FOX: FBI has recoved ALL of Clinton's emails from wiped Server

[EdwardBernays]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by In_The_Wind (a host of the Latest Breaking News forum).

Source: Fox News

Catherine Herridge: "The @FBI was able to recover [Clinton's] deleted emails ... wipe was not what I would call a professional standard."

Read more: https://twitter.com/FoxNews/status/690326045803855872

---

So, what will happen if there's a huge number of work emails in the recovered emails? Or proof she sent classified info?

Could this be the beginning of a disaster for the Clinton campaign? One thing is certain, this isn't going away any time soon.

[TipTok]

1. Put it on the pile...

Won't change anyone's mind either way though...

Either she is anointed one who is under a sexist politically motivated attack or she is just another citizen who deserves to live by the same laws the rest of us do.

[7962]

5. "put it on the pile"; pretty much says it all. nt

[thesquanderer]

27. There are some minds a "serious" scandal could change

To some extent, I agree with you... most people's minds are made up in terms of whether or not they like Hillary or are intending to vote for her, and one "scandal" more or less (real or not) isn't going to change their minds.

BUT... There are a certain percentage of Dem primary/caucus goers who prefer Hillary in large measure because they think she's more electable in November. (Many of us disagree that that she'd be more electable, but that's not the issue here.) This group may rethink their primary/caucus vote if they see this as a serious issue that could effect her ability to beat the Repubican nominee (whether or not it actually is), and start to think that maybe her nomination would more likely lead to a loss.

And that might actually be the case. If she gets the nomination, there are many independent voters who are having a tough time choosing between candidates they don't like (i.e. polls show her beating Trump and other Republicans nationally despite the fact that she has a higher-than-50% unfavorability rating in the general voting population). To some of these people who are trying to choose the lesser of two evils, maybe there is "one more scandal" that breaks the camel's back, if something ends up being seen as something really serious, or possibly even criminal.

[karynnj]

72. IF -- note - IF, there really is something there that would be seen as damaging, the problem is

the Democratic party should would have been better off knowing a year ago. It seems pretty obvious that Democrats were discouraged from running against HRC. Right now, there are only three on the ballot - O'Malley, who has yet to get traction, Clinton and Sanders.

Going to your last paragraph, which I agree with, I wonder the LONG TERM affects if she is GRUDGINGLY voted into office. I really doubt anyone relishes the thought of having to defend another Clinton through charges of wrongdoing.

[marble falls]

2. I'll need a better source than Fox and Catherine Herridge.

[EdwardBernays]

4. I understand

Saying that, she did tag the FBI on Twitter and they certainly haven't denied it... yet...

And Fox sucks, but I'd think a claim like that probably went across a lawyers desk...

[pocoloco]

32. Piss on the messenger! LOL!

That always works!!

[hobbit709]

3. wipe was not what I would call a professional standard."

you could say that about a lot of things coming from Camp Weathervane.

[2pooped2pop]

55. she used the wrong cloth

should have used bounty. It's the quicker picker upper.

[thesquanderer]

66. More proof for Republicans...

...that the government can't do anything right.

[Botany]

6. HRC sent and received emails?

Did they get the one about Bill Clinton running drugs to fund the Clinton Foundation?

A big fat nothing burger. Karl Rove had millions of emails wiped out that covered
fixing elections, Don Siegleman, and Val Plame so where is all the interest in these
real crimes?

[7962]

11. Its the fact that she had HIGHEST LEVEL SECURITY emails thats a problem.

Or have you been conveniently ignoring that news? She has lied about it the entire time thinking they were deleted.
Here's a story from that right wing rag NBC News
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/hillary-clinton-emails-contained-info-above-top-secret-ig-n499886
"Clinton's campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment."
Of course not, it takes some time to come up with a new excuse.

[yallerdawg]

23. The classifications are occuring in the release to the public of these emails.

This happens in all FOIA releases, and what level of clearance is dependent on the department doing the classifying.

The wicked thing in this is conflating the notion she sent classified emails - not the truth her email releases are being classified as standard practice.

