Comey, Who Investigated Hillary Clinton For Using Personal Email For Official Business, Used His Personal Email For Official Business (buzzfeed.com) 464
An anonymous reader shares a report: Former FBI Director James Comey, who led the investigation into Hillary Clinton's use of personal email while secretary of state, also used his personal email to conduct official business, according to a report from the Justice Department on Thursday. The report also found that while Comey was "insubordinate" in his handling of the email investigation, political bias did not play a role in the FBI's decision to clear Clinton of any criminal wrongdoing.
The report from the office of the inspector general "identified numerous instances in which Comey used a personal email account (a Gmail account) to conduct FBI business." In three of the five examples, investigators said Comey sent drafts he had written from his FBI email to his personal account. In one instance, he sent a "proposed post-election message for all FBI employees that was entitled 'Midyear thoughts,'" the report states. In another instance, Comey again "sent multiple drafts of a proposed year-end message to FBI employees" from his FBI account to his personal email account.
The report from the office of the inspector general "identified numerous instances in which Comey used a personal email account (a Gmail account) to conduct FBI business." In three of the five examples, investigators said Comey sent drafts he had written from his FBI email to his personal account. In one instance, he sent a "proposed post-election message for all FBI employees that was entitled 'Midyear thoughts,'" the report states. In another instance, Comey again "sent multiple drafts of a proposed year-end message to FBI employees" from his FBI account to his personal email account.
Hypocrisy in government? (Score:2, Funny)
Well... I'll never! Color me shocked ... shocked, I TELL YOU!
What I don't understand about Comey is that he all but threw the election to Trump while panning Trump left and right.
Re:Hypocrisy in government? (Score:5, Insightful)
What I don't understand about Comey is that he all but threw the election to Trump while panning Trump left and right.
It's easy to understand. Comey and the rest of the beltway didn't even suspect Trump might get elected. The purpose of that farcical reopen/close stunt was to clean the slate; Clinton would win the election and enter office with no outstanding investigative hangups.
Re: (Score:2)
Comey was covering his ass after "clearing" Clinton only to find out months later that Anthony Weiner had more of her classified emails on his laptop.
Re:Hypocrisy in government? (Score:5, Informative)
> That and the FBI was actually pretty pro-Trump.
Are we reading the same report?
Page 5:
Page 420 shows a text saying "we'll stop" Trump from becoming President [imgur.com]--a text that was somehow completely omitted, rather than redacted, from previous disclosures.
Page 430 shows FBI agents getting 'gifts' from the media [imgur.com].
Page 461-2:
You may want to read more than just the conclusions at the end.
Whut? (Score:2, Insightful)
If anything, he was Trump's tool.
Re:Whut? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
"Comey arguable lost Clinton the presidency (or at least contributed to it) by announcing the email investigation etc at with what we'll call "very interesting timing", or at best amounts to simply bad luck for Clinton."
Well then by all means Clinton should run again in 2020. Pretty please?
Re:Hypocrisy in government? (Score:4, Insightful)
Plenty of people holding clearances and many whose careers were ended (or put in jail) for far less cared about that shit.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Hypocrisy in government? (Score:5, Interesting)
"Just think of the October announcement of the reexamination of the case and it being shut again two days later as a way to reinforce that this is a non-issue right before the election."
Are you kidding me?
Imagine tables reversed: ...and then two days later has a press conference saying "on further review, not enough evidence has been found to proceed with charges."
FBI director has a press conference 11 days before the election and states "The FBI is reviewing allegations that Mr. Trump molested an under-age female."
And you're telling me that wouldn't have been an election-killing attack on Trump?
Get real.
Re: (Score:3)
"The FBI is reviewing allegations that Mr. Trump molested an under-age female."
And you're telling me that wouldn't have been an election-killing attack on Trump?
There is no way that would have 'killed' his election chances. There were allegations flying around about Trump walking in on underage girls changing their clothes all the time at Miss Teen USA, and 60 million idiots still voted for him. His voters absolutely do not care how or what Trump does to women (or girls).
But did he send any classified information? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No it's still illegal because it circumvents the FOIA laws. That was the reason Clinton set that server up in the first place - so she could decide which emails would be preserved.
Re: (Score:2)
And using an external email service is legal for conducting official (and probably confidential) business?
Re: But did he send any classified information? (Score:5, Insightful)
That wasn't illegal in 2010. That was made illegal following Clinton leaving secertary of state position.
It is currently illegal and yet Trump has not just one but multiple private data channels sitting on top of classified data daily. My favorite was a photo with the media that showed classified docents sitting underneath an unsecured phone in the room with reporters.
That makes Clinton look sane. And that takes quite a bit
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not familiar with this photo, but I am genuinely curious: how do you know, just from looking at a picture, whether a phone is secured or not? I would have expected that secured and unsecured phones would appear the same. After all, a notable difference in outward appearance would seem to beg for phones that mimic the "safe" appearance in order to gain exposure to sensitive material, and it that difference would advertise that authentic secured phones have likely been exposed to sensitive (hence valuable
Re:But did he send any classified information? (Score:5, Interesting)
How so? The email sent from his FBI account, to his Gmail account circumvented the FOIA laws because magically the sent email was not retained and preserved?
Really?
Re: (Score:2)
How so? The email sent from his FBI account, to his Gmail account circumvented the FOIA laws because magically the sent email was not retained and preserved?
Really?
> fwds official email from gov't account to personal
> now has original sender's address in personal email address book
> send all future communications from personal address, using personal email address book.
Pretty simple.
Re: (Score:2)
Read the story below, and then fuck right off. Let's stop pretending that anyone really cares if someone in a presidential administration uses personal email.
https://nyti.ms/2yoxME [nyti.ms]
In case you can't figure out how to bypass the paywall:
Re: (Score:2)
She set it up because state unsecured emails had long been compromised.
Re: (Score:2)
Clinton wasn't sending copies from her gov't email address to her @clintonemail.com, that WAS her gov't email address. She refused to use her @state.gov account.
Re: (Score:3)
Wrong. Clinton's intent is not mentioned once in the report. That is not its purpose.
Re: (Score:2)
Three fucking classified emails are the "big difference"? Note: Classified, not Secret, Top Secret or SAP.
Comey wasn't the only one (Score:4, Interesting)
Strzok and Page also used personal email to conduct FBI business. And yes, it was probably illegal - their work-related communications must be subject to FOIA’s disclosure provisions.
Re: (Score:3)
The OIG report also says (Score:5, Interesting)
The OIG report also says Comey claims he didn't know Anthony Weiner was married to Clinton's chief of staff Huma Abedin...
Director of the FBI.
Re: (Score:2)
My jaw dropped when I read that in the OIG executive summary.
But in a way this seems consistent with Comey's various misjudgments. He made some really naive errors.
Comey may be a case of the Peter Principle, a man who has "risen to the level of his incompetence". For him that level was where he had to handle matters with political implications. Comey made a complete hash of those when all he had to do was do things the usual way.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
The OIG report also says Comey claims he didn't know Anthony Weiner was married to Clinton's chief of staff Huma Abedin...
Director of the FBI.
Given that Anthony Weiner himself apparently didn't know he was married to Abedin, I'll give Comey a pass on just this one.
Re:The OIG report also says (Score:4, Informative)
Those "Russian ad buys" were in favor of progressive causes though. They funded Black Lives Matters, Clinton campaign rallies, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Not to mention most of those "Russian ad buys" occurred after the election.
Unsurprising. (Score:5, Insightful)
I've long suspected that use of personal email accounts is so rampant in government that if the FBI did prosecute, half of congress would be torn between destroying their own emails and trying to dig up anything the other party sent them from a person address. It's only a big deal with it can be turned into a political weapon.
Powell did too (Score:5, Insightful)
1,2,3 the righties scream
Meanwhile the IG report drops and results in no new indictments, no firings... a big nothing burger... yawn.
Powell's the one who suggested Hilary do it (Score:3)
Re:Powell did too (Score:5, Informative)
Hillary set up a private server and used it for all her official email. She never used her state.gov email account.
Comparing the two is like comparing someone who occasionally drives over the speed limit, with someone who always drives 100+ MPH.
Re: (Score:2)
Go back to the Bush administration and Colin Powell had a personal server too... and he too used it for business...
Aren't people getting tired of whataboutism like this? It's a logical fallacy and it doesn't help the conversation.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Of course there was no political bias, James Comey is a Republican and his second in command, Andrew McCabe, is a Republican too. Yet the GOP blowhards constantly tell their base this is a conspiracy by the Democrats.
It is the same with the special prosecutor Robert Mueller. He was selected by Rod Rosenstein, the Deputy Attorney General, who was appointed by Trump. Both Rosenstein and Mueller are Republicans. In fact Mueller was the FBI Director under Bush.
