Hillary Clinton is Seriously Dangerous

[8bitagent]

Yep, it's all right wing links! Super right wing, like Democracy Now

http://www.democracynow.org/2016/3/24/g ... s_embraced

Glenn Greenwald: Hillary Clinton Has Embraced Some of the Most Brutal Dictators in the World

Ok so we got the Russians to blame for all of the illicit deeds of the Clintons. And, any news org that publishes articles exposing Hillary is part of the right wing
machination. Just checking. There needs to be a giant eye-roll emoji here

[seemslikeadream]

you are a master at changing the subject ...never answering questions.....

[Sounder]

Iamwhomiam » Thu Nov 03, 2016 4:20 pm wrote:Wow! Sounder, that is one very smart post.

Jack wrote...
Yeah, seriously. It must be the smartest post ever on this board. Sounder is a very, very smart guy. As he argues, he's responsible for this mess of a world and one cannot trust him.

Too clever by half Jack.
Funny thing is, I do feel responsible for the messed-upness of this world. That's a good thing right?


I remember in high school and college, all the smart kids doing their impression of intelligence by being the best at parroting back the ‘information’ given by the teachers. They developed good memory but not much active engagement with said information.

I decided that using ones intelligence in this way, while good for personal advancement, may not be so good for social growth and development. As it happens I was the smartest kid in class, testing wise*, but did not at all identify as being smart. I felt incredibly ignorant. I was told many things but knew little with certainty, beyond a few math problems.

So I went my own way, and thanks to Kuhn, Morris Berman and others, came to the realization that a better application of intelligence is to create new forms and connections between them, rather than depending on existing forms for ones grounding. (Although to be fair, grounding in existing forms is a necessary first step.)

Later I determined that our split model of reality creates the bad assumptions that continue to produce the messed-upness in this world.

Why do we stick with this poor reality model? Co-dependence?


And Iam, why does self evident truth bother you so much?

Smart people are considered smart because they are the ones that know best how to converse and convince in terms of our current 'categories of understanding'. Therefor they are most responsible for the maintenance of intellectual structures, our dominant narrative. They are then the ones responsible for the messed-upness in this world, not regular people.

*small school

[Searcher08]

I am just so fucking tired of this "I'm so fucking tired of this right wing crapola shit being pushed here" being pushed here by folks citing the New York Times, Politico, Daily Beast, Washington Post yada yada yada as sources. They are ALL choc full of shit. Remember when we we were all fighting in our own ways for getting 9/11 out into the open and remember all the support from the mainstream media we received, the same media the left is breathlessly quoting.

I am just so fucking tired of this.

[seemslikeadream]

you can't tell the difference between FOX NEWS/Breitbart/TrumpNews and the rest....I have no hope for you


HAS THE F.B.I. GONE FULL BREITBART?

As Trump Ally, Rudy Giuliani Boasts of Ties to F.B.I.

The FBI Wants to Make America Great Again

Agent: FBI is ‘Trumplandia’

When Trump owned casinos in Atlantic City, he allowed Kallstrom’s organization to hold fundraisers “pro bono” there. Trump became a major supporter of New York’s Police Athletic League, run for decades by Manhattan District Attorney Robert Morgenthau, all moves that endeared him to law enforcement officials in jurisdictions where he did business.

Reports of FBI Clinton Foundation investigation, looming indictment 'just not true,' reports NBC's Pete Williams
2:34 a.m. ET

On Wednesday night, The Wall Street Journal reported on bitter infighting between some FBI field agents and their superiors at the FBI and Department of Justice over whether to pursue an initial inquiry about the Clinton Foundation, based on an anti-Clinton book, and Fox News reported that an indictment was likely in the case, citing two anonymous sources. Donald Trump has been citing that report at his rallies, even as Fox News' Bret Baier walked it back a bit, noting that the FBI can't indict people, among other problems. These leaks come amid reports that a group of FBI agents, especially in the New York field office, are strongly pro-Trump and hostile to Hillary Clinton.

On MSNBC Thursday, NBC justice correspondent Pete Williams carefully poured cold water on at least the Fox News reports. When Chuck Todd asked him about the status of the Clinton Foundation investigation, he said: "There really isn't one, if you want to call it an investigation. That's a term of art in the FBI. There was an initial inquiry that was opened a couple of months ago based largely on media reports and a book called Clinton Cash, and there were some initial things done in that. But FBI officials tell me there's been virtually no movement on that case for the last several months. So this idea that there are indictments near or something like that, I am told, is just not true."

