quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

nutsucking toilet-licking, nutsucking, slobberblogging, nutsucking, hallucinating, nutsucking, airport bathroom, nutsucking, pants shitting, nutsucking, cock-gargling, nutsucking, felching, nutsucking, ass-wipe ken.

did I miss anything?

nutsucking.

(funny how none of the pro-gay crowd ever censures that...)

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

nutsucking toilet-licking, nutsucking, slobberblogging, nutsucking, hallucinating, nutsucking, airport bathroom, nutsucking, pants shitting, nutsucking, cock-gargling, nutsucking, felching, nutsucking, ass-wipe ken.

did I miss anything?

nutsucking.

(funny how none of the pro-gay crowd ever censures that...)

quote:

...The AP review of Clinton's calendar - her after-the-fact, official chronology of the events of her four-year term - identified at least 75 meetings with longtime political donors and loyalists, Clinton Foundation contributors and corporate and other outside interests that were either not recorded or listed with identifying details scrubbed. The AP found the omissions by comparing the 1,500-page document with separate planning schedules supplied to Clinton by aides in advance of each day's events. The names of at least 114 outsiders who met with Clinton were missing from her calendar, the records show.

The missing entries raise new questions about how Clinton and her inner circle handled government records documenting her State Department tenure - in this case, why the official chronology of her four-year term does not closely mirror other more detailed records of her daily meetings. At a time when Clinton's private email system is under scrutiny by an FBI criminal investigation, the calendar omissions reinforce concerns that she sought to eliminate the "risk of the personal being accessible" - as she wrote in an email exchange that she failed to turn over to the government but was subsequently uncovered elsewhere.

No known federal laws were violated and some omissions could be blamed on Clinton's highly fluid schedule, which sometimes forced late cancellations. But only seven meetings in Clinton's planning schedules were replaced by substitute events on her official calendar. More than 60 other events listed in Clinton's planners were omitted entirely in her calendar, tersely noted or described only as "private meetings" - all without naming those who met with her...

The AP first sought Clinton's calendar and schedules from the State Department in August 2013, but the agency would not acknowledge even that it had the material. After nearly two years of delay, the AP sued the State Department in March 2015. The department agreed in a court filing last August to turn over Clinton's calendar, and provided the documents in November. After noticing discrepancies between Clinton's calendar and some schedules, the AP pressed in court for all of Clinton's planning material. The U.S. has released about one-third of those planners to the AP, so far...

Former senior State Department logistics officials and government records experts interviewed by the AP said that secretaries of state have wide latitude in keeping their schedules - despite federal laws and agency rules overseeing the archiving of calendars and warning against altering or deleting records. Omissions in Clinton's calendar could undermine the document's historical accuracy, particularly its depictions of Clinton's access to political, corporate and other influences, experts said.

"It's clear that any outside influence needs to be clearly identified in some way to at least guarantee transparency. That didn't happen," said Danielle Brian, executive director of the Project on Government Oversight, a nonpartisan government reform group. "These discrepancies are striking because of her possible interest at the time in running for the presidency."...

When Clinton met in September 2009 with her 12 corporate breakfast guests at the New York Stock Exchange, her planning schedule that morning listed the hourlong event as "CEO breakfast discussion and New York Stock Exchange opening bell ceremony," adding that no press would be allowed...

Details about Clinton's private conversation with her corporate guests were not included in her records. Four of the attendees - Schwarzman, Nooyi, Cote and Kullman - headed companies that later donated to Clinton's pet diplomatic project of that period, the U.S. pavilion at the 2010 Shanghai Expo. All the firms represented except Coach lobbied the government in 2009; Blackstone, Honeywell, Omnicom and DuPont lobbied the State Department that year. Schwarzman and Frankfort have personally donated to the Clinton Foundation, and the other firms - except for American Tower and New York Bank of Mellon - also contributed to the Clinton charity...

Clinton's calendar listed meetings with 124 business leaders and political donors and loyalists, but not with 114 others who were identified by the AP's review. In some cases, repeat Clinton visitors were listed for some meetings, but not for others.

Four meetings with S. Daniel Abraham, a multimillionaire who founded the Center for Mideast Peace, were noted in Clinton's calendar. But in four other sessions - including two listed only as "private meeting" - Abraham's name was omitted. Abraham, a prolific fundraiser for Clinton's 2008 campaign who has donated $3 million to a super PAC backing Clinton in 2016, told the AP last year that he and Clinton typically discussed Mideast policy.