Sadly, this rightwing trope is validated and given credence right here - aren't we 'the left'?

Or is it just more 'higher standard' for Hillary?

[7962]

26. Did you even read the article? SAP emails were on her server.

The ones marked "SAP" are the HIGHEST level of secrecy and cant even be opened without special actions. Which means they were "classified" at that time. She is lying and thought deleting everything would cover it. She had emails containing classified materials. Lots of them.
And even if what she says "nothing marked classified" was true, which its not, it is HER RESPONSIBILITY to make sure classified information IS properly marked and to be able to recognize that material. ANYONE in government or the military is briefed on this subject. Many have been punished for far less than this.

[yallerdawg]

54. I'm reading what it says.

In a letter to lawmakers, the intelligence community's internal watchdog says some of Clinton's emails contained information classified Top Secret/Special Access Program, a secrecy designation that includes some of the most closely held U.S. intelligence matters.

Only speculation and innuendo takes "contained information" which is now classified into transmitting "Top Secret/Special Access Program" emails.

The letter, first reported by Fox News, doesn't make clear whether Clinton sent or received the emails in question, but in the past, emails containing classified information have tended to have been sent to Clinton, not written by her.

Speculation and innuendo - just fine for "Hillary."

[Gore1FL]

14. I don't think Karl Rove is the standard with which we measure acceptible behavior n/t

[TipTok]

18. So someone else broke the law and therefore it doesn't apply anymore?

... or just to the Clintons?

What exactly are you trying to say?

[secondwind]

35. Rove is not running for office

[7962]

7. The presence of SAP messages reveals she's been untruthful the entire time

You cannot open SAP messages without knowing what you're opening. Her lame-ass excuse of "nothing marked classified" is constantly put out there because NONE of these emails would contain that word. Thats not how they're classified!!
Some of these emails are so secret that some of the Congressmen on the panel arent even cleared to view them. So how can she be telling the truth? At all?

[razorman]

30. I think these revelations about SAP messages may be her undoing.

She and her people have continually said that she never sent or received any emails that were,"marked classified" at the time, which is pretty much irrelevant. So, I think that an investigation from this point might start looking for whoever removed the markings (if they were indeed removed) and why. However it all turns out, it is not going away soon.

[sknabt]

53. Thanks for quoting Fox News but..

.. they have been beating the email server story to death because they hate Hillary as much as they hate Obama. Unfortunately, their constant smoke blowing has spread and is driving Hillary's poll numbers and favorables into the toilet as the corporate media who Hillary stiff-armed early in her campaign try to put her into her place too.

I get why Progressives love Bernie and despise Hillary. However, it's Hillary or whatever Republican wins the nomination for President. You can count on 1 hand the number of states Bernie will carry in a general election. That's why Fox News is so kind to Bernie in the primaries, concentrating their smear campaign on Hillary.

So far the State Department has yet to find a single email contrary to the Clinton narrative nothing she received was marked classified.

It's interesting to me a memo to a Republican led committee gets leaked right before the Iowa caucus. Ditto this FBI story. All leaked to... wait for it... right-wing Fox News, Republican Hillary hating headquarters.

Katherine H. was asked to respond to Hillary's response the oh-so-classified email is only referencing a news article on drones. She promises there's more but Fox News, the least accurate cable news outlet, almost never tells the whole truth so I suspect this is a truckload of bulls--t. Why? Because nobody is more knowledgeable of the emails than the Clinton campaign. And they don't appear panicked over any of Fox News' drip, drip, drip smear campaign other than its affect on her poll numbers.

[TipTok]

65. Do you understand that the issue of marking doesn't matter in the least?

If anything it is just another breach of classification and not a mitigating factor.

If I go to my classified e-mail, read that information and then regurgitate it onto my gmail to my brother without referencing the fact that it is SECRET or TS, I have just broken the law.

It certainly doesn't mean the classification goes away because I didn't transfer the marking.

It's the information itself that is classified and the header just informs you of that.

