HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » FBI's Comey: I feel 'pres...

Wed May 11, 2016, 02:11 PM

FBI's Comey: I feel 'pressure' to quickly finish Clinton email probe--Politico

(This is all there is of the interview)

------

FBI's Comey: I feel 'pressure' to quickly finish Clinton email probe

By Josh Gerstein

05/11/16 01:23 PM EDT

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/hillary-clinton-email-investigation-fbi-james-comey-223071

FBI Director James Comey said Wednesday he feels "pressure" to complete the federal investigation into Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's private email server competently and quickly.

However, Comey said the pressure is similar to other high-profile cases the bureau handles such as terrorism investigations.

"We want to do it well and we want to do it promptly. I feel pressure to do both of those things," Comey told reporters during a roundtable at FBI headquarters. "As between the two things, we will always choose 'well.'"

Comey indicated he's not taking into account political events, including the upcoming conventions or the fall election.

"I don't tether to any external deadline," the FBI chief said.

Comey swatted away a series of questions about the status of the investigation, describing it only as "ongoing."

Asked about complaints from some security clearance holders that they would be in jail if they acted similarly to Clinton, the FBI director declined to comment directly, but said: "There's no special set of rules for anybody that the FBI investigates."

In response to another question, Comey said he wasn't familiar with the term "security inquiry" that Clinton and her aides have used to describe the ongoing probe. Comey said he considers the work agents are doing to be an "investigation."

"It's in our name. I'm not familiar with the term 'security inquiry','" the director said.
However, he passed up the chance to repeat a reporter's characterization of it as a "criminal" probe.

82 replies, 4736 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 82 replies Author Time Post
Reply FBI's Comey: I feel 'pressure' to quickly finish Clinton email probe--Politico (Original post)
KoKo May 2016 OP
BillZBubb May 2016 #1
Skink May 2016 #6
Attorney in Texas May 2016 #29
Kalidurga May 2016 #67
pdsimdars May 2016 #51
ThirdWayToTheHighway May 2016 #76
pdsimdars May 2016 #80
CentralCoaster May 2016 #2
Attorney in Texas May 2016 #36
Bob41213 May 2016 #41
Attorney in Texas May 2016 #45
InAbLuEsTaTe May 2016 #65
Matt_in_STL May 2016 #3
RufusTFirefly May 2016 #7
pdsimdars May 2016 #53
tammywammy May 2016 #61
pdsimdars May 2016 #82
Joob May 2016 #8
Fawke Em May 2016 #4
Bob41213 May 2016 #12
Fawke Em May 2016 #18
mindwalker_i May 2016 #31
NCTraveler May 2016 #30
blm May 2016 #5
Fawke Em May 2016 #19
blm May 2016 #34
awake May 2016 #43
blm May 2016 #69
awake May 2016 #70
blm May 2016 #71
awake May 2016 #72
blm May 2016 #74
awake May 2016 #75
BillZBubb May 2016 #44
bvf May 2016 #47
pdsimdars May 2016 #56
notadmblnd May 2016 #9
4139 May 2016 #10
JackRiddler May 2016 #15
hrmjustin May 2016 #11
panader0 May 2016 #20
hrmjustin May 2016 #22
panader0 May 2016 #25
hrmjustin May 2016 #27
panader0 May 2016 #28
BillZBubb May 2016 #46
hrmjustin May 2016 #50
KoKo May 2016 #78
catnhatnh May 2016 #13
CruzinNCrying May 2016 #14
felix_numinous May 2016 #16
COLGATE4 May 2016 #17
Fawke Em May 2016 #21
DisgustipatedinCA May 2016 #23
moriah May 2016 #24
Attorney in Texas May 2016 #32
moriah May 2016 #35
Attorney in Texas May 2016 #37
pdsimdars May 2016 #60
felix_numinous May 2016 #63
Sheepshank May 2016 #26
Peace Patriot May 2016 #42
NCTraveler May 2016 #33
Attorney in Texas May 2016 #39
Ash_F May 2016 #38
ViseGrip May 2016 #40
BillZBubb May 2016 #48
pdsimdars May 2016 #62
BlueStateLib May 2016 #49
BillZBubb May 2016 #55
pdsimdars May 2016 #64
BlueStateLib May 2016 #66
pdsimdars May 2016 #81
Gomez163 May 2016 #52
JoePhilly May 2016 #54
BillZBubb May 2016 #57
JoePhilly May 2016 #58
BillZBubb May 2016 #59
SheenaR May 2016 #68
Mnpaul May 2016 #73
Ohioblue22 May 2016 #77
KoKo May 2016 #79

