The FBI, we may know soon......

[pinebox]

Late Monday night, very late, the FBI asked to make a new secret filing in their investigation of Hillary.
It's coming down the pipe and fast. We'll see what happens.

Check this out https://www.scribd.com/doc/315018012/Clinton-FBI-Email-Probe

The FBI has asked a federal judge for permission to file a second secret declaration detailing its probe into Hillary Clinton’s private email server.

In the request, which came as part of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit, the Justice Department offered for the FBI to provide “additional details” about how it “conducted a reasonable search for records” as part of the open records case and “determined that there were no records responsive.”

“These details supplement defendant’s showing that it conducted a reasonable search, but cannot be disclosed on the public record without compromising information that the FBI seeks to protect,” the department said in a filing late Monday evening.
The FBI currently has possession of the server Clinton used to run her personal email setup as part of an investigation into whether classified information was mishandled.

In a separate filing Monday, the Justice Department refused to detail the nature of the FBI probe connected to Clinton’s machine, except that it was based on a “security referral” from inspectors general at the State Department and federal intelligence agencies.

“[T]he FBI is not required to identify a particular federal statute that it alleges has been violated in connection with the pending investigation, or the target(s) of the investigation,” in order to keep the information secret, it asserted.

MORE http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/282454-fbi-asks-to-make-new-secret-filing-in-clinton-email-case

[LexVegas]

1. Losing hurts, huh? nt

[Chasstev365]

2. Pay to play money laundering is a crime, huh?

[Segami]

3. Getting indicted will hurt more...

[pinebox]

9. I think we're going to know VERY soon what's up

[randome]

16. "VERY soon". How many business hours does that translate to?

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[ExtraGriz]

27. keep dreaming

[brush]

60. Better hope it happens before tonight when Obama endorses Hillary . . .

because if you think Obama's DOJ is going to indict the candidate he endorsed, I've got a bridge for sell that you might be interested in.

And btw, the FBI doesn't indict.

[dinkytron]

66. It sure will.

[pinebox]

6. Denying reality hurts worse

This hasn't anything to do with Bernie.
Nice try at failed projection though.
Have a Kodak moment.

[LexVegas]

8. "Denying reality"

[pinebox]

14. Ya like this whole thing is about nothing

Right? Right.

It's just some RW smear about Hillary and she's been through 30 years of that, right? Right. Those are usually the talking points we hear on here.

Sooner or later we're going to know what the FBI recommends. You better start praying VERY hard that the FBI says "we've found Hillary committed no criminal activity" because ANYTHING BUT and she is in big trouble. You had better hope this happens sooner than later.

That is a fact.

[rock]

29. It certainly has been so far

[pinebox]

34. It's been about nothing?

This is already damaging her. A lot.

[vdogg]

43. Which is why she won 4 out of 6 states last night.

Any more damage like that and she might win the presidency.

[rock]

44. And has a 3 1/2 million popular vote lead

Yeah, I'm convinced by your Bernie Logic. Really? Is it sarcasm? Really?

[leveymg]

30. Sure. Investigations by the FBI, Intel Community and State Dept, are just part of a VRWC. Sure.

Who's in denial, here?

[LanternWaste]

22. I also pretend that mocking wearied prophecies is 'denying reality.'

I also pretend that mocking wearied prophecies is 'denying reality.' Our bias requires it of us, and we seem to be doing its bidding rather effectively.

[tonyt53]

4. You do realize that Bernie does not get the nomination if Hillary is gone, don't you?

If before the convention nomination, I'd wager that possibly Al Gore might accept it. Not a chance in hell that Bernie gets it.

[pinebox]

7. Nada to do with Bernie

This is about Hillary and what's happening with the FBI.

[Adrahil]

13. Prepare for disappointment.

There won't be an indictment. Merry Fitzmas.

[pinebox]

15. Who says I'd be disappointed?

I don't want to see her indicted. Sure I may dislike her but in reality that would usher in Trump like greased lightning on race day should she stay in. Surely you can agree with that.

You can predict the future? To quote Star Wars; "Only a Sith deals in absolutes".

[Adrahil]

23. Ah! A Star Wars fan! We can be friends!

I'm glad to hear you are not hoping for an indictment.

But yeah, I'm convinced there won't be an indictment, at least not against her personally. Folks are WAY over blowing this, IMO.

[pinebox]

24. Good deal

I am not sure about anything at this point. What I have heard is that there are some very questionable things and it's also things she knew about. Andrea Mitchell really broke that down hard and showed the differences between Hillary and former SOS's.