The clinton camp never denies this, at least any more, they just count on the fact that most people don't understand the system.

[thesquanderer]

67. re: "And they don't appear panicked"

If they were, you would expect them to show it?

[karynnj]

75. The key word in your claim about the State Department is MARKED

This seems to come up several times a week in the State Department briefings and - as you can see - they are NOT saying that there was no classified information.

QUESTION: Yesterday you were asked – it was still the State Department’s assertion that none of the documents that have been released contained information that was classified at the time it was sent or received. You said of the documents that have been released, “Yes, that’s the case.” Do you mean when you say that, just to point a really fine point on this, that none of that information was marked classified, or has the State Department made a definitive assertion that none of those documents contained classified information?

MR TONER: No, we – and a fine point is fine. But we’ve said none of the emails released to this point in our monthly productions were marked classified at the time that they were sent. They were upgraded at the time of release.

QUESTION: But you can’t say definitively that they didn’t contain classified information at the time they were sent, just that they weren’t marked as classified?

MR TONER: Correct. And we’ve also said that – acknowledged that there are other reviews and investigations into some of these broader questions.


http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2016/01/251619.htm#IRAQ

[Lurks Often]

8. IF the allegations turn out to be true, I wonder what the Clinton supporters

here will say. Will they acknowledge that their preferred candidate broke the law and belongs in jail, find some way to excuse it or will they be in denial and engage in bizarre conspiracy theories?



To the jury: If this was Bernie Sanders I would post the same thing.

[7962]

12. May I refer you to post #6.....

[Lurks Often]

17. Saw that one

I so love the "Since the Republicans did it, it's ok for Democrats to do the same wrong thing" argument.

Oh, and the likelihood of Karl Rove being cleared for Top Secret/SAP level intelligence is about the same as winning a $1 billion Powerball

[7962]

29. That excuse never worked for me as a kid, either.

"but Johnny swims in the creek!!"

[Nuh Uh]

87. Clinton supporters will....

Draft Joe Biden who will easily win the presidency from any Republican or Democratic challenger.

[Zorro]

9. After Fox "News" failed to bring Clinton down over Benghazi

they're going to their backup plan and flog the private email server as some serious issue that disqualifies her.

Pathetic.

[EdwardBernays]

13. sorry

are you saying that Fox is lying about the FBI? Or that if the FBI recovered all the emails it's not news?

Or what?

[Zorro]

20. Making mountains out of molehills to discredit a Clinton is a Fox "News" agenda

and has been for years. Vince Foster. Whitewater. Etc.

[EdwardBernays]

22. I see

And what will you say if the FBI does find she's done something illegal?

[Zorro]

25. I'll say the same thing when they found out she had Vince Foster murdered

Why are you carrying Fox News' water?

Oh. Edward Bernays. I get it.

[Plucketeer]

76. So, when John Edwards went down in flames in '07

I should've just sucked it up and accepted that it was a conspiracy of the Right that brought him down - not his despicable actions. Clinton Jay-walked - walked against the lights - did a Right turn without signalling (after all, she isn't real practiced at doing her own driving over the past few decades - and maybe that's part of her problem!). Hey - we've all done it - and it's not a punishable violation unless we get caught, Right?

[Jarqui]

10. If they find proof she sent classified info which is against the law

then they also have her on lying to the Congressional investigation and probably on obstruction of justice.

There is a reason one would delete stuff off their server. Hopefully, for her sake, it's not a sinister one.

They can indict her with widespread public acceptance if she's been caught and her campaign is effectively over because of the damage it will do to her in the polls. We have had criminals in the White House in the past but the American public did not vote them in there widely accepting they were criminals.

Wonder if they found Bryan Pagliano's missing emails ... there's probably a bunch of them there ... He may regret not cutting a deal with them ...

Like I've been saying, this scandal is not going away. There's much more FOIA stuff to come - including some new requests. And supposedly the FBI or an authority is looking at what the Clinton Foundation got while she was Secretary of State. It's ugly stuff that is going to be chatted about daily or weekly from now until after November.

