FBI Will Hand Over Notes on Clinton email Investigation to Congress: Report

a reply to: Xcathdra

Thank you for adding the videos to the thread

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: Sillyolme

I'm curious...how does it feel to defend a corrupt political criminal? Do you do it for the lulz or do you stand to gain from it, maybe financially, or you have some other reason?

Sorry I wouldn't know.

a reply to: carewemust

If he gives them to the media. If he gives them to the republicans to cherry pick over that's something different altogether.
Their history guarantees it.

a reply to: Agit8dChop

Some were suggesting that huh?
Like the entire house oversight committee?

a reply to: carewemust

They didn't find anything they could get her on. Aw too bad ...

a reply to: burntheships

Why do you think the notes on her questioning is giving you a witness list?
They're not releasing their notes on the investigation. Just her testimony.

a reply to: Sillyolme

No, what they found were a bunch of prosecutors who wouldn't take the case because she was apparently "not sophisticated," enough to understand the nuances of intelligence handling and they didn't want to set the precedent of adjudging a presidential candidate incapable of understanding the rules of proper intelligence handling in a court of law.

originally posted by: Sillyolme

Why do you think the notes on her questioning is giving you a witness list?
They're not releasing their notes on the investigation. Just her testimony.

They are releasing all of it, if you care to read the OP.
Or maybe you did, and your just correcting the record.

Update on this story, The State Department wants the
FBI Files first, before Congress gets to see them...

The State Department wants a chance to review notes and other materials from the FBI's probe of former Secretary Hillary Clinton's email use before any documents are provided to Congress, a spokeswoman said Monday.

abcnews.go.com...

Probably so they can redact them beyond use...

a reply to: burntheships

It would seem to me that Congress would have higher jurisdictional authority than the State Department being as they are one of the three coequal top branches of government rather than the State Department, which is set below the Executive branch.

Sounds like State is wanting to do some cya.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

You would think....
I wonder if the FBI has any say in determining that?

More light shed on exactly how they are stalling this all out,
in hopes to make it to the election....

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: burntheships

Nope. They can't do a damn thing with notes. No recording? Nope no recording.
Notes unless taken by a court stenographer could NOT possibly be completely accurate.
Just one MORE attempt by republicans to get her. Now to get her out of the way because their own candidate has gone mentally AWOL.

And one more attempt for the Democrats to enable her escape from prosecution. We'll see how it all comes out in the wash. Not too much longer and Hillary's tsunami of corruption should finally catch up to her. I'm hoping that in the event it doesn't, the people will be able to have their voices heard loud and clear. Because, we are her final judges.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: carewemust

If he gives them to the media. If he gives them to the republicans to cherry pick over that's something different altogether.
Their history guarantees it.

If Hillary Clinton had more integrity, and presence of mind, there would not now be anything TO cherry pick.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Found this: Apparently, State Department is pushing hard
on this, trying to get in front of it....

We did dispute the idea that they can just deliver all of this stuff to Congress without any coordination with the interagency. We’re not saying ‘Don’t do it.’ We know they have to do it. We recognize that. All we’ve asked for is a chance to see as much as they’re willing to let us see so that we can prepare ourselves.

lawnewz.com...

They are worried about names being release. Yeah right,
that is hilarious considering Clinton's emails contained
all of those names.

a reply to: burntheships

a chance to see as much as they’re willing to let us see so that we can prepare ourselves.

They want to know how hard the hammer blow is going to be.

Here is Judge Jeannine Pirro on this.

She puts it in perspective.

a reply to: carewemust

Give me a break.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: carewemust

Give me a break.

You tired, SillyOlMe? Take a break. Hillary does so for days at a time. You can too!

a reply to: burntheships


This confuses me because there are so many moving parts to Hillary's schemes. I knew about the State Department deciding to release some of Hillary's official e-mails, after they were forced to do so by Judicial Watch.

Now, the FBI says that they also have a batch of Hillary's PERSONAL e-mails? The State Department wants to see these e-mails because they might contain classified information. That's impossible, because Hillary swore that there was no classified information in the e-mails on her home computer.

And we also have Guccifer 2.0 and Assange sharing some e-mails that cause a big stir.. with resignations and mysterious deaths coming in the wake of these e-mail releases.

Is there a thread that describes Hillary's overall e-mail saga? I can't figure out which batch is attached to which scandal, or potential crime.

What I want to know is why Brian Pagliano received immunity for his testimony.

As for the state department wanting the FBI files first - absolutely not. I can see them sitting on that info till after the election.