*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 7314
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #840 on: July 05, 2016, 09:17:53 PM »
Quote from: James Comey
To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.

He is verbatim telling us that Hillary won't be charged or punished in any manner because she is Hillary.
« Last Edit: July 05, 2016, 09:19:27 PM by Rushy »

Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #841 on: July 05, 2016, 09:29:35 PM »
Gotta keep the neverending scandal narrative going.

Maybe she is the never ending scandal?

*

Offline Снупс

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1931
  • WhisperI'lllistentohearit
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #842 on: July 05, 2016, 09:38:19 PM »
https://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/4rd6ou/fbi_recommends_no_charges_against_hillary_clinton/

A lot of people bitched about it, taking that way, too, and a bunch of e-lawyers explained why they're wrong
There are cigarettes in joints. You don't smoke it by itself.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 7314
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #843 on: July 05, 2016, 10:01:37 PM »
Quote from: James Comey
there was no evidence that Clinton or her staff deleted emails with the intention to hide contents



Ayy lmao

I guess we better release everyone from prison that mishandled classified data but had no intent to harm the US. Good news, Snowden! Good news, Bradley Manning! You're free! It turns out you can't be convicted of this crime!

Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #844 on: July 05, 2016, 11:01:05 PM »
Quote from: James Comey
To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.

He is verbatim telling us that Hillary won't be charged or punished in any manner because she is Hillary.

lol not even close.  your reading comprehension is genuinely terrible.

"Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past.

In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here.

To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences [at all]. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions [even when criminal sanctions are not warranted]. But that is not what we are [tasked with deciding]."
I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 7314
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #845 on: July 06, 2016, 12:02:34 AM »
Quote from: James Comey
To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.

He is verbatim telling us that Hillary won't be charged or punished in any manner because she is Hillary.

lol not even close.  your reading comprehension is genuinely terrible.

"Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past.

In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here.

To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences [at all]. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions [even when criminal sanctions are not warranted]. But that is not what we are [tasked with deciding]."

Hmm, so what you're saying is:

He is verbatim telling us that Hillary won't be charged or punished in any manner because she is Hillary.

Sounds to me like she won't be charged or punished in any manner, but she would in [similar circumstances]. She illegally transmitted at least 113 emails and possibly thousands more (who knows? they got wiped with a cloth!) with several emails ordering that the classification headers be stripped. This case is so blatantly corrupt I'm almost laughing.



Please send me those classified documents to my personal server and make sure you mark them as unclassified! Don't worry, I don't intend to do anything with it. It's not like the Russians would be interested in monitoring the State department! haha!



Additionally, in other news, with primary season over, the voter turnout has been Republican +62%, Democrat -21%, compared to 2012. There were so many additional Republican voters that R votes in total outnumbered D votes (extremely unusual). Not all of those votes were Trump/Hillary votes, however. There's no telling if those same voters will show up for the GE on the R or D side.
« Last Edit: July 06, 2016, 12:19:43 AM by Rushy »

Offline Blanko

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2471
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #846 on: July 06, 2016, 02:50:39 AM »
"Hillary Clinton is extremely careless"
-FBI, 2016

Totally corrupt, but makes for a nice campaign slogan I suppose.

George

Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #847 on: July 06, 2016, 02:52:27 AM »
Quote from: James Comey
To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.

He is verbatim telling us that Hillary won't be charged or punished in any manner because she is Hillary.

That's not what he's saying at all.  "Security or administrative sanctions" refers to people getting in trouble in work, as in getting fired, getting demoted, having their security clearances removed, etc. - none of which, of course, is the FBI's job.  In any case, it wouldn't be much use trying to impose those sanctions on someone who doesn't even work in that department anymore.

Offline Blanko

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2471
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #848 on: July 06, 2016, 03:04:35 AM »
This is also effectively the killing blow for Bernie's campaign. He's only been holding out for this long for a possible indictment, and now it's clear that's not happening, leaving behind millions of disenfranchised fanatics. Meanwhile Trump is now guaranteed to face an opponent whom the FBI characterizes as completely negligent of national security.

Could be worse.

*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 8178
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #849 on: July 06, 2016, 03:25:40 AM »
This may be the least palatable election in US history. It's hard to imagine a situation where you could make a case that Trump is the better choice, yet here we are. Good luck America and may God have mercy on your souls. Please stay the fuck away from us.
Th*rk is the worst person on this website.

George

Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #850 on: July 06, 2016, 03:34:56 AM »
Trump is still the far worse choice.  He'd probably shitpost classified information on Twitter.  "The CIA says that domestic terrorists are a bigger threat right now than ISIS.  They expect me to believe this crap.  Sad!"

