Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 24 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,560 posts, read 16,548,014 times
Reputation: 6042
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by redwood66
I have provided the information that says the emails were compromised. This is from the section of the IG report that discusses an internal review of the investigation. The conclusion of that review stated what I posted above. That you CHOOSE to read it in another way to make you happy matters not.
You have provided a paragraph that you didnt comprehend that said it was possible that the server had been compromised through someone email being hacked and being linked in.
possible is not the same as it actually happening. The executive summary in the first 10 pages made sure to explain that so that people like you wouldnt jump the gun, but you did it anyways.
Quote:
A statement that the FBI assessed that it was “reasonably likely” that hostile actors gained access to Clinton’s private email server was changed to “possible.”
The statement also acknowledged that the FBI investigation and its forensic analysis did not find evidence that Clinton’s email server systems were compromised
She should not have been using anything but a secure computer (for classified emails) at the State Dept. or an issued device to view or send .gov emails to protect the info and keep records of her time as SoS, just like every other government employee is expected to do.
State.gov computers are not secure. You do not put classified material on them. They are in fact less secure than a small group private server such as Clinton's. In fact though neither is very secure.
The issue is record retention not classified material.
So what does this do for the obstruction of justice issue for the firing of Comey? This report pretty much concludes that he should have been fired, which both parties at different times have said should happen.
Bit Trump did not initially fire Comey. All these "issues" were well know. It seems Trump appreciated that Comey reopened the email case. He misinterpreted that as loyalty (i.e. loyalty to Trump not the U.S.)
So what does this do for the obstruction of justice issue for the firing of Comey? This report pretty much concludes that he should have been fired, which both parties at different times have said should happen.
A couple problems with saying Trump is in the clear for the Comey firing. One Trump has given more than one explanation for firing Comey so which one is it? Two, just because Comey was incompetent if Trump simply fired Comey because he wanted the Russia investigation to end then it still could be obstruction.
But this report does complicate things. I am sure Trump will assume he is vindicated and call for the Russia investigation to end.
State.gov computers are not secure. You do not put classified material on them. They are in fact less secure than a small group private server such as Clinton's. In fact though neither is very secure.
The issue is record retention not classified material.
The issue is both. I stated secure with classified material in parentheses. Those should not be on anything but in the proper secure environment. Yet they were on her server and emailed to people outside the gov. She also was attempting to avoid the records retention requirements.
Bit Trump did not initially fire Comey. All these "issues" were well know. It seems Trump appreciated that Comey reopened the email case. He misinterpreted that as loyalty (i.e. loyalty to Trump not the U.S.)
Well this is not really an excuse either because the "issues" were known when Obama was president and he did not fire him either.
Bit Trump did not initially fire Comey. All these "issues" were well know. It seems Trump appreciated that Comey reopened the email case. He misinterpreted that as loyalty (i.e. loyalty to Trump not the U.S.)
Why would Trump believe Comey reopening the email case was loyalty? I never heard that. Comey worked under the Obama AG office at that time. He had nothing to do with Trump who was a candidate. He asked for loyalty after he was elected.
A couple problems with saying Trump is in the clear for the Comey firing. One Trump has given more than one explanation for firing Comey so which one is it? Two, just because Comey was incompetent if Trump simply fired Comey because he wanted the Russia investigation to end then it still could be obstruction.
But this report does complicate things. I am sure Trump will assume he is vindicated and call for the Russia investigation to end.
I didn't say he was in the clear. I just asked a question. If he is guilty of anything he should be held to account. It will complicate things though going forward and of course Trump is seeing this as a vindication. What is most troubling for me is the lack of professionalism in a LE agency.
Bit Trump did not initially fire Comey. All these "issues" were well know. It seems Trump appreciated that Comey reopened the email case. He misinterpreted that as loyalty (i.e. loyalty to Trump not the U.S.)
Rod Rosenstein's letter recommending Comey be fired
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