"The fact that some information was not captured isn't necessarily a sign of bad faith," said Steven Aftergood, a government records expert at the Federation of American Scientists. He added, "It's obviously more important to have a complete record than a scattershot one."

quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/state-dept-clinton-failed-to-hand-over-key-email/

quote:

Former Secretary Hillary Clinton failed to turn over a copy of a key message involving problems caused by her use of a private homebrew email server, the State Department confirmed Thursday. The disclosure makes it unclear what other work-related emails may have been deleted by the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee.

The email was included within messages exchanged Nov. 13, 2010, between Clinton and one of her closest aides, Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin. At the time, emails sent from Clinton's BlackBerry device and routed through her private clintonemail.com server in the basement of her New York home were being blocked by the State Department's spam filter. A suggested remedy was for Clinton to obtain a state.gov email account.

Seems it just got worse, at least in the lie area.

quote:

It's been an exceptionally busy news week, but this story warrants significant coverage, as it brings to light yet another national security-endangering consequence of Hillary Clinton's improper email scheme. As you already know, Sec. Clinton was personally and specifically warned in 2009 and 2011 about the serious IT security risks her unsecure set-up posed. She acknowledged these concerns, then did nothing. Now the Associated Press reports that technical difficulties plaguing her server in 2010 resulted in the State Department temporarily reducing and disabling its official system's anti-hacking protective measures as a work-around. Extraordinary:

quote:

State Department staffers wrestled for weeks in December 2010 over a serious technical problem that affected emails from then-Secretary Hillary Clinton's home email server, causing them to temporarily disable security features on the government's own systems, according to emails released Wednesday. The emails were released under court order Wednesday to the conservative legal advocacy group Judicial Watch, which has sued the State Department over access to public records related to the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee's service as the nation's top diplomat between 2009 and 2013. The emails, reviewed by The Associated Press, show that State Department technical staff disabled software on their systems intended to block phishing emails that could deliver dangerous viruses. They were trying urgently to resolve delivery problems with emails sent from Clinton's private server.

"This should trump all other activities," a senior technical official, Ken LaVolpe, told IT employees in a Dec. 17, 2010, email. Another senior State Department official, Thomas W. Lawrence, wrote days later in an email that deputy chief of staff Huma Abedin personally was asking for an update about the repairs. Abedin and Clinton, who both used Clinton's private server, had complained that emails each sent to State Department employees were not being reliably received...After technical staffers turned off some security features, Lawrence cautioned in an email, "We view this as a Band-Aid and fear it's not 100 percent fully effective."

In other words, in order to accommodate her not-allowed, malfunctioning arrangement, State deliberately placed its secure system at risk. It's indefensible. And it also exposes another major lie from Clinton, who's sworn under oath that she turned over all work-related emails as required. This was already a known lie, but this week's additional revelation helps illustrate how deep that lie was:

quote:

Former Secretary Hillary Clinton failed to turn over a copy of a key message involving problems caused by her use of a private homebrew email server, the State Department confirmed Thursday. The disclosure makes it unclear what other work-related emails may have been deleted by the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. The email was not among the tens of thousands of emails Clinton turned over to the agency in response to public records lawsuits seeking copies of her official correspondence. Abedin provided a copy from her own inbox after the State Department asked her to return any work-related emails. That copy of the email was publicly cited last month in a blistering audit by the State Department's inspector general that concluded Clinton and her team ignored clear internal guidance that her email setup violated federal standards and could have left sensitive material vulnerable to hackers.

...Meanwhile, the administrator of her bootleg server pleaded the fifth 125 times at a deposition this week...

The fifth amendment -- coincidentally under assault this week from posturing, hysterical Democrats -- ensures the right of an accused to party to not make self-incriminating statements. In this case, such statements apparently include such damning admissions as "yes, I have seen Cheryl Mills." Perhaps Pagliano's lawyers advised him to stonewall every single question from the Judicial Watch attorney because any other strategy might risk compromising a plea deal reached with federal investigators?...

quote:

The conservative radio personality, Chris Plante (WMAL, Washington, DC) opines that the most insidious power of the media is their power to ignore. While it is certainly true that the chief editor of a major newspaper or the producer of a network newscast has the ability to spike or kill a story, which is essentially their way of “ignoring” the news if you will, what is more subtle, deceitful—and dare I suggest corrupt—is their penchant to frame a story to fit a specific narrative. They no longer report the news, but they do shape a message.