Re: (Score:2)
That's kind of a puzzle there, that the White House didn't have an email server. I worked at NASA HQ just down the street in the mid-90's and we had email servers (I ran them) and I knew people who worked at the White House who'd come from NASA. It's weird to me that they had a web site but no email server.
[John]
Re:Powell did too (Score:5, Informative)
Powell never used his personal email for official government related emails. That is a lie. The Left tried to get him on it and it failed for that precise reason.
To the contrary, he did. But it wasn't illegal to use personal servers for government related email. It only became policy after Hillary left office: https://www.wsj.com/articles/c... [wsj.com]
https://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/colin-powell-defends-personal-email-227889
https://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/fbi-colin-powell-email-probe-218748
(it was probably illegal for him to not archive them, though.
In fact, it was Powell who advised Hillary on use of personal e-mail: https://abcnews.go.com/Politic... [go.com]
Re:Powell did too (Score:4, Informative)
But it wasn't illegal to use personal servers for government related email. It only became policy after Hillary left office
Then why, in his original testimony to Congress, did Comey specifically state that Clinton did break the law? He chose not to pursue the case because, in his opinion, she had no intent to commit those felonies, but he did, very specifically, state that she committed them.
I guess maybe he was referring to the willful destruction of evidence in an ongoing investigation, a la interns with phones and hammers?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
right (Score:3, Interesting)
so nothing confidential at all, just employee memo drafts?
Except Clinton's official bussiness was Classified (Score:2, Insightful)
(U) Comey was investigated former Secretary of State Clinton for her handling of classified materials.
(U) Unclassified materials were found on an insecure personal server that she had set up to work from home
(U) She claimed that she had no knowledge that any of the documents on that server were classified -- meaning some variety of confidential (C), secret (S), or (most likely at her level) top secret (TS). She believed it was all unclassified (U)
(U) Her claim is fucking ridiculous, because in classified do
Re: (Score:2)
(U) Her claim is fucking ridiculous, because in classified documents every page, heading, sentence, and bullet point, and source reference is preceded by note just like this: (U) (FOUO) (C) (S) (TS)
(U) Is this painful to read? This is the sort of thing that she claims was missing from her documents.
It's also the thing the FBI claims was missing from her documents: [wikipedia.org]
Three emails, out of 30,000, were found to be marked as classified, although they lacked classified headers and were only marked with a small "c" in parentheses, described as "portion markings" by Comey.
(U) You can't get such documents off of the secure network. To get such documents on her private server, she or a lackey uploaded them.
Or someone wrote up some information in an email, either not realizing it was classified or not realizing it shouldn't be sent over email, and clicked send.
(U) Most people who get caught for lesser fuck-ups end up going to jail.
No one doing what Clinton did would be sent to jail, all of the examples of people go
Smear. (Score:4, Insightful)
This is what a smear campaign looks like.
Sigh. Political games are not headlines, but I guess the morning show folks need something to cluck about.
FBI agents received bribes from journalists (Score:5, Interesting)
On page XII in the report, the IG says the department “identified numerous FBI employees, at all levels of the organization and with no official reason to be in contact with the media, who were nevertheless in frequent contact with reporters.”
The IG expressed “profound concerns about the volume and extent of unauthorized media contacts by FBI personnel that we have uncovered our review.”
The contact between FBI agents and the media extended to receiving “improperly receiving benefits from reporters, including tickets to sporting events, golfing outings, drinks and meals, and admittance to nonpublic social events.”
“The harm caused by leaks, fear of potential leaks, and a culture of unauthorized media contacts is illustrated in Chapters Ten and Eleven of our report, where we detail the fact that these issues influenced FBI officials who were advising Comey on consequential investigative decisions in October 2016,” the report states.
The IG is forceful in its opinion that the problem with leaking is not “with the FBI’s policy, which we found to be clear and unambiguous.” Instead, the leaking phenomenon “appears to be a cultural attitude among many in the organization.”
According to charts provided in the IG report, one reporter had contact with 12 FBI officials, including an FBI executive and unit chief.
Another reporter contacted an assistant director 21 times and a special agent 23 times, according to the IG. Some FBI employees were in contact with multiple reporters, with one special agent contacting various journalists 32 times.
Makes my head hurt (Score:3)
I swear, on Slashdot, Trump & Hillary have become Godwin's Law 2.0
It is nearly impossible NOT to find a reference to one or both of these idiots in every single topic. Every Damned One. O.o
got attacked by both parties (Score:3)
He must be the most honest man in government.