[Recursion]

37. Received, not sent (nt)

[Jarqui]

41. Received or sent, isn't it given it was a private server?

[Recursion]

43. That's a red herring; it's a breach either way.

There are entirely separate networks for classified emails; it's never supposed to go to a normal email server, whether private or government.

It's equally a breach (for the sender) no matter where the server was hosted.

[Jarqui]

52. Ok, we're on the same page :)

[Gore1FL]

15. This is what happens when amateurs try to be IT professionals. n/t

[jonno99]

21. Funny! +1

[fleur-de-lisa]

16. Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT

On Fri Jan 22, 2016, 07:28 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

FOX: FBI has recoved ALL of Clinton's emails from wiped Server
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141321824

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

I am wondering if DUers need right wing sources to attack opponents now.
Why not just post positive things about your candidate?
Has DU turned into Freerepublic 2.0?

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Jan 22, 2016, 07:36 AM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I don't think this jury system ought to be used to run interference for those who don't like the subject matter or even necessarily the source of information in a post.
Argue -- don't censor.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: The Clintons are both assholes as far as I'm concerned. But I don't need fucking Fox to tell me that.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: News stories that do not portray Her Majesty The Annointed One in a positive light do not mean that the poster is a freeper or that DU is Free Republic. Let's gain some perspective, shall we?
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This is a frivolous alert.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Garbage in, garbage out.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: It's a point of view. Argue against it, don't alert it.

[7962]

38. This OP was ALERTED?? Good lord. Is this 6th grade?

And actually got two votes to hide....sheesh

[Major Nikon]

60. I suspect there's a coordinated effort to alert on every single negative HRC post

[MosheFeingold]

84. Concur

No one is allowed to notice that her majesty is unclothed.

They will explode when Bernie wins IA and NH.

[liberal N proud]

19. FOX?

Don't know if it's true if we are using FOX as a source. They are good at embellishing if not fabricating facts.

[jonno99]

28. It's posts like yours that drive me to distraction. I've heard a number

of times this week "I'm never watching MSNBC again!!" - or someother supposed "safe" news source (whatever that is). But, I've also heard that many in the RW think fox is a "sellout".

And then, many here claim that the MSM is "in the tank" for HRC - is this true? If so, then we'd better be willing to accept news from all sources - to at least get us closer to the truth.

You don't like Fox? Fine (I don't especially like them either); but to disregard everything they report on it's face - just because it's FAUX(!) - strikes me as immature, and leaves one in danger of being ill-informed.

My advice: consider the source of all news - heavily salted if need be.

My two cents...

[7962]

36. Yes! Its SO odd how some cover their ears & eyes simply based on the source

Sometimes Fox is first with the story for whatever reason. LBN is constrained by time limits, so you post the first story you see. And even being fox, Catherine Herridge is no right wing slouch, shes a legit journalist. Bachelors from Harvard & Masters from Columbia.

You're right, there's a whole lot of immaturity around here when it comes to a news source. Look at the fact that the whole OP was alerted on!!

[jonno99]

42. "Look at the fact that the whole OP was alerted on!!" And worse yet, 2 of 7 concurred with

the alert.

Ignorance is not a virtue...

[ieoeja]

49. See post #44.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141321824#post44

[ieoeja]

44. Just the opposite actually.

Studies have repeatedly shown that people who listen to FOX News, even if they pay attention to other sources and consider themselves Liberal, end up believing in more falsehoods and disbelieving in more truths than those who pay no attention whatsoever to FNC.

If you pay any attention to FNC it would be to your benefit to stop. People have embraced this notion that, "there are two sides to every story." If one side is telling the truth, then other side is simply a lie. Why pay attention to the lie just to "get both sides"? That does not make any sense.

