FBI's attempt to show Clinton probe w...

FBI's attempt to show Clinton probe was nonpartisan keeps running into politics

There are 32 comments on the The Washington Post story from Aug 21, 2016, titled FBI's attempt to show Clinton probe was nonpartisan keeps running into politics. In it, The Washington Post reports that:

Republicans are complaining the materials from the FBI's investigation into Hillary Clinton's email use were turned over in such a way that assessing them is difficult, while Democrats say they never should have been given to legislators at all. The political dust-up over the FBI handing documents about the Hillary Clinton email investigation to Congress is intensifying, with Republicans complaining the materials were turned over in such a way that assessing them is difficult and Democrats contending Clinton staffers, other State Department officials, former secretary of state Colin Powell and at least one other person, according to an email from a senior aide to Sen. Charles E. Grassley that was sent to congressional offices.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Washington Post.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

“Hillary, thirty years of lying”

Since: Nov 08

Paris

#2 Aug 21, 2016
Facebook Falsely Claims Colin Powell Cleared Hillary In Email Case
Derek Hunter

Facebook’s “Trending Topics” section is at it again. Saturday morning the site ran a headline in the section declaring,“Colin Powell: Former Secretary of State Confirms He Recommended Using Personal Email to Hillary Clinton.” The only problem is Powell made no such declaration and he denied Clinton’s claim.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/08/20/facebook-fa...
FBI Fool Comey

Bronx, NY

#3 Aug 21, 2016
45FBI expects us to believe this humbug? Poppycock! Balderdash! FBI: F umbling B umbling I diots!
kuda

Cincinnati, OH

#4 Aug 21, 2016
Have Republican MCs leaked these confidential materials?

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#5 Aug 21, 2016
kuda wrote:
Have Republican MCs leaked these confidential materials?
well, it certainly wasn't Clinton that released the emails that may have killed that Iranian spy, that was the FBI and the US congressional committee headed by Trey Gowdy.

“Denny Crain”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#6 Aug 21, 2016
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>well, it certainly wasn't Clinton that released the emails that may have killed that Iranian spy, that was the FBI and the US congressional committee headed by Trey Gowdy.
Why would you think they had to be leaked? Every nation with the capability has hacked Hillary's e-mails ! Including the 33,000 that were under subpoena that she destroyed !

“Denying those who deny nature”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

#7 Aug 21, 2016
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>well, it certainly wasn't Clinton that released the emails that may have killed that Iranian spy, that was the FBI and the US congressional committee headed by Trey Gowdy.
Of course it wasn't Clinton who released those emails. Hackers helped themselves and I would not be surprised if some of those hackers worked for the Iranian government. Otherw worked for the Russians, Ukrainians, Chinese, or for themselves.

The problem is that they were able to obtain that information and more because instead of using a secure email server run by the State Department, Clinton used her own run by someone who really didn't know what they were doing and leaving her server improperly secured.

As for the FBI attempt to show that the Clinton probe was nonpartisan, sorry, but no one is going to believe that. Anyone else who did what she did without the political connections would be trying to arrange a plea deal to keep themselves off death row.

Whine as much as you like, but Hillary Clinton has blood on her hands.

“Hillary, thirty years of lying”

Since: Nov 08

Paris

#8 Aug 21, 2016
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>well, it certainly wasn't Clinton that released the emails that may have killed that Iranian spy, that was the FBI and the US congressional committee headed by Trey Gowdy.
Who put them on a private insecure server..........oh wait......why it was Hillary herself.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#9 Aug 21, 2016
Denny CranesPlace wrote:
<quoted text>Why would you think they had to be leaked? Every nation with the capability has hacked Hillary's e-mails ! Including the 33,000 that were under subpoena that she destroyed !
you don't know that for sure in fact, it seems her server was more secure than most of the gov't sites that have been hacked, like the joint chiefs of staff's...

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#10 Aug 21, 2016
Le Jimbo wrote:
<quoted text>Who put them on a private insecure server..........oh wait......why it was Hillary herself.
the iranians didn't get it from there, they got it from the news media when the US congressional committee released it!

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#11 Aug 21, 2016
tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>

Of course it wasn't Clinton who released those emails. Hackers helped themselves and I would not be surprised if some of those hackers worked for the Iranian government. Otherw worked for the Russians, Ukrainians, Chinese, or for themselves.

The problem is that they were able to obtain that information and more because instead of using a secure email server run by the State Department, Clinton used her own run by someone who really didn't know what they were doing and leaving her server improperly secured.

As for the FBI attempt to show that the Clinton probe was nonpartisan, sorry, but no one is going to believe that. Anyone else who did what she did without the political connections would be trying to arrange a plea deal to keep themselves off death row.

Whine as much as you like, but Hillary Clinton has blood on her hands.
no, it was the committee witch hunt that released them. there is no credible evidence to show her server was hacked.

“Denying those who deny nature”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

#12 Aug 21, 2016
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>no, it was the committee witch hunt that released them. there is no credible evidence to show her server was hacked.
Proof, since the FBI seems to have proof that hackers had done it. Not to mention how many of them are currently on Wikileaks. Sorry, but there is plenty of evidence including other nations hacked her server. The question is not if her server been hacked, but who and how many have dones so. The fact that for three months, she had no Intrusion Protection software installed means that it was wide open and anyone could of hacked it.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jul/...