Response to KoKo (Original post)

Wed May 11, 2016, 02:16 PM

1. Why can't he admit it's just a "security inquiry"?

Hillary said that's all it is. She should know, right? She wouldn't make stuff up!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BillZBubb (Reply #1)

Wed May 11, 2016, 02:25 PM

6. If she says so

I would think a security inquiry would wrap up quickly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BillZBubb (Reply #1)

Wed May 11, 2016, 03:26 PM

29. That's bad news. That means he's looking at legal violations that may OR MAY NOT violate security.

Obama has said that he does not believe Hillary intentionally threatened national security so the FBI has gone out of its way to make a special point of the fact that it is looking at the issue from a different perspective than the Obama administration.

That is not good at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Reply #29)

Wed May 11, 2016, 05:14 PM

67. So would that be something like the Clinton Foundation?

Although I think if she was acting like the world's biggest gun moll making deals to sell arms to donors that is a threat to national security.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BillZBubb (Reply #1)

Wed May 11, 2016, 04:28 PM

51. I remember one reporter called the FBI and asked and they told him that the only thing the FBI

 

does is criminal investigations.

Maybe Comey's just being very careful.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pdsimdars (Reply #51)

Wed May 11, 2016, 07:50 PM

76. That's what I took away from it

 

Never heard of the FBI investigating anything noncriminal... That's not how law enforcement works.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ThirdWayToTheHighway (Reply #76)

Wed May 11, 2016, 09:08 PM

80. As Comey said, it's right in their name. . . it's the F.B of Investigation.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Wed May 11, 2016, 02:19 PM

2. So, it's not a "security review" as is oft suggested by those with a lot to lose from this.

 

Word, it's always about words with the Clintons and they proxies.

But they'll never top Bill's epic redefinition of "having sex" to exclude oral sex, manual sex, and apparently anything not specifically involving putting the daddy part right inside the mommy special secret place.

This is an investigation with criminal implications.

Period.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CentralCoaster (Reply #2)

Wed May 11, 2016, 03:32 PM

36. Not a "security review" means that the FBI is not looking at the bigger picture of whether Hillary's

legal violations led to security breaches but is looking at the narrower issues of whether Hillary complied with the law.

That's essentially saying the "no harm, no foul" concept that Obama has been pushing is off the FBI's table, and the FBI is looking for strict compliance with the law.

This is an unfavorable development.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Reply #36)

Wed May 11, 2016, 03:57 PM

41. As an Attorney, what do you make of the Comey sit down?

Is it a subtle hint in your view of anything? Or should not too much be read into it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bob41213 (Reply #41)

Wed May 11, 2016, 04:09 PM

45. Not my area of the law, but Comey is a straight shooter and if there is evidence of noncompliance

with the specific laws within the scope of his investigation OR NONCOMPLIANCE WITH THE INVESTIGATION, Comey will call that out.

If there is no breach of the law and there is legally required compliance with the investigation, Comey will vindicate Hillary.

It's that simple.

