Profile picture
Take3Tylenol♦SC♦ @Take3Tylenol
, 153 tweets, 29 min read Read on Twitter
If you're tired of political talk from me, just mute me for the next 8 hours. I'm currently reviewing the backlog of Oversight Committee hearings and will be live tweeting my thoughts. So, let's get into this.
Chaffetz acknowledges his respect and admiration for the FBI and addresses the concern of a double standard with the Clinton investigation and starts to build a timeline. The day of her Senate confirmation hearing, Hillary registered a domain name for her email.
"Classified Information is classified for a reason. It's classified because if it were to get out into the public, there are nefarious actors, nation states, others that want to do harm to this country and there are people who put their lives on the line protecting and serving
our country. When those communications are not secure. It puts their lives in jeopardy."
@TGowdySC and @jasoninthehouse believe that there was a dangerous precedent set about sloppily mishandling classified information and being subjected to no consequences.
Chaffetz is confused at the conclusion of the investigation given the fact pattern.
Here we go.... Cummings is recognized. "Some say you went too far in the investigation" obviously not... "No reasonable prosecutor would bring a case based on this evidence." Bullshit. I bet there are plenty of prosecutors. Especially on the committee. This is a clear cut case...
The gentleman yields to the narrator: There's a reason the wording changed from Gross negligence to Extremely Careless and I can explain that in one graphic.
Negligence implies criminality. Careless implies she's just stupid. Anyone in the government with that level of clearance better have a clear understanding of classified info and if you don't you shouldn't be in a government position. Not the State Dep and Especially not POTUS
Back to Cummings. Clinton acknowledges that she made a "mistake".

No, she made a choice to circumvent security protocols for her convenience. That's the so-called "intent" you were looking for @Comey.
"If prosecutors had gone forward they would have been holding the Sec to a different standard from everyone else"

And now comes the Republican bashing.... Because we wanted a fair investigation.

No evidence that Comey was flipped blah blah blah.
Cummings believes that the decision was not based on convenience, but on conviction.

More Republican bashing....

Now, he's bringing up Petraeus and the fact that they had no hearing. Right... Because he was convicted. Dumbass...

"We've had no hearings on Zika" Wait for it...
Grandstanding like he normally does...

I'm done with this blowhard. Just retire already.

Chaffetz: 1. You want a Petraeus hearing, you got it.
2. Oversight committee was the first to do a hearing on Zika. It was chaired by Mr. Mica
Cummings: Can we have another one?
Absolutely
Swearing in. Record reflects affirmative.
Comey opening statement:
Investigation was conducted in the highest traditions of the FBI. Done in an Apolitical and Professional way, including the conclusion. I expected the debate and want transparency. Any conversation is welcome.
I want to be able to explain the conclusion we reached.

Two things matter in an investigation
What'd they do?
What were they thinking when they did it?

"Did Hillary know what she was doing was unlawful?"

Really?.... She first became a senator 18 years ago. She's been around it
We don't want to put people in jail unless we can prove that they knew they were doing something they shouldn't do.

Gross negligence statute - Maybe you don't need to prove that they knew they were doing something unlawful. Maybe it's enough to prove that they were careless
"Without a reasonable doubt"

Statute has only been used once since it has been established. Case involved espionage.

The facts:
Evidence of great carelessness, but not enough that they could estanlish that they talked about classified info and that they knew it was unlawful.
Chair recognizes himself

Chair: Where were the servers?
Wit: Basement of her home in New York.
Chair: Was that an authorized or unauthorized location
Wit: It was an unauthorized location for the transmitting of classified information
Chair: Is it reasonable or unreasonable to expect Hillary Clinton would receive and send CI
Wit: As Sec of State? Reasonable that the Sec would encounter CI in the course of her work
Chair: Via email?
Wit: Sure, depending on the nature of the system. To communicate CI it would have to be a classified rated system
Chair: But you did find more than 100 emails that were classified that had gone through that server, Correct?
Wit: Right, through an unclassified server. Correct.
Chaffetz asks that Clinton did come to possess CI via email on the unsecured servers
Correct.
Chaffetz asks Comey if Clinton lied.
Comey claims they have no basis to conclude that HRC lied to the FBI and he can't speak on her lying to the public.
Chaffetz asks if she lied under oath
Comey states not to the FBI
Chaffetz asks Comey about Hillary's statement in Mr Jordan's document
"There was nothing marked classified on my emails, either sent or received." and whether that statement was investigated under oath.
Comey states it would require a referral from Congress.
"You'll have one in the next few hours."
Chaffetz asks if the law was broken
"In connection with the use of the email server, my judgment is that she did not"
Chaffetz asks if they were not able to prosecute or if she didn't
Lawyer answer: Judgment is that there's not enough evidence without a reasonable doubt to claim that she did.

Chaffetz questions if the FBI would give Hillary a clearance if they saw this on a background check
Comey avoids hypotheticals
Comey's answer changes when Chaffetz asks a similar question not pertaining to anyone in particular.

Hook, line, and sinker.

Backpedaling...
Comey ignores the fact that he's continuing to make the chair's point.
He didn't say that there were no consequences. Just in this situation.... With HRC.
What would happen if this was an employee of the FBI?
Review of security and adjudication.
Chair yields
Here comes jackass..
"Some have tried to argue that this case is worse that Petraeus" "Knowingly and INTENTIONALLY" Yield to Narrator (YTN) Gotta throw that "Intentionally" in there because "Hillary dindu nuffin she knew was wrong". What a hack...
"Petraeus had 8 Private notebooks in his personal residence" Sure did. Pen and paper locked up in his house not connected to the internet... Hillary had an email server not connected to SIPR (Image) in her basement. For a quick masterclass on CI, see here threadreaderapp.com/thread/9841040…
Comey explains Petraeus hid the books and then lied about it when they found them stating this is how someone gets prosecuted. Cummings infers that because Hillary was forthcoming (Aside from wiping the server, smashing blackberries and laptops) she didn't know she was doing bad.
Gowdy's up to bat.
Never sent or received - False
No classification markings - False
No CI on the server - False
One device - False
All work related emails handed over - False
No work emails deleted - Dodged
HRC Lawyers read emails and were overly inclusive - False
Going for the throat!
False Exculpatory statements

Used for evidence of intent and consciousness of intent in criminal prosecution

HRC affirmatively rejected receiving a state.gov email, kept the emails for 2 years and only turned them over to congress.
Unauthorized email system setup before she was sworn in
Thousands of emails with CI were discovered
Associate was proven to have been hacked, but they can't be sure she wasn't
Took place over a long period and resulted in destruction of public records.
Still Insufficient evidence
Times up... Damn 5 minute time limit.
Maloney's up
Pull your lips from his ass for a second...
"Republicans turned" blah blah blah
Note: I find it funny that no one mentions the required annual federal training for CI.... @TGowdySC @RepGoodlatte? If she couldn't remember
the meaning of the (C) on her emails, she doesn't need to be POTUS...
Back to the mouthpiece.
Time for leading questions based on quotes from Republican Reps.
Typical... The same bullshit from the Strzok hearing.
Yawn. You need to leave too...
Jim Jordan!
A bunch of prosecutors back home would look at the fact pattern and would take it to Grand Jury.
Factors that helped Comey make his decision
Context of Actions - Typically used by defense to mitigate circumstances during sentencing.
What context does Comey mean?
The fact that she's a Former FLOTUS, Senator, and Sec of State? The Tarmac meeting with the AG? Her nomination for POTUS?
Supposed context for prosecutorial judgment calls according to Comey:
Background
Nature of the offense
Drunk - (Image)
Inflamed by passion - (Image)
Consider the entire circumstance of their background

He never inferred political context.

Data on the server:
Work emails
Personal Emails
Clinton Foundation documents
Classified information

Then HRC Lawyers get to examine the email and determine what information gets released.
Emails that were not released to the State Dep or Congress got destroyed and devices were altered in a way that would prevent recovery.
Shouldn't that be destruction of evidence? Jim sure thinks so. I do too. What about you?
Did HRC know that her legal team deleted those emails? - I don't believe so
Did she approve the actions? - No specific instructions given
Did you ask? - Yes
Did she know the devices were cleaned in a way to preclude forensic recovery? - I don't believe so.
Abedin's deposition stated the email server was setup to prevent people from seeing what was going on.

