Russian issues

Discussion in 'Free Speech Alley' started by LSUpride123, Mar 3, 2017.

  1. Tiger in NC

    Tiger in NC It's Been Long Enough

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2011
    Messages:
    4,503
    Likes Received:
    1,280
    I don't think the FBI chose to ignore it at all. They did an exhaustive investigation that was widely publicized. If I am not mistaken the issue came down to whether there was intent on the part of HRC to share said information with our enemies. I get it that you guys don't like her; neither do I. That said, I am careful to assume guilt on the part of someone who has been cleared by those who have investigated her. This will be debated for many years to come I am sure.
     
  2. LSUpride123

    LSUpride123 Boobies make everything A OK!!!

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2008
    Messages:
    20,344
    Likes Received:
    7,261
    Intent is made up and negligence doesn’t care about intent. Which is why they changed the word.

    Just like the sailor who took pictures of the sub he worked on to show his parents went to JAIL.
     
    shane0911 and Winston1 like this.
  3. Tiger in NC

    Tiger in NC It's Been Long Enough

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2011
    Messages:
    4,503
    Likes Received:
    1,280
    The caveat that you are excluding is that a prosecutor has to be able to prove intent, which is why Comey said, "no reasonable prosecutor....." Here is where your conservative media doesn't do you any justice. For months before the investigation ended, conservative media outlets pumped up the idea that Clinton was going to prison and doing so based upon here-say. Combine that with the climate of shocking click bait articles that are titled and written only to shock and to feed red meat to the base and you create the perfect recipe for many conservatives believing that it was a given that Clinton would go to prison. After hearing this for months and months you start to believe it. Trump is doing it now about a whole host of things and you don't even know it because you are too blinded by what you want to believe.

    Clinton was not indicted because the findings of the investigation didn't merit it; nothing else. We are in a conspiracy theory climate right now, especially from the right, where every time an investigation or election or court case doesn't go your way, you explain it away with the next conspiracy theory. Clinton lost the election because of her e-mail "scandal" and the fact that she was a presumptuous bitch who failed to campaign in places that she should have won. Plain and simple. Everything I said in that sentence is true and factual and does not rely on conspiracy theories to justify the reasoning.

    Now we are witnessing the conservative media attempt to do the same thing with the Trump-Russia investigation. Trump is leading the charge.....discredit the people investigating you by persistently creating conspiracy theories to throw shade on the investigation. The only difference this time is that some Republicans are speaking out (i.e. Trey Gowdy) and disputing some of these more outrageous claims that Trump throws out there.
     
  4. shane0911

    shane0911 Helping lost idiots find their village Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2005
    Messages:
    26,363
    Likes Received:
    13,730
    She wasn't indicted because she is a Clinton. Nothing else. If literally ANYONE on the planet had done what she did they would be in jail for a long time. As 123 pointed out "negligence" doesn't give a crap about intent. Mishandling of classified information is a big fat nope.
     
    el005639, HalloweenRun and lsutiga like this.
  5. Tiger in NC

    Tiger in NC It's Been Long Enough

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2011
    Messages:
    4,503
    Likes Received:
    1,280
    Thank you for proving my point by regurgitating the conservative media talking points because that is literally all that you or 123 have done. In fact, it is all that either of you ever do. You are literally telling me that you are willing to take 123's explanation over that of countless legal scholars and that sums it up perfectly.
     
  6. shane0911

    shane0911 Helping lost idiots find their village Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2005
    Messages:
    26,363
    Likes Received:
    13,730
    You do realize that those "legal scholars" that you hear on TV are paid to talk right?

    You say that you have spent time in the military and I will take that at face value. Common freaking sense alone should tell you that if you mishandle sensitive information you are in trouble. I don't know if you remember Clayton Lonetree or Lonewolf, something like that. Slept with a hooker and gave her a name that she could have walked into the embassy and read off of the directory herself. He went to jail for it. So you can think that we are spouting the talking points however it is you with the hook in your mouth my friend. This is not debatable, it is beyond question to anyone with half a brain, ANYONE else is in jail for the rest of their lives. Anyone.
     
    el005639 and lsutiga like this.
  7. LSUpride123

    LSUpride123 Boobies make everything A OK!!!

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2008
    Messages:
    20,344
    Likes Received:
    7,261
    Negligence has no caveat. You and the libs created that.

    neg·li·gence
    ˈneɡləjəns/
    noun
    1. failure to take proper care in doing something.

    In black and white, Comey laid out HRC failed to take proper care of classified information.
    https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/p...-clinton2019s-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system

    "Our investigation looked at whether there is evidence classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on that personal system, in violation of a federal statute making it a felony to mishandle classified information either intentionally or in a grossly negligent way, or a second statute making it a misdemeanor to knowingly remove classified information from appropriate systems or storage facilities."

    So again, that is why the wording was changed.

    God damn you are wrong so much....


    "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."


    No, Comey and the FBI were in her bag. We have written evidence of it already which, as we all know here, you ignore.


    http://content.jwplatform.com/players/khzSJccG-EAYoNgFe.html

    In this video, even Cuck Tapper admits it.
     
  8. HalloweenRun

    HalloweenRun I'll try to be nicer, if you try to be smarter!

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2009
    Messages:
    5,743
    Likes Received:
    3,379
    I’m done. Live in bliss. It’s up to you.
     
  9. dachsie

    dachsie Freshman

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2017
    Messages:
    1,612
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    So the guy who took a picture of his sub to show his parents had malicious intent? He was prosecuted for mishandling classified information because he thoughtlessly took a picture
     
    Winston1 likes this.
  10. Tiger in NC

    Tiger in NC It's Been Long Enough

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2011
    Messages:
    4,503
    Likes Received:
    1,280
    https://blogs.wsj.com/law/2016/07/05/the-clinton-email-probe-and-the-question-of-gross-negligence/

    If you do so knowingly or maliciously

    But you are.

    It is debatable because we are sitting here debating it.
     

Share This Page