My bet is Sid Blumenthal is going down and Hillary is a material witness but not a co-conspirator. I think Obama's DoJ would pursue a recommendation against Blumenthal, but would not pursue an indictment recommendation against Hillary (whether a Hillary DoJ would immediately show itself to be corrupt and purely political by discontinuing an ongoing prosecution against Blumenthal would be an interesting issue).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CentralCoaster (Reply #2)

Wed May 11, 2016, 05:02 PM

65. It's not? What incentive does Hillary have to lie? /sarcasm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Wed May 11, 2016, 02:23 PM

3. This whole thing is a lie. Hillary supporters said today this was a make-believe press conference.

 

They said that he would not be holding a press conference and that anyone who said so was just wishful thinking. Next you'll tell me he arrived under sniper fire. Lies!!! Lies!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Matt_in_STL (Reply #3)

Wed May 11, 2016, 02:27 PM

7. Yup. Held in the same studio where they faked the Apollo Moon landing

It's pathetic how the Clinton campaign feels compelled to create their own euphemism for an FBI investigation.

Can't blame them though.

Being investigated by the FBI doesn't exactly inspire voters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RufusTFirefly (Reply #7)

Wed May 11, 2016, 04:32 PM

53. Maybe that explains this

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pdsimdars (Reply #53)

Wed May 11, 2016, 04:46 PM

61. Explains a photo from New Hampshire?

If you're going to slam Hillary for small crowds you should try and at least find something more recent. Regardless, it's a stupid tactic since from the beginning she said she wasn't holding big rallies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tammywammy (Reply #61)

Wed May 11, 2016, 09:20 PM

82. Ah someone posted that as from CA

 

Here's one, I don't see much of a difference though.




If you think that makes that much of a difference. I think it illustrated the same point however.






.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Matt_in_STL (Reply #3)

Wed May 11, 2016, 02:28 PM

8. lol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Wed May 11, 2016, 02:23 PM

4. This:

In response to another question, Comey said he wasn't familiar with the term "security inquiry" that Clinton and her aides have used to describe the ongoing probe. Comey said he considers the work agents are doing to be an "investigation."


I've been saying that all along. The FBI doesn't "do" security reviews. They are a criminal investigative team.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511744139

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fawke Em (Reply #4)

Wed May 11, 2016, 02:37 PM

12. Yeah, but you're clearly a Republican hack

*sarcasm*

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bob41213 (Reply #12)

Wed May 11, 2016, 03:12 PM

18. LOL - yeah, everyone knows that the FBI is a Partisan GOP SubCommittee run by Trey Gowdy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bob41213 (Reply #12)

Wed May 11, 2016, 03:26 PM

31. They put Hillary up on a pedistal

... and are expending huge amounts of energy to keep her there in spite of the boulders and small moons trying to knock her off. If this thing turns out to be serious, it will be like all the Hillary suppoerters got punched in the face.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fawke Em (Reply #4)

Wed May 11, 2016, 03:26 PM

30. "They are a criminal investigative team. "

 

They are so much more than that. I have them in my office multiple times a year. Our dealings with them have absolutely nothing to do with criminal activity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Wed May 11, 2016, 02:25 PM

5. I wasn't comfortable when Jane Sanders said FBI needs to hurry on FOX. I worried it would

make the impression that the campaign was depending on it. I don't think any Sanders voters see his success as based on perceived crimes of HRC. It diminishes his actual message that many of us voted for, imo.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/278128-jane-sanders-it-would-be-nice-if-fbi-moved-along-clinton

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blm (Reply #5)

Wed May 11, 2016, 03:14 PM

19. Correct: her FBI issues affect the general election race far more.

If she's indicted in the middle of the race, it's over for the Democrats.

If she wins and gets into office, an indictment will result in impeachment, which the Republicans will start immediately anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fawke Em (Reply #19)

Wed May 11, 2016, 03:30 PM

34. Most real experts have said there isn't anything indictable. The wishful thinking is ghoulish

in my view. And counterproductive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blm (Reply #34)

Wed May 11, 2016, 04:07 PM

43. Care to share who those "experts" are?

It seem to me if there was no "there" there then the FBI would have been done mouths ago. This is not looking like it will be good for Hillary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to awake (Reply #43)

Wed May 11, 2016, 05:37 PM

69. You never clicked on the many articles posted about it over the last 6mths?

Surely you don't ask others to do what you would normally do when a particular subject is of interest to you, do you?