When they got caught, they deleted what they had and cleaned the devices

Is that part of the context of the decision?
Sure
Time for Norton -.-
Luckily her slow talking will kill the time quickly

Oh boy. More grandstanding...
"There's no guidance on what you can or cannot do on official email"
Clearly someone is forgetting their training...
@lachlan covered things pretty well in his article
freebeacon.com/issues/five-st…
Norton apparently can't remember any of the paperwork or user agreements she signed.
Root of the problem - Unclassified Systems are not authorized to have CI
DeSantis has the ball.

Administrative consequences would be appropriate if someone demonstrated extreme carelessness. Consequences such as:

Termination of federal employment
Loss of clearance
Ineligibility in future Nat Sec positions (Like POTUS 👀)

Hypotheticals scare Comey.
DeSantis has Comey explain the reason mobile devices shouldn't be used overseas to discuss CI

The call data is transmitted over networks that could be compromised.

He asks Comey how the CI got onto the private server.
Conversations over Top secret matters took place on it.
DeSantis is tearing it up.

Mentioning the Secret Compartmented Information (SCI) NDA and acknowledging that other training outlines the requirements for handling CI.

SCI NDA and CI NDA signed by HRC entered into the record.

Clay is up and he starts by bringing up Ferguson...
Claims of a political witchhunt against HRC.

"Did Sec Clinton or any of her staff INTENTIONALLY violate federal law"
YTN: There's that word again... Intentionally. The answer is yes. They did it with the assumption that it would be never be revealed.
"Did Sec Clinton or any of her staff attempt to obstruct your investigation"
Comey: "We did not develop any evidence of that"

YTN: Really? That's interesting. We already determined that you didn't receive all the emails, they destroyed the devices, and lied about everything....
And now Clay asks something really fucking stupid... "Do the "mistakes" that she has apologized and expressed regret for rise to a level that would be worthy of federal prosecution?

Mistakes? ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME? Me forgetting to feed Clover before leaving was a mistake.
Her "mistake" was based of an intentional choice that she and her yes-men made to blatantly ignore Federal Law. You, sir, are a fucking disgrace @LacyClayMO1
Now, this jackass is on a tangent about Andrew Anglin and the Daily Stormer...

I'm not going to go into the whole #WhiteGenocide thing, but you cannot tell me that anti-white hatred is not a real threat, Mr. Clay.
Moving on... WY-Lummis.
She starts by mentioning that constituents are calling her asking about "18 US Code 1924"
They are wondering how as an attorney, this could have not come to her attention. It's simple @CynthiaLummis. Hillary Clinton doesn't care. She has been above the law for so long that it's finally catching up and she's had plants in key areas along the way. Lynch must testify.
Ms. Lummis is correct. Classified materials can be very dangerous. Top Secret is defined as information that would cause exceptionally grave danger to our National security. 7 email chains were determined as being TS and the FBI can't be sure the server wasn't compromised...
Again Comey refers back to his old song and dance about "Intent". I hope it was all worth it, Jim...
BAM! Lummis snaps back that the intent was retaining everything at an unauthorized location.
"It's more than that though" Wat....
Show that and prove criminal intent.
Clearly knew. Given all the training I received in the USAF for a TS, My SCI read-in for the Army, and even just working for Interior as low level as I was, I knew doing that would be breaking the law... But I was just a lowly servicemember and now contractor. Not Sec of State...
Should, must, had to have known doesn't cut it apparently... I wonder how Kristian Saucier (Nuclear sub sailor who took souvenir pictures to show grandkids) feels seeing all of this shit...

So, HRC attorneys did not have the required clearance to receive the information they did
30,000 emails destroyed. I wonder what damage that could have done. Conspiracies proven right. Trump running unopposed and maybe we wouldn't have the political climate we do now where "Anti-Fascists" are using fascist tactics to protest free speech while claiming POTUS is fascist
He's a fascist alright. Look at the journalists he's throw in jail or had killed. Look how he uses the military to stop these protests. What a fascist...

