One of the problems the Media and the GOP have with their attacks on the Clintons, and particularly now, Hillary clinton, is that the pileons generally end up getting Dems to rally around her.

This is just 1 data point, but Gallup reports:

Democrats' overall opinions of the major Democratic contenders for president have changed little despite six eventful weeks of campaigning. Hillary Clinton remains the best liked among her party faithful. She enjoys a net favorable score of +60, which is essentially where she stood in July. Bernie Sanders is still the next best-liked candidate in the field, with his net favorable stable at +29.

Clinton is plus 4 net favorable with Dems in the last months. Something to keep an eye on.

Since at least 2003, they have emphasized that information shared by a foreign government with an expectation or agreement of confidentiality is the only kind that is "presumed" classified. The State Department's own regulations, as laid out in the Foreign Affairs Manual, have been unequivocal since at least 1999: all department employees "must ... safeguard foreign government and NATO RESTRICTED information as U.S. Government Confidential" or higher[.] [My emphasis.

I think Reuters is misunderstanding the applicable rules. Reuters appears to be referring to 12 FAM 534.1(d):

The story that has captured the imagination of the Nation's Media - EGhazi! - has a new twist -- David Shuster of al Jazeera is reporting that:

FBI treating Clinton emails as a potential criminal investigation. @DavidShuster reports. https://t.co/RWaqXrcnrW

— Al Jazeera America (@ajam) August 20, 2015

This development could carry serious implications for William Roebuck, the career State Department official who was the Director of the Office of Maghreb Affairs at State and is now US Ambassador to Bahrain.

More on the flip.

Fox News is reporting that:

An email from a top Clinton adviser containing classified military intelligence information, and one from a top aide containing classified information about the Benghazi terror attack, were the documents that kick-started the FBI investigation into the mishandling of classified information, Fox News has learned.

I went on State's FOIA site and found the e-mails. Here are links: November 18,2012 email from Jake Sullivan to Hillary Clinton forwarding e-mail chain and March 27, 2011 Huma Abedin e-mail to Hillary Clinton forwarding e-mail chain (the links require your to search the list. No direct link to documents).

In an AP Story sourced by Intelligence Community officials, the extreme weakness of the claims against Hillary Clinton are well explained. AP writes:

The two emails on Hillary Rodham Clinton's private server that an auditor deemed "top secret" include a discussion of a news article detailing a U.S. drone operation and a separate conversation that could point back to highly classified material in an improper manner or merely reflect information collected independently, U.S. officials who have reviewed the correspondence told The Associated Press. [My emphasis]

The idea that an email discussing a news article could be deemed "Top Secret" is ludicrous of course. But the IC is nothing if not ludicrous when it comes to classification issues. The story continues:

While some will claim that:

. It is not in dispute that her cache of 30,000 e-mails contained classified documents from as many as five U.S. intelligence agencies.

This claim would be false. For one the State Department disputes it:

Trump is in the doghouse again, this time due to reactions by fellow Republicans to comments he made about Fox News Host Megyn Kelly after the Republican debate. Trump told CNN Kelly "had “blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her wherever.”

That comment resulted in Trump being axed from a Republican gathering hosted by the Red State Blog. Trump had been invited to be a "keynote speaker" at the event, which had a guest list of about 900 people. Red State is edited by Erick Erickson, who is also a Fox News Contributor. [More...]

Final Update: Winner Winner Chicken Dinner: John Kasich. Trump held his own but was overshadowed. Huckabee had some good moments. Jeb Bush was too bland. Christie is a lost cause, no pizzaz, no leadership qualities. Dr. Carson, and the two lookalikes, Walker and Cruz, were good for entertainment. Neither has a prayer. Ron Paul was Dennis the Menace and Marco Rubio was too clean cut, and uninspiring.

****

Thanks to BTD for putting up a thread on tonight's debate. I hadn't intended to watch, but I am, so I'll weigh in here. Feel free to comment in either thread. [More...]

The latest news about Joe Biden considering a bid for the Democratic presidential nomination is hardly a surprise. Joe Biden has always considered running for President in 2016. A year and a half ago, in February, 2014, he told ABC he couldn't think of any reason not to run. He said then he would decide by the end of the summer in 2015.

Joe Biden has always been there laying in the weeds, waiting for something to happen that might derail Hillary. Apparently, he thinks the time is now. [More....]

The Clinton campaign writes letters:

I feel obliged to put into context just how egregious an error this story was. The New York Times is arguably the most important news outlet in the world and it rushed to put an erroneous story on the front page charging that a major candidate for President of the United States was the target of a criminal referral to federal law enforcement. Literally hundreds of outlets followed your story, creating a firestorm that had a deep impact that cannot be unwound. This problem was compounded by the fact that the Times took an inexplicable, let alone indefensible, delay in correcting the story and removing "criminal" from the headline and text of the story.

Discuss.

Donald Trump has had an easy time of it in the media thus far. Yesterday, something he didn't expect popped up.

What actually happened is not up for discussion here. First, none of us were there, and more importantly, I have no interest in being sued by Donald Trump over readers' comments. (Be forewarned, comments opining on the substance of the allegation and personal attacks on either Trump or his ex-wife's character will be deleted as soon as I see them.)

What is of interest (at least at this site) is how he responds to this unexpected public relations mess, including his response to erroneous public comments by those who work for him. (His lawyer, who also serves as executive vice president at the Trump Organization) has acknowledged his erroneous statements about the law and apologized.

Many have said the test of leadership during a crisis is not the crisis itself, but one's behavior during it. How's Trump doing?

In a statement released yesterday, the Intelligence Community Inspector General (IC IG) and the State Department IG claimed with regard to Hilary Clinton's emails while Secretary of State:

The IC IG found four emails containing classified IC-derived information [. .. ] The four emails, which have not been released through the State FOIA process, did not contain classification markings and/or dissemination controls. These emails were not retroactively classified by the State Department; rather these emails contained classified information when they were generated and, according to IC classification officials, that information remains classified today.

Now what does this mean? It means the Intelligence Community, represented here by the Ic IG, disagrees with the State Department's determination on the classification of certain information contained in the Clinton e-mails. In their opinion, the information should have been designated classified and should be so designated now. But State does not agree. A review of the memos (PDF) exchanged between State and the IGs illustrates this turf war: