The NY Times grudgingly notes trouble in Their Blue Heaven:
Hillary Clinton’s 15,000 New Emails to Get Timetable for Release
By Mark Landler and Steven Lee Myers Aug 22, 2016
Well, they have toned down the gloomier front page headline, which reads:
"New Clinton Emails Raise Shadow Over Her Campaign"
Let the sun shine!
There is also a bit of bad-news management in their opening (4th paragraph):
WASHINGTON — The dispute over Hillary Clinton’s email practices now threatens to shadow her for the rest of the presidential campaign after the disclosure on Monday that the F.B.I. collected nearly 15,000 new emails in its investigation of her and a federal judge’s order that the State Department accelerate the documents’ release.
As a result, thousands of emails that Mrs. Clinton did not voluntarily turn over to the State Department last year could be released just weeks before the election in November. The order, by Judge James E. Boasberg of Federal District Court, came the same day a conservative watchdog group separately released hundreds of emails from one of Mrs. Clinton’s closest aides, Huma Abedin, which put a new focus on the sometimes awkward ties between the Clinton Foundation and the State Department.
The F.B.I. discovered the roughly 14,900 emails by scouring Mrs. Clinton’s server and the computer archives of government officials with whom she corresponded. In late July, it turned them over to the State Department, which now must set a timetable for their release, according to Judge Boasberg’s order.
While the emails were not in the original trove of 55,000 pages that Mrs. Clinton’s lawyers handed to the State Department last year, the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, said in July that he did not believe they had been “intentionally deleted.” Still, he characterized Mrs. Clinton’s handling of classified information during her years at the State Department as “extremely careless.”
As to the "intentionally deleted" question, it is clear, if we can believe anything at all that Hillary has said, that her team deleted thousands of emails. We were assured that the deleted emails related to wedding plans and yoga schedules, but that was debunked by James Comey of the FBI when he announced that the FBI had recovered thousands of work-related emails.
And his take about intentional deletion was quite different from the Times presentation today:
The F.B.I. discovered “several thousand” work-related emails that were not in the original trove of 30,000 turned over by Mrs. Clinton to the State Department. Three of those contained information that agencies have concluded was classified, though Mr. Comey said he did not believe Mrs. Clinton deliberately deleted or withheld them from investigators.
The FBI was not investigating violations of the Freedom of Information Act or the National Archives Act, both of which relate to record-keeping and neither of which have criminal penalties. His comment about intentional deletion related to the intentional, or inadvertent, deletion of evidence of mishandling of classified information. In that context, his meaning is clear - Hillary may or may not have lied about circumventing the FOIA and the National Archives Act (OK, she lied) but per Comey she did not deliberately conceal evidence relevant to the FBI investigation.
So I suppose the next Hillary spin will be that these newly discovered work-related emails were just deleted in the normal course of this and that. When they are released, and the push is on to get them out before the election, we may see for ourselves just what sort of "work-related" stuff the FBI found, and whether it overlaps with the pay-to-play connection between State Department access and Clinton Foundation donations.
Will these revelations change any minds? A majority of the US public already considers Hillary untrustworthy.