[7962]

69. So theres never "2 sides to every story"?

Then why do we have trials with both prosecution & defense?
Here's an example of 2 sides to every story:
1- "arrest him! He hit me with a bat!"
2- "he was coming at me with that knife, so I hit him with this bat"

And yes, in politics it can be the same as that example. When talking about funding a program, for example. One person can say "our budget is being cut" while another could say "They're getting more than last year"

If you only get ONE side of that story, you might think that there's either a raise or a cut going on. Too many shows will only tell you one side of the story.
Its just silly the reaction Fox still gets around here. And the reporter on this particular story is well viewed in journalism circles, maybe even their best one. Hell, she's even sued Fox in the past and still has her job!

Of course, there are those online sites that defy all logic, like InfoWars & Western Journalism. Those will post stories about Fox being too liberal!

[Gore1FL]

85. They recovered most in September

This is not all that earth-shattering. Nor, is it unbelievable that people who recover data from hard drives for a living are able to do their jobs. Additionally, it is not unbelievable that, based on the skill level of who ever she had running the private data center out of her house was unskilled based on what we know.

It's fine to dismiss a source as biased. But considering the news in September (reported by many many organizations), yours is not a particularly sensible argument.

[MosheFeingold]

31. Don't really understand the point of covering ears and eyes and making noise

I have no idea if this is true and concur that Fox has low credibility.

But ignoring what semi-respectable (semi!) news is reporting is a good way to be out of touch and a good way to get caught flatfooted by a story that seemingly explodes out of no where.

Accordingly, I object to the tendency on DU to flag and delete right-wing sources that contain some sort of unknown mix of truth and bullshit. We are all adults here and can see the agendas. We don't need a "safe space."

In WWII, I listened to Lord Haw-Haw and Axis Sally (Germany's versions of Tokyo Rose) because they gave away valuable tidbits of information unintentionally about their side and because they would often share true information that Stars & Stripes (or whatever) would censor. Same is true with Fox News and the like.

You just have to be a big boy or girl and get out a giant BS filter.

[jonno99]

34. "You just have to be a big boy or girl and get out a giant BS filter." +1000 nt

[ieoeja]

50. See post #44.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141321824#post44

[Gore1FL]

86. Did and refuted it.

Thanks for the link!

[dorkzilla]

90. Okay how is this - it shows HRC telling an aide to strip the classified tag from an email.

From the Department of State. Is that source okay?

https://foia.state.gov/searchapp/DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_Jan7thWeb/08635C6-8/DOC_0C05787519/C05787519.pdf

[Jarqui]

24. So on top of the 55,000 pages of emails they have

Have they discovered (ignore Giuliani allegations for the moment)
http://www.examiner.com/article/rudy-giuliana-convinced-hillary-clinton-will-be-indicted
Furthermore, as the former mayor reminded his audience, Clinton "... destroyed 34,000 emails. That's evidence of a guilty knowledge, the destruction is evidence of guilty knowledge, evidentiary principle that you can use against someone when they're in a situation where who knows what's on those 34,000 e-mails." Giuliani said that he would have argued, as a prosecutor that in itself is evidence of a guilty knowledge.

'34,000 destroyed emails' ?

That's pretty major because it would probably take more than 55,000 pages to print those. Which means, at the current pace they've been on that this will probably take them until next November or beyond to get through them all. Hillary will have to enjoy monthly releases of her emails that will stir more controversy until the election (if she lasts that long).

If this tidbit of news is true, this is a pretty major development against her chances because she can't clear herself before the election and bears some responsibility because she had them deleted.

[Crepuscular]

33. A question?

Correct me if I'm wrong but the 55,000 pages of Emails that Hilary surrendered were in hard copy, right? That contributed to the length of time needed to analyze them, as each had to be read or scanned.

One would presume that if the FBI recovered deleted Emails that they would already be in a data format that would allow them to be key word searched & sorted, etc., which would facilitate a much more timely analysis then has occurred with the previously released emails, no?

[Jarqui]

39. Yes, it may well help

But they could have scanned those existing 55,000 using OCR and then searched. So they don't have to scan these emails and their text searches won't be compromised by OCR errrors.