Offline Blanko

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2471
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #851 on: July 06, 2016, 03:43:03 AM »
Hillary is confirmed to have leaked classified information to foreign governments, making her a liability to national security as president. Trump has done no such thing, so how is he worse again?

*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 8178
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #852 on: July 06, 2016, 03:45:53 AM »
He wants to alienate or already has alienated some key foreign partners and large segments of the American population.
Th*rk is the worst person on this website.

Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #853 on: July 06, 2016, 04:46:12 PM »
He wants to alienate or already has alienated some key foreign partners and large segments of the American population.

And you think Hillary hasn't?

I'm willing to be a fair amount of those thousands of emails she deleted might have alienated a couple foreign "partners" had the contents been disclosed. She was pretty much ordering regime change via hotmail.

US elections are designed to alienate large segments of the American population, that's why it is so neatly organized into Left and Right, Blue and Red. It is a polarized nation by design. BTW if you don't live here than you don't have a clue what it's like, so keep you uninformed opinions to your damn self.

*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 8178
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #854 on: July 06, 2016, 06:33:42 PM »
He wants to alienate or already has alienated some key foreign partners and large segments of the American population.

And you think Hillary hasn't?

She wasn't censured by the British Parliament, I know that much.

Quote
I'm willing to be a fair amount of those thousands of emails she deleted might have alienated a couple foreign "partners" had the contents been disclosed.

But they weren't, so who they didn't.

Quote
She was pretty much ordering regime change via hotmail.

If people were alienated by the US ordering regime changes (which she did where exactly?) the US would have lost their partners a while ago.

Quote
US elections are designed to alienate large segments of the American population, that's why it is so neatly organized into Left and Right, Blue and Red. It is a polarized nation by design. BTW if you don't live here than you don't have a clue what it's like, so keep you uninformed opinions to your damn self.

Sorry I forgot America is a special snowflake. I will give you your space before you get triggered. I hope you don't feel raped.
« Last Edit: July 06, 2016, 09:42:19 PM by Rama Set »
Th*rk is the worst person on this website.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 7314
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #855 on: July 06, 2016, 09:20:46 PM »
He wants to alienate or already has alienated some key foreign partners and large segments of the American population.

Can you be more specific about these "key foreign partners"? Also, about what alienated them? I don't honestly think that Trump could say anything that would alienate any foreign entity. You don't stop working with someone because they said mean things about you.

*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 8178
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #856 on: July 06, 2016, 09:41:59 PM »
Can you be more specific about these "key foreign partners"? Also, about what alienated them?


https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/british-parliament-set-to-debate-banning-donald-trump/2016/01/18/7351d87a-ba14-11e5-85cd-5ad59bc19432_story.html

Quote
I don't honestly think that Trump could say anything that would alienate any foreign entity. You don't stop working with someone because they said mean things about you.

But you maybe do not give them the credence that a more reasonable person might receive.  There have been numerous instances in Canada-US relations that have been impeded because the PM didn't like POTUS and vice versa.  Also, see how Mexico feels after Trumpadump builds a wall along their border.


Th*rk is the worst person on this website.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 7314
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #857 on: July 06, 2016, 09:51:52 PM »
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/british-parliament-set-to-debate-banning-donald-trump/2016/01/18/7351d87a-ba14-11e5-85cd-5ad59bc19432_story.html

They did that because a petition was signed that forced parliament to debate the topic. The debate lasted all of what, thirty minutes? A few MPs laughed about it and moved on. It's funny you'd even bother linking this.

But you maybe do not give them the credence that a more reasonable person might receive.  There have been numerous instances in Canada-US relations that have been impeded because the PM didn't like POTUS and vice versa.  Also, see how Mexico feels after Trumpadump builds a wall along their border.

Trump wants to squash TPP and repeal NAFTA. Those two things are going to piss on Canada and Mexico any way you look at it. Bernie wanted to do the same thing, but no one sat around claiming he was "alienating key foreign partners."
« Last Edit: July 06, 2016, 09:53:32 PM by Rushy »

*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 8178
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #858 on: July 06, 2016, 09:58:29 PM »
That doesn't mean he wasn't. Besides, you get a bit more scrutiny when you have a chance of winning your nomination.
Th*rk is the worst person on this website.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 7314
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #859 on: July 06, 2016, 10:01:02 PM »
That doesn't mean he wasn't. Besides, you get a bit more scrutiny when you have a chance of winning your nomination.

Keeping an Act and looking at implementing another that actively hurts your own nation in lieu of alienating what you call "key foreign partners" is not what I would expect from a leader. I'd rather have a Bernie than a Hillary. At least I know Bernie believes what he says.

Keep in mind Hillary's stance suddenly changed to being against TPP after Bernie's popularity surged. I doubt she would actually veto it given the chance.
« Last Edit: July 06, 2016, 10:03:14 PM by Rushy »