There is not a finer example of the media ignoring the facts and shaping a message than what we are witnessing regarding Hillary Clinton’s email server, the classified material on that server, as well as the case of the missing emails. The media have embraced the Clinton campaign’s narrative that there is “nothing to see here,” that there wasn’t some “mishandling email controversy,” at most, or repeat Secretary Clinton’s own bogus statement, “using a personal e-mail was permissible” as “other Secretaries of State did the same thing.” Other excuses have been thrown against the wall to see if something will stick, such as, she was “trying to protect her privacy” or “she was clueless about how regular emails work on a conventional computer.”

Anyone in the intelligence community and DOD holding a top secret clearance with Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI)—a type of classified information concerning or derived from sensitive intelligence sources, methods, or analytical processes—knows that not only is Hillary Clinton (and her minions) lying but that the media—unable to completely ignore the multifaceted issue—has shifted to shaping the narrative. The KGB disinformation service couldn’t have done a better job.

To transfer any classified information onto an unclassified system, you have to work at it. To transfer classified information from a secure classified system and move it to an unclassified system is not only difficult, it is illegal. Those within the intelligence community know this action, in all of its forms, is called espionage. The essence of espionage is the unauthorized movement of classified documents out of a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility, a SCIF, and into the hands of “any person not entitled to receive it.” The men and women with TS/SCI who toil in the IC and DOD, working with the nation’s most trusted secrets, know that if they were to secure a private email server and move any shred, chad, or hint of classified information onto that server, the FBI would be on them like stink on a dead fish with a one-way ticket to a federal brig. And they would be charged with espionage...

The espionage case against Alger Hiss and the case against Hillary Clinton are eerily similar. Both were long-term Democrats, former lawyers, and senior State Department officials that removed classified information “from its proper place of custody…or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed.” It is an undeniable fact that both systematically transferred thousands of pieces of classified information out of the State Department’s offices at Foggy Bottom.

Additionally, there is the issue of 33,000 missing emails. Maybe Julian Assange of WikiLeaks fame could help us out here and release those documents...The former Secretary of State, “gave her State Department emails containing Top Secret and other classified information to her lawyer.” I’m fairly certain, David Kendall was not a fully cleared individual and transferring classified material to someone not authorized to receive them is an act of espionage.

Congressman Trey Gowdy introduced Americans to the legal issue known as “spoliation of evidence.” When some item of relevant evidence—whether documents, physical objects or data—relevant to an ongoing legal matter—is destroyed, discarded or modified in some way, the U.S. legal system allows investigators to presume that the missing evidence was unfavorable to that party and furthermore allows them to draw conclusions accordingly. The classic junior high school excuse, “the dog ate my homework,” or “they were emails dealing with Chelsea’s wedding or yoga” isn’t valid under the law when the disappearance and their handling is suspicious.

Even Inspector Clouseau would find the admission of 33,000 emails, scrubbed or “wiped clean” from a private server, to be highly suspicious. The intentional destruction or negligent loss of evidence suggests that Hillary Clinton believed that her emails were harmful to her, and that consciousness of guilt led her to destroy, hide or lose them. The media will never acknowledge Secretary Clinton’s intentional destruction her emails—classic spoliation of evidence—even if they were beat over the head with it. [same with the comrades here!]...

Dr. Paul Kengor’s exposé on Frank Marshal Davis, The Communist, demonstrated that the one-time editor traveled to the Soviet Union and learned the fine art of propaganda and disinformation from instructors from the KGB. Sixty years later, it appears America’s journalism schools now teach the same propaganda coursework and disinformation strategies as Cold War Moscow. The old Soviet press gave their all for the Motherland and warped the news as required to ensure it fit Stalin’s and the Communist Party’s message. Isn’t that what is going on with today’s media? A better question may be, “Who isn’t a socialist or a closet communist in today’s Democrat-centric media,” carrying the water for the White House, running a Soviet-style disinformation campaign and obscuring the facts in the case of Hillary Clinton?

