No criminality in Clinton emails - FBI

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by jack4freedom, Nov 6, 2016.

  1. perotista

    perotista Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2014
    Messages:
    15,333
    Likes Received:
    4,261
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    According to Gallup, those Americans who have trust in our own government to do the right thing most of the time is down to 19%.
     
  2. Penrod

    Penrod Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2015
    Messages:
    12,507
    Likes Received:
    51
    Trophy Points:
    48
    He never showed them to anyone. He is charged with trying to destroy them. Maybe he should have used a hammer
     
  3. bois darc chunk

    bois darc chunk Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2015
    Messages:
    8,626
    Likes Received:
    3,490
    Trophy Points:
    113
    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
    Seems like there are conflicting stories….One article says shipmates, and the other says ex-wife, another woman and shipmates. However, this is a clear case of intent.
     
  4. cupAsoup

    cupAsoup Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2015
    Messages:
    7,879
    Likes Received:
    899
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What this really comes down to is that Hillary and Trump will determine who wins through our democratic process. That process is the last thing those on the right wanted to happen. They know Trump is going to lose. The only chance they ever had was disqualification of some manner of Hillary as a candidate. Sorry cons, you're not going to be able to weasel your way out of this defeat. Own it.
     
  5. Penrod

    Penrod Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2015
    Messages:
    12,507
    Likes Received:
    51
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Mine says he never showed them to anyone but lost his phone and someone saw it and reported it. There was no intent. You dont need any
     
  6. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    48,009
    Likes Received:
    39,959
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Reviewing the emails that have nothing whatsoever to do with Hillary is still an ongoing investigation into Weiner.

    But the emails that do relate to Hillary were easy to extract and compare electronically and establish that there was nothing there.
     
  7. Talon

    Talon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2008
    Messages:
    42,482
    Likes Received:
    21,814
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Sad, but not surprising.
     
  8. dixon76710

    dixon76710 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    52,799
    Likes Received:
    2,229
    Trophy Points:
    113
    They didn't extract emails related to Hillary. They only extracted emails to and from Hillary, while she was secretary of state and determined there was nothing there. They made no statement about the overwhelming majority of emails that were not to and from Hillary but were instead to and from her team of people that she directs. Or emails before or after she was secretary of state. Which is where you would expect to find most of the evidence related to Hillarys email.
     
  9. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    135,960
    Likes Received:
    32,192
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    When asked in testimony why there was nothing in the 302 FBI interview forms regarding any inquiery into intent Comey said he didn't believe they looked into intent so how does he know there was no intent?

    And intent to what specifically? Gross negligence does not require intent.

    He said that no prosecutor would prosecute the crimes, of course that has nothing to do with anything and demonstrably false.

    Did she store classified information on her private server with the intent of not using an approved, within the law, rules and regulations system for her official communications?
     
  10. bois darc chunk

    bois darc chunk Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2015
    Messages:
    8,626
    Likes Received:
    3,490
    Trophy Points:
    113
    1. To be prosecuted with the Espionage Act requires mens rea, the intention or knowledge of wrongdoing that constitutes part of a crime. No one has been prosecuted with the Espionage Act without intent since the Gorin decision, which added that requirement to the Espionage Act. This is not new information to you. I've posted it to you before in other threads.

    2. With the Espionage Act, the intent is that sharing confidential information may cause or would cause harm to the United States. No, gross negligence does not require intent. However, no one has been found guilty of the Espionage Act using gross negligence as the charge. Only one person, an FBI agent, has ever been charged using gross negligence, and he plead guilty to lying to federal agents instead.

    3. The FBI is an investigative law enforcement agency…. meaning they gather evidence. In the United States, innocence is assumed and guilt must be proven… proven with a preponderance of evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt. In the quote above, Comey stated that there wasn't sufficient evidence to charge her. It is a frivolous waste of court time to try a case with insufficient evidence. No prosecutor in his right mind would attempt to try a case against a Presidential candidate without sufficient evidence from the FBI. Some lawyers might want to for partisan purposes, but that doesn't make their efforts legitimate. Prosecutors are usually paid by the tax payer and don't take cases to court unless they think they can win. Winning requires evidence… which the FBI director says doesn't exist.

