Over 1/2 of the contributions coming in to the Foundation over the past 8 years were from the State of New York. So it is a continuing entity elsewhere, but as it is based in NY, with all Board members based in NY, operating under NY State laws… it’s effectively shut down.
No. This is wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong. Even if you assume that an FBI agent had to actually read every one of 600,000 emails, 40 agents could have done this by working a little overtime and average 2-3 emails per minute. Most emails take a few seconds to read. And recipes for risotto can be skimmed in this context.
Dollar strengthens as election seen swinging toward Clinton
Dow surges 300 points as FBI clears Clinton on eve of election
Not everyone is disappointed, Aceplace57.
But not “as a fraud” which is what you said. It was initially set up as a family foundation and faced less stringent rules. Once they started soliciting outside funds they were supposed to make more complete financial disclosures and they failed to meet those requirements. So they are suspended from being a charity until they do.
Yawn. Here is the letter. The AG used the word fraud. The Foundation is still shut down. They have yet to produce the records. Call it what you will, being temporarily shut down for fraudulent filings is still being shut down for fraud.
When the NYAG is satisfied the fraudulent paperwork is corrected and filed, allowing the Trump Foundation to re-open, I’ll then concede the point and not refer to it being a fraud.
I’m not disappointed. I’m relieved our Democratic candidate has been clearer. Makes it much easier to vote for her tomorrow.
Just seeking answers. This isn’t your typical case where terse statements are expected.
I’d venture to guess that upwards of 99% of the people who are outraged about her email server have no idea what an email server is.
As someone in IT, I hear a lot of complaints about computer security from people who’s password is “password”.
Looks like Kurt Eichenwald has found a 2017 hobby: his campaign to bring down James Comey.
Yawn? Seriously?
The letter says if they don’t stop soliciting donations they’ll consider it “a continuing fraud”. That doesn’t mean they were shutdown as a fraud. And I see nothing in that letter about having filed fraudulent paperwork. But if you want to spin so the good people of the SDMB won’t start going lenient on ol’ Trump then go ahead I guess.
I’m not sure I would use the word “fraud” to describe the Trump Foundation, but the terms “fly by night,” “disreputable,” and “bogus” seem to be pretty apt. Do you disagree?
NYAG used “fraud”. I’m good with that.
Of course. It’s a pile of crap charity.
If they had been shutdown over that golf club lawsuit payment, that Florida campaign contribution or buying a portrait for his clubhouse I would have no problem saying they were “shut down for fraud” regardless of the name of the actual statute they violated. But they were shutdown for not filing the proper paperwork. Saying “but they used the word fraud in the letter” is bullshitting us. The word was used as a threat for non-compliance.
My original thought was a damned if you do/damned if you don’t scenario. He publicly reopens the case and he’s throwing the election for Trump or he keeps it quiet and that favors Clinton.
But NOW apparently there was nothing whatsoever that the FBI didn’t already see so unless they are going to nail her aide for having classified emails on an unapproved laptop I’m completely mystified of why Comey did what he did. 
Well, there is one, still unverified. That his minions knew about the laptop weeks before he did and, for whatever motives, didn’t tell him. Since the investigation is supposed to be about e-mails to and/or from Hillary’s criminal server, I think they were pulling a Ken Starr: they were examining hoping to find something they could use. Something they could leak that would start a whole new round of investigation. From Whitewater to blow job, V.2.
Which is to say, once they knew that something on that laptop was not “pertinent”…it was not an email to or from Hillary…they were supposed to stop right there. But they kept on for weeks, digging the horseshit for the pony. They gave up after a while, and then tried to snow Comey that it was no big deal. So, he wasn’t covering his own ass so much as theirs.
'Course, then he didn’t know what they were up to but he’s supposed to supervise. Not that much of a help, IMHO.
One thing I don’t understand is, wouldn’t the FBI have full authority to examine every email anyway? Presumably, they could look at every bit of the laptop’s data because they were investigating the charges against Weiner. Why did they need the “HRC email server” warrant in the first place?
There is a pretty large degree of uncertainty about when law enforcement needs a warrant to look at different data on a computer to which they already have authorized access. Several courts have ruled that it’s not enough to have lawful access to the device. You also need to look at only the data that is relevant to the warrant (or for which you have consent).
In cases like this, the FBI is going to play it safe and assume the more restrictive jurisprudence is correct. The warrant to look at Weiner’s computer (or the scope of his consent) was probably limited to looking at or for certain things, and once they determined that the email archive wasn’t likely to contain whatever they were looking for, the safe thing to do is get a warrant.
True dat, but the law is the handjob of justice. They could just leak it to the Hon. Mr. Issa or Chaffetz. “Sources say”, and away they go, off to the races. If somehow Hillary managed to quash it by some legality, then she’s surely guilty! “Why is she hiding the truth from the American people?” is just as good as a verdict, way they play the game.
What I don’t get is how he made such a big deal about it even before he knew if there was something new.
It’s easy to swirl all the spin together in your mind but he most certainly didn’t make a big deal about this. Yes, he could assume everyone else would make a big deal about it but all he did was inform Congress that he got some new stuff and had to take a look at it.