Hillary Clinton is Done: part 4

[PhantomWolf]

Do you really not know that the letter was addressed to him, and all the other majority and minority leaders of several congressional committees? Unbelievable.

The question is not who the letter was addressed to, but rather who it was given to and when. Did the other majority and minority leaders of those congressional committees get it at the same time? According to them, no.

The claim that Comey called him is a total lie.

Are you saying that Chaffetz lied when he claimed... "FBI Dir just informed me"?

 

[Stacko]

Are you saying that Chaffetz lied when he claimed... "FBI Dir just informed me"?

That doesn't say how Comey informed him which is the game you're fighting against.

 

[The Big Dog]

The question is not who the letter was addressed to, but rather who it was given to and when. Did the other majority and minority leaders of those congressional committees get it at the same time? According to them, no.

Are you saying that Chaffetz lied when he claimed... "FBI Dir just informed me"?

Them? I saw one unsubstantiated quote in a fanatical democrat site repeated on another democrat site.

Show me the time stamps.

The claim that it was a call is a complete lie.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

From an op-ed in today's New York Times titled: "Why Clinton's Emails Matter":

"The fact that emails on Anthony Weiner’s computer might be relevant to the investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s private email server had to be reported to an interested congressional investigative committee. If Mr. Comey had sat on the information — with part of the country already voting in the presidential election — he would have not only made the F.B.I. more of a target for partisan fury, but also made himself a target for future House investigations, since he had testified under oath that the F.B.I. had completed its Clinton email investigation."

Posted only because that opinion pretty much mirrors the one I've expressed here.

 

[PhantomWolf]

Them? I saw one unsubstantiated quote in a fanatical democrat site repeated on another democrat site.

You realise that the majority of this argument is an ad hominem fallacy? It's something you have repeatedly done a lot in this thread.

The claim that it was a call is a complete lie.

You were there?

 

[The Big Dog]

You realise that the majority of this argument is an ad hominem fallacy? It's something you have repeatedly done a lot in this thread.

You were there?

False and ridiculous. It is a factual claim and the credibility of the person making the claim is of course subject to challenge.

There is no proof of anything, and the claim that it was a phone call is an obvious lie.

Post some proof.

(I cannot believe I have to explain this on a site for so called skeptics)

 

[Minoosh]

cripes, seeing an electronic version of an email ...

An electronic version of an email?

 

[The Big Dog]

An electronic version of an email?

Yeah, as opposed to the ones that Hillary PRINTED and turned over to State.

 

[Tony Stark]

From an op-ed in today's New York Times titled: "Why Clinton's Emails Matter":

"The fact that emails on Anthony Weiner’s computer might be relevant to the investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s private email server had to be reported to an interested congressional investigative committee. If Mr. Comey had sat on the information — with part of the country already voting in the presidential election — he would have not only made the F.B.I. more of a target for partisan fury, but also made himself a target for future House investigations, since he had testified under oath that the F.B.I. had completed its Clinton email investigation."

Posted only because that opinion pretty much mirrors the one I've expressed here.

Total BS. It isn't his job to make sure Republicans don't get mad at him. And now Democrats are mad at him anyway. And Republicans will go back to being mad when this turns out to not change the outcome.

And investigations for what? What he said at the time was true. It doesn't retroactively make him a perjurer that this later changed.

 

[PhantomWolf]

False and ridiculous. It is a factual claim and the credibility of the person making the claim is of course subject to challenge.

There is no proof of anything, and the claim that it was a phone call is an obvious lie.

Post some proof.

(I cannot believe I have to explain this on a site for so called skeptics)

Because you aren't taking a skeptical approach, you're taking a Partisan one.

A Skeptical approach merely says, One person has claimed this, it's up to them to prove their claim. A Partisan says...

I saw one unsubstantiated quote in a fanatical democrat site repeated on another democrat site.

Also a skeptic doesn't call something of which they have no knowledge themselves...

an obvious lie.

Since you weren't there you have no idea if it is true or not, claiming it is an obvious lie is not skeptical, and also opens you up to the burden of proof to prove your own claim, that it's a lie.

The only thing you are right about it that having to explain this on a skeptics board is rather sad.

 

[The Big Dog]

snip.

No evidence of anything, of course.

No surprise that you posted nothing of substance.

 

[Foolmewunz]

Total BS. It isn't his job to make sure Republicans don't get mad at him. And now Democrats are mad at him anyway. And Republicans will go back to being mad when this turns out to not change the outcome.

And investigations for what? What he said at the time was true. It doesn't retroactively make him a perjurer that this later changed.

Can we resurrect the term "Asperger's Syndrome" (now d.b.a. "High Functioning Autism")? The defense of Comey's brainfart seems to be based on Comey needing to say, "But how does this effect MEEEEEE?"

Maybe not quite Asperger's but its step-sister, Narcissism. His first reaction to finding out that there MIGHT be something there was to think, "OMG, I told the Witch Hunting Committee that it was only closed because there was no (or insufficient) evidence. This makes MEEEEEEE look bad."

