Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

frylock

(34,825 posts)
59. Not sure if you've heard, but there's an ongoing criminal investigation.
Thu Jun 2, 2016, 11:16 AM
Jun 2016

I believe that the FBI is currently gathering evidence. Surely, you're aware of this development?

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Decades when email did not exist and Colin Powell never had a private server? LOL! merrily Jun 2016 #1
There's no legal difference between an AOL account and a private server. YouDig Jun 2016 #17
I watched an interview with Powell in which Powell said he used only for housekeeping matters. merrily Jun 2016 #24
Interesting that retroactively confidential material ended up on it then, huh. YouDig Jun 2016 #34
Really? The report says there is a stronger legal case against Powell than Hillary? Are you sure? merrily Jun 2016 #37
No I said that. The IG said he used it for SoS communication, not just housekeeping. YouDig Jun 2016 #39
He said housekeeping level matters as SOS, so yes, SOME SOS communications. merrily Jun 2016 #41
Well, enough that got retro-confidential info in there, which makes YouDig Jun 2016 #42
Though you have reworded your legal claim, it is still bogus. merrily Jun 2016 #49
Yes, legally there is a difference. Fawke Em Jun 2016 #33
And legally, both Google and Clinton are not government agencies, and not YouDig Jun 2016 #36
Days before the widespread use of e-mails, files could be hidden simply by locked files or shredded Jitter65 Jun 2016 #32
You really need to step outside the bubble and educate yourself on the facts. AtomicKitten Jun 2016 #2
Berners are 100 percent MFM008 Jun 2016 #3
I never pegged the WSJ as a Berner! merrily Jun 2016 #4
Owned by Rupert Murdoch who also owns Faux redstateblues Jun 2016 #45
So, everything in the WJS is alien, per the OP? Or did you have a different point? merrily Jun 2016 #46
Anyone who presumes to have more information bvf Jun 2016 #5
Anyone who thinks that moral corruption is not enough to make a candidate unelectable.... peace13 Jun 2016 #6
Hey, anything can happen Proud Public Servant Jun 2016 #7
I had forgotten about that quote. mathewsleep Jun 2016 #31
Another classy post from you! Nt Logical Jun 2016 #8
This message was self-deleted by its author TM99 Jun 2016 #9
Then why is the FBI still investigating? NightWatcher Jun 2016 #10
Vast Right Wing Conspiracy? Mess boys ate the strawberries? Yurovsky Jun 2016 #16
I would add anyone claiming Clinton is the "lesser of two evils" baldguy Jun 2016 #11
Your history says something quite different about Hillary. B Calm Jun 2016 #12
Funny how all these people back in '08 did NOT support Clinton. hobbit709 Jun 2016 #13
I thought hypocrisy was a Republican trait, but I have to admit it is funny! B Calm Jun 2016 #14
R-Lite too. hobbit709 Jun 2016 #15
It's a Conservative trait. frylock Jun 2016 #61
No principles, just like their candidate Doctor_J Jun 2016 #19
Soulless, yep I think that's it! B Calm Jun 2016 #21
They outright HATED her. frylock Jun 2016 #60
Yes they did! Hypocrisy surrounds them! B Calm Jun 2016 #62
Another one? LOL! Hey, there's nothing the least bit fishy about any of them. merrily Jun 2016 #25
LOL B Calm Jun 2016 #27
Dang, some of those threads are interesting. merrily Jun 2016 #51
Good find. What say ye OP? panader0 Jun 2016 #30
Last time someone reminded RB of her past, she disappeared for about a week. LOL B Calm Jun 2016 #48
Bwahaha... 99Forever Jun 2016 #35
Situational ethics nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #54
So true! Bwahaha... B Calm Jun 2016 #58
Like people who think Hillary is liberal or would try to help the 99%? Doctor_J Jun 2016 #18
You have no way of knowing what the FBI has found. None. morningfog Jun 2016 #20
..and I want a pony and a Disney World trip and.. TheCowsCameHome Jun 2016 #22
More Abusive Gaslighting from Her Majesty's Apparatchiks TheSarcastinator Jun 2016 #23
In fairness merrily Jun 2016 #26
Having to rely on an indictment shows that Sanders is not the strongest candidate Gothmog Jun 2016 #28
That is circular logic. He may not be the current strongest candidate, morningfog Jun 2016 #29
Alas, unless the FBI is part of the Sanders campaign... nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #55
Yes, we know, the FBI is all about wasting its time. Waiting For Everyman Jun 2016 #38
Ok you might think email server is a nothing burger TimPlo Jun 2016 #40
Another day, another tantrum. n/t QC Jun 2016 #43
I'm cool with that Kelvin Mace Jun 2016 #44
The invesyigation is either the end of the Clinton campaign, or airy nothing... Orsino Jun 2016 #47
Well said. emulatorloo Jun 2016 #52
I'll take "What is completely missing the point" for $500, Alex. Miles Archer Jun 2016 #50
Anybody not getting why she is indeed in legal jeopardy nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #53
This statement from the top post is not seem to be true: Jarqui Jun 2016 #56
Major Tom to RBInMaine... NorthCarolina Jun 2016 #57
Not sure if you've heard, but there's an ongoing criminal investigation. frylock Jun 2016 #59
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Anyone talking about "ind...»Reply #59