Lummis questions Comey's confidence about the 30k emails not having CI.
Short answer - No
Furthermore, the emails they did receive were not marked properly for CI. Everything is just piling up on Atlas' (Comey) shoulders as he withholds the weight from Clinton...
Onto @RepLynch who opens with Powell using personal email for official business. He didn't set up a private email server. He used commercial email. There's a huge difference. Colin Powell's statute of limitations had long been up by the time he revealed that. Not gonna dwell...
I'm not gonna engage in a game of apples and oranges. If you have nothing else of interest, I'm done paying attention to your time. Good news. He yielded.
@RepMarkMeadows is on deck. He's gonna go after the false statements again.
Comey admits that Hillary lied about her claim that she never sent CI and that things were being classified retroactively. Comey tries to "plead the 5th" in Hillary's absence. "I don't think that's a question I should be answering"....
Nothing marked classified - False, again.
Some statements were marked with (C) for Confidential. A reason person of HRC's intelligence and experience knows what that C means. Hell, even a civilian could infer that it still for something. Even if they were under the impression that it meant Classified. Not the enigma code
Meadows completely shuts down Comey's claim that he can believe someone of HRC's background wouldn't understand what the (C) stood for. Nicely done.
Backpedaling like a child who has never used a hand brake before...
Sophistication. Was she sophisticated enough to know about (C)
Wow... And some people wanted her as the president? You see. That's the problem. Hillary was pushed as the other person who could be Trump, but she's not smart enough to know about classified markings and according to her side, she can't remember what it means.
The entire push for Hillary to be the president was a fucking hate boner for Trump... I'm sure he's enjoying that rent free dwelling in your skulls..
I saw that smile, @RepMarkMeadows... You just thought the same thing I did. If you believe that, then I have a lovely bridge to sell you. HAHAHAHA. The quote from Hillary was under sworn testimony in front of the Benghazi committee. I love it. She lied under oath to Congress.
Time's up. Cooper is next. Do TN proud.
I don't like where this is going....
TN, what are you doing?
TN, STAHP! This man needs to be replaced.
Dude is literally speaking for all of Congress saying that they exempted themselves from the law. I wish someone would speak up...
Really? Talking about introducing legislation about holding congress to the same laws. When I said I wanted someone to speak up, I didn't mean Cummings...
Mr. Duncan for TN, please turn this around...
Recapping right now:
110 emails with CI - Sent or received
Attorney's wiped devices to prevent recovery
Thousands of emails discovered having not been turned over
Skipping Connolly. Nothing of importance from anyone with any shred of understanding about the severity of this. It's "political theater" to him and his B.A. in Lit and Masters in Public Administration.
Holy shit, Hurd is fired up! Former intel for the CIA and he doesn't take kindly to Connolly's claim. An private server housing TS/SCI in a basement that is not protected from hostile actors is not a crime or mishandling CI?
Oh, excuse me. It is mishandling CI, but intent rears it's ugly over-used head again. If I never hear it again, it will be too soon. Now, he's attacking from a Counter-intel angle. It put America's secrets at risk to foreign powers.
How can we prevent this from happening again if they don't set a precedent that this is not acceptable? We can't. This case clearly shows a double standard just from Comey's answers. So, a member of the FBI would be subject to these consequences in the same situation, but not her
So, despite all this evidence. Despite the fact that this is such an unusual circumstance, this won't qualify for a Case of First impression because it's HRC and she can't be treated differently because of her position. 😶
Who's next? Cartwright? I already don't like this is. This wishy-washy bipartisan BS. Back to Republican bashing and another jackass who doesn't understand CI. Three emails had a (C) marked in front of a paragraph in the body. That particular paragraph was confidential.
However, the problem is that he's making the assumption that they didn't just decide not to use the markings. These emails to and from HRC, thousands of them were not marked. Only 3. Why? Perhaps a new staffer who didn't catch on?
Maybe they missed them when going through emails.
Thousands more were not turned over and eventually got deleted. Why? Destruction of federal records. That's failure to retain like @CynthiaLummis mentioned. As the head of the State Department...
So, Cartwright's claim is that if the email doesn't have a header, she wouldn't know it's classified. Okay, sure. I'll give you that. Why didn't they? Who sent them? Who forwarded them? Did they originate on the server? If so, it was their responsibility to mark.
What can we infer from that? One of two things. They didn't care to mark them properly or everyone who sent or received emails through that server didn't complete the proper training.
Ignorantia juris non excusat
"ignorance of the law excuses not"
Mr. Buck, Come on down. Did hostile nations obtain information from Hillary Clinton's servers - I don't know. It's possible, but we don't have direct evidence.
Did she know she had no authority to have the server in her basement - Yes
Did she know she would be receiving CI - Yes
Alright Duckworth, that was pretty pointless...
Wew Lad... Okay. Walberg was mostly just re-hashing information until @Comey came out with this fucking gem... "But you know what would be a double standard? If she were prosecuted for gross negligence." Are you serious... Jim, I know you probably won't ever read this, but wow...
I cannot believe you just said that. She is so much of a victim, so much of a martyr that if you actually did prosecute her, it would be a double standard... Just fucking WOW....
I don't know if I'm going to make it through this hearing without having an aneurysm... Wish me luck.
Comey is just absolutely amazing at shooting himself in the foot. He just used careless and negligence interchangeably.
Fuck me... @tedlieu 's got the mic.... ALRIGHT LISTEN THE FUCK UP TEDDY. Numbers are not what matter here. Whether it was 3 emails being marked or 300, they were marked. PERIOD. Ultimately, marking is the responsibility of who said it. If they chose not to mark, it's on them.
Secondly, you're ignoring the other variable. THE EMAILS THEY DIDN'T TURN OVER YOU PRICK. How many do you suppose were marked or not marked that still contained CI?
Mica's up. He compares the investigation to "Hamilton" in the sense of choregraphy.
Timeline:
6/30 Lynch and Clinton tarmac meeting
7/2 Hillary interviewed by FBI
7/5 Comey recommends no prosecution
7/6 Lynch closes case

Less than a week...

Mica requests the 302s for the record
Plaskett wants to talk about Police involved shootings that the victim had no responsibility for whatsoever and she wants to moral grandstand. I need headache medicine...
@farenthold questions the hacking attempts and whether prosecution recommendation would change if attempts had been successful. Comey says no, I say yes. They would pin it on her as fast as they could.
Boyle is up. Why does he look like a 14 year old in a suit?
He's complaining about up-classing and wants to work on processes for it.
Hice has the time. He's concerned about public response to the recommendation with the optics. Comey responds interestingly about the questioning. It appears Hillary's lack of prosecution or consequence is large in part to the fact that she's no longer a government employee.
Guess what @RepLynch? That doesn't apply to Powell anymore ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Mr. Welch on the board and off the board. Nothing worthwhile. Especially when he tried to yield the rest of his time to Cummings...
Massie Time. He's questioning about the amount of intent it would take to bring CI onto an unsecure system. 👀
Ms. Lawrence sounds like she's in the middle of having a stroke reading this letter... 5 minutes is way too long. Hope she doesn't fall off her soapbox.
Mr. Blum is up. Cyber security professionals have quoted some prices for compromising certain systems on the market. He then questions Comey about Hillary's server being less secure than Gmail.
Watson-Coleman 😴Leading questions. Any evidence that National security has been put at risk as a result. No, duh. He's already stated that they couldn't even tell if the server had been compromised. Pass.
Grandstanding again. Police involved shootings of course. Flavor of the month. Horowitz and Strzok had the children in cages battlecry. Do the job you're currently tasked with.
Mr. Walker goes after claims of the investigation being a witchhunt. Comey doesn't believe it is. Comey states that the IG of Intelligence recommended the continuation of the Clinton investigation. Reviewing the False statements.
DeSaulnier - Expresses concerns over people saying the system's rigged and expects Comey to set the record straight. Nothing more really
@DesJarlaisTN04 - Constituents had concerns that she was above the law. Questions about the interview and false statements. Comey doesn't want to make judgments about the false statements to the people. He wants to focus on what she said to the FBI.
Dr. DesJarlais asks about precedent and refers to the Nishimura case. Not particularly knowledgeable of the case. Will have to look into it. Nishimura was charged under 1924, the statute that Ms. Lummis mentioned previously. Similarities do bring questions. Will report back.
Grisham - Questions about evidence that HRC was not charged by the DOJ due to previous positions or political influence. None and Comey asks for someone to show him. He then mentions the double standard of "Celebrity hunting". Interesting... Sounds like how the media treats POTUS
Then she whines about the committee being misused. She drug out her 5 minutes talking about nothing....
Mr. Carter questions the timeline. A year long investigation comes to a close after a 3 hour interview of the central subject of the investigation.... Carter yields to Chaffetz after having asked if Pagliano (HRC's Private IT contractor) knew that she was not following protocol.
Chaffetz asks about the immunity agreement and what the FBI got out of it. Comey excuses himself from answering. Carter's time ends shortly after with no real progress.
Mulvaney - Back to the false statements He asks if Hillary said the same during the interview. Comey claims he's not equipped to answer without the 302. Mulvaney asks if the interviewers questioned why she lied to Congress. Comey asks to get back to him.
Mulvaney asks if it would have been of interest to Comey when trying to prove intent. Comey affirms that's true. He asks what the reason the server was setup. Comey replied convenience. Huma Abedin's deposition claimed it was concealment. To keep her personal emails from anybody.
Mulvaney sums it all up
ytcropper.com/cropped/Sp5b6d…
Gosar - Questions why the DOJ provided Pagliano an immunity deal and what they got out of it. He then yields the time to Gowdy. Round two! Get your ass ready, Comey.
