Absence of Malice?

[mike777]

I can't buy that. Too many sources are saying Comey grossly overstepped his bounds. Best quote I saw was that there is a vast difference between being independent and flying solo. Comey is navigating this one on his personal magic carpet ride with no net from Justice.

 

I found this today from the Washington Post, from two sources, one pro-Clinton Democrat and the other anti-Trump Republican: both are experienced with the Justice Department: (emphasis added)

 

 

And now it is impossible to put the spilled ink back into the bottle. It really is deplorable action. How could waiting two weeks to write the letter affect the investigation or compromise Comey himself for failing to notify? His own policies dictate and years of precedent establish without doubt he should fave waited.

 

If FBI directors start interfering with elections while winning candidates jail the losing side, we may as well pull the plug on this experiment.

 

OK so you feel that Comey is ridiculous and deplorable and acted dishonorably and is on a magic carpet ride, got it. Clearly you dont trust his leadership of the FBI.

[Winstonm]

OK so you feel that Comey is ridiculous and deplorable and acted dishonorably and is on a magic carpet ride, got it. Clearly you dont trust his leadership of the FBI.

 

First, I called his actions deplorable, not him. I don't see the word "ridiculous" anywhere.

 

That said, you are right that I feel his leadership is questionable, at best.

[Al_U_Card]

But it was okay when he found that Hillary had bad judgement but had done nothing illegal?

[cherdano]

An earlier post said that because this is a continuation of the investigation that he already testified to Congress about, he couldn't keep it secret. He had to tell them that new information had come to light and the investigation is being reopened, even before they've actually gotten access to the evidence.

It seems the actual reason he couldn't keep it secret is because there are two many FBI agents leaking details of such investigations to media.

[mike777]

"Hillary Clinton took her war against FBI Director James Comey...."

 

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3885578/Put-table-Hillary-ramps-war-FBI-director-Comey-hits-strange-unprecedented-deeply-troubling-decision-announce-reopening-email-probe.html#ixzz4ObUMGuMK

Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

 

It looks like The next President of the United States and her closest aids are out to destroy Comey's career at the FBI. Attack his honor, attack his integrity and his leadership at the FBI becomes impossible.

 

Good lesson for those in government, cross Clinton and she will destroy you.

[kenberg]

I have a question.

 

The FBI needs a warrant. My question is a simple factual one. How is this obtained?

 

Comey, or some representative of the FBI, goes directly to a federal judge?

The FBI works through Justice Department lawyers and they go before a federal judge?

I am assuming someone goes before a federal judge.

 

 

I am still grappling with the basic facts here. I did see something somewhere that said Comey had not yet been give permission by the Justice Department to seek a warrant. I know he needs a warrant but the head of the FBI has to ask permission to seek a warrant? Perhaps so, but it surprises me.

 

Added: The "somewhere" that I saw this is

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/10/we-do-not-have-a-warrant-fbi-admits-comey-jumped-the-gun-with-clinton-email-announcement/

The Justice Department has not granted approval for FBI agents to examine the materials, so FBI officials have no idea whether the emails contain sensitive or incriminating information or anything investigators have seen before.

 

This seems to say he needs permission. I have no idea if that is correct.

[Winstonm]

"Hillary Clinton took her war against FBI Director James Comey...."

 

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3885578/Put-table-Hillary-ramps-war-FBI-director-Comey-hits-strange-unprecedented-deeply-troubling-decision-announce-reopening-email-probe.html#ixzz4ObUMGuMK

Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

 

It looks like The next President of the United States and her closest aids are out to destroy Comey's career at the FBI. Attack his honor, attack his integrity and his leadership at the FBI becomes impossible.

 

Good lesson for those in government, cross Clinton and she will destroy you.

 

I don't think reasonable people see that as the lesson to be learned.

[kenberg]

I don't think reasonable people see that as the lesson to be learned.

 

I agree with you on that, but I think that she is making a mistake. "The crowd booed at the first mention of the FBI issue."

Sure. But they still get to vote only once each. She needs to address not her cheering supporters, but the country as a whole. There are a lot of centrists out there. Center, left, center right, center center. They won't be doing the booing, they will be doing the voting that will decide who is president.

[cherdano]

I agree with you on that, but I think that she is making a mistake. "The crowd booed at the first mention of the FBI issue."

Sure. But they still get to vote only once each. She needs to address not her cheering supporters, but the country as a whole. There are a lot of centrists out there. Center, left, center right, center center. They won't be doing the booing, they will be doing the voting that will decide who is president.

Clinton has convinced enough voters by now, she just needs them to turn out. I think a Republican FBI director who broke precedent by making opinionated comments on Clinton's email use back in July, and who (despite warnings) wrote a letter 11 days before the election that he should have known would result in misleading coverage, will help turn them out.

[cherdano]

There's "classified" and then there's "classified". Some things are classified because of their potential impact on national security. Some things are 'classified' because somebody doesn't want the general public to know about them. The questions about Hillary's emails revolve, afaik, around classification of the former sort. FBI "leaks" (if that's what they are) are of 'classified' information of the latter sort.

