What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Official Hillary Clinton 2016 thread (13 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Couple other points from this:

- The fact that State hid this information since early February. This happened right after the above-TS emails were revealed.

- That State says this is standard protocol is really funny, when else has State ever had an internal investigation halted by the FBI?
It seem to me that the State Department does a poor job classifying things.

 
This is a prime example of the kind of hateful BS from Bernie supporters that makes me despise him, though I admit he is a lot more classy than his supporters.  
Lol at calling Hillary out as hateful BS.

You guys are as thin skinned as the trumpies.

 
It seem to me that the State Department does a poor job classifying things.
I think we could agree Hillary should live under the rules she herself enforced on others. Hillary did nothing for transparency and easing classification rules as SOS, quite the opposite she thoroughly enforced the classification rules while hiding all her own public documents which she chose not to share from Foia.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anyhow, nobody knows anything about this investigation. We don't know if it's criminal (unlikely) if there are any targets (unlikely) when it's going to be done (hopefully soon, since it's a big waste of taxpayer money IMO). Everything else is pure speculation: 

http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/dont-be-fooled-no-one-has-any-idea-what-is-going-on-with-the-clinton-fbi-investigation/
What part of that is applicable to Hillary being interviewed by the FBI and the FBI shutting down State's internal review?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
No. What bothers me is the need for it all to begin with. It really shouldn't take a FOIA request for a transparent public servant. It shouldn't take legal action for compliance with a FOIA request. And discovery. All of these are the results of wrongdoing and obstruction - that's what bothers me.

ETA: I actually like most of her policies - it's Hillary herself I can't stand.
Exactly.  Although it is more her purported policies than what her actual policies will be

 
Well, I suppose the part that there's no confirmation that she will be. 
FYI the FBI finished its review, it's moving ahead with interviews. Hillary's aides have hired counsel, and the FBI shut down State's own review in early February. Supposedly Hillary's interview will be scheduled as well in the next couple weeks. I guess you can await confirmation from Hillary herself.

 
How can this not be a criminal investigation?  
The only purpose to interviewing Heather Samuelson is to explore the destruction and hiding of data, and the only reason the FBI would be involved in that as opposed to State is to determine if a crime occurred.

Btw the term 'security review' has always been a tautology. If people take data which must by law be handled in secure networks and put it on unsecure media or networks that's a crime.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The only purpose to interviewing Heather Samuelson is to explore the destruction and hiding of data, and the only reason the FBI would be involved in that as opposed to State is to determine if a crime occurred.

Btw the term 'security review' has always been a tautology. If people take data which must by law be handled in secure networks and put it on unsecure media or networks that's a crime.
Everyone understood the "internal review" to be a coverup.

Based on what's been published in the news, it is very likely that the FBI found a smoking gun.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/state-department-releases-more-clinton-emails-several-marked-classified

 
If the FBI asks a question about information maybe contained in a deleted email, which the FBI may or may not have, does she answer truthfully or deceptively?

Good. Luck.

 
If the FBI asks a question about information maybe contained in a deleted email, which the FBI may or may not have, does she answer truthfully or deceptively?

Good. Luck.
Hillary will be the last one interviewed though, right?  If that is the case, she will have a pretty good idea of what the FBI has based on the questions they asked her minions.

 
"We can have a New York debate either the night Syracuse is playing in the NCAA tournament or on the next morning of Friday, April 15."

A Friday morning debate.  Quality stuff.

 
Pretty sure this isn't the FBI's first rodeo.  If there's something there, they'll get it.
You have more faith than I do in the FBI but even if that is true I was simply responding to SID that regardless of what the FBI finds I feel Hillary will have a solid idea what it is before she sits down with them.  

 
If the FBI asks a question about information maybe contained in a deleted email, which the FBI may or may not have, does she answer truthfully or deceptively?

Good. Luck.
If they ask anything about an email, she claims she can't recall the details of any of the 60,000 emails...which makes sense, I can't recall the details of an email I sent last week.

I expect the interview to confirm what the FBI already knows - who had access to the server, who had access to her account, who else had accounts on the server, when was it set up, how frequently was it updated/patched, who authorized the server, who was authorized to delete emails, what were State Department protocols for handling non-marked classified information, etc.  Its unlikely that the FBI will ask any question of Hillary that they do not already know the answer.

 
Hillary will be the last one interviewed though, right?  If that is the case, she will have a pretty good idea of what the FBI has based on the questions they asked her minions.
Well let's keep in mind Hillary deleted nearly everything she chose not to copy to .gov. And - if they have recovered the deleted archive - the FBI would not be limited to what we have seen from the State rollout either in date or substance. Assuming Hillary has not been tipped off from internal leaks, and assuming the fbis hold their cards, that would pose quite the brinkmanship challenge to Hillary. Does she gamble that they have nothing and are just bluffing when they ask about x, or do they actually ***know*? 

Petraeus got caught lying and he had relatively few documents at issue and he should have known the Feds knew pretty much everything there was to be known too.

