Exclusive: FBI still does not have warrant to review new Abedin emails linked to Clinton probe

[massadvj]

I believe the DOJ strategy at this moment will be to give Huma immunity, and then for Huma to take the hit, thereby keeping this scandal from going up to OPapaDoc, Hitlery and Cheryl Mills. 

[HonestJohn]

So, @HonestJohn, what do you think this is about?  I think you're saying that so far the FBI has nothing and isn't likely to have anything.

Comey did something no other FBI Director ever did before... in stating his recommendation not to prosecute. That wasn't his call to make.

That's an indicator there.  He looks like he's trying to stake out powers not given to an FBI Director.

Now this?  It's very possible that he's again trying to carve out prosecutorial powers for the FBI Director position.  He's done it before and no one slapped him down for it.

[HonestJohn]

Any investigator is going to reopen a case when they think they may have new evidence, ESPECIALLY in one that no charges were filed. Comey also stated, "Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case."

Comey also stated, "Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case."

That shows he's closing the case.

---

It's like a cop saying to you, after a domestic disturbance, "We think your paddled your kids, but as the evidence stands now, we can't make a case of child abuse."

Do you expect that, at any time from then until the statue of limitations ends, the police to come back and cuff you?

No, you wouldn't.

[mystery-ak]

Josh Rogin

.@BretBaier emails Chris Wallace while he's on air: Weiner has given FBI permission to search computer so no warrant needed. @FoxNewsSunday

[Sanguine]

Comey did something no other FBI Director ever did before... in stating his recommendation not to prosecute. That wasn't his call to make.

That's an indicator there.  He looks like he's trying to stake out powers not given to an FBI Director.

Now this?  It's very possible that he's again trying to carve out prosecutorial powers for the FBI Director position.  He's done it before and no one slapped him down for it.

OK, now I understand what you meant.

[bigheadfred]

Comey also stated, "Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case."

That shows he's closing the case.

At that point. Perhaps to keep up the investigation would fuel the "witch hunt" meme. If the FBI thinks there is new evidence per the laptop why wouldn't they reopen the investigation? He makes a statement now and is accused of trying to influence the election. But the public does have a right to know this now, IMO. He buries it now and announces it after the election and people will be screaming he knew it "now" and not "then" and by not releasing it "now" he did influence the election--for hillary. Tough spot.

[HonestJohn]

At that point. Perhaps to keep up the investigation would fuel the "witch hunt" meme. If the FBI thinks there is new evidence per the laptop why wouldn't they reopen the investigation? He makes a statement now and is accused of trying to influence the election. But the public does have a right to know this now, IMO. He buries it now and announces it after the election and people will be screaming he knew it "now" and not "then" and by not releasing it "now" he did influence the election--for hillary. Tough spot.

In high profile cases, the investigator better have *ALL* his ducks in a row.  *ALL* of them.

Before doing anything.

It looks like he doesn't, but decided to jump on this anyway.

That's the action of someone either extremely foolish... or power-hungry.

[bigheadfred]

It's like a cop saying to you, after a domestic disturbance, "We think your paddled your kids, but as the evidence stands now, we can't make a case of child abuse."

Do you expect that, at any time from then until the statue of limitations ends, the police to come back and cuff you?

No, you wouldn't.
« Last Edit: Today at 01:31:03 PM by HonestJohn »

Sure, yeah, until the nosy neighbor calls the PD and tells the PD they saw  you paddling your kids and then walks over and tells you they called the police. Naturally you blame the sitter/nanny.

[sneakypete]

Comey did something no other FBI Director ever did before... in stating his recommendation not to prosecute. That wasn't his call to make.

That's an indicator there.  He looks like he's trying to stake out powers not given to an FBI Director.

Now this?  It's very possible that he's again trying to carve out prosecutorial powers for the FBI Director position.  He's done it before and no one slapped him down for it.

@HonestJohn

 I see it as a self-defense move own part. He has to know he was being set up to take the fall for the lack of prosecution. Now he has subtly told the world that he hasn't see the files himself because he doesn't  have a warrant. Which means he wants one and  LoRetta won't give him one.

[bigheadfred]

In high profile cases, the investigator better have *ALL* his ducks in a row.  *ALL* of them.

Before doing anything.

It looks like he doesn't, but decided to jump on this anyway.

That's the action of someone either extremely foolish... or power-hungry.

I don't know how the U.S. Attorney's Office is supposed to react if they are presented with this new "evidence. So for argument's sake they were. And it is presented by another agency--the NYPD. Do they mount some kind of investigation, and have they already, and are now presenting it to the top FBI officials for review?  It appears to me Comey is getting *ALL* his ducks in a row.

[sneakypete]

Josh Rogin

.@BretBaier emails Chris Wallace while he's on air: Weiner has given FBI permission to search computer so no warrant needed. @FoxNewsSunday

@mystery-ak

Excellent news! Now the Feebs will have probable cause to indict him for espionage unless he cooperates with them and is willing to testify against his wife and her boss.

[Bigun]

Anyone with a shred of common sense knows that Hillary violated the law, and nearly anyone other than she would have already been indicted, but for the utter politicization of the Executive Branch under Barack Obama. None of that requires the assistance of hysterical conspiracy theories. 

The FBI already knows at least some of what is in the emails, because they were tipped off by the NYPD. But they are required to publicly assert otherwise pending Justice Department approval of a search warrant. Any honest and impartial AG would provide such approval, given what is already known. But honesty and impartiality are the very opposites of what we have come to expect from this Administration.

There is a monumental tug-of-war going on behind the scenes, between career investigators in the FBI and the thoroughly corrupt Justice Department, with James Comey right in the middle. And make no mistake: it is not just Hillary that Loretta Lynch seeks to protect, but Barack Obama, the Clinton Foundation and Hillary's campaign associates as well.

   and   

Spot on across the board!