Thanks to Comey, most think HRC lied about not sending classfied data - what to do about that?

[Bill USA]

DUers have seen articles analyzing Comey cleverly worded statement on Hillary's email practices. Even though the FBI correctly concluded there was no evidence of any intent to transmit classified data and additionally,

... the evidence actually shows even though Comey said she sent something like over a hundred classified emails

"From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time"

- the actual number was 3. But even these three emails Comey referred to "bore markings indicating the presence of classified information".

Only a very small number of the e-mails containing classified information bore markings indicating the presence of classified information. But even if information is not marked “classified” in an e-mail, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it.

____ But as we learned in the Investigation of the Investigation, these "markings" Comey was referring to were additions of the letter "c" (next to items somebody thought was classified info) in the body of the email. NOTE these emails DID NOT have the required Header/Subject line showing that classified information was included in the document. Thus, by Government reg - they WERE NOT classified. THis is why Comey had to add:

"But even if information is not marked “classified” in an e-mail, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it."

Further it should be noted that 2 of these emails the Dept of State said were classified (i.e. bore those "markings (in the body of the email) indicating classified info&quot IN ERROR.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512247076

But thanks to Comey's repetition of the lie that she sent/received classified emails most people now think that she lied when she said she did NOT send/receive classified emails.


[font size="3"]
My question is: "What do you think should be done about this?" [/font] You realize NONE of the Corporate Media outlets will clarify these facts for people.

___ Should Hillary's campaign put an ad out there making it completely clear there were no 100+ Classified emails. And that the "very few" Comey emails said "bore markings indicating the presence of classified information" - none of these three emails were marked Classified in their header/subject line.

___ Should DUers post in discussion forums all over the internet - to make people aware that Hillary did not in fact send any emails designated Classified?

____ Should a PAC put out an ad pointing these facts out and also challenging corporate media to actually tell people the truth?

What do you think should be done?

[CanadaexPat]

1. Learn to win. Let it go and let it drop.

[Bill USA]

2. I remember the 'Swift boating" of Kerry.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

3. You can't unring a bell.

[musicblind]

8. But you can make enough noise to drown it out. n/t

[Bill USA]

18. I have not been able to find a transcript the committee hearing questioning of Comey

Here is an important part. IT is Rep Cartwright pointing out that the manual on sending classified info requires a header saying their document is classified on any document containing classified information. he then asked Comey if the three emails he referred to (which had the "c"s in the text) had classified headers on them. Comey's answer was "No".

This means that every time Comey or GOP committee members say: "Clinton ______ classified information." they were lying. Because none of the emails Comey referred to as "containing classfied information" were MARKED classified - as is required by the Gov reg/manual.

If you right click on the video and click on "copy video url"
Then paste that url in the navigation field at the top of the window and by clicking you can go to the site where many videos some having partial transcripts added.


If anybody can find a full transcript of the hearing, I would very much appreciate them sharing it with us.

[SkeleTim1968]

16. That's what Kerry did. It did not work for him.

I don't believe there is any strategy that guarantees a win.

[Mike Nelson]

4. It's not Comey...

...it's the so-called Media. He answered, "no, no, no," when asked if she lied. The media does not play clips that make Hillary look like she did not commit any crime. They say she was "indicted" when she was not... and the Republicans cheer them. The bigger story - about the 3 emails - is not repeated. That surprised me, although I guess it shouldn't have...

[elleng]

5. THANKS!

[Bill USA]

14. note suggested action no. 3.

"Should a PAC put out an add pointing these facts out and also challenging corporate media to actually tell people the truth?"

Nine Times Reporters Botched The Facts On Hillary Clinton's Emails - Media Matters
(I suggested action by a PAC as the Hillary campaign can't do it.)

How about some ideas on how to get the truth out and 'call out' the media for repeating Repugnant Big Lies as if they were fact. Is there a way to get the truth out there and also show how the Corporate media operates in sycophantic symbiosis with GOP Disinformation machine.

[SkeleTim1968]

17. Would you happen to have a link?

Was this just an interview with the media or was that the Congressional committee?

[Cosmocat]

20. COMEY IS A PARTISAN DOUCHEBAG POS

and he should have been called that clearly before he even ended his sham press conference.

Jesus, he teed it up for the media.

He VERY CLEARLY crafted his statements to put the false information out there AND editorialized in a way to create sound bites that "prosecuted" her.

Yeah, UNDER OATH in the congressional hearing he backed off what he said and then admitted to the actual facts when Ds pinned him down on it.

But, the damage was done and that he was forced to say she did absolutely nothing wrong at the hearing never saw the light of day, I mean by that time HALF OF FUCKING DEMOCRATS thought she should be charged.