Therefore, it's not a gigantic time saver. Apparently the 55,000 pages represented 25,000 emails. So there are 40% more emails to review than the last batch (but presumably a bunch will be personal and that shouldn't take as long). 35,000 emails (roughly 77,000 pages) is still a pretty big job to go through.

And then they're looking at other staff (like Bryan Pagliano ... if they find his). This thing is going on and on as long as she is a candidate and beyond.

[Divernan]

48. Clinton hot messes - To Infinity And Beyond!

[stonecutter357]

40. .

[7962]

47. Bwaaaaaaaaaaa!!!

[Divernan]

45. Now we'll learn what she really thought of O, Michelle, her in-laws, etc.

I recall she said she deleted all those emails which she arbitrarily and unilaterally declared were of a purely personal nature. So now they've been recovered as well. Every snide comment she ever made regarding her "personal" opinion of other cabinet members, elected federal and state officials, career state department, Hollywood types, foreign dignitaries.

You got a lot of 'splainin' to do Hillary.

The Clinton Family is just one incredible hot mess after another.

[Renew Deal]

51. The truth comes out.

It has nothing to do with Benghazi for you. It's your personal quest for family gossip and BS.

[Divernan]

58. I think she deleted emails which were political bombshells & called them "personal"

I think there are now thousands and thousands of newly recovered emails, spread out like a veritable field of brightly colored cluster bombs (we know how Hillary supports cluster bombing), just waiting to be triggered. I'm thinking, bright orange for those referring to fellow Democrats; bright red for those referring to Republicans; bright yellow for those referring to foreign leaders; and bright pink referring to her corporate backers.

[Renew Deal]

62. So we agree

Gossip and BS

[Divernan]

71. Nope. SOS's comments, written by her own hand, are NOT "gossip and BS".

[thesquanderer]

77. Ironically, the pontential damage could be the opposite of what people are worried about.

re: "I recall she said she deleted all those emails which she arbitrarily and unilaterally declared were of a purely personal nature."

In fairness, if she had done the "right" thing and kept government and personal correspondece separate, she--or any goverment employee--would still be arbitrarily and uniltarelly distinguishing which correpsondences were government and which were personal, just in the very process of deciding which acount to use.

That said, this mingling means that, while the "official" problem is that there may be classified government info on what was essentially her personal server, the investgation could also yield examination of the reverse... *personal* correspondence that, if kept separate form the start, no outsider would have had any access to.

So there are two possible sources of damage here: Classified info where it shouldn't be, and the revealing of personal emails that she would have wanted to keep private... it's possible that this could come back and bite her from the other direction. Not using two accounts could result in not keeping personal correspondence private, which could end up being more of an issue than not keeping government correspondence where it belonged.

[Renew Deal]

46. That's good news

Hopefully what happened matches what they say happened.

[leftyladyfrommo]

56. This topic has been so done to death

that I doubt anyone will even pay attention to it.

[Jarqui]

57. I was looking for corroboration of this story ...

The most intriguing thing about the FBI recovering Hillary Clinton's deleted emails
Natasha Bertrand
Sep. 23, 2015, 9:28 AM
http://www.businessinsider.com/fbi-recovered-clintons-deleted-emails-2015-9

The FBI has been able to recover deleted emails from former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's personal server, a source close to the investigation told Bloomberg.

And intriguingly, agents sifting through the emails Clinton said were "personal" in nature have reportedly handed some over to investigators — indicating that they are relevant in at least some way to the FBI's ongoing investigation.

"Once the emails have been extracted, a group of agents has been separating personal correspondence and passing along work-related messages to agents leading the investigation," Bloomberg reported.

Facing criticism earlier this year for exclusively using a private server during her time as secretary of state, Clinton handed over about 30,000 work-related emails for the State Department to make public. She deleted about 31,000 emails she says were personal.
...
It is unclear how many deleted emails the FBI has been able to find. The IT firm Clinton hired to oversee the server after she left the State Department, Platte River Networks, said last month that it was "highly likely" a backup copy of the server was made. And an official speaking to The New York Times said the emails had not been difficult to recover.

