State Department halts review of Clinton emails at FBI request
Source: Reuters
"The State Department consulted the FBI about this in February, and in March the law enforcement agency asked the State Department to halt its inquiry.
"The FBI communicated to us that we should follow our standard practice, which is to put our internal review on hold while there is an ongoing law enforcement investigation ," State Department spokeswoman Elizabeth Trudeau told reporters.
"The internal review is on hold, pending completion of the FBI's work," she added." We'll reassess next steps after the FBI's work is complete."
Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-clinton-emails-idUSKCN0WY5Q0
Zira
(1,054 posts)They halt the State Department review because of the ongoing FBI investigation...
"The government forbids handling of classified information, which may or may not be marked that way, outside secure government-controlled channels, and sometimes prosecutes people who remove it from such channels. The government classifies information as top secret if it deems a leak could cause "exceptionally grave damage" to national security.
Two judges have allowed a group suing for Clinton's records to seek sworn testimony from officials. On Tuesday, one judge said there was "evidence of government wrongdoing and bad faith" over the arrangement."
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)The indictment fairy is not coming and Hillary will be the Democratic nominee.
moonbabygo
(281 posts)why is the FBI still working on this? They retrieved all the emails. They know she did or didn't do, so let's move on.
bahrbearian
(13,466 posts)7962
(11,841 posts)And she knows it, thats why shes always so flip about it.
The fix is in & it has been. At the most, one of her associates will take the fall
TipTok
(2,474 posts)An aide at mid to high level will fall on the sword and take the hit, fade away for a bit to be taken care of and come back at a later time.
Democat
(11,617 posts)Let's hope so at least.
7962
(11,841 posts)Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)JoFerret
(10,704 posts)Those GOP talking points are getting very stale.
Leave the tearing down to the GOP - they do it quite nicely without your help. Been doing it to Clinton for years.
And guess what - she's still standing tall and working to create positive change.
Zira
(1,054 posts)That coupled with your lack of integrity for even vetting your candidate.
If She supposedly going for positive change it would be kinda hard when she's sold out to everyone she needs to wring in. Name a corporation she needs to wring in that isn't in her super pac.
Perhaps you should look up what a super pac is and what lobbyists are and what it means when someone accepts money from lobbyists. Your, for the 1% candidate, relies on people refusing to actually vet her.
There is no reason for someone who is actually against wall street corruption, against fracking, against war, against the TPP, against everything that causes climate change, to vote for a Hillary Clinton, with her record. I'm going to guess you're not truly evil, just incredibly willfully blind.
Response to Zira (Original post)
Duckfan This message was self-deleted by its author.
WhoWoodaKnew
(847 posts)Am I wrong?
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)Reter
(2,188 posts)An October indictment means disaster for us.
cstanleytech
(26,290 posts)so as not to jeopardize getting a conviction in a criminal case?