Here's one:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-hillary-clinton-is-unlikely-to-be-indicted-over-her-private-email-server/2016/03/08/341c3786-e557-11e5-b0fd-073d5930a7b7_story.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blm (Reply #69)

Wed May 11, 2016, 06:59 PM

70. Oh so an "expert" is someone with an opinion

We can speculate as to what will come down when the FBI has finished their investigation but there are no experts who know whether or not Hillary will be in trouble. What we do know is that this is not a "security review" but a full blown FBI investigation which is not over yet, and the fact that we might nominate someone who under this cloud of Uncertainty is not a good idea in my opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to awake (Reply #70)

Wed May 11, 2016, 07:17 PM

71. experts in the field consulted by the writer….or would they only be

'experts' if they offered an opposite analysis and were consulted by a writer of an opinion that matched yours?

Like the many 'experts' from Heritage Foundation and the Federalist?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blm (Reply #71)

Wed May 11, 2016, 07:24 PM

72. I have not quoted any experts

I wish that Hillary had not used a home server and then we would not have to worry about this.

I find it very disheartening that Hillary supporter offen accuses others on this site of being right wingers when real issues are raised.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to awake (Reply #72)

Wed May 11, 2016, 07:43 PM

74. I'm not an HRC voter - I voted for Sanders. What I don't appreciate

from many of my fellow Sanders supporters here is that they often rely on RW propaganda sites to target HRC and other Dems.

I guess I'm being more general in my reply, and not so much pointing specifically at you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blm (Reply #74)

Wed May 11, 2016, 07:49 PM

75. Ok

I also am for Bernie but I am verry worried the Hillary's home severe will come back and bit us if she is our candidate and the FBI has not finished its work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blm (Reply #34)

Wed May 11, 2016, 04:07 PM

44. And not one of those experts has all the evidence the FBI has.

Not one of them has interviewed a principle in the investigation.

Those experts are about a accurate as a bet on red or black in roulette. Or flipping a coin.

The fact that the FBI investigation is ongoing means there is at least prima facie evidence of an indictable crime or crimes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blm (Reply #34)

Wed May 11, 2016, 04:15 PM

47. "Most real experts"

 

are kibitzing from armchairs and not participating in the FBI investigation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blm (Reply #5)

Wed May 11, 2016, 04:36 PM

56. I took it to mean that she was thinking about what was best for the Democratic Party.

 

The longer it drags out, the worse it will be. If Hillary is the nominee, and she gets indicted . . . not so good. If she's elected (which is a remote possiblity) the GOP has already been talking about impeachment.
Much better to get cleared or jailed now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Wed May 11, 2016, 02:29 PM

9. "There's no special set of rules for anybody..."

Comey said he wasn't familiar with the term "security inquiry" that Clinton and her aides have used to describe the ongoing probe. Comey said he considers the work agents are doing to be an "investigation."

"It's in our name...



interesting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Wed May 11, 2016, 02:31 PM

10. Means at atleast 6 weeks more or months ?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 4139 (Reply #10)

Wed May 11, 2016, 02:50 PM

15. Can also mean another 8 years for Comey.

 

So much baggage the Clintons have, so many ways to blackmail them!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Wed May 11, 2016, 02:33 PM

11. Oh no indictment! So many got their hopes up that he was going to indict.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hrmjustin (Reply #11)

Wed May 11, 2016, 03:16 PM

20. Not yet, but her "reputation" is sinking daily.

The stain and smell of the e-mail and Clinton Foundation investigations should be enough to sway
any thinking person away from HRC. Thinking being the key word.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to panader0 (Reply #20)

Wed May 11, 2016, 03:18 PM

22. Great way to insult us.

 

