New FBI files contain allegations of 'quid pro quo' in Clinton's emails

[AURaptor 1,137]

FBI interview summaries and notes, provided late Friday to the House Government Oversight and Intelligence Committees, contain allegations of a "quid pro quo" between a senior State Department executive and FBI agents during the Hillary Clinton email investigation, two congressional sources told Fox News.

"This is a flashing red light of potential criminality," Republican Rep. Jason Chaffetz of Utah, who has been briefed on the FBI interviews, told Fox News.

He said "there was an alleged quid pro quo” involving Undersecretary for Management Patrick Kennedy and the FBI “over at least one classified email.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/16/new-fbi-files-contain-allegations-quid-pro-quo-in-clintons-emails.html

[homersapien 11,812]

So a Republican interprets a Clinton email differently from the FBI and Fox reports it.

Shock!

[AURaptor 1,137]

12 minutes ago, homersapien said:

So a Republican interprets a Clinton email differently from the FBI and Fox reports it.

Shock!

In their own words...

 

https://youtu.be/wbkS26PX4rc

 

[quietfan 233]

6 hours ago, AURaptor said:

In their own words...

https://youtu.be/wbkS26PX4rc

I didn't hear either mention 'quid pro quo' in this clip.

This thread is about Rep. Chaffetz charges of a 'quid pro quo'.  The FBI statement, as cited in the FOX News link, says the topic of re-classification of documents was unrelated to the topic of a standing  FBI request for more FBI slots overseas.

Quote

 

A spokesperson at the FBI provided a lengthy statement to Fox Saturday night -- disputing Chaffetz's characterization and stating that, while the conversation did happen, the two issues discussed were not connected. The FBI's statement is below: 

"Prior to the initiation of the FBI’s investigation of former Secretary Clinton’s personal email server, the FBI was asked to review and make classification determinations on FBI emails and information which were being produced by the State Department pursuant to FOIA. The FBI determined that one such email was classified at the Secret level. A senior State Department official requested the FBI re-review that email to determine whether it was in fact classified or whether it might be protected from release under a different FOIA exemption. A now-retired FBI official, who was not part of the subsequent Clinton investigation, told the State Department official that they would look into the matter. Having been previously unsuccessful in attempts to speak with the senior State official, during the same conversation, the FBI official asked the State Department official if they would address a pending, unaddressed FBI request for space for additional FBI employees assigned abroad. Following the call, the FBI official consulted with a senior FBI executive responsible for determining the classification of the material and determined the email was in fact appropriately classified at the Secret level. The FBI official subsequently told the senior State official that the email was appropriately classified at the Secret level and that the FBI would not change the classification of the email. The classification of the email was not changed, and it remains classified today. Although there was never a quid pro quo, these allegations were nonetheless referred to the appropriate officials for review."

 

I often talk about two or more separate things in one phone call while I have a person on the line.  I imagine Rep. Chaffetz does to.  Doesn't mean either of us is trying to connect one topic to the other, or looking for any kind of quid pro quo.

[AURaptor 1,137]

the vid was to show that Hillary lied. And Comey said that she lied, her actions WERE criminal, and in any other case, a person would be prosecuted. 

[icanthearyou 4,468]

3 hours ago, AURaptor said:

the vid was to show that Hillary lied. And Comey said that she lied, her actions WERE criminal, and in any other case, a person would be prosecuted. 

Could you please cite your legal credentials.  You legal opinion is based on.......?

[Guest NC1406]

Legal precedent?

[AURaptor 1,137]

 I don't have to list my legal credentials. James Comey himself said that what Hillary did was wrong, and had anyone else done it they would have been prosecuted. Or at least face disciplinary action. She got away with no punishment because of who she is. 

[quietfan 233]

53 minutes ago, AURaptor said:

James Comey himself said ... had anyone else done it they would have been prosecuted. Or at least face disciplinary action. She got away with no punishment because of who she is. 

Technically (from your clip), he said "this should not suggest that in similar circumstances a person engaged in this activity would face no consequences".  That is not the same as saying anyone other than Clinton would face prosecution or disciplinary action.  And 'consequences' do not necessarily mean the same thing as, nor are limited to, legal prosecution or disciplinary action.

I think that was just legalize for "we're not establishing a legal precedent or opening ourselves up for a 'but Hillary' defense from any- & everyone arrested for espionage, and we will continue to handle every individual case based on the specifics and details of that case".

[AURaptor 1,137]

6 hours ago, quietfan said:

Technically (from your clip), he said "this should not suggest that in similar circumstances a person engaged in this activity would face no consequences".  That is not the same as saying anyone other than Clinton would face prosecution or disciplinary action.  And 'consequences' do not necessarily mean the same thing as, nor are limited to, legal prosecution or disciplinary action.

I think that was just legalize for "we're not establishing a legal precedent or opening ourselves up for a 'but Hillary' defense from any- & everyone arrested for espionage, and we will continue to handle every individual case based on the specifics and details of that case".

That ' legal precedent ' and lack of intent stuff was pure bunk.