So it the FOX headline basically they found them all? I'm honestly a bit confused why this tweet was news

[lamp_shade]

61. That's all I could find too... from September. Perhaps Herridge is a little confused?

[Jarqui]

64. A fairly recent rumor by right wing media was the FBI investigation had branched

into looking at the Clinton Foundation. If the "personal" emails included the Clinton Foundation (as they very well could), well they now have some evidence to chase down to see if there was anything going on there. Because the speaking fees and donations sure rolled in ...

Can you imagine the stress she must live under? Having congress, the IG, FBI, etc rummaging through your stuff to find wrong doing, trying to run a campaign, media on your ass all the time, (maybe Bill chasing some skirts) etc?

[LonePirate]

59. And the differences between DU and FR continue to disappear with each passing day

How low are we going to sink?

[itcfish]

63. OMG

You sound so hopeful that Clinton will be destroyed. If that is the case, you better start getting used to saying. Pres. Trump. Sad really.

[SansACause]

68. HRC not that dumb.

The whole conspiracy requires that HRC be dumb enough to send secret/damning/proof of alien intelligence/etc., through email. She ain't.

[TipTok]

81. It's not a matter of being dumb...

It's a risk vs reward thing.

Official govt emails are subject to FOIA requests and folks digging into her business have caused the Clintons problems in the past.

I suspect, but don't know for certain, that she thought that no one would question the use of the home server because of who she is and she could keep them private.

Obviously it has blown up in her face and she lost that particular gamble but it was a reasonable bet at the time.

[thesquanderer]

70. Is this actually LBN? I can't find your headline at the link provided. (n/t)

[EdwardBernays]

78. It's there

Try again.

[thesquanderer]

83. Here's what I get at your link:

A tweet (not a news article) that says:

"The @FBI was able to recover [Clinton's] deleted emails ... [wipe] was not what I would call a professional standard."

I'm looking for the headline to match (as LBN requires): "FBI has recoved ALL of Clinton's emails from wiped Server"

or for that matter, any indication that they did indeed recover ALL of them. Tweets are often imprecise because of the character limit, and because, well, they're tweets. We already knew that the FBI recovered deleted emails. Is there any link to a new story saying they recovered "ALL" of them?

[hrmjustin]

73. You guys are like kids waiting for Santa when it comes to these emails.

If i hadposted a fox story about sanders it would be hidden.

There is a double standard here.

[Divernan]

74. No. It would be debunked with facts and links.

[OKNancy]

79. So some tweet that is only on right-wing sites is stirring you guys up again - THIS IS OLD

THIS IS NOT BREAKING NEWS.

Jesus Christ - The most intriguing thing about the FBI recovering Hillary Clinton's deleted emails
Sept 23 2015
http://www.businessinsider.com/fbi-recovered-clintons-deleted-emails-2015-9

FBI Said to Recover Personal E-Mails From Hillary Clinton Server

DATED Sept 22, 2015

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-09-22/fbi-said-to-recover-personal-e-mails-from-hillary-clinton-server

-------------------------

You see, this is the problem with posting tweets that aren't even news sources.

[potone]

80. The problem is that there have been so many fake scandals involving the Clintons.

It is hard to know what a real scandal is. Remember the disgusting allegations about Hillary in the wake of Vince Foster's suicide? I'm not even a Hillary supporter, but I remember how outrageous some of the charges against her and Bill were when he was president. I don't know what to think about this; I guess we'll find out how serious this is.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

82. Wow, DUers carrying water for an uncorroborated story

from Fox News twitter page.

Any port in a fucking storm for the Anybody But Hillary party.

[Grassy Knoll]

88. Usual Suspects......

[KamaAina]

89. Fox? The same Fox that employs Oliver North?

After his email scandal?

[In_The_Wind]

91. Locking

Statement of Purpose

Post the latest news from reputable mainstream news websites and blogs. Important news of national interest only. No analysis or opinion pieces. No duplicates. News stories must have been published within the last 12 hours.