Comey's statement shows Hillary did not lie (if you decipher what he said)

[Bill USA]

https://bluenationreview.com/comey-statement-on-emails-proves-hillary-clinton-did-not-lie/

According to Comey, the year-long investigation of 55,000 Hillary emails did not reveal a single email clearly marked classified. Only three — just three — of Hillary’s emails “bore markings indicating the presence of classified information.” “Bore markings” is not the same thing as “marked classified.” In his July 7 testimony before Congress, Comey said that those markings were simply a (c) somewhere in the body of the email and nothing in the header or subject line. He further stated that they were improperly marked and that it was reasonable for Hillary to assume they were not classified.

Additionally, two of those emails are now known to have been mismarked as a result of “human error.” They did not contain classified information.

Here’s what those two emails were about:


[blockquote style="border:1px solid #000000;padding: 10px;"]One email, dated Aug. 2, 2012, noted that Kofi Annan, the former secretary general of the United Nations, was stepping down as special envoy trying to mediate the war in Syria. A second one, sent in April 2012, discussed Mrs. Clinton’s call to the newly inaugurated president of Malawi.

Absent that pair of emails, Hillary’s opponents are left with this, from Comey’s statement: “110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received.”

Let’s break that down. 110 out of 55,000 emails are said to have contained classified information. That’s just 0.2 percent of her emails. Crucially, these emails were not marked classified. And there is absolutely no indication or accusation that classified markings were concealed or removed.
(MORE)

[mcar]

1. K&R

[misterhighwasted]

2. KnR

..

[lunamagica]

3. K&R.

[oasis]

4. K and R

[Hortensis]

5. "No obstruction of justice."

There is no need for any "deciphering." FBI Director Comey stated the findings of an intensive, hideously expensive year-old investigation as concisely as possible:

"No obstruction of justice."

"No willful or intentional misconduct."

[Bill USA]

6. Comey's statement made it sound as if Clinton DID receive & send emails with classified info in them

in Comey's statement he said: "110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received"

later he did avow that: "Only a very small number of the e-mails containing classified information bore markings indicating the presence of classified information"

https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/statement-by-fbi-director-james-b.-comey-on-the-investigation-of-secretary-hillary-clintons-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system

"From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time;"

~~
~~

Separately, it is important to say something about the marking of classified information. Only a very small number of the e-mails containing classified information bore markings indicating the presence of classified information.

[font size="3"] ...So what did Comey mean [/font]when he said: "a very small number of the e-mails" contained Classified information?... what is a 'very small number'?? .. and for that matter, does "contained Classified information" mean that it is a Classified message"???

As the article referenced in OP pointed out, in Comey's testimony before the GOP Congressional committee investigating the FBI investigation ... it was brought out that only 3 emails "bore markings" indicating classified information was in the emails.

But the article points out: “Bore markings” is not the same thing as “marked classified.” and that...

"In his July 7 testimony before Congress, Comey said that those markings were simply a (c) somewhere in the body of the email and nothing in the header or subject line".

So,,,, it turns out the 110 emails that "have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received" ... were NOT marked/identified as CLASSIFIED.



[font size="3"] I think most people[/font] came away thinking Comey's statement was that - there were 110 emails that were actually CLASSIFIED. In fact, those emails were NOT marked Classified. But, as the article indicates, what the FBI investigation ACTUALLY found was:

... the year-long investigation of 55,000 Hillary emails did not reveal a single email clearly marked classified. Only three — just three — of Hillary’s emails “bore markings indicating the presence of classified information.” “Bore markings” is not the same thing as “marked classified.” In his July 7 testimony before Congress, Comey said that those markings were simply a (c) somewhere in the body of the email and nothing in the header or subject line. He further stated that they were improperly marked and that it was reasonable for Hillary to assume they were not classified.

Actually, most of the clarifying information was not in Comey's statement but only came out in the House committee's questioning of Comey for more details. Which, I suspect, is NOT what the Repugnants were hoping for. But they can take heart in the fact that most people (and in particular, M$M toadies) will not become informed on these facts and will still think Hillary was dishonest when she said that she neither sent nor received classified information during her tenure as Sec of State.

[Hortensis]

8. Bill, Comey made the legalies extremely clear for

those prone to confusion. He could not have made it more clear:

NO CRIME COMMITTED. NONE.

[Bill USA]

9. yes, he was clear re lack of criminality, but he made it sound like she lied about classified info

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2249141

[Hortensis]

10. No, he did not. "...NO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE"

is what he said.

[Bill USA]

11. what I said was: many people would come away thinking he said she did receive/send Classified info

What I said was (please read this carefully now) Many people will come away from hearing his statement thinking he said she received/sent emails which were Classified. But on further examination we find she DID NOT send receive classified information in emails.

Here are the key statements, as to whether a crime was committed, in the 'recommendations' part of his statement:


https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/statement-by-fbi-director-james-b.-comey-on-the-investigation-of-secretary-hillary-clintons-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system

[font size="3"]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.

~~
~~

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.

~~
~~

In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts.

NOTE however, he still threw in a statement that is NOT supported by the facts: "Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information" ... this boils down to three emails which in fact WERE NOT marked "classified". So he was WRONG in saying "there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information".

[Sancho]

7. Yep...K&R