HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » FBI Said to Prepare to In...

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 10:13 PM

FBI Said to Prepare to Interview Clinton Aides About E-Mai

"FBI agents are planning to seek interviews with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s aides in coming weeks as an investigation into her use of private e-mail for official business enters a new phase, according to two people familiar with the inquiry.
Investigators would also like to interview the Democratic presidential front-runner herself as part of the inquiry, the people said. The Federal Bureau of Investigation is striving to complete its probe by May or June and pass its findings along to prosecutors for potential action, the people said."

Entering a new phase?

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-03-04/fbi-said-to-prepare-to-interview-clinton-aides-in-e-mail-inquiry

37 replies, 2294 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 37 replies Author Time Post
Reply FBI Said to Prepare to Interview Clinton Aides About E-Mai (Original post)
NWCorona Mar 2016 OP
DCBob Mar 2016 #1
2pooped2pop Mar 2016 #2
NWCorona Mar 2016 #6
Qutzupalotl Mar 2016 #3
NWCorona Mar 2016 #4
Lint Head Mar 2016 #28
libdem4life Mar 2016 #10
DamnYankeeInHouston Mar 2016 #5
NWCorona Mar 2016 #7
demwing Mar 2016 #30
HereSince1628 Mar 2016 #8
libdem4life Mar 2016 #11
HereSince1628 Mar 2016 #12
libdem4life Mar 2016 #14
HereSince1628 Mar 2016 #22
libdem4life Mar 2016 #35
Sienna86 Mar 2016 #36
libdem4life Mar 2016 #37
angrychair Mar 2016 #9
ucrdem Mar 2016 #13
840high Mar 2016 #15
MaggieD Mar 2016 #16
NWCorona Mar 2016 #17
MaggieD Mar 2016 #18
NWCorona Mar 2016 #19
Post removed Mar 2016 #20
MaggieD Mar 2016 #21
andrewv1 Mar 2016 #23
DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2016 #34
jcgoldie Mar 2016 #24
NWCorona Mar 2016 #25
Jarqui Mar 2016 #26
DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2016 #33
Jarqui Mar 2016 #27
MineralMan Mar 2016 #29
pdsimdars Mar 2016 #31
NWCorona Mar 2016 #32

Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 10:21 PM

1. Yeah, the end phase.

They are simply trying to do this investigation as thorough and complete as possible to ensure they have dotted all the i's and crossed all the t's and also to make sure they leave no room to be criticized.. especially considering how high profile this case is.

I am convinced nothing will come of this once its all said and done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DCBob (Reply #1)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 10:25 PM

2. Even if they drop it

 

It was still another poor decision on her part and the republicans will keep this alive for over a year, I'll bet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DCBob (Reply #1)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 10:30 PM

6. And like we've said before

We will see soon enough

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 10:26 PM

3. "Investigators would also like to interview the Democratic presidential front-runner herself"

But nothing to see here, everything's fine...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Qutzupalotl (Reply #3)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 10:29 PM

4. Has there ever been a candidate who was compelled to talk to the FBI?

To much baggage 💼

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Reply #4)

Fri Mar 4, 2016, 01:50 PM

28. No. But a sitting President and his aides were. His Vice President went to prison. Richard Nixon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Qutzupalotl (Reply #3)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 11:39 PM

10. That caught my eye too...that is definitely new. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 10:30 PM

5. Endless annoying scandal after scandal.

I want Bernie because he is a class act. I'm not allowed to say what Hillary is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DamnYankeeInHouston (Reply #5)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 10:32 PM

7. Let's just say that Bernie's the better candidate

And let the courts handle this. This will be a big test for Obama.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DamnYankeeInHouston (Reply #5)

Fri Mar 4, 2016, 01:59 PM

30. I believe that Hillary Clinton is a corrupt liar

 

There you go, I said it for you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 10:41 PM

8. There are a handful of 'stages' in an investigation

1) receipt of allegation/mandate to investigate
2) preliminary investigation, securing of sources of evidence
3) assessment of need to proceed, planning for investigation
4) execution of complete investigation
5) reporting

I don't think the above are formal categories but rather 'typical' phases that an investigation moves through.

It seems that 1 and 2, are completed and the investigation is proceeding. Providing immunity to Pagliano allows collection of evidence that can help frame inquiries and assessment of responses.

It seems as though the investigation has moved to 3 and perhaps back to 2 with the help of Pagliano, which will lead to planning in preparation of completing the investigation through questioning of Clinton and others who handeled information that ended up on the Clintons' server.

Sounds like step 4 is going to happen in the next few months with step 5 being reached in early summer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HereSince1628 (Reply #8)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 11:41 PM

11. Did they offer immunity to Pagliano? n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #11)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 11:48 PM

12. Yes, but it's typical for immunity to be negotiated and that's interesting

It's generally a quid pro quo and not given without a profer that the person receiving immunity has information that is worth the loss of a target to prosecute.

Was it like that this time? Who would be the possible bigger fish??? I don't think we know

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HereSince1628 (Reply #12)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 11:55 PM

14. He was her IT guy, as I recall, and set it all up. He was pretty high in the system, so they may

 

not only get pertinent information, but it's also getting quite close to HRC, herself. I thought they'd go for Abedin...she was the one getting paid on two payrolls simultaneously, and she's been almost her personal aide...I almost wrote maid....LOL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #14)

Fri Mar 4, 2016, 07:51 AM

22. My understanding is Abedin had 3 sort-of-related jobs at once...

She was the close aide of HRC at State, she was on salary at Clinton Foundation. She also operated a consulting/advising business that seems to have existed to mostly to facilitate people making contact with the Clintons.