And that's what this defense of his action is. "Hey, he has to watch out for his reputation!" No. Never heard of nobility? You sit on it like you would any investigation until you know for sure. There's more at stake than your own reputation in the Republican Club House.

It's a very strange reaction but with the poster boy for narcissism running on the GOP ticket, we have a decent example to go by.

 

[Minoosh]

Again from the CNN story I quoted earlier:

The White House had no role in Comey's decision to inform Congress he was investigating new emails related to Hillary Clinton's private server, Earnest added.

I'm a bit slow on the uptake but that sounds like an extremely strange statement. Why on earth would the White House feel a need to disclaim a role? Done either "spontaneously" or maybe in response to a question, "Did the White House have a role ..." etc.?

It shows my thinking is not quite as bizarre as it may seem - someone else tried to connect those dots.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

No evidence of anything, of course.

No surprise that you posted nothing of substance.

Ironic.

 

[Minoosh]

Yeah, as opposed to the ones that Hillary PRINTED and turned over to State.

This from Wikipedia:

In October, the State Department sent letters to Clinton and all previous Secretaries of State back to Madeleine Albright requesting emails and documents related to their work while in office. On December 5, 2014, Clinton lawyers delivered 12 file boxes filled with printed paper containing more than 30,000 emails. Clinton withheld almost 32,000 emails deemed to be of a personal nature.

Since State (per Wikipedia) asked for emails related to their work while in office, Hillary had license to withhold emails not related to their work. At first blush that seems like a lot to withhold; but it amounted to 22 a day, not totally implausible, especially if she didn't text much. Her claimed work email product was slightly lower than her claimed personal emails, but there could be many reasons for this; perhaps more hard documents used, more conversations face-to-face or on secure telephone lines, etc. Then:

Datto, Inc., which provided data backup service for Clinton's email, agreed to give the FBI the hardware that stored the backups. As of May 2016, no answer had been provided to the public as to whether 31,000 emails deleted by Hillary Clinton as personal have been or could be recovered.

Why no answer to the public on this question? Maybe because publicizing the mechanics of all this might also be a possible security breach?

The Occam's razor answer here seems to me to be: Investigators have read all the missing emails; they found nothing in exhaustive investigations because there was nothing to find except very, very marginal instances not sufficient for prosecution or even further investigation.

 

[The Big Dog]

This from Wikipedia:


Since State (per Wikipedia) asked for emails related to their work while in office, Hillary had license to withhold emails not related to their work. At first blush that seems like a lot to withhold; but it amounted to 22 a day, not totally implausible, especially if she didn't text much. Her claimed work email product was slightly lower than her claimed personal emails, but there could be many reasons for this; perhaps more hard documents used, more conversations face-to-face or on secure telephone lines, etc. Then:



Why no answer to the public on this question? Maybe because publicizing the mechanics of all this might also be a possible security breach?

The Occam's razor answer here seems to me to be: Investigators have read all the missing emails; they found nothing in exhaustive investigations because there was nothing to find except very, very marginal instances not sufficient for prosecution or even further investigation.

The FBI found thousands of work related emails in the electronic copies they recovered and that Hillary tried to destroy. They turned them over to state who are redacting them and producing them at a glacial pace. Judicial watch got a couple 100 pages today.

 

[Minoosh]

The FBI found thousands of work related emails in the electronic copies they recovered and that Hillary tried to destroy. They turned them over to state who are redacting them and producing them at a glacial pace. Judicial watch got a couple 100 pages today.

They found them on the backup server or Hillary's own?

Wikipedia did say as of May but I imagined people constantly vetting the entry.

Have you found significant evidence of wrongdoing in the 100+ pages?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Well, that is kind of open to interpretation.

Comey included this in his statement:

"Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case."

(bolded mine)

Sounds like rather than saying "she hadn't committed a criminal offence" he felt there was evidence she may have, but chose not to prosecute for other reasons.

So the concept of 'every violation of a statute is not a criminal violation' went over your head?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

From an op-ed in today's New York Times titled: "Why Clinton's Emails Matter":

"The fact that emails on Anthony Weiner’s computer might be relevant to the investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s private email server had to be reported to an interested congressional investigative committee. If Mr. Comey had sat on the information — with part of the country already voting in the presidential election — he would have not only made the F.B.I. more of a target for partisan fury, but also made himself a target for future House investigations, since he had testified under oath that the F.B.I. had completed its Clinton email investigation."

Posted only because that opinion pretty much mirrors the one I've expressed here.

So keeping silent about investigations into the Trump-Putin connections was important because of the political implications but when it comes to Clinton the standard is different?

 

[Foolmewunz]

The FBI found thousands of work related emails in the electronic copies they recovered and that Hillary tried to destroy. They turned them over to state who are redacting them and producing them at a glacial pace. Judicial watch got a couple 100 pages today.

Thank God! Can we finally get to the bottom of what time she got back to the Hamptons?