The sort of "classified" information in Clinton's emails was quite likely just of the form "THE US IS OPERATING A TOP-SECRET DRONE PROGRAM IN PAKISTAN/AFGHANISTAN".

If the content of Clinton's emails had actually endangered US citizens if it had come out, then you can be sure Comey would have told us about it.

[kenberg]

Clinton has convinced enough voters by now, she just needs them to turn out. I think a Republican FBI director who broke precedent by making opinionated comments on Clinton's email use back in July, and who (despite warnings) wrote a letter 11 days before the election that he should have known would result in misleading coverage, will help turn them out.

 

That might well be so. She can go with that, and apparently she is doing so. If I were her campaign manager, I would advise her differently, but I am not, and there are no doubt good reasons why I am not.

[Winstonm]

Clinton has convinced enough voters by now, she just needs them to turn out. I think a Republican FBI director who broke precedent by making opinionated comments on Clinton's email use back in July, and who (despite warnings) wrote a letter 11 days before the election that he should have known would result in misleading coverage, will help turn them out.

 

Totally agree. I think their campaign is still somewhat shell-shocked. Perhaps after Monday, when the demand for answers has been addressed, she will say more?

[Al_U_Card]

Being Hil's #1 aide, what if Abedin was copied on some of those deleted e-mails?

[Al_U_Card]

Didn't some of them have to do with foreign policy?

[cherdano]

I think Josh Marshall (who initially defended Comey) has this right.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/deeply-disturbing

[kenberg]

I think Josh Marshall (who initially defended Comey) has this right.

http://talkingpoints...eply-disturbing

 

This is far and away the best article I have seen on this.He puts his case clearly. I am keeping an open mind on what the truth is, but the article is well written.

[Winstonm]

This is far and away the best article I have seen on this.He puts his case clearly. I am keeping an open mind on what the truth is, but the article is well written.

 

If this is accurate, I think it is the most disturbing of all possibilities: an extremely powerful government agency with partisan rogue agents who are capable of influencing the Director's decision making. That is a chilling thought.

[shyams]

While I am not denying that, as Secretary of State, Mrs Clinton had access to some of the most sensitive documents, the US Govt classification system and the number of people in the US with access to such "classified" documents is severely flawed.

 

1. I believe around 5 million people working for (or contracting for) the US Govt have access to classified documents.

2. I also believe a good 10%-15% of these have access to all but the highest level of classification {I have no idea what that means and how many levels of classification exist}.

3. Every "classified" document is supposed to be treated with kid gloves by all these 5 million people.

 

Are we saying there are never any accidents?! Or worse, malicious incidents involving such classified documents?

And how does the media or the senators decide whether a leaked classified document is low level classified or has a very sensitive classification?

 

 

My point is: The tag "classified" has no significance unless someone with authority and knowledge can opine that the documents involved were really sensitive and meant for access by a handful of people. In absence of such opinion, no incident involving "classified information" can merit any of the debates going on in the media.

[kenberg]

If this is accurate, I think it is the most disturbing of all possibilities: an extremely powerful government agency with partisan rogue agents who are capable of influencing the Director's decision making. That is a chilling thought.

 

This is an immense can of worms. It has been reported, several times, that Justice knew of his plans, and had the power to forbid him to do it. Just about everyone has probably been in this situation at one time or another.

Boss: Do the following

Worker: Put that in writing

Boss: No, just do it.

 

My view is that if the boss won't put it in writing,, leaving me to take the heat, then I do what I think is right instead of what boss thinks is right. If boss puts it in writing then I will, if I don't find it too objectionable, do as I am told. And boss can take the heat when it all blows up.

 

Here is how, from my viewpoint, it should have gone.

First, the agents inform Comey as soon as Clinton emails are discovered on the Weiner computer (assuming, as reported, that is the case).

Next, Comey informs Lynch.

Lynch says "We will move immediately to get you a warrant to look at these messages in detail. This is very sensitive and tricky. We will get the needed warrant absolutely without delay, we will examine the emails without delay, and then we will see if Congress needs to be informed. We will defintitely infomr them if there is anything to inform them about, but I believe it is legitimate to wait until we have a better understanding of what we are dealing with"

 

Did Lynch say any such thing? I have no idea. Did she just say "You can't inform Congress, that's that, end of story."? I have no idea.

 

Nobody looks good here.

 

I have been thinking more about these emails being on the Weiner computer. A separate post for that.

[kenberg]

"Clinton emails are on the Weiner computer"

 

What does this mean? It's not eentirely obvious.. My email messages at kenbecky are somewhere. In the cloud maybe, but not on my computer. Of course I can download material and place it in a file on my computer. is that what is being said? Downloaded from where? It matters, at least some. I have been trying to think this through.

 

My kenbecky account goes back years to when we first set up a gmail account. It soon became obvious that it would be better for Becky to have a separate email account, and she does. I also have an email account, krb, through the university that is still active.