Re:Keep things in perspective (Score:4, Informative)
But he's still subject to the same records retention laws that Clinton was willfully subverting.
Re:Keep things in perspective (Score:4, Insightful)
But he's still subject to the same records retention laws that Clinton was willfully subverting.
And how would sending an email from his official FBI account to a personal Gmail account subvert any record retention laws? In one case there are no records retained in government servers, in the other case there are. This does not sound like the same thing. Possible leaking of secure information is another matter, but that is not the main problem from my understanding.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The other name for this is calling Trump to account for his past actions. Under rule of law, these investigations are slow and deliberate. This would also be true for any common criminal, when the law is working as the constitution intends.
Furthermore, investigations into wealthy criminals is almost always a slow process, because they can afford to erect so many barriers of du
Re: (Score:2)
>that would be murder,
At what point is the murder justified if you save thousands of lives with it?
Re: (Score:2)
"At what point is the murder justified if you save thousands of lives with it?"
...said the Roman soldier as he plunged the spear in.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
>that would be murder,
At what point is the murder justified if you save thousands of lives with it?
After the fact.
If you killed Hitler before he did anything wrong, there'd be no justifiable reason to kill Hitler.
Don't resort to violence (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The definition of histrionic. Calm down before Hippocrates fumigates your vagina.
If you knew Mike Pences history (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Sites back, grabs a tub of popcorn... (Score:4, Informative)
Clinton wasn't accused of using personal email for business. She was accused of transmitting top secret documents over unsecured personal email (very illegal), and using personal email to communicate state business secretly outside of officially logged and recorded channels (also illegal).
Is this what Comey is accused of? If not, everyone can fuck off with their "he did it too" shit.
Re:Sites back, grabs a tub of popcorn... (Score:4, Interesting)
Ok. Clinton wasn't accused of using personal email for business. She was accused of transmitting top secret documents over unsecured personal email
Classified, actually. Top Secret is considerably higher; "classified" is not the same as "top secret".
Amusingly, her server turns out to have been more secure than the State Department server. The State Department got hacked, but the Clintons didn't. https://securityintelligence.c... [securityintelligence.com]
(very illegal),
In fact, all she had to do was issue an exemption stating that her server was allowed for classified email. As Secretary of State, she had the authority to declare what server are secure!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Then how did those darn Russians get her emails? The alternative to badly secured server hacked by Russians is the Seth Rich conspiracy theory. Pick your poison carefully.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course every foreign intelligence server had access to her server. That's what foreign intelligence agencies exist to do - not to mention it was Exchange 2010 with an internet-facing webmail login. Hell, I could've gotten into it.
Re: (Score:2)
foreign intelligence server = foreign intelligence agency
Re: Sites back, grabs a tub of popcorn... (Score:4)
It would have been a problem if he hadn't returned the salute as it would have been an insult to ignore the salute.
No, Different leak [Re:Sites back, grabs a tub...] (Score:5, Informative)
Then how did those darn Russians get her emails? The alternative to badly secured server hacked by Russians is the Seth Rich conspiracy theory. Pick your poison carefully.
The DNC email leak was from the DNC, not the Clinton server (and was years after Hillary left the Secretary of State office). It was done by phishing John Podesta's account: https://www.apnews.com/dea73ef... [apnews.com]
https://www.engadget.com/2017/11/03/ap-investigation-russia-hack-dnc-clinton-emails/
Re:No, Different leak [Re:Sites back, grabs a tub. (Score:4, Informative)
The DNC email leak was from the DNC, not the Clinton server (and was years after Hillary left the Secretary of State office). It was done by phishing John Podesta's account:
There were three distinct leaks: one from the Clinton server, one from the DNC and one from Podesta. The Podesta leak has nothing to do with the DNC leak and the phished Podesta account is on gmail.
Re: (Score:3)
Citation? Actually, never mind.
Re:Sites back, grabs a tub of popcorn... (Score:5, Informative)
"Amusingly, her server turns out to have been more secure than the State Department server. The State Department got hacked, but the Clintons didn't. https://securityintelligence.c... [securityin...gence.c...] [securityintelligence.com] "
The OIG report released today SAYS that foreign governments had at least one of her emails marked Secret - from her server.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Top Secret is a classification, as are Secret and Confidential. 'Classified' itself is not a classification at all.
Re:Sites back, grabs a tub of popcorn... (Score:5, Interesting)
That doesn't mean she wasn't hacked, it means that the state department detected their hack, while Hillary didn't.