The Fox News report also alleged that there's a high probability that five foreign entities breached Hillary Clinton's private email server, and Williams said "I am told that there is no such view" at the FBI. That doesn't mean there was no breach, he added, just that they "found no positive proof of any successful hacks." Todd asked Williams what FBI officials think about all the leaking going on, especially since it seems partisan. "Are they comfortable with all this innuendo that's being based on FBI sources?" he asked. "Well, they don't like it, certainly, but they don't believe that the answer is to come out and say anything," Williams said, chuckling. "I think many of them feel like they said enough last Friday." Peter Weber
http://theweek.com/speedreads/659545/re ... e-williams

[Searcher08]

you can't tell the difference between FOX NEWS/Breitbart/TrumpNews and the rest....I have no hope for you


HAS THE F.B.I. GONE FULL BREITBART?

As Trump Ally, Rudy Giuliani Boasts of Ties to F.B.I.

The FBI Wants to Make America Great Again

Agent: FBI is ‘Trumplandia’

When Trump owned casinos in Atlantic City, he allowed Kallstrom’s organization to hold fundraisers “pro bono” there. Trump became a major supporter of New York’s Police Athletic League, run for decades by Manhattan District Attorney Robert Morgenthau, all moves that endeared him to law enforcement officials in jurisdictions where he did business.

I have always been beyond hope.

The FBI - that is the same organisation fruh has been posting about for years but NOW the fruitcake left are going "they are teh evilz". Do you really think the FBI are out of step with the establishment factions, the same org that went around doing 'wet work' on people like that southern doctor who met people connected with the 9/11 hijackers?

[seemslikeadream]

I am not a fruit cake ....but please go ahead....I'll be in the FBI and the 2016 Election

pile on with the rest of the FOX NEWS crowd here ..fine by me

Maddow Examines How Fox's Debunked Clinton Report Began With FBI Agents Presenting Breitbart Hit Pieces As Evidence

Maddow: The FBI "Actually Used That Breitbart.com, Anti-Hillary Clinton Book As Their Source For Launching A Local FBI Inquiry Into Hillary Clinton"



RACHEL MADDOW (HOST): This week, The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal reported that there has been, I guess you'd call it, like, a breakout? There's been a breakout from this otherwise insular little Breitbart.com corner of conservative media and political activism. Those two papers reported that apparently there are Breitbart.com fans, there are Breitbart.com true believers, there are people who buy this stuff who are working inside the New York field office of the FBI. The New York Times and Wall Street Journal were first to report that the New York field office of the FBI used that anti-Hillary Clinton book, and the DVD of the same name, from the Breitbart.com guys, from the Breitbart.com editor and his boss who's now the head of the Donald Trump campaign, the one funded by Donald Trump's biggest donor, right? They actually used that Breitbart.com, anti-Hillary Clinton book as their source for launching a local FBI inquiry into Hillary Clinton. That was their evidence. That was their research. These agents in the New York field office reportedly decided that they needed to look into what Breitbart.com was saying about Hillary Clinton. It all sounds terrible. Sounds totally legit. We should look into that. We're the FBI.

It had previously been reported that New York FBI agents brought this anti-Hillary Clinton Breitbart stuff to a meeting -- excuse me, they had brought this anti-Hillary Clinton stuff to a meeting with career Justice Department prosecutors back in February, and one of the participants in that meeting described it as, quote, "one of the weirdest meetings I have ever been to." But, all we knew before now was that they had brought some stuff about Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation to that meeting. We now know, based on the current reporting, that what the New York agents brought prosecutors at meeting wasn't just generic anti-Hillary Clinton stuff, or Hillary Clinton stuff they had cooked up on their own. No, it was this stuff that had been cooked up at Breitbart. It is the stuff that came from the eco-sexuals having sex with trees website. That is what they had, that is what they brought to career Department of Justice prosecutors, and reportedly the career prosecutors were like, "uhh, where you did you get this? I'm not sure that's a case."

Thanks to lord knows whatever's going on, apparently, inside that New York field office of the FBI, that little adventure, which is now reportedly over, that little adventure of the Breitbart.com readers inside this one FBI field office, that's what's out now in today's news five days before the election. That's what was breathlessly reported on Fox News last night based on FBI sources, breathlessly reported on Fox last night as a whole new Hillary Clinton FBI investigation. One that was definitely going to lead to an indictment.

http://mediamatters.org/video/2016/11/0 ... ces/214289

[Sounder]

It is a bit ironic to see previous skeptical people living with such dependence and support for and from mainstream media.

I do agree that a fair section of the anti-media are right-wing nuts, not an endearing set. But that does not mean that the Clinton 'family' should not be taken down.

If they were taken down, more people might decide to show more respect for limits placed on the ability of 'public servants' to cash in on their positions.

[seemslikeadream]

The FBI Is Self-Destructing at the Worst Possible Moment
And it was a long time coming.


BY CHARLES P. PIERCE
NOV 3, 2016

Of all the astonishing things in an astonishing (and increasingly grim) presidential campaign, the sudden involvement of elements of the Federal Bureau of Investigation in the act of ratfcking a candidacy is even more amazing than the fact that there is a vulgar talking yam one step away from running almost the entire federal government. There hasn't been a hotter hot mess in Washington since John Mitchell was running both the Department of Justice and a criminal conspiracy to obstruct same.

On Thursday, for example, thanks to the folks at Think Progress, we discovered that the Feebs are now investigating their own Twitter account.

ThinkProgress has learned that the FBI's Inspection Division will undertake an investigation of the account. Candice Will, Assistant Director for the FBI's Office of Professional Responsibility, said she was referring the matter to the FBI's Inspection Division for an "investigation." Upon completion of the investigation, the Office of Professional Responsibility will be referred back to the Office of Professional Responsibility for "adjudication." Federal law and FBI policy prohibit employees from using the power of the department to attempt to influence elections.
Yeah, horses, barns, that whole thing. The important thing to remember is that one portion of the FBI seems to be at war with another portion of the FBI and that almost everybody has a gun.

But, by far, the most astonishing revelation has been that, in launching their probe into the Clinton Foundation, the Feebs in charge relied for source material on Clinton Cash, the meretricious hit job by veteran GOP ratfcker Peter Schweizer, as The New York Times tells us. (Schweizer runs a rightwing chop shop founded by Steve Bannon, the Breitbart slug who's running the Trump campaign.) Keep the Times in mind, because it gets better.

In August, around the same time the decision was made to keep the Manafort investigation at a low simmer, the F.B.I. grappled with whether to issue subpoenas in the Clinton Foundation case, which, like the Manafort matter, was in its preliminary stages. The investigation, based in New York, had not developed much evidence and was based mostly on information that had surfaced in news stories and the book "Clinton Cash," according to several law enforcement officials briefed on the case. The book asserted that foreign entities gave money to former President Bill Clinton and the Clinton Foundation, and in return received favors from the State Department when Mrs. Clinton was secretary of state. Mrs. Clinton has adamantly denied those claims.
If that seems a rather anodyne description of the book, it should, because, more than most publications, the Times has a good reason to soft-pedal the impact of Clinton Cash on federal law enforcement. In April of 2015, in an act that both reminded us all of how the Times was Ken Starr's lapdog regarding the Clintons in the 1990s and presaged the abysmal coverage that followed of Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign, the Times—and, alas, Marty Baron's Washington Post—entered into an unprecedented deal with Schweizer, whose history as an ideological picklock already was well-known.


The Day Political Journalism Died
At the time, we pointed that out to the regulars here in the shebeen, and commented on how that decision was both ethically bizarre and perfectly predictable.

Again, why not just wait until you can order the damn thing on Amazon, rather than climbing under the covers with someone whose CV contains a stint as a hack in the service of Princess Dumbass Of The Northwoods? The answer can be found in the first story that the Times produced under this arrangement.
But Clinton Cash is potentially more unsettling, both because of its focused reporting and because major news organizations including the Times, The Washington Post and Fox News have exclusive agreements with the author to pursue the story lines found in the book.
Got that? The book has credibility because the New York Times cut a deal with the author. Because of this, the author, and his curious resume, are washed in the blood of the Lamb. (It's God's own little joke that Judy Miller's out there shilling for her longform alibi at the same time that her old employers are touting this unique "arrangement.) I will make the Toby Ziegler bet with Carolyn Ryan that her newspaper linked up with this character because her newspaper has had a hard-on for the Clintons from the time it botched the original Whitewater story right up until last Sunday, when its star political columnist went off her meds again.
If you want to find the source point at which the elite political media began mainstreaming dangerous political pollution—which is to say, when the notion of Donald Trump as an actual presidential candidate took shape—you can do worse that pick this particular moment, when the Times decided that we were all just haggling about the price. The pollution has poisoned the election and it appears to have poisoned the FBI into a kind of self-destructive madness.

And there's less than a week left to find the antidote, assuming anyone really wants to look for one.
http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/po ... ork-times/

Trump Campaign Pays Millions to Overseas Big Data Firm
by KATE BRANNELLY

LONDON — Big data crunched in a nondescript office more than 3,000 miles from the U.S. might just convince you to cast a ballot for Donald Trump.

In September alone, the Trump campaign paid British firm Cambridge Analytica $5 million to help target voters.

The company says it holds data on 230 million adults across the U.S. — and around 4,000 "data points" on each of them.

Using transaction information from loyalty cards, club and gym memberships and charity donations, it seeks to understand which way an individual might lean politically — and how to potentially change their mind.

"The more you know about someone, the better you can engage with them and the more relevant you can make the communications that you send to them, so our job is to use data to understand audiences," chief executive officer Alexander Nix told NBC News.

PlayThings Donald Trump Might Be Sorry He Said Facebook Twitter Google PlusEmbed
Things Donald Trump Might Be Sorry He Said 1:51
None of the data the company collects is, on its own, very intrusive or sensitive, he said.

"This is not health data or financial data or anything that people might feel nervous about, but when you look at the data as a whole, when you aggregate it all, it paints a very interesting picture about the individuals," Nix added.

The information "certainly allows you to begin to understand what interests them, what issues they care about, what ideologies they may have, if it's politics, or what goods and services may be important to them."

In other words, grabbing a sandwich from a preferred café chain, subscribing to a favorite magazine, signing up to a newsletter or even becoming a pet owner are all used to create a profile.

"CITIZENS HAVE TO BE TOLD WHY THEIR PERSONAL INFORMATION IS BEING COLLECTED, WHERE IT IS GOING TO BE STORED AND WHO IT MAY BE SHARED WITH."
Campaign messaging can then be micro-targeted to a voter.

Nix likens his data and behavioral consulting company's process to the kitchen.

"When you bake a good cake it's the sum of the ingredients ... it's actually flour, and eggs, and ginger, and everything else. And that's what we're looking at," he said. "It's very hard to pull out one data point in isolation and say 'you are that', because that's everything we're trying to get away from."


Insights gained from TV-watching habits and religious affiliations allow psychological attributes to be profiled. And that helps the Donald J Trump for President Campaign decide what to tell you, or not.

In a office featuring a foosball table and filled with computer screens packed with graphs and charts, Cambridge Analytica senior data scientist Eyal Kazin explained how voters are segmented into groups. Some require issue-related persuasion to bring them around to Trump's agenda, while others are deemed to just need "a nudge" to turn out and vote.

Related: Trump's New App Wants You — and Your Data

In practice, this could reach voters in the form of a social media message about gun ownership, a TV ad about caring for military veterans during your favorite morning show, the scheduling of a rally in your neighborhood or a letter dropped on your doorstep.

Some of the Trump campaign's $5 million spending with the firm in September was used to buy targeted digital and TV advertising space.

PlayTrump Facebook fundraising an enticing option Facebook Twitter Google PlusEmbed
Trump Facebook fundraising an enticing option 17:37
Nix argues that such rigorous marketing actually benefits the voter. He says it means Americans receive information about issues that are fundamentally important to them, saving their time.

However, privacy campaigners have raised concerns about such methods.

Daniel Nesbitt, research director of U.K.-based civil liberties activist group Big Brother Watch, said: "Citizens have to be told why their personal information is being collected, where it is going to be stored and who it may be shared with. Without this basic information citizens are going to be left in the dark about what is happening to their personal data and won't have a proper chance to say, 'no.'"

The Open Rights Group, which is a digital rights protection campaign, called the approach a "disturbing development."


Jim Killock, its executive director, said: "American privacy law is completely broken, there is a real sense that you don't own your own information. It's putting power into the hands of a small number of companies who know a great deal about people's beliefs and habits.

He added: "Politicians are relying on this to bring them to power, that makes it very hard for them to challenge these very intrusive profiling tools. What politician is going to constrain the thing that has brought them to political office?"
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/2016-e ... rm-n677321

[Searcher08]

It is a bit ironic to see previous skeptical people living with such dependence and support for and from mainstream media.

I do agree that a fair section of the anti-media are right-wing nuts, not an endearing set. But that does not mean that the Clinton 'family' should not be taken down.

If they were taken down, more people might decide to show more respect for limits placed on the ability of 'public servants' to cash in on their positions.

It reminds me of the party politicizing of the CIA courtesy of Porter Goss and the fight inside it (Ray McGovern etc).

If there is a suspicion of illegal behaviour, it should be investigated - turning it into a partisan issue is a signal that when it comes down to it, the appearance of justice is more important than actual justice for many Clinton supporters. It mirrors the attitudes around the Wikileaks material - talk about ANYTHING other than the leaked material.

[seemslikeadream]

the leaked material.....coming from

Part of the FBI is Trumpland, and is part of http://Briebart.com . They are trying to throw the election to Trump with their leaks.

http://Briebart.com is owned by this zillionaire Robert Mercer

FBI used a book put out by Briebart(campaign chair for Trump) which is a witch hunt against Hillay to convince Comey to change mind


Two days before FBI director James Comey rocked the world last week, Rudy Giuliani was on Fox, where he volunteered, un-prodded by any question: “I think he’s [Donald Trump] got a surprise or two that you’re going to hear about in the next few days. I mean, I’m talking about some pretty big surprises.”



When Trump owned casinos in Atlantic City, he allowed Kallstrom’s organization to hold fundraisers “pro bono” there. Trump became a major supporter of New York’s Police Athletic League, run for decades by Manhattan District Attorney Robert Morgenthau, all moves that endeared him to law enforcement officials in jurisdictions where he did business.



As Trump Ally, Rudy Giuliani Boasts of Ties to F.B.I.


HAS THE F.B.I. GONE FULL BREITBART?


FBI takes a page from Breitbart: Far-right “Clinton Cash” book used in Foundation investigation


How Fox's Debunked Clinton Report Began With FBI Agents Presenting Breitbart Hit Pieces As Evidence

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=40133

[Spiro C. Thiery]

opednews.com
Article: FBI-Clinton Investigation Impacts Four Presidents
by Lynn Landes

As the dam breaks on the latest Hillary Clinton scandals (emails & The Clinton Foundation), four U.S. presidents could get caught up in the deluge: Presidents Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and George H.W. Bush.

It appears that Obama lied when he said that he only learned about Hillary Clinton's secret server when the news broke to the general public. Apparently, Obama also sent and received Clinton unsecured emails himself, which was against the law. Perhaps that is why he is working so hard to get Hillary elected -- as protection from prosecution. Or perhaps after he leaves office, Obama wants to get in on the easy money that has so enriched previous presidents and prime ministers around the world, as they peddle their influence at the public's expense through organizations, such as the Bush family's Carlyle Group and the Clinton Foundation. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/ ... ber11.usa4

And that is why the Clinton-Bush connection (or cartel) screams out for attention now. In the wake of the ongoing FBI investigation, what has not been widely discussed in the corporate media is the decades-long relationship between the Clinton and the Bush families. It has a long and sordid history. Reports dating back to the Iran-Contra days in the 1980's, describe the corrupt relationship between the Clintons and then Vice-President George H.W. Bush (and former CIA Director), as drugs were being trafficked into the U.S. by the CIA through Mena, Arkansas. https://ajmacdonaldjr.wordpress.com/201 ... and-murder

In recent decades, former Presidents George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush, have partnered with the Clinton Foundation and its Global Initiative on many natural disasters, including: The Tsunami in India (2004), Hurricane Katrina (2005), the Haiti earthquake disaster (2010), Hurricane Sandy (2012), and Typhoon Haiyan in the Phillipines (2013) are some, but perhaps not all of their shared enterprises.

And now, it appears that these Clinton-Bush charitable projects did much more to enrich themselves, than to serve the public. http://www.wnd.com/2015/10/clinton-foun ... earthquake

Add to that, the Bush family's indications that they will be voting for Hillary Clinton for President, and that pretty much cements their uncomfortably close relationship. Although the Clintons and the Bushes often share the same stage and speaking engagements, it appears that in preparation for Hillary's run for the White House, the Clintons took some pains to hide their connection. Bill Clinton's speaking fees to the Bushes Carlyle Group appear to be missing from his 2012 federal financial disclosure filing http://peureport.blogspot.com/2014/06/b ... group.html.

Maybe that was an accidental omission. What was no accident is that Billy Bush (nephew of President George H.W. Bush and first cousin of President George W. Bush), provided the tape that almost torpedoed Donald Trump's election hopes. For anyone who thinks that it was just a coincidence, the Bush family is full of strange coincidences at tragic moments in our nation's history. Such as Marvin P. Bush, George W. Bush's younger brother, who was a principal in a company called Securacom that provided security for the World Trade Center on 9/11 in 2001. Or the son of then Vice President George H. W. Bush, Neil Bush, who invited Scott Hinckley to have dinner on the same day in 1981 that Scott's brother, John W. Hinckley Jr., shot President Ronald Reagan. Or George H.W. Bush, for whom there is compelling evidence, was a CIA agent and involved in JFK's assassination in 1963. http://www.wnd.com/2013/09/did-george-h ... ssination/.

