email from Senator Blumenthal to Hilary

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by spence

I see you're putting faith in pretty unbiased sources

It looks like this hit piece is referencing the CIA source named in an email from Blumenthal to Clinton, falsely redacted by Gowdy and later deemed not classified by the CIA. This was cleared up last fall.


I see, the infighting between the CIA and State over retroactive classification is unnecessary then. Don't know why they're wasting their time.

Actually - the email with the NSA / SAP stuff was released last month, not from the fall. As for the single source, he is, interestingly enough, a Democrat, with experience at the NSA and Naval War College, after a stint as a Naval Intelligence Office, hardly a unknowing source.

But, doesn't fit your model.

[spence]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Actually - the email with the NSA / SAP stuff was released last month, not from the fall.

Do you mean released or re-reported? Many of these emails are being rehashed in an attempt to stir up previously discussed issues.

[JohnR]

Released.

[scottw]

if Hillary is not the target of the investigation and she unknowingly participated in all this hanky panky...why is the person who set up her server being granted immunity?

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by scottw

if Hillary is not the target of the investigation and she unknowingly participated in all this hanky panky...why is the person who set up her server being granted immunity?

Ding ding ding
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by scottw

if Hillary is not the target of the investigation and she unknowingly participated in all this hanky panky...why is the person who set up her server being granted immunity?

I'm sure the FBI is just looking for a degree of completeness in the investigation. Not everyone who pleads the fifth is guilty, if his lawyer just wants to shield him from political attacks that's what you recommend.

I wouldn't be surprised if Clinton is interviewed at some time in the near future.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

I wouldn't be surprised if Clinton is handcuffed at some time in the near future.

fixed it

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by spence

Not everyone who pleads the fifth is guilty.

No, but people who plead the fifth don't want to incriminate themselves because something illegal was going on.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

No, but people who plead the fifth don't want to incriminate themselves because something illegal was going on.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Correct. And the reason the FBI gave him immunity, is that now he isn't facing charges, therefore he no longer can plead the fifth, so they can compel his testimony. Someone wants to hear what he has to say.

I doubt she gets indicted (though obviously I would love it if she did), I just hope it's a thorough investigation so we can put it behind us and wait to see what he complete lack of scruples entertains us with next.

Yesterday: those women accusing my husband of anything unethical, are liars who are out for publicity and money. All of them.

Today: I'm a feminist!!!!!

No scruples, just ambition.

[spence]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

No, but people who plead the fifth don't want to incriminate themselves because something illegal was going on.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

He may just have been advised that as his attorneys don't know exactly what's going on he should keep his mouth shut just in case. If I'm the FBI I don't want anyone stating my position is political, so the investigation needs to be as complete as possible.

It's just like the IRS investigation, Lerner pleads the fifth and the investigation showed nothing illegal.

[spence]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Released.

Haven't seen that anywhere.