This could go either way I think, we'll just have to wait & see what happens.

[ILikeTurtles2]

47. Will you vote for her come November?

[Lord Magus]

53. I'm really not interested in what Andrea Greenspan has to say. -nt-

[PJMcK]

17. If this is about the FBI investigation, then why...

... did you post it in GDP? It strikes me this subject should be in either LBN or GD.

It seems to me that you're intention is to continue to criticize Secretary Clinton. If that's the case, be more direct, won't you?

[ILikeTurtles2]

20. I'd like to see Gore as president. I don't see online that he ever remarried.

[pinebox]

21. It isn't LBN and as far as GDP goes

It has to do with one of the Dem candidates, it wouldn't belong in GD and would be locked. That is where things to do with Trump and clown car party favors go.

Not criticizing here and you should know me, if that was the case, I would have in my OP. I can't stand her but let's be honest, we're all wondering what is going on with the FBI aren't we?

[leveymg]

31. Until now, this subject was relegated to GDP. It's not part of the VRWC or an intent to make her

look bad. BTW, criticism of Secretary Clinton isn't forbidden.

[PJMcK]

39. Thanks, for the clarification

I did know that criticism of Secretary Clinton was allowed. In fact, I don't think citing the FBI investigation is criticism. If she did something illegal and prosecutable, we'll know soon enough. At the moment, though, we only know what's been reported in news outlets. Why is it that we usually don't trust the newscasters except when they sync with our established views?

[leveymg]

56. Shrinks call it confirmation bias. It's the same reason many stick to partisan sites for news.

However, there are a number of related cognitive and social biases:

Availability cascade A self-reinforcing process in which a collective belief gains more and more plausibility through its increasing repetition in public discourse (or "repeat something long enough and it will become true&quot .[16]
Backfire effect The reaction to disconfirming evidence by strengthening one's previous beliefs.[17] cf. Continued influence effect.
Bandwagon effect The tendency to do (or believe) things because many other people do (or believe) the same. Related to groupthink and herd behavior.[18]
Base rate fallacy or Base rate neglect The tendency to ignore base rate information (generic, general information) and focus on specific information (information only pertaining to a certain case).[19]
Belief bias An effect where someone's evaluation of the logical strength of an argument is biased by the believability of the conclusion.[20]
Bias blind spot The tendency to see oneself as less biased than other people, or to be able to identify more cognitive biases in others than in oneself.[21]
Cheerleader effect The tendency for people to appear more attractive in a group than in isolation.[22]
Choice-supportive bias The tendency to remember one's choices as better than they actually were.[23]
Clustering illusion The tendency to overestimate the importance of small runs, streaks, or clusters in large samples of random data (that is, seeing phantom patterns).[11]
Confirmation bias The tendency to search for, interpret, focus on and remember information in a way that confirms one's preconceptions.[24]
Congruence bias The tendency to test hypotheses exclusively through direct testing, instead of testing possible alternative hypotheses.[11]
Conjunction fallacy The tendency to assume that specific conditions are more probable than general ones.[25]
Conservatism (belief revision) The tendency to revise one's belief insufficiently when presented with new evidence.[4][26][27]
Continued influence effect The tendency to believe previously learned misinformation even after it has been corrected. Misinformation can still influence inferences one generates after a correction has occurred.[28] cf. Backfire effect
Contrast effect The enhancement or reduction of a certain perception's stimuli when compared with a recently observed, contrasting object.[29]
Curse of knowledge When better-informed people find it extremely difficult to think about problems from the perspective of lesser-informed people.[30]
Declinism The belief that a society or institution is tending towards decline. Particularly, it is the predisposition to view the past favourably and future negatively.
Decoy effect Preferences for either option A or B changes in favor of option B when option C is presented, which is similar to option B but in no way better.

[Matt_in_STL]

54. I actually had someone insinuate that unfavorable poll results would not be allowed here

I really do believe people think that anything unfavorable is going to be blocked from here.

[rock]

45. It's always about Bob, er, I mean Bernie

[ecstatic]

65. Martin O'Malley probably. nt

[YouDig]

5. In other words, Hillary is now the Democratic nominee.

[NCTraveler]

10. People like Sanders and Clinton live under a different set of rules.

Your dreams of an indictment won't become reality even if there is something there.

Proof: Sanders supporters don't bat an eye when Schumlin appoints Jane to a commission position right after Sanders agrees to stump for him. You simply don't care about crony capitalism and that is well known. You don't bat an eye because you are well aware they play by a different set of rules.