I think Abedin is a person 'within the zone of the investigation' as a recent paper referred to persons of interest. Several of the released emails suggest Abedin helped Clinton with technology issues. It's not difficult hard to imagine that Abedin may have assisted with consideration of how to solve a variety of office problems for her boss. Migration of sensitive information between secure and insecure email systems seems to be the office problem in which the FBI is chiefly interested.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HereSince1628 (Reply #22)

Fri Mar 4, 2016, 06:44 PM

35. I wonder if she is still in that position with HRC....or should I say, any of those positions? n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #35)

Fri Mar 4, 2016, 11:11 PM

36. I have seen Abedin by Clinton's side after several debates.

It appears Abedin functions as one of her closest assistants, if not her closest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sienna86 (Reply #36)

Sat Mar 5, 2016, 10:01 PM

37. Maybe it's her the FBI has it's sights set on, ultimately? n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 11:37 PM

9. As i've said a dozen times now

we should not allow very precious oxygen to be sucked out of the room and derail the very important things we want done as Democrats.

If tRump doesn't release his taxes or goes to jail himself for the federal crimes he may have committed, then we need a candidate that can actually beat a Cruz or Rubio.

As recently as a speech I heard yesterday Clinton was talking about love and unity and making the country whole again.
If she really means that than withdraw now with dignity, on your own terms, and give this issue the attention it deserves. Have your day in court and be well. The country will be in good hands with Bernie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 11:52 PM

13. Brought to you by the guy who wants Apple to hack your iPhone.

Comey needs to go.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #13)

Fri Mar 4, 2016, 01:37 AM

15. I think he's pretty decent.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Fri Mar 4, 2016, 01:41 AM

16. Yeah - the phase is called "the end"

 

The only people clinging to this fantasy that she will be indicted for some faux scandal are the GOP and sadly, Bernie supporters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #16)

Fri Mar 4, 2016, 01:49 AM

17. Actually I don't want her to be indicated. I wouldn't wish that on anyone!

Besides that would give 🔥 to the Republicans regardless of the Democratic nominee. My thoughts on the email situation is known but still... I just want this over just like you do.

My last post for tonight so have a good one!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Reply #17)

Fri Mar 4, 2016, 01:54 AM

18. So stop encouraging the Faux Scandals ginned up by GOPers

 

Pretty simple. IRS, Benghazi, Whitewater, whatever. That Dems throw in with that shit is beyond the pale.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #18)

Fri Mar 4, 2016, 02:00 AM

19. Ok I'll make a promise to you.

I won't OP anymore about this emails unless an indictment happens. OK?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #16)


Response to Post removed (Reply #20)

Fri Mar 4, 2016, 02:18 AM

21. LOL - yeah, dog forbid somebody push back on the BS

 

They call that "trolling" around here.

An interesting feature of socialism that is well featured in history books is that they tend to float a lot of unproven propaganda while simultaneously trying to discredit actual facts. Fascinating stuff. I love history.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #21)

Fri Mar 4, 2016, 08:16 AM

23. Ok, ok, have a good one....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to andrewv1 (Reply #23)

Fri Mar 4, 2016, 02:39 PM

34. That was a cheap shot at Maggy but I am not surprised .

You really should apologize to her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Fri Mar 4, 2016, 09:00 AM

24. I find it ironic...

... that the same Sanders supporters who rail against superdelegates because they make the process less democratic (I agree with that point btw) are desperately hoping that the choice people will make for a nominee will be superseded by a legal issue that for the most part no-one would care about otherwise. All about being more democratic until it becomes evident that their guy wont be the one getting more votes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jcgoldie (Reply #24)

Fri Mar 4, 2016, 12:41 PM

25. I think that's a false equivalence

Ones a matter of law and the other is a set of arbitrary rules.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Reply #25)

Fri Mar 4, 2016, 12:47 PM

26. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jcgoldie (Reply #24)

Fri Mar 4, 2016, 02:11 PM

33. Because they know in their bones their flailing candidate could never beat her stg8 up.

It would be like a Dodgers fan hoping Matt Harvey, Jacob deGrom, Noah Syndergaard, Steven Matz, and Bartolo Colon break their arms.

Pathetic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Fri Mar 4, 2016, 01:02 PM

27. It will be interesting as to who is willing to talk with them without immunity.

That IT guy's lawyer insisted on it for legal reasons under criminal law.

After all this time, the FBI, etc cut a deal with him for a reason. They must be going for bigger fish.

If there was no criminal or national security concern here, the FBI would have been gone long ago. It's hard for me to believe they would have hundreds of FBI and Intelligence Community agents and two Inspector Generals work on this for months when absolutely no crime was broken while national security was not at risk. The FBI have been involved for months for a serious reason.

If you get a bunch of them pleading the 5th, it would not surprise me while the stench of this goes way up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Fri Mar 4, 2016, 01:54 PM

29. According to "unnamed sources" as usual.

"according to two people familiar with the inquiry."

Who are these two people? Unconfirmed information pretending to be news, apparently.

This story has no credibility without named sources.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Fri Mar 4, 2016, 02:01 PM

31. One way or the other, this needs to be cleared up sooner the better

 

Let Hillary put this behind her. Whatever happens, it's better not to have this hanging on and on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pdsimdars (Reply #31)

Fri Mar 4, 2016, 02:04 PM

32. Agreed!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread