FBI Director will be holding a Press Conference at 11AM EST today

originally posted by: CynConcepts

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: CynConcepts
a reply to: Sillyolme

"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. "

How can one not read in the above quote that the FBI thinks she is guilty and should face consequences that is just because it is Hillary they are going to let it slide?

I read "security or administrative sanctions" as having your clearance temporarily limited or suspended while things are looked into. In Hillary Clinton's circumstance, she is between jobs and not currently working at State, so those sanctions are not applicable in the present moment.

How can a candidate for President be seriously considered to effectively run our country if security sanctions may be applied in the future?

I find it disturbing that the DNC would go ahead and nominate her and the superdelegates would go ahead and vote for after the scathing comments Comey made about her actions and judgment.

But they will. It's disturbing none-the-less.

These two corrupt parties are holding the U.S. hostage.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: SonOfThor

Trump is still way worse in the people's eyes . He will never be elected.

Maybe 'your peoples' not mine........jmo, just like that's your opinion.....I'm CERTAINTLY NOT voting for Clinton the crook.

a reply to: introvert

no there aren`t, there is no other case in which the secretary of state did this, to compare this case to any run of the mill mishandling of classified info would be like comparing the case of world drug cartel leader to that of a street corner pusher in Harlem.

This case has too many unique aspects of it`s own to even try to compare it to any other case of negligently handling classified info.

Hillary running for POTUS:
Hi, I am Hillary Clinton.
I was Secretary of State a number of years ago.
When I was Secretary of State, I took care of state secrets like a doddering old grandma.
Since then, I fell down a flight of steps and bonked myself on the head so hard that I had to take a few months off to recuperate. Now I have seizures and poop my pants.
I am a liar too.

originally posted by: Tardacus
a reply to: introvert

no there aren`t, there is no other case in which the secretary of state did this

The laws are not written to focus on just the SoS. Laws are applied equally. Therefore, any comparable case can be considered.

to compare this case to any run of the mill mishandling of classified info would be like comparing the case of world drug cartel leader to that of a street corner pusher in Harlem.

Horrible comparison.

This case has too many unique aspects of it`s own to even try to compare it to any other case of negligently handling classified info.

The law, and the FBI, disagrees.

originally posted by: MountainLaurel
"IGNORANCE is no DEFENSE for breaking the LAW" ........so it's just not true that enforcing Laws is based on INTENT. PUNISHMENT can be determined by INTENT depending on the crime and your ability to hire a good lawyer.

Some lawyers are corrupt and as long as they get paid good sums of money they will be mediocre at best...a great lawyer gets paid hundreds of thousands, if not millions for high profile clients, to bail them out of a crime. In HRC case it is treason...so the lawyer had better be damn good one.

Side note...the Clinton Foundation has millions of dollars to spend...all funneled in from corrupted donors (including Saudi's)

originally posted by: Skywatcher2011

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
Honest question why are people shocked by this news, when is the last time that such a high ranking politicized person ever been to jail.

She wasn't going to jail, we all new it.

Also, I am happy for all the girls and women in the U.S. who will get a boost of confidence from Hillary's candidacy and probable win. I don't think that's any small consolation prize.

You are right...woman and young girls will learn that it is really OKAY to lie to people and get away with it

great post Skywatchers! Agree!

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Bone75

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: IAMTAT

This is the most important part.

All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information

Intent was key and has been crucial to the cases that were taken to court in previous instances.

So she didn't intend to send classified information over an unsecured network?

That is not what I said. The law states that the individual would have to "knowingly and willing" share information with the purpose of damaging the security of the US.

You're moving the goalposts...

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

a reply to: butcherguy
right, and she is almost 70 years old now her extremely poor judgement isn`t going to get any better in the next 4 years. People thought Reagan was too old and senile to be present but he looks like a spring chicken compared to Hillery.

a reply to: Bone75

I did not move the goalposts. Keep reading:

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.

All those actions can compromise the security of the US.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UnBreakable
If there is a God, now would be the time for him to act and show us there is a thing as karma. Of course I don't wish death on anyone, but I'll settle for a debilitating illness, stroke, heart attack, etc. something that Her Royal Highness can't control and stops her bid to become POTUS, since she thinks she can do whatever she wants.

Desperate times call for desperate measures?

Better get to prayin'.

Don't worry. I'm going to church for the first time in fourty years and lighting Novena candles. If there was any time an act of God was required to save this country, the time is now.

originally posted by: Tardacus
a reply to: butcherguy
right, and she is almost 70 years old now her extremely poor judgement isn`t going to get any better in the next 4 years. People thought Reagan was too old and senile to be present but he looks like a spring chicken compared to Hillery.

70 years of corruption from birth will come back hard to hit her...just wait and see *evil smile*

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UnBreakable
If there is a God, now would be the time for him to act and show us there is a thing as karma. Of course I don't wish death on anyone, but I'll settle for a debilitating illness, stroke, heart attack, etc. something that Her Royal Highness can't control and stops her bid to become POTUS, since she thinks she can do whatever she wants.

Desperate times call for desperate measures?

Better get to prayin'.

Don't worry. I'm going to church for the first time in fourty years and lighting Novena candles. If there was any time an act of God was required to save this country, the time is now.

If you hear back from him, let us know what he says.

a reply to: introvert

we don`t know that the law disagrees because the case isn`t going to be tried in court before the law, we can only say that Comey disagrees.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: DBCowboy

Obviously she didn't commit any crimes.
They're not indicting her.

This is something that many of us said would happen, not because she is innocent, but because our system is corrupt.

And this is something that many of us said would happen, not because we are Hillary supporters, but because the facts and evidence did not support the conspiracy the right wing was selling.

FBI Rewrites Federal Law to Let Hillary Off the Hook

Yet, Director Comey recommended against prosecution of the law violations he clearly found on the ground that there was no intent to harm the United States. In essence, in order to give Mrs. Clinton a pass, the FBI rewrote the statute, inserting an intent element that Congress did not require.

The added intent element, moreover, makes no sense: The point of having a statute that criminalizes gross negligence is to underscore that government officials have a special obligation to safeguard national defense secrets; when they fail to carry out that obligation due to gross negligence, they are guilty of serious wrongdoing.

The lack of intent to harm our country is irrelevant. People never intend the bad things that happen due to gross negligence. I would point out, moreover, that there are other statutes that criminalize unlawfully removing and transmitting highly classified information with intent to harm the United States. Being not guilty (and, indeed, not even accused) of Offense B does not absolve a person of guilt on Offense A, which she has committed. It is a common tactic of defense lawyers in criminal trials to set up a straw-man for the jury: a crime the defendant has not committed.

www.nationalreview.com...

Haha, it don't matter now. The only reason the perception is that she will take it is because of her friends in media. She still won't win, she has been too publicly tainted for the last year now. If Trump is smart enough to pick up Ernst for VP, that should seal the deal. And now they just got so much ammunition to literally paint her as a criminal and liar in all the commercials. The damage is done, she loses in November is my call.

All I can say about this is, maybe its time for the working class to riot about this decision and call for resignations. When the fedral laws are broken and our national security compromised, investigated and cleared by the FBI and the culprate is let go to run for the United States presidency, Things really need to be corrected. This is the same party that wants to take away our rights, but its alright for them to brake the rules walk. Like I said maybe its time.

a reply to: IAMTAT

Just stop, dude.

This decision is in-line with the law and previous cases. There is no need to go down the conspiratorial path.

It's about time people come back to reality and quit listening to the propaganda so damned much.