[MohRokTah]

11. FBI!!!! FITZMAS!!!!!! BWAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!

[NurseJackie]

12. And this helps Bernie, how?

What exactly is it that you're hoping to accomplish?

[randome]

18. It helps in his step dance rehearsals because it gives him a tune to stomp his feet.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[leveymg]

32. Has nothing to do with Bernie. Has everything to do with investigation of HRC.

Some of us still care about the Rule of Law in America.

[still_one]

19. Are you still here?

[Triana]

25. I've said all along and still say...

...this is SO going nowhere.

[pinebox]

26. You had better hope

and I hope you're right because anything LESS than that and Dems have a huge problem on their hands.
We'll know sooner or later what is going to happen but I wouldn't count your chickens before they hatch.

[JTFrog]

42. .

[Dr Hobbitstein]

49. Yay! I'm not the only one who posts that! nt

[JTFrog]

50. For some reason the OP always makes me think of that video. n/t

[Dr Hobbitstein]

52. Indeed. nt

[zappaman]

58. Perfect.

[apcalc]

28. She will not be indicted ...

She committed no crime...

Jeeeeeeeeeeeeez

[pinebox]

35. Can you show us where that is the case?

We don't know, only the FBI does. Don't by your milk after the expiration date. We'll know soon enough what's happening

[leveymg]

36. You didn't read the Joint Statement of the Inspector Generals at State and the Intel Commun.>

https://oig.state.gov/system/files/statement_of_the_icig_and_oig_regarding_review_of_clintons_emails_july_24_2015.pdf.

(If pdf does not come up, go to statement posted at office of the Director of National Intelligence: https://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsroom/press-releases/210-press-releases-2015/1232-statement-from-the-inspectors-general-of-the-intelligence-community-and-the-department-of-state-regarding-the-review-of-former-secretary-clinton-s-emails )

July 24, 2015
Statement from the Inspectors General of the Intelligence Community and the Department of State Regarding the Review of Former Secretary Clinton's Emails

Yesterday the Office of the Inspector General ofthe Intelligence Community (IC IG) sent a congressional notification to intelligence oversight committees updating them of the IC IG support to the State Department IG (attached).

The IC IG found four emails containing classified IC-derived information in a limited sample of 40 emails of the 30,000 emails provided by former Secretary Clinton. The four emails, which have not been released through the State FOIA process, did not contain classification markings and/or dissemination controls. These emails were not retroactively classified by the State Department; rather these emails contained classified information when they were generated and, according to IC classification officials, that information remains classified today. This classified information should never have been transmitted via an unclassified personal system.

[tex-wyo-dem]

57. Thanks for posting, once again...

The cognitive dissonance with some Hill worshippers is astounding, eh?

[leveymg]

59. The problem is some have no cognitive dissonance. When shown the facts, they simply double-down and

dig their heads deeper into the sand. That's confirmation bias. Then there are those who are simply repeating the same litany of lies and misleading slogans, and are aware of it. They are trolls, even if we're not allowed to call them that.

But, there are those in the other camp who can be persuaded; so, for them, we have to have our arguments, documentation and sources ready to present, and not be afraid to differ with the official line, even when it threatens us for trying.

[tex-wyo-dem]

62. It's the exact same thing I ran into when arguing with...

My conservative acquaintances about W and his lies and corruption. Just refused to see reality, or did so purposefully.

[leveymg]

68. Authoritarians tend to attract two types: frustrated aggressives and bureaucratic wannabes

They're in both parties. To identify and understand both, I find the Frankfurt School Critical Theorists helpful, Eric Fromm along with the social psychologists Adorno, Horkheimer, Lewin, Maslow and Milgram.

The only difference between the W and HRC followers are who they look to for permission to torture. If you need a leader, you have a problem.

Erich Fromm put it this way:

Erich Fromm 1957
The Authoritarian Personality

First published: in Deutsche Universitätszeitung, Band 12 (Nr. 9, 1957), pp. 3-4;
Translated: by Florian Nadge;
CopyLeft: Creative Commons (Attribute & ShareAlike) marxists.org 2011.

What do we mean by “authoritarian personality”? We usually see a clear difference between the individual who wants to rule, control, or restrain others and the individual who tends to submit, obey, or to be humiliated. To use a somewhat friendlier term, we might talk of the leader and his followers. As natural as the difference between the ruling and the ruled might — in many ways — be, we also have to admit that these two types, or as we can also say, these two forms of authoritarian personality are actually tightly bound together.