The President recently endorsed the Democrat nominee for President. The media obfuscated the fact that the FBI received what was tantamount to “marching orders” from the chief law enforcement officer. If the FBI Director insists and submit charges; treason, espionage or something lesser, the Justice Department will ignore the evidence and will never approve an indictment of Mrs. Clinton. And the media will have done its job of ignoring the facts and maintaining the Clinton campaign’s narrative that this was nothing but Republican witch hunting.

quote:

This’s time to keep my word and here’re the docs I promised you.
It’s not a report in one file, it’s a big folder of docs devoted to Hillary Clinton that I found on the DNC server.
The DNC collected all info about the attacks on Hillary Clinton and prepared the ways of her defense, memos, etc., including the most sensitive issues like email hacks.

As an example here’re some files:

2016er Attacks – HRC Defense Master Doc [updated]

04.29.15 CGEP

2016 Democrats Positions Cheat Sheet 7-7-15

20150426 MEMO- Clinton Cash Unravels

Attacks on Clinton Family Members

Clinton Foundation Donors $25K+

Clinton Foundation Vulnerabilities Master Doc FINAL

Clintons PFD 2015

HRC Defense – Emails

HRC Travel – Private Jets FINAL

MEMO — Clinton Cash Claims (2)

quote:

Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, has said his organisation is preparing to publish more emails Hillary Clinton sent and received while US secretary of state.

Clinton, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, is under FBI investigation to determine whether she broke federal law by using her private email in sending classified information. A new WikiLeaks release of Clinton emails is likely to fan a controversy that has bedevilled her campaign and provide further ammunition for Donald Trump, her Republican presidential rival, who has used the issue to attack her.

Assange’s comments came in an interview on ITV’s Peston on Sunday. “We have upcoming leaks in relation to Hillary Clinton … We have emails pending publication, that is correct,” Assange said.He did not specify when or how many emails would be published...

Assange, a trenchant Clinton critic, said she was receiving constant personal updates on his situation. The WikiLeaks founder has been confined to the Ecuadorian embassy in London since July 2012, when he sought asylum to avoid extradition. Assange is wanted in Sweden over allegations of rape dating from 2010, which he denies, but he has not been charged.

Assange said it was highly unlikely that the US attorney general, Loretta Lynch, would indict Clinton. “She’s not going to indict Hillary Clinton, that’s not possible. It’s not going to happen..."

quote:

In a recent interview with ITV, Assange said the whistleblowing website will soon be leaking documents that will provide “enough evidence” for the Department of Justice to indict the presumptive Democratic nominee.

Assange hinted that the emails slated for publication contain additional information about the Clinton Foundation. He also reminded ITV’s Robert Peston that previously released emails contained one damning piece of communication from Clinton, instructing a staffer to remove the classification settings from an official State Department communication and send it through a “nonsecure” channel. Assange then pointed out that the Obama administration has previously prosecuted numerous whistleblowers for violating the government’s procedures for handling classified documents.

In regard to the ongoing FBI investigation, however, Assange expressed a lack of confidence in the Obama administration’s Justice Department to indict the former Secretary of State.

quote:

In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory,[1] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response [2] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion,[3] often for their own amusement…

"Trolls aspire to violence, to the level of trouble they can cause in an environment. They want it to kick off. They want to promote antipathetic emotions of disgust and outrage, which morbidly gives them a sense of pleasure."

Two studies published in 2013 and 2014 have found that people who are identified as trolls tend to have dark personality traits and show signs of sadism, antisocial behavior, psychopathy, and machiavellianism

quote:

Question: What Is an Internet 'Troll'? How Should I Deal With Trolls?

Answer: An internet 'troll' is an abusive or obnoxious user who lives to get a rise out of others online. Trolls use shock value to promote arguments in web conversations. Named after the wicked troll creatures of children's tales, an internet troll is someone who stirs up drama and abuses their online anonymity by purposely sowing hatred, bigotry, racism, mysogyny, or just simple bickering between others. Trolls like a big audience, so they frequent blog sites, news sites, discussion forums, and game chat. Trolls thrive in any environment where they are allowed to make public comments…

At the harsher end of the troll spectrum, trolls are cruel and malicious users who want to set an online community on fire with hate and discord.

quote:

A 2010 decision temporarily disabling State Department security features to accommodate Hillary Clinton’s private server effectively laid out a "welcome mat" for hackers and foreign intelligence services, a leading IT official who oversaw computer security at the Defense Intelligence Agency told Fox News.