Both the Bushes and the Clintons have been implicated in a decades-long trail of scandals. They are considered by many to be crime families whose tentacles reach far and wide. However, they could not have gotten away with so much without a lot of help from powerful insiders and an army of complicit agents. One high profile example is James Comey, who has been in charge of two controversial investigations (if not cover-ups) of Bill and Hillary Clinton. Besides Hillary's 2015 email investigation, that Comey badly mishandled, he also led the DOJ's 2002 flawed investigation into Bill Clinton's last minute pardon of Marc Rich. Another coincidence?

As much as the FBI should be applauded for their efforts to uncover this most recent Clinton scandal, they should also be aware of those within their own ranks who have protected the Bushes and the Clintons for many decades. And take care. The Bush-Clinton Cartel appears to be capable of anything.

[kool maudit]

Please stop defending Hillary or attacking Trump in the Hillary is dangerous thread, slad. You asked me to stop doing the inverse in the Trump is dangerous thread, and I did, because you were right.

[stefano]

Spirit cooking! Dear Lord.

Spirit Cooking: The Most Disturbing Podesta Email Yet? (Warning: Graphic Content)

by Cassandra Fairbanks | Nov 4, 2016

In perhaps the most disturbing Wikileaks release to date, Tony Podesta (John Podesta’s brother) is invited to a “Spirit Cooking” dinner with performance artist Marina Abramovic.

Dinner with a famous artist might sound deeply mundane, but there is far more to this story.

Abramovic, 69, is a fairly famous Serbian performance artist, who now lives in New York.

In an email dated June 28, 2015, Abramovic wrote:

“Dear Tony,

I am so looking forward to the Spirit Cooking dinner at my place. Do you think you will be able to let me know if your brother is joining?

All my love, Marina”

Tony then forwarded the email to his brother, John, asking:

“Are you in NYC Thursday July 9

Marina wants you to come to dinner

Mary?”

While this seems like a completely normal and uninspiring email, a look at what “spirit cooking” is, changes things immediately.

I'm going away for the weekend and next week, but I'm expecting both sides to throw something truly batshit at the other today or tomorrow. What a campaign! Good luck to our American friends - please vote responsibly (I mean Stein or Johnson).

[seemslikeadream]

GOP Rep. Jason Chaffetz Reported To FBI For Using Potential Illegal Private Email Server
By Jason Easley on Wed, Nov 2nd, 2016 at 1:27 pm

The man who has promised to lead the investigations of Hillary Clinton if she wins the White House, Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) is under new scrutiny for his potential use of an illegal private email server.


The Democratic Coalition Against Trump explained in a statement why they reported Rep. Chaffetz to the FBI:

The Democratic Coalition Against Trump reported Representative Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) to the FBI on Wednesday morning for possibly breaking Executive Order 13526 and 18 U.S.C. Sec. 793(f) of the federal code, which makes it unlawful to send or store classified information on a personal email. As was recently resurfaced by the Democratic Coalition’s #TrumpLeaks program, Rep. Chaffetz lists his personal Gmail address on business cards brandished with the Congressional seal. Rep. Chaffetz sits on the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations, which has jurisdiction over “internal and homeland security,” among other things.

“The mishandling of classified information that concerns the national security of our nation is something that the FBI takes very seriously,” said Scott Dworkin, Senior Advisor to the Democratic Coalition. “The irony is unparalleled- Representative Chaffetz, the person who led the charge against Secretary Clinton’s personal email server use, could actually be the one who is breaking the law and putting our national security at risk in the process.”

It is going to be very difficult for Rep. Chaffetz to investigate Hillary Clinton if he also was using a private email server. The Democratic Coalition Against Trump raises a great point. Why is Hillary Clinton the only person under investigation?

The Russian hacks have proven that the FBI needs to look at all officials who have access to classified information and use private email. If Republicans want to make email use a national security issue, then let’s examine all the members of Congress who are using private email servers.

Rep. Chaffetz is the person who released FBI Director James Comey’s letter about new potential Clinton emails to the public. It is only fair that Chaffetz’s own handling of email and classified information is given the same scrutiny that he is demanding of Hillary Clinton.