What they have in common, what defines the essence of the authoritarian personality is an inability: the inability to rely on one’s self, to be independent, to put it in other words: to endure freedom.

( . . . )

The passive-authoritarian, or in other words, the masochistic and submissive character aims — at least subconsciously — to become a part of a larger unit, a pendant, a particle, at least a small one, of this “great” person, this “great” institution, or this “great” idea. The person, institution, or idea may actually be significant, powerful, or just incredibly inflated by the individual believing in them. What is necessary, is that — in a subjective manner — the individual is convinced that “his” leader, party, state, or idea is all-powerful and supreme, that he himself is strong and great, that he is a part of something “greater.” The paradox of this passive form of the authoritarian character is: the individual belittles himself so that he can — as part of something greater — become great himself. The individual wants to receive commands, so that he does not have the necessity to make decisions and carry responsibility. This masochistic individual looking for dependency is in his depth frightened -often only subconsciously — a feeling of inferiority, powerlessness, aloneness. Because of this, he is looking for the “leader,” the great power, to feel safe and protected through participation and to overcome his own inferiority. Subconsciously, he feels his own powerlessness and needs the leader to control this feeling. This masochistic and submissive individual, who fears freedom and escapes into idolatry, is the person on which the authoritarian systems — Nazism and Stalinism — rest.

More difficult than understanding the passive-authoritarian, masochistic character is understanding the active-authoritarian, the sadistic character. To his followers he seems self-confident and powerful but yet he is as frightened and alone as the masochistic character. While the masochist feels strong because he is a small part of something greater, the sadist feels strong because he has incorporated others — if possible many others; he has devoured them, so to speak. The sadistic-authoritarian character is as dependent on the ruled as the masochistic -authoritarian character on the ruler. However the image is misleading. As long as he holds power, the leader appears — to himself and to others — strong and powerful. His powerlessness becomes only apparent when he has lost his power, when he can no longer devour others, when he is on his own.

When I speak of sadism as the active side of the authoritarian personality, many people may be surprised because sadism is usually understood as the tendency to torment and to cause pain. But actually, this is not the point of sadism. The different forms of sadism which we can observe have their root in a striving, which is to master and control another individual, to make him a helpless object of one’s will, to become his ruler, to dispose over him as one sees fit and without limitations. Humiliation and enslavement are just means to this purpose, and the most radical means to this is to make him suffer; as there is no greater power over a person than to make him suffer, to force him to endure pains without resistance.

[brush]

61. Gotta give it to you. You're persistent. You've been pushing this for forever.

It's hopeless though. Obama endorses Hillary tonight.

No way is his DOJ going to indict the person he just endorsed for president (you know the FBI doesn't indict, right?).

[liberal N proud]

33. We may never know because...

Its SECRET!

[pinebox]

37. Ya it's hilarious isn't it?

I don't find it funny that the FBI is doing this, why do you? You should stop and ask why they are.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

38. Every thing secret degenerates, even the administration of justice

Every thing secret degenerates, even the administration of justice; nothing is safe that does not show how it can bear discussion and publicity. Lord Acton

[JudyM]

67. +1. Deftly stated.

[thesquanderer]

41. This has to do with the FOIA lawsuit, doesn't really tell us anything about the FBI investigation

As I understand it, the people involved in the FOIA lawsuit have asked the FBI for more information (a second request, for info beyond what was in the first), and the FBI is answering by saying okay, but they again want the info they provide to remain off the public record, since the info is also relevant to their own investigation. It says nothing about the progress of the FBI's own investigation.

[SidDithers]

46. Get 'em in while you still can...nt

Sid

[onenote]

48. How do you leap from this request to something being disclosed soon?

If anything, it suggests just the opposite. That the investigation isn't wrapped up and they want to continue it without disclosing certain information publicly in connection with the FOIA litigation.

[creon]

51. patience is a virtue

The FBI is not going to tell anyone anything about this matter. It is an investigation and the FBI will not tell anyone about it.
The FBI, will, eventually, say something. Eventually. people will have to wait; whether they want to wait or not.

What we have is rumor and gossip.

[SamKnause]

55. It's a big club and you ain't in it. (George Carlin)

It doesn't matter what she did, or does in the future.

They will not touch her.

She is a member of the club.

[jcgoldie]

63. I thought

...it was supposed to come down the "pike" ... as in turnpike... if it goes down the pipe it might be something else messier.

[ecstatic]

64. Is it time to move OPs like this to the Creative Speculation forum? nt