"You're putting not just the Clinton server at risk but the entire Department of State emails at risk," said Bob Gourley, former chief technology officer (CTO) for the DIA. "When you turn off your defensive mechanisms and you're connected to the Internet, you're almost laying out the welcome mat for anyone to intrude and attack and steal your secrets."

He was referring to revelations from new court-released documents in a lawsuit by conservative watchdog Judicial Watch. They show the State Department temporarily turned off security features in 2010 so that emails from then-Secretary of State Clinton's personal server would stop going to the department's spam folders...

The court-released emails show State Department IT staffers struggled to resolve the issue in December 2010, and it was considered an urgent matter. "This should trump all other activities," Ken LaVolpe, a senior technical officer, wrote on Dec. 17, 2010.

The disabled software was designed to block so-called phishing emails that could insert viruses into the system. Another senior State Department official, Thomas W. Lawrence, wrote that Clinton aide Huma Abedin was personally checking in for status reports on the progress.

The State Department inspector general's report released in May found Clinton's personal server used exclusively for official State Department business violated government rules. It also reported that in early January 2011 -- a month after the security feature shut-down -- an IT worker shut down the server because he believed "someone was trying to hack us." The individual, who was not identified by name in emails released by the IG, reported a second incident only hours later, writing, "We were attacked again so I shut (the server) down for a few min."

An email also from this time period documented Clinton's concern about getting a government email account. In November 2010, Clinton wrote to Abedin: "Let's get separate address or device but I don't want any risk of the personal being accessible.” Though Clinton said all her work-related emails were turned over, this document was provided not by Clinton but by Abedin.

While Clinton swore under oath last fall all records had been provided, campaign spokesman Brian Fallon said in a statement that Clinton did not have all the emails. [oh how convenient]

"We understand Secretary Clinton had some emails with Huma that Huma did not have, and Huma had some emails with Secretary Clinton that Secretary Clinton did not have," he said. He asserted the November 2010 email shows that “contrary to the allegations of some, Secretary Clinton was not seeking to avoid any use of government email. As indicated in this email, she was open to using a state.gov account but she simply wanted her personal emails to remain private, as anyone would want." [hey that sounds like something one of the comrades would say!]

This week, the head of WikiLeaks Julian Assange told a British television network that he was in possession of Clinton emails that have not yet been released, indicating the system was compromised.

In an interview with British Television Network ITV, Assange said he has Clinton emails that are not public, and there is "enough evidence" for criminal charges, including regarding the Clinton Foundation, though he claimed she was too protected by the Obama administration for an indictment to go forward.

"There's very strong material, both in the emails and in relation to the Clinton Foundation," Assange said...[maybe some mocking will make that go away vile critter parts?]

An NSA whistleblower said the Assange claim should be taken seriously, given WikiLeaks’ track record of releasing authentic documents. [and some extra mocking for this one too eh?]...

Binney said there is a double-standard at play in the Clinton case, given more than 2,100 emails on her server containing classified information have been identified. [gee that looks like a factual statement! maybe if you repeat some of the discredited myths that will help?] He called her files “vulnerable [to] attack [from] all people in the world -- hackers, governments, everybody."...

quote:

The discovery of a potentially damning email that Hillary Clinton failed to turn over to the State Department is of "critical importance," according to Judge Andrew Napolitano.

On "Mornings With Maria," Judge Napolitano explained that the email was from top Clinton aide Huma Abedin to the then-secretary of state and her inner circle, saying that they had been hacked and they were temporarily disabling State Department security features to accommodate Clinton’s private server.

Judge Napolitano said this revelation directly contradicts Clinton's repeated claims that she never jeopardized national security secrets and that her emails were never hacked.

He added that U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan suspected that Clinton was not being forthcoming in releasing all her work-related emails, so he had her swear "under penalty of perjury" that she had surrendered all her governmental emails to the State Department.

"That is a code phrase for 'I think you're lying to me,'" Judge Napolitano explained.

He said that Clinton's failure to turn over this email could add perjury to an already "overwhelming" case, which could see her indicted for espionage, conspiracy, obstruction of justice and a variety of other charges.

