In the Fox appearance, Clinton was asked by Chris Wallace, the anchor, about previous statements she’s made when questioned on the email controversy, while he played tapes of her past remarks to the public.

“After a long investigation, F.B.I. Director James Comey said none of those things that you told the American public were true,” Wallace said.

Clinton pushed back. “Director Comey said my answers were truthful, and what I’ve said is consistent with what I have told the American people: that there were decisions discussed and made to classify retroactively certain of the emails,” she said.

The Washington Post, NPR, NBC News and PolitiFact all challenged Clinton’s claims, saying they appeared to be based on a selective and misleading interpretation of Comey’s remarks. The Post awarded her “Four Pinocchios,” the worst truth-telling rating it gives, for statements it classifies as “Whoppers.”
(more)

"Well, Chris, you forgot to play what Comey said when Matt Cartwright asked him about Classified Headings on the emails. Comey admitted that none of the emails he said had classified information in them - none of them had classified headers/subject lines for emails - on them - as is required by the governing regulation."

"Extremely careless?" Well then, I guess 300 career professionals in the Government who sent me those emails were careless and negligent. If 300 career professionals in the Government were 'careless and negligent' how valid or realistic is your definition of 'careless and negligent'? We know from the Dept of State IG report that there is widespread use of personal commercial email accounts for official business - as Colin Powell and Condi Rice used in the Bush administration.

Do you understand Chris, that all commercial email service providers have hundreds of cyber-security people who work to protect their systems from hackers and malware intrusions. In order to do their jobs, these people must have access to any and all emails and attachments thereto. They can examine any emails or attachments on their systems. And do you know Chris, that these individuals do not have government security clearances. Therefore, no one can say - with confidence - that any classified data in emails on commercial email accounts - has NOT been compromised.

Now, the system we set up was a government controlled server, managed by government IT people - who do have government security clearances. Thus, the system I used was more secure than using a personal commercial email account as Colin Powell and Condi Rice, for example, did. The security of my system, as Dir. Comey testified to, when he said they found no evidence of any hacking on that server. He said the FBI's software for finding malware did find malware in some emails of people who I communicated with in the Government. Now, if their malware detecting software could find malware in emails, it certainly is capable of finding malware on a server. People don't put malware on servers only to have it erase itself after a period of time. Anybody who puts malware on somebody's server wants that malware to remain there to send them updates on what is happening (e.g. emails sent & received) on that server. Now, during the time I was Sec of State, unfortunately, we know Government computer systems were hacked several times. But this did not happen, as Dir Come testified to, on my system.

All I can do Chris, is report the facts to the public so they can make informed decisions. Is there anything wrong with making sure that people are aware of ALL the facts Chris? Or ha-ha-ha, is that a novel concept here at Fox??"

Following the Democratic National Convention, Hillary Clinton now leads Donald Trump by 8 points — 50 percent to 42 percent — up from a single-point difference last week, according to the latest NBC News|SurveyMonkey poll.

◾Clinton’s largest bounce in any national poll, as measured in comparison to another survey by the same pollster conducted with a full set of interviews after the Republican National Convention, is 13 percentage points. That comes from a CNN survey, which showed her turning a 5-point deficit into an 8-point lead.

~~
~~


There are some hints that Clinton’s post-convention lead over Trump will eventually settle in at about 7 percentage points, give or take a couple points. The biggest tip-off is that both the national polls and the state polls we’ve seen so far look similar to the ones we were seeing in June, when Clinton maintained a lead over Trump of about 7 points after wrapping up the Democratic nomination. Since Clinton and Trump were roughly tied after the GOP convention, a 7-point lead for Clinton would mean she’d gotten about a 7-point bounce, double the size of Trump’s.

FiveThirtyEight’s forecast models aren’t used to seeing a lot of 7-point overnight shifts, which rarely occur outside the conventions. (In recent elections, they’ve also rarely occurred during the conventions, with most convention bounces looking more like the modest one Trump got.) So the models may still need another day or two to catch up.

Our hyperaggressive now-cast, which describes the results of a hypothetical election held today, will be the quickest to adapt: It already shows Clinton with a 5.6 percentage point lead over Trump. Be wary of getting too attached to the now-cast, however. It is useful in situations like these, where you want a quick read on how a news event has affected the polls, but it can also jump around a lot on the basis of statistical noise or short-term aberrations in the polls.
(more)

tape of Comey hearing:
[blockquote style="border:1px solid #000000;padding:10px"]REP. TREY GOWDY, R-S.C., CHAIR, BENGHAZI COMMITTEE: Secretary Clinton said there was nothing marked classified on her e-mails either sent or received. Was that true?

JAMES COMEY, FBI DIRECTOR: That’s not true.

GOWDY: Secretary Clinton said, "I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material." Was that true?

COMEY: There was classified material e-mailed.


WALLACE: Well, let me just say -- he not only [font style="background:#eeffcc;"]directly contradicted what you said[/font], he also said in that hearing that you were extremely careless and negligent.

CLINTON: Well, Chris, I looked at the whole transcript of everything that was said, and [font style="background:#eeffcc;"]what I believe is[/font], number one, I made a mistake not using two different e-mail addresses. I have said that and I repeat it again today. It is certainly not anything that I ever would do again.

"Well, Chris, you forgot to play what Comey said when Matt Cartwright asked him about Classified Headings on the emails. Comey admitted that none of the emails he said had classified information in them - none of them had classified headers/subject lines for emails - on them - as is required by the governing regulation."

"Extremely careless?" Well then, I guess 300 career professionals in the Government who sent me those emails were careless and negligent. If 300 career professionals in the Government were 'careless and negligent' how valid or realistic is your definition of 'careless and negligent'? We know from the Dept of State IG report that there is widespread use of personal commercial email accounts for official business - as Colin Powell and Condi Rice used in the Bush administration.

Do you understand Chris, that all commercial email service providers have hundreds of cyber-security people who work to protect their systems from hackers and malware intrusions. In order to do their jobs, these people must have access to any and all emails and attachments thereto. They can examine any emails or attachments on their systems. And do you know Chris, that these individuals do not have government security clearances. Therefore, no one can say - with confidence - that any classified data in emails on commercial email accounts - has NOT been compromised.

Now, the system we set up was a government controlled server, managed by government IT people - who do have government security clearances. Thus, the system I used was more secure than using a personal commercial email account as Colin Powell and Condi Rice, for example, did. The security of my system, as Dir. Comey testified to, when he said they found no evidence of any hacking on that server. He said the FBI's software for finding malware did find malware in some emails of people who I communicated with in the Government. Now, if their malware detecting software could find malware in emails, it certainly is capable of finding malware on a server. People don't put malware on servers only to have it erase itself after a period of time. Anybody who puts malware on somebody's server wants that malware to remain there to send them updates on what is happening (e.g. emails sent & received) on that server. Now, during the time I was Sec of State, unfortunately, we know Government computer systems were hacked several times. But this did not happen, as Dir Come testified to, on my system.

All I can do Chris, is report the facts to the public so they can make informed decisions. Is there anything wrong with making sure that people are aware of ALL the facts Chris? Or ha-ha-ha, is that a novel concept here at Fox??"