Kinda like defending Clinton no matter how indefensible her conduct? at least Gyrate recognizes reality.
As a non-USA citizen I don’t directly have a dog in this fight but I must say I like the sound of this “Wilt Boner” chap mentioned a few pages back. Is he likely to stand next time around? will he provide stiff opposition? Is it too late for him to be inserted into the discourse?
Which is my childish way of distracting my thoughts from the rather astonishing fact that Trump is still in with a shout. From a Bugle podcast fantasy scenario to a 50/50 chance at the presidency seems ludicrous to my outsiders eyes.
It is quite possible that Hilary is crooked, It is absolutely certain that Trump is a terrible human being that every world leader will see as weak and dangerous, that he could have even come so close is a sad reflection on US politics.
We certainly haven’t covered ourselves in glory with this election. Both candidates are actually under FBI investigation, which is unprecedented. Have we even had ONE candidate under investigation before?
We wouldn’t know, since it is a violation of normal practice to announce them publicly.
His Foundation has been shut down as a fraud. Does that count?
We know about both candidates this time though.
We can be reasonably sure all presidential candidates were under FBI investigation during the J Edgar days. 
Apologies in advance if I missed it in this thread…
Comey sent two letters recently to Congress. Who released those to the press?
I’m not defending Clinton; I’m debunking right-wing falsehoods about Clinton. The two are not necessarily the same.
Has it? All I remember is it ceasing to operate in New York because the charity-related paperwork hadn’t been filed properly. Unless I’ve missed something the IRS investigation is still in its early stages and the fraud hearings don’t start until the end of the month.
Guess I’ll be accused of “defending Trump no matter how indefensible his conduct” now…
For the first letter, Chaffetz spilled the beans on twitter and within half an hour wikileaks tweeted a copy of the letter.
Given the intense public interest…
I think the public deserves a bit more detail then a terse letter basically saying “never mind”.
At least indicate the resources used. Number of agents. What they found in very general terms. A rough number of relevant emails they actually examined would help.
They don’t need to explain why Comey’s decision hasn’t changed. That’s a judgement call he made. Just let the public know they really did something besides sit around and write a short statement.
Reread this thread. Nearly everybody expected this to take months and they do it in a freaking week? Oddly enough the AG gave a statement a few days ago. I’m Paraphrasing here. . Get this clusterfuck resolved fast!!!
That may be possible with 25 agents working overtime. But we weren’t told anything about the resources that were allocated.
No, we don’t.
This is conspiracy theory territory. It’s not difficult to review thousands and thousands of emails in a very short period. Ask any law firm associate. All the more so if many are duplicates, or if you have the full resources of the FBI behind you.
Typically, a contract reviewer will review about 40 docs/hour or 320 docs/8 hour day. That can change wildly based on the complexity of the review. For instance, a patent case on DNA sequencing has material considerably more complex than a case regarding wrongful termination. I’ve overseen reviews with 60 reviewers that would review about 20k docs/day. That can be scaled up or down as much as necessary. There is no rule saying you can’t have 500 reviewers working on a project if you have the bodies to do it.
I know someone will want a cite.
I paraphrased this comment earlier. Reading between the lines and decoding the spin.
I got called into the big boss’ office once. I know what an ass chewing sounds like. 
This whole idea that the emails couldn’t possibly have been reviewed in the time that they have been is frankly baffling. For crying out loud, banks and credit card companies deal with volumes of data that dwarf this particular laptop in order to detect fraud and mistakes. They don’t need to have people sitting there literally reading credit card transactions. Do people really think that banks can process big data involving bazillions of transactions on a daily basis, but the FBI has to do all investigations by hand?
It is an absolute embarrassment that General Flynn, who used to head the Defense Intelligence Agency, cannot comprehend that computers are able to discern things like: “Hey, these two emails are identical! Nothing new to see here!” in a very, very rapid manner. Perhaps that is why he was fired from that position?
I heard that the vast majority of these emails were excluded from review because they were copies of emails that had already been reviewed. So – exclusion by file comparison.
Unfortunately I don’t know how many non-duplicate emails remained for review.
Exactly. Even positing that they didn’t exclude the vast majority as duplicates, it’s not some Herculean task to review hundreds of thousands of emails in a week. You could probably do it with two dozen agents.
The rest were determined to be personal.
I do data mining in my job regularly. I’m not an expert like the techs working at the FBI. But I do get the job done and meet my assignment deadlines
I am familiar with eliminating duplicate content and using unique keys to search the records. It still takes considerable time, unless there’s a very big team allocated.
The FBI already did this work once. Huma turned in several devices that were checked. That saves time doing it again on Weiners laptop.
I’m not yelling cover up. I’d just like to hear what they did in the past week. How many relevant emails were actually found? A couple thousand could be easily done in a week. A 100,000? Now you need the entire Dept working.
A National election was directly impacted. Expecting a briefing about the investigation doesn’t seem unreasonable.