1. #1
    Scorpion
    Update your status
    Scorpion's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 09-04-05
    Posts: 7,797
    Betpoints: 15377

    FBI's Hillary Clinton email investigation not letting up

    http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/267269-fbis-clinton-investigation-not-letting-up

    FBI's Hillary Clinton email investigation not letting up




    <header> </header> Name:  b-qqbqmccaad5yz.jpg
Views: 207
Size:  39.8 KB






    By Julian Hattem - 01/28/16 06:00 AM EST
    Six months after it began, the federal investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server shows no signs of slowing down.
    Former FBI officials said the length of the probe is not unusual and speculated that a decision on whether to file charges against Clinton or her top aides could come later this year, during the heat of the general election campaign.
    ADVERTISEMENT

    “I don’t know that there’s any magical cutoff date,” said Ron Hosko, the FBI’s former assistant director of the criminal investigative division and a 30-year veteran of the bureau.For Democrats, the extended investigation has become a source of some anxiety, with Republicans gleefully raising the prospect of the Democratic presidential front-runner being indicted.
    “It does give pause to Democrats who are concerned that there may be another shoe to drop down the road,” said Andrew Smith, a political science professor at the University of New Hampshire.
    The government has been examining the former secretary of State's private email server since last July, when the inspector general for the intelligence community issued a security referral noting that classified information could have been mishandled.
    That referral came months after Clinton acknowledged that she had exclusively used a personal email address housed on a private server during her tenure as secretary.
    The scrutiny of her email practices has mounted since then, with more than 1,300 emails that passed through her server found to contain information that has since been classified, some at the highest levels.
    The State Department and Clinton’s campaign contend that none of the information in the emails was classified when it was originally sent, and they have portrayed the matter as an interagency dispute.
    The FBI and Justice Department have refused to discuss the details of their investigation and declined to comment to The Hill.
    Officials have indicated that the bureau is not targeting Clinton specifically, however, but is investigating whether any information on her account was mishandled. Earlier this month, Fox News reported that the FBI had expanded its inquiry to examine how the State Department’s work intersected with the Clinton family foundation.
    In December, FBI Director James Comey pledged that the probe would be “competent,” “honest” and “independent.”
    “We don't give a rip about politics,” he told a Senate committee.
    Yet the FBI is well aware of the high political stakes surrounding the investigation.
    “I think the clock ticks louder every day,” said Hosko, who is the president of the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund. “I’m sure they’re all incredibly sensitive to it.”
    President Obama has downplayed Clinton’s email setup, claiming that it was “not a situation in which America’s national security was endangered.”
    Multiple former officials, lawmakers and lawyers have said they are confident that Comey, who is a Republican, will not let the presidential campaign influence the FBI’s investigation.
    Yet many conservatives worry that even if the bureau comes up with sufficient evidence that Clinton broke the law, the Justice Department will decline to press charges. In response, some have pressed for a special prosecutor to be appointed, or for the FBI to pledge to release whatever evidence it digs up.
    So far, Democrats have publicly shrugged of the threat of criminal action by painting it as a partisan attack from Republicans.
    Clinton’s top rival for the Democratic presidential nomination, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), channeled the feelings of Democrats in October when he told Clinton during a debate that “the American people are sick and tired of hearing about your damn emails.”
    But Clinton will have to confront the issue more forcefully if charges are filed.
    And should Clinton win the nomination, the topic is sure to be an issue in the general election campaign — even if no indictment is handed down.
    A fight over the emails then could weaken Democratic enthusiasm and turn off swing voters, some analysts predicted.
    “More likely, it’s going to sour some of those folks in the middle,” said Doug Roscoe, a political science professor at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth.
    “Having to be in the news talking about this investigation takes her off message,” he added.
    It might not be Clinton herself who faces the music for any potential crime, however.
    The former secretary of State did not appear to send most of the emails now marked classified. Instead, they were largely sent or forwarded to her by aides.
    “It’d be a lot harder to make a criminal charge for having received [classified] information," said Bradley Moss, a lawyer who specializes in national security and protection of classified information

    “If I’m in Clinton’s campaign, I’m more worried if am Cheryl Mills, Huma Abedin or Jake Sullivan than if I’m Hillary Clinton,” Moss said. Mills, Abedin and Sullivan were all top aides of Clinton’s at the State Department. Abedin and Sullivan continue to hold high positions in Clinton’s presidential campaign.
    “The sloppiness and the complete fundamental failure to comply with any aspect of operational and informational security is what puts them at risk,” Moss said. “You just can’t do that that many times and not expect to find yourself in trouble.”
    Clinton’s campaign did not respond to a request for comment from The Hill.

  2. #2
    brooks85
    brooks85's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-05-09
    Posts: 44,709
    Betpoints: 6881

    Clinton would be terrible for the lower class and overall negative for the middle class but people like me will profit of her. It is obama all over again for me if she wins.

  3. #3
    Mr KLC
    Mr KLC's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 12-19-07
    Posts: 30,627
    Betpoints: 408

    She won't be indicted. I've already seen this story 20 years ago.

  4. #4
    chico2663
    chico2663's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 09-02-10
    Posts: 36,915
    Betpoints: 6713

    how well did you do under bush? oh that's right you lost it. I am one of few i know when he won the election put my stocks in bonds because he was toxic for the country. The only thing good he did for the poor was invent the obama phone. That's what kills me about assholes like you is that you stick your head in the sand!Your not the only one that knows how to day trade!

  5. #5

  6. #6

  7. #7
    hostile takeover
    hostile takeover's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 12-06-09
    Posts: 2,257
    Betpoints: 5372

    I hate to say it, but he fact that she hasn't been indicted yet tells me that she won't.

    The only reason she isn't in jail right now is the Clinton's are calling in every favor they have.

    Even if the FBI says she should be indicted, the DOJ (Obama and Clinton's puppet, Loretta Lynch) doesn't have to do sh*t.

    Good luck America

  8. #8
    chico2663
    chico2663's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 09-02-10
    Posts: 36,915
    Betpoints: 6713

    mr klc that wasn't toward you. bush used the rnc and lost 22 millione mails even some that proves there were no weapons on mass destruction. Don't blame george cause he was a huckleberry. Old man bush just did a book blaming Cheney and Rumsfeld for the disaster which was his presidency.
    also there were 13 benghazi's under bush administrations. What CAN'T BE SAID ABOUT BENGHAZI WAS THAT IT WAS A CIA mission. the cia doesn't report directly to the secretary of state. Obummer is to big a puss to admit this was his fault!

  9. #9
    chico2663
    chico2663's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 09-02-10
    Posts: 36,915
    Betpoints: 6713

    ps i m voting for kasich he was good gov. hopefully he will be good president

  10. #10
    brooks85
    brooks85's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-05-09
    Posts: 44,709
    Betpoints: 6881







    lol you knowingly visit poltifact and huffingtonpost, how embarrassing. I can't wait for your reply on how politic is unbiased lol
    Last edited by brooks85; 01-28-16 at 04:16 PM.

  11. #11
    unde0087
    Did we win?
    unde0087's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 03-27-08
    Posts: 28,146
    Betpoints: 119

    Can't even trust the bitch with a handful of emails and people want to put her in the white house, fukin clowns

  12. #12
    brooks85
    brooks85's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-05-09
    Posts: 44,709
    Betpoints: 6881

    Quote Originally Posted by chico2663 View Post
    how well did you do under bush? oh that's right you lost it. I am one of few i know when he won the election put my stocks in bonds because he was toxic for the country. The only thing good he did for the poor was invent the obama phone. That's what kills me about assholes like you is that you stick your head in the sand!Your not the only one that knows how to day trade!
    just fine, again showing you have no idea what you're talking about.

    The market was around 11k when he entered and just about 14k before the crash. You must not be good at math huh? Don't know why I am asking, you're obviously not.

  13. #13
    chico2663
    chico2663's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 09-02-10
    Posts: 36,915
    Betpoints: 6713

    i am also repeating bush's father . can't see you get past that!

  14. #14

  15. #15
    chico2663
    chico2663's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 09-02-10
    Posts: 36,915
    Betpoints: 6713

    do you have any bias against wikipedea?

  16. #16

  17. #17
    brooks85
    brooks85's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-05-09
    Posts: 44,709
    Betpoints: 6881

    Quote Originally Posted by chico2663 View Post
    do you have any bias against wikipedea?
    of course not, I enjoy when people post wiki pages without reading them


    think you can rub a few brain cells and fine the HUGE difference between the two controversies?

    I'll give ya a hint, the answer is in the first sentence of the second paragraph... lol

  18. #18
    chico2663
    chico2663's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 09-02-10
    Posts: 36,915
    Betpoints: 6713

    good thing your a sheep brooks

  19. #19
    chico2663
    chico2663's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 09-02-10
    Posts: 36,915
    Betpoints: 6713

    she is not in trouble because it was her that sent them. She may be a p.o.s. but she is a smart p.o.s.

  20. #20
    brooks85
    brooks85's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-05-09
    Posts: 44,709
    Betpoints: 6881

    really can't find it with that huge hint? I mean I basically gave you the exact location to look. It is pretty obvious... don't let your ego make you give up. Educate yourself for once.

  21. #21
    chico2663
    chico2663's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 09-02-10
    Posts: 36,915
    Betpoints: 6713

    dumbass I already knew that but I love when people think the R.N.C is actually a part of the govt. Before you ever think of a comeback please be a couple thoughts before!

  22. #22
    chico2663
    chico2663's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 09-02-10
    Posts: 36,915
    Betpoints: 6713

    Hell why didn't he put it on the T.L.A. I mean he was a rancher in texas.

  23. #23
    chico2663
    chico2663's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 09-02-10
    Posts: 36,915
    Betpoints: 6713

    crickets

  24. #24
    brooks85
    brooks85's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-05-09
    Posts: 44,709
    Betpoints: 6881

    Quote Originally Posted by chico2663 View Post
    dumbass I already knew that but I love when people think the R.N.C is actually a part of the govt. Before you ever think of a comeback please be a couple thoughts before!
    so you're admitting you're just a sheep then because obviously the controversies are completely different situations. Glad we could establish that truth. And we can go ahead and "pretend" you already knew that lol

    the guy who goes to politifact and huffingtonpost... lol

  25. #25
    chico2663
    chico2663's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 09-02-10
    Posts: 36,915
    Betpoints: 6713

    you right one led us into a false war and the other is because republicans are afraid she will win a 3rd term of obummer

  26. #26
    chico2663
    chico2663's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 09-02-10
    Posts: 36,915
    Betpoints: 6713

    so when did the r.n.c. become part of the govt. glad your not smart enough to overcome that.

  27. #27
    brooks85
    brooks85's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-05-09
    Posts: 44,709
    Betpoints: 6881

    Quote Originally Posted by chico2663 View Post
    so when did the r.n.c. become part of the govt. glad your not smart enough to overcome that.
    when did anyone say it was?

    stay focused chico, you're letting your emotions make you irrational. Again, focus on the facts. Completely different controversies for a very obvious reason.

  28. #28
    brooks85
    brooks85's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-05-09
    Posts: 44,709
    Betpoints: 6881

    It isn't much different than what you just said about bush and the stock market. You clearly have a sheepish quality about you. You say what you want to be true as opposed to what is actually true.

  29. #29
    chico2663
    chico2663's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 09-02-10
    Posts: 36,915
    Betpoints: 6713

    you tried to make it seem that they were different and i showed you your errors in that. you haven't proved me wrong in anything. i hate clinton and voting for kasich. My father always told me not to argue with an idiot because they will always try to take the argument on a different tangent!

  30. #30
    brooks85
    brooks85's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-05-09
    Posts: 44,709
    Betpoints: 6881

    Quote Originally Posted by chico2663 View Post
    you tried to make it seem that they were different and i showed you your errors in that. you haven't proved me wrong in anything. i hate clinton and voting for kasich. My father always told me not to argue with an idiot because they will always try to take the argument on a different tangent!
    lol yes I "tried" by making you post a wiki page that proved yourself wrong. Yep, it was all me

  31. #31
    chico2663
    chico2663's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 09-02-10
    Posts: 36,915
    Betpoints: 6713

    fact bush got out of office and he had it at 6500 when he got out of office. I think even with the bumps right now it is still better than that.

  32. #32
    chico2663
    chico2663's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 09-02-10
    Posts: 36,915
    Betpoints: 6713

    i wasn't wrong because neither server is a govt server.

  33. #33
    brooks85
    brooks85's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-05-09
    Posts: 44,709
    Betpoints: 6881

    Quote Originally Posted by chico2663 View Post
    fact bush got out of office and he had it at 6500 when he got out of office. I think even with the bumps right now it is still better than that.
    lol, again you have no idea what you're talking about.

    1. "he" didn't have it anything. Just like Obama had nothing to do with comeback. That is why it is a stock market, it goes up and down. Presidents affect sectors more than the whole market.

    2. Seeing as you don't know much about investing, he was a president for two terms and since the market went from 11k to 14k MOST investors would have profited very nicely in that time frame because more positions are not held for 10 years or anywhere near that amount of time.

  34. #34
    chico2663
    chico2663's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 09-02-10
    Posts: 36,915
    Betpoints: 6713

    problem is most investors left money in lost there ass. only republican presidency that had good net is reagan . i guess those last 6 months of bush you made a mint. lol well seeing i had money in bonds when this shit went down. I could double down on my stocks. I thought you did well day trading.My broker told me I was a nut for switching when bush took office. He said after the fact There was only a few that made money during bush. I guess you were one of the others.lmao

  35. #35
    chico2663
    chico2663's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 09-02-10
    Posts: 36,915
    Betpoints: 6713

    Democrats vs. Republicans
    The same local investment advisors who declare that Obama is bad for stocks, also state that the market wants Republican pro-business policies. While those investment advisors also claim to be able to pick winning stocks and time the market, I've long since accepted that not only do I not possess those abilities, such abilities do not even exist. Nor does the ability exist to actually know what the stock market wants. I can, however, research past performance under Republican and Democratic administrations.

    The October 2003 Journal of Finance published such a study by Pedro Stana-Clara and Rossen Valkanov that examined the issue. The study viewed stock market returns from 1927 - 1998, and was far more scientific than my simple analysis of stocks since 2001. It looked at excess returns over the risk free rate of a three month Treasury bill.

    The results:

    • Republicans - positive 1.7 percent annually
    • Democrats - positive 10.7 percent annually

    Fact: Through 1998, US stocks performed higher by nine percentage points annually under Democrats than Republicans. If this study were to be updated, the gap would widen further.

12 Last
Top