Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FBI Reopens Clinton E-Mail Probe Less Than Two Weeks Before Vote

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 319 posts

Re: FBI Reopens Clinton E-Mail Probe Less Than Two Weeks Before Vote

#81

Post by jonknee »

carsongross wrote: post #62
mzw_mzw wrote: post #7

That was a very strange article with all the near-wishful "igniting speculation about a Clinton defeat" stuff. The whole emails issue has been inside baseball, politics-wise. Insiders and pundits love yelling about it but average voters either don't care (the vast majority) or have already assumed she's guilty/not guilty and priced that into their vote. Reopening the investigation is not going to change the election…

> Reopening the investigation is not going to change the election outcome. Perhaps true. But it does indicate who Comey thinks is going to win the election. If you were the director of the FBI would you re-open an investigation of your about-to-be boss?

Comey already threw his about-to-be boss under the bus by publicly denouncing her deemed-legal behavior. What does he have to lose at this point?

Re: FBI Reopens Clinton E-Mail Probe Less Than Two Weeks Before Vote

#82

Post by cmdrfred »

MaxfordAndSons wrote: post #65
cmdrfred wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems pretty clear. They are going to investigate those new emails. Hence, reopening the investigation. Where am I wrong?

I was under the impression that there's some operational distinction between looking at and evaluating some information, and declaring a formal, targeted investigation as "open". But its probably too fine a distinction for the general public to be bothered about. It's a bad look vs a worse look.

Perhaps, I think the key takeaway for Americans is the "Not Guilty" that Americans seemed to believe was the case in regards to these emails (It was really "Nobody would prosecute") may not be so.

Perhaps it would have been better to admit fault and deal with this outright in the beginning, rather than attempting to manipulate the process[0].

[0]http://observer.com/2016/07/exclusive-security-source-detail...

Re: FBI Reopens Clinton E-Mail Probe Less Than Two Weeks Before Vote

#85

Post by bb88 »

Kenji wrote: post #19
mzw_mzw wrote: post #7

That was a very strange article with all the near-wishful "igniting speculation about a Clinton defeat" stuff. The whole emails issue has been inside baseball, politics-wise. Insiders and pundits love yelling about it but average voters either don't care (the vast majority) or have already assumed she's guilty/not guilty and priced that into their vote. Reopening the investigation is not going to change the election…

The e-mails should have put her in prison, and they would have put anyone else in the same situation in prison. But you're right, with her being her, they're a complete nonissue. They simply don't matter at all.

"Scooter" Libby leaked the name of a CIA agent and got pardoned. It's time for Obama to pardon Hillary on this.

Re: FBI Reopens Clinton E-Mail Probe Less Than Two Weeks Before Vote

#86

Post by burkaman »

gthtjtkt wrote: post #41

As much as I would like this to be true, I think that's a pretty biased interpretation of his letter. My reading would be this: "We found some new emails. They're relevant, but we don't know if they're important. We're looking into it." What I find interesting is the timing of this letter and, possibly, the fact that he wrote it at all . But we can't judge the significance of those without knowing if this is standard…

It sounds like he only sent the letter because of his testimony, and his testimony was highly unusual, so the letter must be too.

Re: FBI Reopens Clinton E-Mail Probe Less Than Two Weeks Before Vote

#87

Post by drawnwren »

ethanbond wrote: post #73
drawnwren wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't seen any numbers that indicate the nation cares either way on this. Here's some analysis of Hilary getting slight gains after the announcement that FBI wouldn't prosecute.[1] Is your comment based on polling or just gut feeling? [1] http://www.inquisitr.com/3287325/hillary-clinton-polls-did-f...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/09/09/hi...

This generally seems like a poor signal. People are very bad at reporting what affects their voting decision and a little better at reporting how they will vote. I would be much more apt to believe this was an important factor if we see a shift in the tracking polls or a significant shift in another.

Re: FBI Reopens Clinton E-Mail Probe Less Than Two Weeks Before Vote

#88

Post by ethanbond »

drawnwren wrote: post #87
ethanbond wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/09/09/hi...

This generally seems like a poor signal. People are very bad at reporting what affects their voting decision and a little better at reporting how they will vote. I would be much more apt to believe this was an important factor if we see a shift in the tracking polls or a significant shift in another.

> I haven't seen any numbers that indicate the nation cares either way on this

Regardless of if it will affect their vote (some it will, some it won't), people absolutely do care.

Re: FBI Reopens Clinton E-Mail Probe Less Than Two Weeks Before Vote

#89

Post by jljljl »

jbermudes wrote: post #71
jljljl wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a few likely differences, although it's hard to tell from the limited info in the Clinton case: 1) Saucier generated the classified information. He took the photos. I don't think there was evidence the Clinton was knowingly sending classified information to non-cleared individuals 2) Saucier himself deleted the files from his laptop after learning he was under investigation. The FBI in Clinton's case determin…

Regarding #2, there's some circumstantial evidence that there was an attempt to hide emails either through deleting them or not turning them over: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/9272#efmBA7BOJ

The FBI explicitly investigated whether there was an attempt to hide emails. Here is Comey's statment:

> The lawyers doing the sorting for Secretary Clinton in 2014 did not individually read the content of all of her e-mails, as we did for those available to us; instead, they relied on header information and used search terms to try to find all work-related e-mails among the reportedly more than 60,000 total e-mails remaining on Secretary Clinton’s personal system in 2014. It is highly likely their search terms missed some work-related e-mails, and that we later found them, for example, in the mailboxes of other officials or in the slack space of a server.

> It is also likely that there are other work-related e-mails that they did not produce to State and that we did not find elsewhere, and that are now gone because they deleted all e-mails they did not return to State, and the lawyers cleaned their devices in such a way as to preclude complete forensic recovery.

> We have conducted interviews and done technical examination to attempt to understand how that sorting was done by her attorneys. Although we do not have complete visibility because we are not able to fully reconstruct the electronic record of that sorting, we believe our investigation has been sufficient to give us reasonable confidence there was no intentional misconduct in connection with that sorting effort.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/07/politics/james-comey-hillary-c...

Post reply on HN