a conspiracy on Trump's potential inauguration day and that Clinton is actually the President but that nobody knows it?

[Virginiá]

I wouldn't associate the word "powerful" with a man who got beat up by his Boflex home gym.

Are you saying that someone, especially an old person, who slips/falls or otherwise makes a clumsy mistake on exercise equipment can't say or [/i]write[/i] something that feels powerful? (not saying what he wrote was powerful, either)