[yallerdawg]

6. Try as "they" may...

most Democrats don't even care about emails, or any of the other rightwing propaganda pumped out by the Republicans.

Even before Comey took the long way to say 'nothing here.'

It's time for us to focus on Trump.

"They" picked him. Time to answer for that choice.

[oasis]

7. Hillary's surrogates should be well versed in every aspect of the email

issue. They should be the ones to keep the MSM honest at every opportunity. Hillary should shake it off and address the issue as a minor speed bump if she is pressed in an interview.

[musicblind]

9. I think your last option is the best option.

If we go around posting it all over the internet, people will just dismiss us as trolls and we risk antagonizing people directly on an anonymous and dehumanizing platform.

Nobody has ever been swayed by a comment on the internet. Plenty of people have been swayed by advertisements. That is why think ads are the best approach.

However, a PAC putting out an advert is the best idea because it allows Clinton to seem "above the fray" and it still gets the message across. Clinton herself should stop addressing the emails but, instead, should assign powerful surrogates and PACs to get the word out about Comey's smear campaign.

Whatever they do, they need to get on it before this becomes ingrained in people's minds.

[John Poet]

13. I think PAC money would be better spent attacking Trump,

broadcasting all his negatives and using his own quotes,
than wasting money trying to explain the email quagmire.

[SkeleTim1968]

15. "Nobody has ever been swayed by a comment on the internet. "

I don't agree with that. Plenty of people are swayed by comments on the internet. Bernie's entire campaign was sprouted online.

[LAS14]

10. I think they/we should do all three.

I don't know if postings on the internet ever changed anyone's mind, but I do know I've found it difficult to get the facts. I can hear David Brooks saying with great indignation (on two different occasions), "She lied!!!" I tend to respect David Brooks, but figured he was wrong this time. It was about the number of servers. Finally I read this detailed account - it leaves the conclusion to the reader. (Link below). It was helpful. I think all we Hillary supporters need the hardest facts available so we can confidently answer people and spread the word. I wish I knew if the multiple servers were serial or simultaneous. Until I know that I'll content myself with "Of course she didn't lie about the servers. Why would she? Do you know how many servers are used at your place of work? I can't even imagine how multiple servers were used unless one broke and was replaced."

Facts, facts, facts. I'm confident that they will support the notion that she didn't lie.

http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/why-hillary-clinton-will-not-be-charged-for-lying-to-congress-even-though-she-did/

[John Poet]

11. The best defense is a good offense. Forget the emails

and just go after Trump.

Working to defend on the email issue just helps to keep it in front of the public, and it takes a hell of a long explanation anyway-- just wasted energy and maybe money if PACs were involved.

Hell, even if Trump hammers on it continuously, it's better to just hammer him back with all his negatives. They're a lot worse. Trump shouldn't be able to set the agenda.

[LAS14]

12. Facts, facts, facts.

The problem with this whole mess (and with Comey's damned irresponsible, unethical character smear) is that it's too complicated/subtle to explain to people. What we need are some pithy sound bite responses to fence-sitters. What the fact checking like we see below does illustrate vividly is that the issues are ridiculous to think that she lied. Any reasonable person would conclude that she testified to congress her best understanding about the little letter 'c' in the 3 of the 30,000 e-mails!!!!!

Come on, DU-ers! Some pithy responses!

http://www.factcheck.org/2016/07/revisiting-clinton-and-classified-information/

[Cosmocat]

21. That POS did a real hit job on her

flat lied when he wasn't baselessly editorializing at his press conference.

It was cemented, and the only thing Ds can do is flat say he exonerated her.

[L. Coyote]

23. Agreed, Comey effectively lied to Congress. And, when pressed, exonerated her.

That is why he developed amnesia when questioned about the lie. Wasn't thee to be a follow-up on Cummingsquestioning him about his interactions with State in regard to those three specific emails. There are witnesses at State who know what transpired with Comey in regard to those emails. Maybe Comey will have to resign.

The real problem here is political abuse of power and how it obstructs government. They decided to go to their side of the playground, form a gang, and start a political war while serving as elected and appointed government figures. And the Dems who want to do their jobs instead have to deal with bullshit like these hearings. The real problem impacts Dem members of Congress directly, robbing We the People of our elected officials time. Maybe they could be sued for damages.

[timlot]

19. I'm always fascinated when posters with high post counts make a "concern thread''

Most voters have made there minds up. The two candidates are too polarizing to siphon votes to the other side. Undecided will just vote 3rd party in protest.

[L. Coyote]

22. Start a Twitter account.

Like this one, and go after the liars with truth.
https://twitter.com/literally_trump

Literally Trump @literally_trump
Donald Trump literally said these things.

And pass on existing resources. Bookmark this one:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027985914