Slashdot Mirror


FBI: Review of New Emails Doesn't Change Conclusion on Clinton (cnn.com)

FBI director James Comey told Congress Sunday that the new scrutiny of emails related to Hillary Clinton has turned up nothing that would cause the bureau to recommend charges against her. The conclusion comes nine days after rocking the presidential race with word that a new trove of emails had been discovered. "During that process, we have reviewed all of the communications that were to or from Hillary Clinton while she was secretary of State," Comey wrote. "Based on our review, we have not changed our conclusions that we expressed in July with respect to Secretary Clinton." From a report on CNN:"We were always confident nothing would cause the July decision to be revisited. Now Director Comey has confirmed it," tweeted Clinton spokesman Brian Fallon. Comey's last-minute announcement gives Clinton an opportunity for an I-told-you-so moment -- but it's unlikely to undo the political damage of his initial announcement. Trump and his allies have seized on that announcement, using it claim Clinton is likely to face criminal charges. "If she were to win, it would create an unprecedented constitutional crisis," Trump claimed Saturday night in Reno, Nevada. "In that situation we could very well have a sitting president under felony indictment and ultimately a criminal trial. It would grind government to a halt." The political benefit for Trump has been that Republicans who'd been skeptical of their party's nominee have largely followed vice presidential nominee Mike Pence's calls to "come home" to the party -- finding Trump less objectionable than Clinton.

22 of 733 comments (clear)

  1. Of course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Of course it doesn't change their conclusion. She did nothing wrong.

    Rock it on Tuesday, Hill! Slashdot is with You!

    1. Re: Of course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No. Clinton directed her maid to print unclassified emails that were retroactively classified years later.
      But that doesn't get yer juices flowing like yet another conspiracy, so carry on!
      Trump that Bitch!
      Lock Her Up!
      Hillary for Prison!

    2. Re: Of course by cold+fjord · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No. Clinton directed her maid to print unclassified emails that were retroactively classified years later.

      Removing the classified markings from a classified document doesn't make it unclassified.
      Classified information is classified regardless of whether it is marked or not.
      Hillary had protective markings removed from some documents - see above.
      Your claim is basically rubbish.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    3. Re: Of course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Did anybody really think she wouldn't beat the rap? Clinton should undoubtedly be prosecuted, but that all depends on the DOJ doing its job, an agency which is thoroughly corrupt and run by a Clinton ally.

      This is only the email case, not the other four active investigations, so there is a glimmer of hope that Clinton might be brought to justice. But if she is running the executive branch? None whatsoever.

      Unfortunately, the Washington insiders have managed to maintain control of their system, even after things were looking up for a short while.

    4. Re: Of course by Charcharodon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They only were "retroactively" classified because she hadn't bothered at the time. She was a classifying agent as SoS. If she didn't know she was supposed to do that she was either criminal, lazy, or stupid. Pick one or more for the correct answer.

    5. Re: Of course by Charcharodon · · Score: 3, Insightful
      "Wouldn't the person who wrote down the classified information into an email (instead of the special system for transmitting classified information) be the one who was "criminal, lazy, or stupid"?

      Yes but that only means they should be in the cell next to hers. As the Boss she would have been expected to get off her fat ass, go down the hall and kick the shit out of who ever was sending her emails improperly. She didn't do that.

      Basic State Dept email, if it is at all similar to our military email. You could send and receive confidential email all day long as long as you encrypted it before you sent it. I'm sure she had access to the higher level systems as well, but they are a pain in the ass to set up and have to be physically secured (locked doors, safes,etc) which probably didn't jive with her "I'm Hillary hear me roar attitude", which is why we have this mess in the first place.

      My time in the Air Force this was hammered home over and over again to all levels. Her claiming she didn't know is very difficult to believe since training is required every year and mandatory briefings on security procedure every quarter with monthly updates and reminders as well. If she pencil whipped her training and briefing requirements that is entirely on her and her Boss (The President) no one else can be blamed for this. Over the course of my career I held everything from a secret (run of the mill security clearance all military get), secret SAR (special access request for my time working on the B2 Bomber, more than a Secret less than a Top Secret), and Top Secret (Russian crypto-linguist which I didn't stay in because I sucked at learning Russian but still ended up with the clearance anyway since they took so long to do.)

      I watched dozens of officers and enlisted loose their jobs of much more benign violations of security protocols than the stunts she pulled.

      Let's define terms to start off with.

      CONFIDENTIAL – Will be applied to information in which the unauthorized disclosure could reasonably be expected to cause damage to the national security.
      SECRET – Will be applied to information in which the unauthorized disclosure could reasonably be expected to cause serious damage to the national security.
      TOP SECRET – Will be applied to information in which the unauthorized disclosure could reasonably be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security.

      Here are some examples to understand the different types of messages:
      "Hey Joe call work, pack a bag, you are probably going TDY tomorrow" not a problem by any method.
      "Hey Joe call work, pack a bag, we are sending you tonight TDY." Starting to edge into Confidential territory.
      "Hey Joe call work, pack a bag, we are sending you tonight to Krap-ic-stan" (we don't normally go there for any reason.) This is definitely confidential and maybe even higher. You can't talk about this stuff outside on non-gov't un-encrypted systems.
      "Hey Joe call work, pack your bag for a 6 month deployment to Krap-ic-stan. We are sending you and 30 other guys to an airfield to support 5 aircraft that are being sent there. This is most definitely Secret or higher now. You are not allowed to talk about this with anyone outside of work. You are not allowed to talk about this over unsecured networks. Email traffic has to be encrypted and only sent over the SIPR network (isolated secured network for Secret/Top Secret traffic) Anything higher level than that was way about my pay grade so if it exists I never saw it.
      "Hey Joe call work, pack your bag for a 6 month deployment to Krap-ic-stan. We are sending you and 30 other guys to an airfield to support 5 aircraft. There are 200 other people being sent from the squadrons A, B, and C along with the Spec-Op guys who will be supporting the Army who will in turn will be supporting the rebels in Krap-ic-stan to take down their dictator." This is most definitely now Secret (we've been doing this

  2. Re:Could be a grinder presidency by cold+fjord · · Score: 1, Insightful

    , if the Dems win everything, then the troubles will go away

    At that point Hillary's political troubles go away and the troubles for the country really begin.

    --
    much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  3. Comey by Kohath · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Everyone told me Comey was irresponsible and wasn't worth listening to last week. Why should we care what he says now?

  4. Proudly on the road to gridlock by damn_registrars · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The GOP will ensure that no matter the composition of the house and senate after this week, nothing will be allowed to progress under President Clinton. No supreme court vacancies will be filled, and no bills that have the least bit of "liberalism" in them will ever make it to the white house. There is a growing number of elected GOP politicians promising to start impeachment on her ASAP as well.

    It appears we would have been better off electing a Ficus Tree instead, it would have operated on a much smaller budget.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    1. Re:Proudly on the road to gridlock by Karl+Cocknozzle · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Then our only choice for moving forward is to take away the GOP's majority in both houses of congress.

      It is totally unacceptable for one party to simply choose to "negate" the results of elections that they do not like, and we've already had significant damage done to the credibility of our government, economy, and currency because of it, and another 2-8 years of gridlock would be a huge (yuuuuuuuuuuge) mistake.

      --
      Who did what now?
    2. Re:Proudly on the road to gridlock by Jeremi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Sure, single party rule worked out OK for the Chinese, lets do it! End the Republican Party!

      We already have de facto single-party rule, so long as one of the two parties consistently refuses to participate anything resembling the running of the government.

      Let's restore two-party rule by replacing the Republican Party with a functional one. Libertarians, you're up.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
  5. Re:Could be a grinder presidency by hambone142 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Health issues could also arise with her again. Perhaps Kaine would be a better President anyway.

    No matter who wins on Tuesday, we will all lose.

    Our Presidential selection really doesn't select the best people. It selects power hungry miscreants.

  6. Re:Scandals every 2 months by Jzanu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Well this is after 30 years of investigation for perceived slights by anti-American interests to supporting those who don't like to work, namely all the Republican congressmen. There is no protection of America or defense of American interests by those scum who prefer to not work while taking pay checks for gossiping.

  7. Meh, mission still accomplished by rsilvergun · · Score: 1, Insightful

    It was a lovely October surprise and might still throw the election to Trump. After 20 years of nonstop character assassination folks don't like Hilary. It doesn't help that she's kind of impersonal (too much time working, not enough socializing). If this news was a week ago it's be a moot point, but then again that's pretty obviously why dropped when it did...

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Meh, mission still accomplished by ScentCone · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Pointing out her corruption and lying isn't "character assassination." Is it "weather assassination" when the meteorologist tells you it's raining?

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  8. Re:Are you mental? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The current poll on the front page has a pretty solid 8% lead for Clinton. I think it's just that the Trump supporters are better organised, modding each other up and doing a good job of reposting the current set of taking points.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  9. You don't fucking care about emails. by Brannon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The Bush administration lost 22 million emails because their entire crew was using private emails servers for administration business. How come nobody cared about that? oh, right, because at the time we were spending a trillion $ and thousands of lives searching for WMDs that didn't exist while outing CIA agents and letting people drown in New Orleans.

    You couldn't care less about emails. You hate Hillary (and Obama) and that's it. No big surprise there--lots of assholes hate Hillary, it's one of the best things about her.

  10. Nope, she printed class email by HBI · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Emails are classified based on the information in them. The fact she didn't mark them appropriately is of tertiary importance - the presence of the information is the crime. The classification guides didn't change. They weren't marked, sometimes, until later, but sometimes they were marked. She didn't care.

    She's getting off on this one in a place where many others were convicted. For instance, Petraeus didn't have classification marks in his personal journal, yet the contents were classified as all hell. The person he shared them with had a TS clearance, but had no need-to-know for the information. In this case, Clinton shared the information with someone with neither clearance nor need to know.

    Understand what you are talking about before commenting.

    --
    HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
  11. Re:Terrified of Crimina Corruption in the Whitehou by kqs · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've never been convicted of any crime. Therefore, by your logic, I'm a more powerful criminal than Al Capone?

    I think that you believe that Hillary has not been convicted because she's bought all of the investigations. But among her opponents are very powerful Republican politicians. Not just one or two, but all of them. Some of her opponents are also billionaires. She and Bill are certainly not poor, but they cannot play in the same leagues as the Koch Bros and Sheldon Adelson (and supposedly Mr Trump). Maybe add the Russian intelligence agencies to that list of enemies. And her opponents have been coming after her for decades, and have so far proved that Bill gets blowjobs and Hillary is not competent at email security. Rather underwhelming.

    Look, Hillary and Bill are powerful people, and they have some rich friends, but nobody is that invulnerable. Al Capone just had a few government agents who had to work within the rules against him; Hillary has half of the most powerful people in the USA (and many outside of the USA) gunning for her. If she was guilty, there would be proof. Instead, all we get is Wikileaks about, um, black magic or something equally moronic.

  12. Re:Terrified of Crimina Corruption in the Whitehou by Aighearach · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Actually when it comes to email security her private server is not known to have ever been hacked, but the State Department email system did get hacked during the same time.

    The only legit complaint about her email server is that is violated transparency guidelines. But note that, nobody else is reacting to it in a way that we get to read their emails; The Bush administration used the RNC email server, Colin Power used a private corporate email (which he really thinks is different than a self-hosted one, but only in that it isn't secure), Bill Clinton refused to use email as President, though he was apparently using it privately for non-work stuff. There are lots of Governors around the country who have an aide whose main job is reading and writing emails, and usually not because the Gov. doesn't know how. We don't have everybody else's email, so the actual transparency problem is hard to pin down.

    Clearly she didn't follow President Obama's transparency directives any better than anybody else, but we don't have their emails either "for whatever reason." The reality is that almost everybody in politics agrees that if they think the public will read it later, they can't actually do work in that channel, because even if they don't do anything wrong it will feed lots of "gotcha" type nonsense that is all taken out of context.

    I've been stopped by the cops over a hundred times, and I've never even paid a parking ticket. I have paid library fines, 50 cents already this year, but that is my only proven misdeed. I guess I'm a master criminal too! Or I just wear clothes the cops don't like, and they aren't any good at their job.

  13. Re:And I left out #spiritcooking which is just cre by yuriklastalov · · Score: 4, Insightful

    RWNJ stands for Right Wing Nut Job, and is a left wing smear against anyone who questions the glorious leftist narrative.

    Incidentally, due in large part to the growing ubiquity of leftist views in America, a sort of Left Wing Nut Job archetype has been taking shape. These are your basic "Trump is a Russian plant", "Biological sex is a myth", or "Hillary is the victim of a vast right wing conspiracy" type of people.

    Really, the alt-right and progressives (AKA alt-left) are essentially the same sorts of people but with different ideological backgrounds. They both clamor for utopian fantasies, berate detractors with hateful insults and rhetoric, and generally wrap themselves up in worldviews that assume everyone on the other side is some combination of evil, stupid, or insane.

    Both sides are incredibly toxic and are, in my opinion, regrettable side effects of the rise of internet culture and the ease with which it allows the creation of unassailable safe-space echo chambers where circlejerks and groupthink are the entire point.

  14. Re:What about her maid? by Maxwell'sSilverLART · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Did you read the story? Clinton had a SCIF in her home. She sent her maid--who had no clearance--into the SCIF--to collect documents. At times, she even received the President's Daily Brief there, a document that is always Top Secret.

    1) There's no way she could have not known that stuff coming into the SCIF was likely to be classified--that's the whole point of having a SCIF.

    2) There's no way she could have not known that her maid was unauthorized to be in the SCIF or to be handling classified information.

    --
    Moderate drunk! It's more fun that way!