You must be proud.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hrmjustin (Reply #22)

Wed May 11, 2016, 03:20 PM

25. And your little ROTFL emoticon is not insulting?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to panader0 (Reply #25)

Wed May 11, 2016, 03:23 PM

27. Really? Calling us non thinking people is the same as a lmfao icon.?

 

Pathetic!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hrmjustin (Reply #27)

Wed May 11, 2016, 03:24 PM

28. Read it and weep.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hrmjustin (Reply #27)

Wed May 11, 2016, 04:10 PM

46. Yes, in fact it is.

If you simply laugh in the face at what someone is saying--you are saying they aren't thinking and are foolish.

Yes, your condescension is pathetic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BillZBubb (Reply #46)

Wed May 11, 2016, 04:19 PM

50. It was foolish to think that big news was going to big news was coming today from Comey.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hrmjustin (Reply #50)

Wed May 11, 2016, 08:26 PM

78. I think the "big news" was Comey hitting back against Sid Blumenthal and others

in the Clinton Camp who keep referring to this as a "Security Investigation." Comey took few question from the Press, but apparently came out to shoot down that this wasn't about a just "Security Investigation" but, in fact, an FBI Investigation that was more comprehensive and, therefore, would take more time to sort out to see if any laws were broken. He's going at it from the "Legal Angle" because the Security/Server issues were probably already given to FBI from Brian Pagliano after he got his Immunity.

Whatever Pagliano knew about the Server could be verified by the FBI's OWN Security people. They have the Servers and can trace what was there and perhaps even the "wiped" or "erased" e-mails that weren't turned over that their staff is going through.

Plus, Records from the Clinton Foundation were requested and turned over. Since both Bill, Hillary and Chelsea had e-mail addresses on the Chappaqua Server then there may have been e-mails there that had to do with Clinton Foundation being hacked or dealings that may not have been appropriate for Hillary as SOS to be dealing with on that Server that both her Husband (former President and Head of Clinton Foundation and later Chelsea) were using from the Chappaqua Server that might have been compromised by being co-mingled with State Department dealings with foreign countries.

There's a lot there that will take time to deal with to see what has been compromised or not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Wed May 11, 2016, 02:40 PM

13. Wiki

Operating under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Department of Justice, the FBI is concurrently a member of the U.S. Intelligence Community and reports to both the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence.[2] A leading U.S. counterterrorism, counterintelligence, and criminal investigative organization, the FBI has jurisdiction over violations of more than 200 categories of federal crimes.

It SAYS "criminal investigative organization"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Wed May 11, 2016, 02:41 PM

14. Interesting presser

 

I think this press release bodes very poorly for Clinton. He basically is shutting down her camp's characterization of what is occurring. Also saying his team is not a pesky gnat they will swat away in time for the GE. If there was "nothing to see here" I am sure the investigation's pace would be much quicker and no need to even entertain a conference. Buckle up Clinton Supporters as there is going to be a long ride ahead.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Wed May 11, 2016, 02:53 PM

16. Nixon's Watergate, Reagan's Iran Contra

and Bush's illegal war crimes being tolerated, lowered the bar in presidential candidates. Before that someone previously impeached or under FBI investigation, or who is under publicly known suspicion for using a private firm for laundering money would not be electable. Never mind those other clowns that have slithered under the bar.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to felix_numinous (Reply #16)

Wed May 11, 2016, 02:57 PM

17. Just what in hell is "publicly known suspicion"?? A suspicion that you and

your buds have and it's public because you posted it on DU?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #17)

Wed May 11, 2016, 03:17 PM

21. No. It simply means that people are aware that she's under an FBI investigation.

Now they'll know it's not some "security review" because the FBI doesn't do those.