Re:Sites back, grabs a tub of popcorn... (Score:5, Interesting)
"As Secretary of State, she had the authority to declare what server are secure!"
Not true. The Sec of State only has classification authority over documents originating with the Dept of State. The classified info they found originated in other agencies.
Re: (Score:2)
In all the news about Hillary Clinton's email servers, I never saw ANYTHING that would indicate Hillary Clinton has any technical knowledge.
I think it is likely that technically-knowledgeable people like those who comment on Slashdot accidentally overestimate the technical knowledge of others. Possibilities:
1) Hillary plugged in her own email server and configured email accounts. (Makes me laugh.)
2) Someone arranged Hillary's office for her. Who has never been revealed,
Re:Sites back, grabs a tub of popcorn... (Score:5, Insightful)
In all the news about Hillary Clinton's email servers, I never saw ANYTHING that would indicate Hillary Clinton has any technical knowledge.
Maybe it's because how flippant she was about it? "Wipe the server" "You mean with a cloth?"
Maybe it's because she deleted so many emails before granting access to the FBI?
Maybe it's because she was head of the Department of State and should have asked somebody if she honestly had no technical knowledge?
Maybe it's because she has almost no credibility and the only ones voting for her were doing it of party reasons, anti-trump reasons, or for gender reasons>
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Stop. You are wrong.
Information is classified - every agency has a large document called a Classification Guide that describes what sort of information that agency considers worthy of classification.
Documents are supposed to be marked if they contain classified information, to allow people to know how to handle the document without reading it. Even if not marked, the information in the document is still classified; it just isn't labelled.
The phrase "classified at the time of sending" is a lie. The docume
Re: Sites back, grabs a tub of popcorn... (Score:4, Informative)
AS Secretary of State, as a former senator, HRC is responsible for determining what is and is. It classified (at any of the three levels) WITHOUT relying on 'markings'. That's like saying it was OK for her to rob a bank because no one told her it was illegal.
It's a childish defense for something that someone who was responsible to know better.
Re: (Score:3)
It boggles my mind how liberals are ok with this but are outraged by a possibly illegal payment to a woman Trump allegedly had sex with.
Re: (Score:3)
You know if boggles the mind of liberals that you care about a handful of emails out of thousands sent over 4 years that contained bits of classified information, and you don't care that the actual President of the United States ordered illegal hush money paid and threats delivered to his former mistresses to keep them from speaking out during an election, then lied about the payments, and then lied about the affairs.
You should be self-aware enough to recognize that if we swapped the Democrat and Republican
Re: (Score:2)
On top of which, doing government business using a personal account was, and AFAIK remains, perfectly legal. The only problem is a Government Records Act requirement that the messages be archived for public review. At the time that Clinton was Secretary of State, there was no time limit on how long she had to archive the messages. In fact Colin Powell has never quite gotten around to archiving his emails from the early 2000s.
My understanding is that since 2016 there has been a hard time limit for archivi
Re: (Score:2)
>Amusingly, her server turns out to have been more secure than the State Department server. The State Department got hacked, but the Clintons didn't.
Alternatively, they both got hacked, but only one was able to detect the hack.
Re: Sites back, grabs a tub of popcorn... (Score:5, Insightful)
HRC used a personal server exclusively for 100% of her work-related emails while Secretary of State - she never, in her entire tenure as Secretary logged into a state Department email account.
Comey sent (3x) drafts of mass departmental emails he planned to send to everyone in the FBI to his private gmail account, presumably to work on them at home gonvieniently.
These are in no way comparable 'offenses'.
I find it hard to believe HRC's private server more secure than the state department email server she should have used - it is simply non-sensical, State had a full-time staff working round-clock to secure their servers, HRC bounced her server from part-time contractor to a web hosting firm.
The IG report clearly states that HRC's email server was accessed by foreign agents - is it only a problem if the Russians hacked her server? Is it OK if it was the Chinese or North Koreans?
Re: (Score:2)
As Secretary of State, she had the authority to declare what server are secure!
Not saying you are lying, but that seems just a little hard to believe. The Secretary of State has final say on how secure software/hardware installations are?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ok
Clinton wasn't accused of using personal email for business. She was accused of transmitting top secret documents over unsecured personal email (very illegal), and using personal email to communicate state business secretly outside of officially logged and recorded channels (also illegal).
Is this what Comey is accused of? If not, everyone can fuck off with their "he did it too" shit.
No.