    4. People mishandle classified information all the time, but only those that share classified material with the knowledge that doing so may cause or will cause harm to the United States are prosecuted for Espionage. That is the importance of the Gorin ruling. Playing "gotcha" because some classified information was where it shouldn't have been isn't going to put someone in jail, unless they can prove it was known that the material would or could harm the USA. Again, as quoted above, Comey said there was no evidence of intent.

    With all that said, you're welcome to believe what you like.
     
  11. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    48,009
    Likes Received:
    39,959
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, that is essentially the same thing that I posted.
     
  12. Penrod

    Penrod Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2015
    Messages:
    12,507
    Likes Received:
    51
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Talk about blind justice
     
  13. dixon76710

    dixon76710 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    52,799
    Likes Received:
    2,229
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Nope. Emails to and from Hillary while she was secretary of state are but a small fraction of the 650,000 emails and a fraction of the emails "related" to Hillary.
     
  14. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    48,009
    Likes Received:
    39,959
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Which is exactly what I said!
     
  15. Your Best Friend

    Your Best Friend Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2016
    Messages:
    14,673
    Likes Received:
    6,996
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I suggest the Clinton email case may suddenly open back up after Trump is sworn in and Comey is kicked to the side of the road, as trash usually is.
     
  16. Wehrwolfen

    Wehrwolfen Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2013
    Messages:
    25,350
    Likes Received:
    5,257
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    Perhaps President elect Trump's proposed Attorney General may think differently. I believe an AG like Rudy Giuliani will reopen the the investigations that Loretta Lynch tried very hard to bury.
     
  17. Your Best Friend

    Your Best Friend Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2016
    Messages:
    14,673
    Likes Received:
    6,996
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I can state confidently that Guiliani will not fail to convict based on Hillary Clinton's intent!

    That lame Comey distinction is buried now along with the Clinton presidency and Comey's career.
     
  18. 22catch

    22catch Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2016
    Messages:
    3,899
    Likes Received:
    2,209
    Trophy Points:
    113
    < smiles benignly and looks down at his sig >
     
  19. jack4freedom

    jack4freedom Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    Messages:
    19,874
    Likes Received:
    8,444
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I sincerely doubt it. My guess is that Trump and his team will not engage in any more of this political character assassination and filthy politics in general. This campaign was the dirtiest by far in my lifetime from both sides of the aisle. If Trump is smart he will focus on positive changes instead of petty bickering. If he takes the low road, not only will it hurt our country, but it will hurt Trump's image. He did and said what he did because that was the only way he though he could win against the onslaught he was up against. Trump does not believe that Hillary Clinton is an evil criminal anymore than he believes that Ted Cruz' father was involved with the Kennedy assassination or that Ben Carson has the same sickness as a child molester. He played hardball against other hard ballers and won. Now is the time to move forward with a positive vision and end the rotten turd fight. Cheers
     
  20. Naruto

    Naruto Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2010
    Messages:
    2,713
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Its safe to say Comey is out of a job one way or another.
     
  21. gc17

    gc17 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2016
    Messages:
    5,187
    Likes Received:
    2,015
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Right, let's put 2 and 2 together for our liberal brethren, If Hillary had followed the rules/law there would be no investigation.
     
  22. dixon76710

    dixon76710 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    52,799
    Likes Received:
    2,229
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, you claimed they reviewed "emails that do relate to Hillary" when in fact they ONLY reviewed emails to and from Hillary WHILE she was secretary of state.
     
  23. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    48,009
    Likes Received:
    39,959
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Semantic quibbling? :eekeyes:
     
  24. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    125,642
    Likes Received:
    48,444
    Trophy Points:
    113
    can you imagine if he had released this a couple days after the election, he is very very lucky he released it before

    .
     
  25. Scamp

    Scamp Banned

    Joined:
    May 11, 2016
    Messages:
    768
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    18
    It's the illegal Clinton Foundation that will doom the Clinton Clowns. Not emails. :cool:
     

Share This Page