 
I am sure the head of the FBI and the Attorney General, two of the most powerful people in government, meet frequently discussing this investigation because it is just a routine security probe.  The FBI just routinely has a dozen top agents perform these routine security reviews and routinely possibly interview leading candidates for president in the height of an election campaign and many on their staff for non-criminal reasons.  Yeah, that's the ticket. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well let's keep in mind Hillary deleted nearly everything she chose not to copy to .gov. And - if they have recovered the deleted archive - the FBI would not be limited to what we have seen from the State rollout either in date or substance. Assuming Hillary has not been tipped off from internal leaks, and assuming the fbis hold their cards, that would pose quite the brinkmanship challenge to Hillary. Does she gamble that they have nothing and are just bluffing when they ask about x, or do they actually ***know*? 

Petraeus got caught lying and he had relatively few documents at issue and he should have known the Feds knew pretty much everything there was to be known too.
I think if Hillary lies it will be limited to saying I don't remember which I suspect will be darn near impossible for the FBI to hang her on.  If push comes to shove, her attorneys will get her to plead the fifth.

 
I am sure the head of the FBI and the Attorney General, two of the most powerful people in government, meet frequently discussing this investigation because it is just a routine security probe and discuss possibly.  The FBI just routinely has a dozen top agents perform these routine security reviews and routinely possibly interview leading candidates for president in the height of an election campaign and many on their staff for non-criminal reasons.  Yeah, that's the ticket. 
Sure they just interviewed a former Secretary of State last week..,

 
I think if Hillary lies it will be limited to saying I don't remember which I suspect will be darn near impossible for the FBI to hang her on.  If push comes to shove, her attorneys will get her to plead the fifth.
That was the lie they hung on Scooter Libby.  Pleading the 5th during an election can not be a good thing.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think if Hillary lies it will be limited to saying I don't remember which I suspect will be darn near impossible for the FBI to hang her on.  If push comes to shove, her attorneys will get her to plead the fifth.
That would be wise. She is very disciplined. I doubt her capacity to refrain from arrogance though.

I'm also curious if Kendall is her attorney or is he himself a witness.

 
DOJ attorneys will be on board, per reports. I hope they're not asking questions as they could run interference, sort of like a Senate committee hearing. Hopefully they're there as observers only.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
That would be wise. She is very disciplined. I doubt her capacity to refrain from arrogance though.

I'm also curious if Kendall is her attorney or is he himself a witness.
i can't remember: was there any classified data on the Magic Thumbdrive? and was Kendall ever issued a security clearance to possess it?

 
How would you like to be the agents asking her questions knowing she's still the favorite to be your next boss and could ruin your career without batting an eye? 

 
How would you like to be the agents asking her questions knowing she's still the favorite to be your next boss and could ruin your career without batting an eye? 
I think this adds motivation.  They will not hold back.  My guess is, based one on what they've gathered so far, she is the enemy.

 
Last edited:
How would you like to be the agents asking her questions knowing she's still the favorite to be your next boss and could ruin your career without batting an eye? 
All or nothing one shot.

I feel bad for the poor badtard who denied  her the official blackberry and told her to shut up and color back in the day. 

But seriously why should anyone at State or IC care about rules & regs if the President put info above TS on a private server and got away with it. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
How would you like to be the agents asking her questions knowing she's still the favorite to be your next boss and could ruin your career without batting an eye? 
I thought Comey himself was doing the interview with Hillary.  If that's the case, I don't think he gives two ####s.

 
Anyhow, nobody knows anything about this investigation. We don't know if it's criminal (unlikely) if there are any targets (unlikely) when it's going to be done (hopefully soon, since it's a big waste of taxpayer money IMO). Everything else is pure speculation: 

http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/dont-be-fooled-no-one-has-any-idea-what-is-going-on-with-the-clinton-fbi-investigation/
We know enough that Hillary Clinton cannot and should not be President.  Just the fact that she had an aide who lacked clearance sift through her emails  is alone disqualifying.  We now have a spectrum of possibility.  The best case is criminal incompetence, and the other end is public corruption.  No matter where we land, she can never lead with clear authority.  She will never be legitimate.  It's past time for the Democratic Party to pressure her to bow out so a viable candidate can assume the mantle at an open convention.

 
Last edited:
Anyhow, nobody knows anything about this investigation. We don't know if it's criminal (unlikely) if there are any targets (unlikely) when it's going to be done (hopefully soon, since it's a big waste of taxpayer money IMO). Everything else is pure speculation: 

http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/dont-be-fooled-no-one-has-any-idea-what-is-going-on-with-the-clinton-fbi-investigation/
Well, we know her actions are responsible for it even being an "investigation".

 
I have to give huge props to Bottomfeeder Sports and Saints. They have debated this issue in depth with mostly opposing viewpoints and have been respectful of each others opinions and have left the hack jobs and name calling out of it. Of course they aren't the only ones but it really stands out because it has been a very long discussion. Well done guys.  :thumbup:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top