She was accused of two things:
1) She used personal email for official business. This was against department policy, but I don't think it was against the law as long as she turned over the work related emails for record keeping (which she did, though she had to be reminded).
This is incredibly common, it's what Comey is being accused of, it's human nature, if you talk to your friend about personal business and work business you're sometimes going to talk in the wrong channel. Clinton should certainly be cr
Re: (Score:2)
It doesn't matter what she was accused of.
Re:Sites back, grabs a tub of popcorn... (Score:5, Insightful)
You jest. But the discussion is already filled with ACs who'd just as soon see someone dead than be civil about their political opponents.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:It is only Illegal if... (Score:5, Insightful)
The rhetoric about this issue is highly partisan, including your post. However, I don't think this is a liberal/conservative issue, really.
As a state employee, I'm allowed to use my personal email address for official business. Once in awhile I do so, if I want to have a particular discussion outside of work hours while not checking my work email for other business. Nothing I'm doing is sensitive, and I'm allowed to do it provided the emails are sent to an official state email address reasonably soon.
If Comey is using a personal email address to send himself drafts of agency-wide letters, that doesn't seem problematic. Comey isn't going to be sending sensitive information to the entire FBI.
Comey did completely mishandle investigating Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server. Neither liberals nor conservatives approve of how Comey handled that investigation, so I don't think that's a controversial statement. Clinton was also incredibly reckless, to say the least, in using a personal email server for handling sensitive information. That is, indeed, problematic. As for there being a political bias, Mike Pence also used a personal email account to conduct official business while he was the Governor of Indiana. That email account was hacked, exposing sensitive information. Mike Pence didn't break Indiana law, and I'm not aware of him ever being investigated over the matter.
While both Clinton and Pence have been heavily criticized for using personal email for conducting work-related business, neither has faced serious consequences for doing so. I don't see a political bias here, for or against conservatives.
As for Comey, using a personal email address for a few emails that don't appear sensitive doesn't seem like a big deal to me. Comey's credibility is gone, but it doesn't have anything to do with this. This seems like a non-issue to me, especially compared with all of the other issues surrounding Comey.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. It seems to me that virtually EVERY government official is going to have a personal email account. After all you are not supposed to use your government account to transact personal business like scheduling a dental appointment or arranging for flowers to be sent to your spouses' mother on her birthday.
If you have a personal account, sooner or later, someone who knows your personal address, is going to send you an email about something governmental. Bingo, you have government business in your per
Re: (Score:2)
Neither liberals nor conservatives approve of how Comey handled that investigation, so I don't think that's a controversial statement.
The investigations were only covered in scrupulous breathless detail by the right-wing press. It's unlikely that most progressives have a terribly developed opinion on the way in which the investigations were handled. They're more likely to care about the number of investigations, the length, the results, the way in which the results were revealed to the public, etc.
It's pretty easy to identify your political affiliation here based on what you think everyone believes. Not just the above, but also your st
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Record unemployment. Greatest personal and business tax breaks in years. Manufacturing is coming back to the USA in record numbers. Lowest black unemployment ever. Republicans are doing a great job. I'm getting raises at work. Best foreign policy we've had since Reagan. I like how the country is moving right now. If Trump runs in 2020 he has my vote.
Re: It is only Illegal if... (Score:2)
How could it not be a shitty job? It involves running the government. The thing we can hope is that while running the government they can dismantle as much of it as possible.
Re: (Score:2)
So? That's not illegal.
Re: At times like this (Score:2, Interesting)
There's many stories in the 500 page report though. Pointing out this detail seems more like a dedicated spin bot than anything else though- Hillary sent and received SCI data and TS data on her private server. Coney forwarded incomplete memos so he could work them during his evenings like the gray soulless minion that he is. Even lumping these two together is silly.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Clinton had her own email server in her bathroom. Comey probably used gmail/aol/yahoo. There's a difference.
It's the difference between a true geek and a luser. Who here doesn't have a server in every room?
Re: (Score:3)
You mean like negotiating an historic agreement to denuclearize North Korea?
His summit with North Korea did not lead to Kim agreeing to anything he hadn't already agreed to. In fact what he signed did not concede anything at all, and recognized Kim as the leader of North Korea.
Posting some of the highest job growth numbers the nation has ever seen?
The change in job growth between 2016, 2017, and 2018 is not statistically significant. That gives no reason to expect that this would not have happened had anyone else been president.
Record stock market highs?
You're ignoring the record stock market falls in with those "record" highs.
Why would Trump want to distract the media?
To try to distract us from his repeated use o