 

When I was more active, math discussions were on krb. I still bring krb up every few days and sometimes it is important to do so, but both math and personal stuff is now done mostly on kenbecky. Now here is the point: If a former colleague wanted to contact me, he might send it to krb, he might send it to kenbecky, I cannot imagine him sending an email to Becky with a message intended for me. It makes no sense.

 

Ok, so it would be weird for HC to contact Abedin through Weiner's email account. But then, what is it that happened? Presumably Abedin did not forward the messages to Weiner.

 

Now Becky and I can, if we wish, read each other's email. This is convenient. Becky will say "So and so sent a message about such and such". She could forward it, and sometimes she does, or else I can just do a click when in my email and bring up her email.

 

But these are letters about who went where on a trip. I am not, and Becky is not, exchanging letters with the Secretary of State about foreign policy.

 

Surely if I were, I would set up my email, and my computer, so that Becky could not access the messages. This is not because I think she is a Russian spy. But if a document is leaked and an investigator comes around to ask who has access to my computer, I would want to be able to say "Me, and me alone". This is simple and obvious, is it not? Surely this comes under the heading of both following the rules and using good judgment.

 

 

The Clinton investigation aside, it seems obvious that the FBI would be concerned if email exchanges involving the Secretary of State appear inexplicably on a computer where you would not expect them to be. Abedin says "I have no idea how they got there". That's a little unsettling.

[mike777]

Clinton and the democrats continue to show their power to destroy Comey. They continue to attack his honor and integrity. .

 

Harry Reid accuses Comey of being a criminal, a lack of honor and integrity and in violation of the Hatch Act.

 

 

Welcome to clinton being President as she destroys those that cross her.

[Winstonm]

"Clinton emails are on the Weiner computer"

 

What does this mean? It's not eentirely obvious.. My email messages at kenbecky are somewhere. In the cloud maybe, but not on my computer. Of course I can download material and place it in a file on my computer. is that what is being said? Downloaded from where? It matters, at least some. I have been trying to think this through.

 

My kenbecky account goes back years to when we first set up a gmail account. It soon became obvious that it would be better for Becky to have a separate email account, and she does. I also have an email account, krb, through the university that is still active.

 

When I was more active, math discussions were on krb. I still bring krb up every few days and sometimes it is important to do so, but both math and personal stuff is now done mostly on kenbecky. Now here is the point: If a former colleague wanted to contact me, he might send it to krb, he might send it to kenbecky, I cannot imagine him sending an email to Becky with a message intended for me. It makes no sense.

 

Ok, so it would be weird for HC to contact Abedin through Weiner's email account. But then, what is it that happened? Presumably Abedin did not forward the messages to Weiner.

 

Now Becky and I can, if we wish, read each other's email. This is convenient. Becky will say "So and so sent a message about such and such". She could forward it, and sometimes she does, or else I can just do a click when in my email and bring up her email.

 

But these are letters about who went where on a trip. I am not, and Becky is not, exchanging letters with the Secretary of State about foreign policy.

 

Surely if I were, I would set up my email, and my computer, so that Becky could not access the messages. This is not because I think she is a Russian spy. But if a document is leaked and an investigator comes around to ask who has access to my computer, I would want to be able to say "Me, and me alone". This is simple and obvious, is it not? Surely this comes under the heading of both following the rules and using good judgment.

 

 

The Clinton investigation aside, it seems obvious that the FBI would be concerned if email exchanges involving the Secretary of State appear inexplicably on a computer where you would not expect them to be. Abedin says "I have no idea how they got there". That's a little unsettling.

 

I wonder if a home network could be the culprit? I don't even know if home networking would allow shared files from e-mails, though, but it is the only thing I can think of that makes any sense.

[Winstonm]

Clinton and the democrats continue to show their power to destroy Comey. They continue to attack his honor and integrity. .

 

Harry Reid accuses Comey of being a criminal, a lack of honor and integrity and in violation of the Hatch Act.

 

 

Welcome to clinton being President as she destroys those that cross her.

 

Comey has done most of the honor and integrity damage to himself. Various parties, both Democrats and Republicans, are criticizing his actions.

[Al_U_Card]

Seems that Comey lost the respect of a lot of his subordinates and agents when he let Hil off. This may be his way of getting them back on his side no matter what the contents.

[kenberg]

I wonder if a home network could be the culprit? I don't even know if home networking would allow shared files from e-mails, though, but it is the only thing I can think of that makes any sense.

 

I also don't know. I have not set up a home network, mostly because I would have to figure out how to do it and I don't see, for us, that there would be any point. But if I did have a home network set up, and then I took a job where I would be exchanging views with the Secretary of State on foreign policy, I would promptly disable it.

 

Often things that look wrong, and for that matter are wrong, turn out to be just bad choices, sometimes really bad choices. That seems to be what Comey decided back in July. It seems likely (to me) that this is the way it will turn out here as well. Or maybe the things on the Weiner computer from Clinton will just be discussions about the best way to cook salmon. That would be too much to hope for.