“Denny Crain”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#13 Aug 21, 2016
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>no, it was the committee witch hunt that released them. there is no credible evidence to show her server was hacked.
LOL They knew her server was under attack several times and did not report it as they were required but then how do you report attempts to hack an illegal server ?

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#14 Aug 21, 2016
tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>

Proof, since the FBI seems to have proof that hackers had done it. Not to mention how many of them are currently on Wikileaks. Sorry, but there is plenty of evidence including other nations hacked her server. The question is not if her server been hacked, but who and how many have dones so. The fact that for three months, she had no Intrusion Protection software installed means that it was wide open and anyone could of hacked it.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jul/...
no, dear, there is no proof that hackers released it!

if that is so why don't they have the 30,000 emails she deleted? because they the hackers wiki got it from hacked the gov't to get it, not clinton' server.

i understand you are not able to use logic, so just listen to me, as i can. clearly you cannot think for yourself.

“Denny Crain”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#15 Aug 21, 2016
tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>

Proof, since the FBI seems to have proof that hackers had done it. Not to mention how many of them are currently on Wikileaks. Sorry, but there is plenty of evidence including other nations hacked her server. The question is not if her server been hacked, but who and how many have dones so. The fact that for three months, she had no Intrusion Protection software installed means that it was wide open and anyone could of hacked it.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jul/...
Clinton and her former aides declined to cooperate with the inspector general, notwithstanding her oft-stated claim that she "can't wait" to meet with officials and clear the air about her emails.

The inspector general's report is damning to Clinton. It refutes every defense she has offered to the allegation that she mishandled state secrets. It revealed an email that hadn't been publicly made known showing Clinton's state of mind. And it paints a picture of a self-isolated secretary of state stubbornly refusing to comply with federal law for venal reasons; she simply did not want to be held accountable for her official behavior.

The report rejects Clinton's argument that her use of a private server "was allowed." The report makes clear that it was not allowed, nor did she seek permission to use it. She did not inform the FBI, which had tutored her on the lawful handling of state secrets, and she did not inform her own State Department IT folks.

The report also makes clear that had she sought permission to use her own server as the instrument through which all of her email traffic passed, such a request would have been flatly denied.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#16 Aug 21, 2016
Denny CranesPlace wrote:
<quoted text>LOL They knew her server was under attack several times and did not report it as they were required but then how do you report attempts to hack an illegal server ?
under attack is far different than being hacked, now isn't it?
kuda

Cincinnati, OH

#17 Aug 21, 2016
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>the iranians didn't get it from there, they got it from the news media when the US congressional committee released it!
It's impossible to educate a radio.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#18 Aug 21, 2016
kuda wrote:
<quoted text>

It's impossible to educate a radio.
my radio is far, far smarter than little jimmy...
He Named Me Black Annie

Cibolo, TX

#19 Aug 21, 2016
I'm sure the probe was nonpartisan. It was the decision not to indict by James Comey that was partisan. When Loretta Lynch met with Bill Clinton two days before the decision and Barack Obama landed in North Carolina on Air Force One with Hillary Clinton on the day of the decision, the Democratic Party flipped off America saying, "Your laws do not apply to us!" Arrogance! Contempt!

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#20 Aug 21, 2016
He Named Me Black Annie wrote:
I'm sure the probe was nonpartisan. It was the decision not to indict by James Comey that was partisan. When Loretta Lynch met with Bill Clinton two days before the decision and Barack Obama landed in North Carolina on Air Force One with Hillary Clinton on the day of the decision, the Democratic Party flipped off America saying, "Your laws do not apply to us!" Arrogance! Contempt!
what would those meetings have to do with Comey and his decision?

man you just parrot whatever you are told without even thinking about it, don't you?

we call that a mindless puppet or being a wh*re... well, wh*res get paid...did you get paid? we have a word for those who do what you did for free too, they won't let me say it here...
He Named Me Black Annie

Cibolo, TX

#21 Aug 21, 2016
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>what would those meetings have to do with Comey and his decision?

man you just parrot whatever you are told without even thinking about it, don't you?

we call that a mindless puppet or being a wh*re... well, wh*res get paid...did you get paid? we have a word for those who do what you did for free too, they won't let me say it here...
Yes, James Comey and John Roberts are unbiased and incorruptible. These are not the droids you are looking for.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Patrick Kennedy Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Ex-US Rep. Patrick Kennedy, wife, Amy, welcome ... May '18 anonymous 2
News States: Federal money for opioid crisis a small... Mar '18 tomin cali 1
News Peter Lucas: Congressman Kennedy launches Texas... (Sep '17) Sep '17 Laredo 1
News Former Rep. Patrick Kennedy: Stop calling Trump... (Aug '16) Aug '16 Captain Yesterday 63
News Ex-US Rep. Patrick Kennedy and Wife Welcome New... (Nov '15) Nov '15 Sterkfontein Swar... 3
News Iraqis find 3 more mass graves in formerly IS-h... (Nov '15) Nov '15 Ritual Habitual 1
News Patrick Kennedy memoir takes hard look at famil... (Oct '15) Oct '15 Sterkfontein Swar... 1