Clinton stated that she was aware of Classification requirements. If so, how is she not sophisticated enough to know she was breaking the law. Gowdy questions the convenience claim when the CI was retained for 2 years after her time with the State Dep and deleted after subpoena.
Gowdy feels Comey is reading a specific intent element into the Gross negligence statute. Comey replies asking why the DOJ has only used the statute once since it's introduction.
Chaffetz recognizes himself for a moment to question why Comey set a precedent as the first FBI Director to not recommend prosecution instead of turning the decision over to the DOJ. I have a hunch it has to do with the optics of the tarmac meeting...
Comey claims that the decision to hold a press conference was for transparency and if he didn't it would look bad and that something fishy might be going on. I could have sworn I was at work, but I must be in a field because I smell bullshit.
Cummings is recognized and he's complaining about the hearing. Dismissive language like "Slippery slope" "Chilling effect". Comey disagrees.
Palmer - Compares the case to the phishing scam that affected John Brennan and James Clapper. (These are the head of Intelligence?) They're commercially protected emails were compromised and no CI was found. Clinton had a private email server with less security and CI.
Comey expresses concerns that he cannot ensure the information has not be compromised, but still doesn't hold the people who put it at risk accountable... Sound real concerned there, Jim.
Palmer asks if Comey stands by his decision about not pursuing any action. He does. Hillary is again compared to a reasonable person stating that they wouldn't keep CI on unsecured devices. You are correct, Mr. Palmer. She sees herself as above the law. Above everyone.
He mentions his "neighbor", Mr. Hurd. Who passionately questioned Comey as a former CIA operator stating that he knows people in the field and if they were put in harms way by Clinton's actions, would that affect the necessity of intent. "Of course"
Grothman - His sights are set on the deletion. Specifically, deletion to the point of affecting recovery efforts. The emails were deleted December of 2014, right after the questions about the Clinton Foundation and Benghazi.... The claim was the emails were all personal. Not true
Work-related emails were deleted beyond recovery, but it's not considered obstruction of justice because there's "no evidence" to prove it was malicious.
Russell might as well drop to his knees while Comey drops trou given the first statement of his time. Let's get back to the matter at hand... Now we're back to the holes in Comey's story that you could drive a truck through...
If Russell had committed the same acts while employed by the FBI, he'd be subject to consequences. Despite the lack of charges, Comey is not stating that there be no consequences for mishandling state secrets, but he refuses the opportunity to state his recommended consequences.
@Comey explains his refusal as a question the people shouldn't hold to the FBI Dir. Here's the problem, Jim... Lynch put you in that position. Her "I'll accept whatever recommendation" is a cop-out putting the blame and the weight of the action taken solely on you.
Russell asks if Comey views that Hillary didn't know her responsibilities to handle CI properly. Comey denies and Russell agrees. He then yields to Chaffetz.
After coming to an agreement with the ranking member, the chairman will be afforded the time to ask some questions.
1. How did the DOJ or FBI view Hillary Clinton instructing Jake Sullivan to take CI markings off a document being sent to her.
It was supposed to be treated as a non-paper. Essentially stripping the document of CI, but the information was not stripped.
Jake stated that they were having trouble sending a classified fax.
Hillary: If they can't, turn into non-paper with no identifying heading and send non-secure.
During the interview, she claimed that she meant to make it into a non-classified document by removing CI.
Chaffetz: If it's going to be turned into a non-classified document, why take off the heading?
Comey: I assume it's non-classified anymore so it wouldn't need the heading. She said during the interview, "I was telling him send me an unclassified document".