It's a criminal investigation, period.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #17)

Wed May 11, 2016, 03:18 PM

23. Publicly-known: there have been articles about it.

 

Suspicion: not proven, but suspected. This is straightforward stuff.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to felix_numinous (Reply #16)

Wed May 11, 2016, 03:19 PM

24. Uh, Hillary's never been previously impeached...

... and unless you're making allegations against the Clinton Global Initiative with your comments about money laundering, I have no idea what you are talking about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moriah (Reply #24)

Wed May 11, 2016, 03:28 PM

32. Give it time

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Reply #32)

Wed May 11, 2016, 03:31 PM

35. Don't hold your breath waiting. Nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moriah (Reply #35)

Wed May 11, 2016, 03:33 PM

37. I'm not holding my breath; I'm actively working to nominate an unimpeachable candidate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to felix_numinous (Reply #16)

Wed May 11, 2016, 04:44 PM

60. Yes, this is my worry. The bar has been set so low, the rich and powerful have no problems with

 

violating the most fundamental laws.

Think of the whistle blowers who were prosecuted under Obama for "espoinage". More than all other presidents in history combined. It is sickening, the double standard. How long can they keep going on like this?

Someone mentioned the case of a sailor who sent his sweet heart a selfie on his submarine but in the background was a sonar image and now he is facing 20 years in prison.

Another soldier in Afghanistan who saw a member of ISIS who he said was going around dressed as a policeman. He reported it to his superiors. But because he sent it on his gmail account, he is also facing 20 years in prison.

And Hillary had emails about troop movments and an email with the real names of undercover CIA agents in the middle east on her private, unsecure, private email server. And, ho hum. . . . .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pdsimdars (Reply #60)

Wed May 11, 2016, 04:50 PM

63. Wow double standards

abound, upside down justice cannot be sustained indefinitely.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Wed May 11, 2016, 03:20 PM

26. why does he feel pressure to complete a job?

 

long drawn out investigations don't serve anyone except to add fodder to the drip drip drip of "leaked info". I also have to do research, come up with findings and am required to do a thorough job, but in a timely manner. It's a balancing act that comes with many jobs.

I have deadlines all the time to complete the job...pressure comes with the job....why is this news?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #26)

Wed May 11, 2016, 03:58 PM

42. Interesting question, Sheepshank. Why is FBI feeling time pressure news?

This occurred to me when I read Comey's quotes, but I didn't quite formulate it into a question. I just noted it. It's a bit odd to have the head of the FBI complaining of pressure. I wish I could watch the press conference, to see if he was Corrupt Media-baited into saying this, and might not have said it otherwise, or if it's a point he really wanted to get across and took initiative on. I'd also like to know if there was a follow-up question about any specific source of pressure.

I mean, it is a situation without precedent--the frontrunner Democratic presidential candidate under long term FBI investigation with no end in sight. OF COURSE there is pressure! But why would he say so, if he was trying to present a steadfast FBI doing their normal investigation process without fear or favor? (That did seem to be the tone of his other statements.)

Damn, this is so bizarre! What are we to make of this? We, the people? We, the voters? We, the members of the Democratic Party? It hangs us on a hook. How are we to know if this candidate is even minimally viable?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Wed May 11, 2016, 03:29 PM

33. Seems to me that the guy is doing a decent job.

 

I really don't have a problem with what they are doing. Glad I'm not in his shoes. They really haven't been letting out much which I find to be good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NCTraveler (Reply #33)

Wed May 11, 2016, 03:36 PM

39. He's going to pitch right over the middle of the plate. If Hilary strikes out, it won't be because

of a crooked game (FWIW, I don't think Hillary is going to strike out on this issue).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Wed May 11, 2016, 03:36 PM

38. Oh boy, it sounds like he is saying they won't be done before the convention.

Take a hint Clinton. Don't do it!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Wed May 11, 2016, 03:50 PM

40. Hillary step down now! STOP referring to investigations as 'inquiries', and step down.

 

Hillary's flowery phrases for investigations is utter bullshit. She takes us for idiots. Rules apply to all Comey? We'll see.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ViseGrip (Reply #40)

Wed May 11, 2016, 04:16 PM

48. I believe Comey when he says for the FBI rules apply to all.

They are being scrutinized by both the republicans and Democrats. They have to make sure their recommendation is airtight and backed by solid evidence.