He said that if the Justice Department declines to indict Clinton for political reasons, many FBI investigators and Justice Department prosecutors could rebel and leak details of the investigation....

quote:

We learned last week that she also withheld a damning email that shed light on how a problem with her bootleg server, which she was specifically warned was a security threat, caused the State Department to temporarily lower its secure system's firewall. May I remind you that Mrs. Clinton did not merely lie to reporters and the public before that blue backdrop last year; she also certified under penalty of perjury that she'd fully complied with a court order to hand over all official emails to the State Department. This is CNN's report from last August:

quote:

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has told a federal judge that she has turned over all of her work-related emails to the State Department after a judge requested she do so, a state department spokesman confirmed to CNN on Sunday. Clinton signed a declaration obtained by CNN, which said "While I do not know what information may be 'responsive' fr purposes of this law suit, I have directed that all my e-mails on clintonemail.com in my custody that were or potentially were federal records be provided to the Department of State, and on information and belief, this has been done." This follows U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan ordering the State Department to have Clinton as well as two former top department aides to state under penalty of perjury they have produced all government records in their possession.

We've detailed above how this sworn certification was false in at least three instances. And now there's more. Take it away, Associated Press:

quote:

An additional 165 pages of emails from Hillary Clinton's time at the State Department surfaced Monday, including nearly three dozen that the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee failed to hand over last year that were sent through her private server. The latest emails were released under court order by the State Department to the conservative legal advocacy group Judicial Watch. The batch includes 34 new emails Clinton exchanged through her private account with her deputy chief of staff, Huma Abedin. The aide, who also had a private email account on Clinton's home server, later gave her copies to the government. The emails were not among the 55,000 pages of work-related messages that Clinton turned over to the agency in response to public records lawsuits seeking copies of her official correspondence...

Dozens of additional work emails Clinton "failed to hand over last year that were sent through her private server," including missives to and from one of her top aides, Huma Abedin. The system she wanted and designed was a secretive private one, specifically because she wanted full control over "personal" content, as was made clear in the scathing Inspector General report last month. And the beauty of the private server, from her perspective, was that she could determine what would constitute "personal" material, allowing her to keep politically sensitive information away from the prying eyes of records request filers -- with the trade-off of making high-level national security secrets extremely vulnerable to the prying eyes of enemy regimes and two-bit hackers. The only reason these dozens of work emails ever surfaced is because (a) Abedin submitted them to the State Department from her own records, and (b) a conservative group successfully sued for access to them. The former Secretary of State and Democratic presidential nominee-in-waiting has said publicly that she only deleted strictly personal emails, using wedding planning and yoga as examples of the sorts of items she saw fit to erase. That explanation has been disproven over and over again...

Oh, to be a fly on the wall at the FBI's data retrieval operations center. I'll leave you with a timely reminder of Hillary Clinton's testimony before the House Select Committee on Benghazi last fall. Her performance was praised far and wide in the media, as if the panel hadn't laid a glove on her. In fact, they'd unearthed dramatic evidence proving that she'd deliberately misled the public about the nature of the attacks. And then there was the following exchange about work-related emails. At first, she testifies that all emails related to official business (i.e., not yoga) were submitted, but sings a different, gobsmackingly self-serving tune when challenged with countervailing evidence:

quote:

"I was under no obligation to make any of [Blumenthal's] emails available unless I decided they were work-related." That says it all, really. She appointed herself as the ultimate, unaccountable arbiter of what "counted" as official correspondence, and she evidently concluded that dozens of plainly work-related messages were not. Hillary Clinton is ethically unfit for the presidency.

[oh but the comrades will vote for her anyways, wont they?]

quote:

James Comey, the straight-arrow director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, is eager to wind up his investigation of Hillary’s use of an unsecure email system, but he can’t do that until he and Justice Department prosecutors sit down with Hillary and interview her.

Hillary says that neither she nor her campaign have been contacted by the FBI. But that is not true. [oh what a surprise!]

Negotiations have been going on for quite some time between the FBI and Hillary’s attorney, David Kendall, who went to law school with Hillary and defended Bill Clinton in his impeachment trial.

Hillary has come up with a dozen excuses why she’s too busy to take time out for an FBI interview.

The strategy she and Kendall have come up with is clear: They want to drag this out as long as possible—if possible until after Hillary is the official Democratic nominee—which will make it harder politically for Comey to recommend an indictment.

Comey is turning up the heat, insisting that the interview be done sooner than later, but it doesn’t look like he will be able to force Hillary’s hand...