Chaffetz claims Comey is generous his acceptance of the explanation. I assume that's due to the numerous lies.
Chaffetz: Did any uncleared individuals receive any CI over the private server
Comey doesn't recall any uncleared individuals having access. Despite Brian Pagliano who was running the server....
Chaffetz asks how many uncleared individuals had access to the server containing CI.
Comey is unable to provide a number, but then states a range between more than 2 and less than 10. 🤔🤔🤔🤔
That's a lot of individuals without requisite security clearance that could view/retrieve CI from the server.
Chaffetz: Did HRC's attorney's have the clearance needed to comb through for personal email?
Comey: "They did not"
Let me get this straight... The FBI allowed uncleared individuals to peruse the system to retrieve "personal" emails. Have you lost your fucking minds?
Chaffetz: Does that concern you?
Comey: "Oh yeah. Sure."
Okay, so why was it allowed?.... This investigation has been botched from the beginning.
Is there any consequence to an attorney rifling through the email without a security clearance?
Well, not necessarily criminal consequences.
I cannot believe he actually just fucking said that... Are you kidding me? You, as the Director of the FBI, allowed uncleared individuals to go through an email archive containing classified information so they could remove personal email.
Then you have the audacity to state the concern of it and the necessity to obtain anything that you could back from the attorneys...

So, what's the consequence? Hillary gave instruction to uncleared individuals to search her email for anything personal before turning email over.
"That's what happened in fact. Whether that was the direction is something I can't answer sitting here."

So, it happened, but no consequences? The attorneys don't work for the government. They can't be fired. What's going to happen?

"If they acted with criminal intent"

......
I'm just going to let this last clip speak for itself as Chaffetz yields back....
ytcropper.com/cropped/VV5b75…
Cummings is recognized in closing. Where he tries to muddy the waters as Ted Lieu did talking about the numbers of marked correspondence. I'm going to tell you the same thing I told Teddy, @RepCummings. The marking of information falls on the person sending the information.
If they made a conscious decision to not mark it that's on them, but the propagation continuing without being marked is on everyone who sent or received the information from then on. The moment it was spread on an unclassified system, it was a spill and all were complicit.
Now, he's attempting to go after the classification process stating that the emails that were marked, were not marked properly. Okay. Here's a little Classification 101... There's an add-in, with Microsoft Outlook that classifies emails for you based on preset configurations.
Something that would have been used had the emails stayed where they belong on SIPRNet... 👀
Cummings yields to Lynch who rattles off a list of commercial and government entities that were hacked and evidence was found to prove it. Given the nature of the investigation and everyone involved, I don't think it's out of line to say they found evidence, but won't admit it...
Truth be told, I don't think we'll ever get a fair investigation on this unless it is completely re-done. Top-to-bottom. The bias was shown in Strzok and Page's texts. McCabe had a link to the Clintons. Comey could have easily been swayed. Anyone with eyes can tell about the AG.
This "matter" was over before it started.
Now, Cummings is back on the killer cops... Hyperbole and fearmongering as a distraction. Next...
Short recess and onto Panel #2: Steve Linick (State Department IG) accompanied by Ms. Costello (Asst IG for Office of Evaluation and Special Projects)
Charles McCullough (Intel Comm IG at the ODNI)

All witnesses sworn in. Affirmative entered into record.
@threadreaderapp unroll please
Missing some Tweet in this thread?
You can try to force a refresh.

Like this thread? Get email updates or save it to PDF!

Subscribe to Take3Tylenol♦SC♦
Profile picture

Get real-time email alerts when new unrolls are available from this author!

This content may be removed anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just three indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member and get exclusive features!

Premium member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year)

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!