Now, what happens after their recommendation may show the rules don't apply for some people or not. That's when it enters the world of politics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BillZBubb (Reply #48)

Wed May 11, 2016, 04:49 PM

62. And if the Dems don't do the right think, it will hit the fan.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Wed May 11, 2016, 04:17 PM

49. Hillary is just 1 out of 300 people who sent emails that were retroactive classified

that were sent to her private email account from the unclassified state.gov email system

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStateLib (Reply #49)

Wed May 11, 2016, 04:35 PM

55. Keep trying to rationalize. They aren't running for president.

They may or may not have been in a position to know that even though not classified, the information was sensitive enough to be treated as classified. Hillary had to know that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStateLib (Reply #49)

Wed May 11, 2016, 04:53 PM

64. No, Hillary signed an agreement under oath that she knew what classified information was

 

how to recognize it. AND that it is not the markings that make it classified or not but the CONTENT. Some Congressmen on the Intelligence Committee have looked at those 22 emails and they say there is not doubt, an 8 year old would have known this is classified.

She, in her position, is REQUIRED to mark it classified when she comes across it. She did not. Because she was on a non-government server, she could not mark it classified on that non-government server.

They also have HER email instructing someone on her staff to remove the markings from an email and send it on an unprotected fax machine.

Spin all you want, these are things we know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pdsimdars (Reply #64)

Wed May 11, 2016, 05:08 PM

66. Dennis Ross and Princeton Lyman

Former ambassador Dennis Ross, who has held key diplomatic posts in administrations of both parties, said that one of his exchanges now marked “secret” contained information that government officials last year allowed him to publish in a book.

Princeton Lyman, a State Department veteran who served under presidents of both parties and was a special envoy to Sudan when Clinton was secretary of state, said he has been surprised and a bit embarrassed to learn that emails he wrote have been classified. He said he had learned through decades of experience how to identify and transmit classified information.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStateLib (Reply #66)

Wed May 11, 2016, 09:11 PM

81. There were over a thousand "classified" emails

 

But there were at least 22 that were classified higher than top secret. They contained information of sources, methods and personal asset. That would NEVER have been anything other than top secret.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Wed May 11, 2016, 04:31 PM

52. This could have been wrapped up in two weeks.

 

That fact that its being dragged out reminds me of Ken Starr. Two weeks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Wed May 11, 2016, 04:34 PM

54. So still no indictment fairy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #54)

Wed May 11, 2016, 04:36 PM

57. Still an ongoing criminal probe.

How proud you must be to support a candidate under FBI investigation!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BillZBubb (Reply #57)

Wed May 11, 2016, 04:38 PM

58. "Innocent until proven guilty" ... I know heard that somewhere.

But I understand that is not a phrase often used by DU's Combustible Hair Club.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #58)

Wed May 11, 2016, 04:40 PM

59. Yeah, you run with that one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Wed May 11, 2016, 05:20 PM

68. Think of the obstruction Obama faced

and multiply it by 20. The next four years will be marked with no achievement and constant distraction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Wed May 11, 2016, 07:28 PM

73. I hope they do a better job than they did with the antiwar protesters here

anyone seeing their "proof" could see that it was a sham.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Wed May 11, 2016, 07:56 PM

77. Just turn it into a benghazi never ending investigation

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioblue22 (Reply #77)

Wed May 11, 2016, 09:04 PM

79. Well..there are currently Four Investigations going on....

Bengazi Investigation is still ongoing, Two FOIA (Freedom of Infomation) Lawsuits which Two Federal Judges have ruled to go forward with Discovery and the current one from The FBI which is also still ongoing.

That's a lot of investigations hanging over Hillary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread