“Hillary’s E-mails” Are ridiculous...

a reply to: shooterbrody

So you would agree no senator has ever been charged for a procedural error then, right??



Of course I am for equal treatment.. But how about a treatment that fits the crime..

It seems to me the sailor never should have been prosecuted for a couple BS pictures on his phone..

Not that we should be making 2 wrongs by expanding an injustice..


For example:

I do not think people should be jailed for getting high.. ever..

So if a cop is busted with drugs. I do not think he should be jailed over it either..

2 wrongs do not make a right..

Deciding to put people in concrete box’s with monsters should not be an easy decision. You should have done something intentionally that directly harms society and probably be a future threat before that is ok..

a reply to: introvert

"At this point, we're just beating a dead horse, but the horse is already beaten to a pulp.

People need to let it go."


Really? A dead horse?

Why is there an active DOJ IG investigation into the handling of the case by the FBI/DOJ?


Looks like the dead horse is still alive and kicking.

a reply to: JoshuaCox
You post this

Of course I am for equal treatment

Yet you posted this

A random low level sailor is not a senator

Which is it ?

a reply to: network dude

I understand that the government was perfectly ok with people haveing private servers for a decade + before deciding to swap to government servers..

I know that hillary’s Server predated that time period..

I know at that point it is a procedural error, not malfeasance..

I know that no senator in American history has EVER been prosecuted for a procedural error..

The question is why would they make a SPEACIAL EXCEPTION and prosecute hillary..

a reply to: shooterbrody

I answered your question. The random sailor never should have been treated that way/.

You don’t expand an injustice..

Assuming it really was just some kid thoughtlessly taking personal photos. HE NEVER SHOULD HAVE BEEN PROSECUTED..

Obviously...

So you are conceding that no senator has ever in AMERICAN HISTORY been prosecuted for such a thing??

So the fbi would have to be biased by applying the law totally unfairly to her..

They are not going to hunt down all the people who had private servers in the past and prosecute them..

it is patently ridiculous..

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: network dude

I understand that the government was perfectly ok with people haveing private servers for a decade + before deciding to swap to government servers..

I know that hillary’s Server predated that time period..

I know at that point it is a procedural error, not malfeasance..

I know that no senator in American history has EVER been prosecuted for a procedural error..

The question is why would they make a SPEACIAL EXCEPTION and prosecute hillary..

"I understand that the government was perfectly ok with people haveing private servers for a decade"


FALSE.... the government has never allowed the use of private servers.


You fail to understand the basic difference between a private server and a commercial email account. Two totally separate things.

a reply to: RickinVa

Why is there an active DOJ IG investigation into the handling of the case by the FBI/DOJ?

Because conspiracy theories now mean more than they used to.

americans are somuch fun

a reply to: JoshuaCox

She knew the law. Is she above the law? She knew she shouldn't do that. But she did it anyways. Hence WHY its a big deal. She broke the law, and noone is above the law.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Had the investigation been conducted properly there would have been a much different outcome.
In fact that investigation was handled so badly the director of the fbi was fired.

a reply to: introvert

In a case such as this, it is usually handled internally within the various departments and is not taken to criminal court, unless specific criteria are met. Such as...intent.

Erasing evidence implies intent right off the bat.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Had the investigation been conducted properly there would have been a much different outcome.
In fact that investigation was handled so badly the director of the fbi was fired.

...so...where are the indictments? The GOP has all the goodies, and they can't make anything stick? And yet they go on and on about the candidate that lost the last election. Folks...been well over a year. Maybe it's time to put up or shut up?

a reply to: RickinVa

"In a case such as this, it is usually handled internally within the various departments and is not taken to criminal court, unless specific criteria are met. Such as...intent."

I know very little about all of this but how can anyone feel they behaved appropriately when they share confidential info with a Man who shares EVERYTHING from his laptop? It sounds like some kind of organized information gathering.

messages were found on Anthony Weiner's laptop

Then-FBI Director James Comey testified earlier this year that "Somehow, her emails were being forwarded to Anthony Weiner, including classified information by (Clinton's) assistant, Huma Abedin," he said.

www.cnn.com...

a reply to: intrptr

That’s not what I would consider a hell worthy tresspass lol.. if it wasn’t a dire threat to national security on sept. 4th. Then it wasn’t a dire threat on sept 5th after whatever memo to change came out..

It isn’t super relevant, but how many leaks from government servers have been hacked and published in that same time period??

Countless right??

Well hillary’s Private server has had no published leaks...

So for all we know the data was safer on her private server.. we know a lot of government ones got hacked.. we DO NOT know that hillary’s Did..

a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

They can’t indict her for something half of Washington was doing..

They don’t prosecute big wigs for procedural errors. So they would be making a special exception for her. Aka it would be biased to prosecute her for the least crime of ANY senator in history..

a reply to: SoulSurfer

Maybe she did...


That’s not old people territory.. that’s the kinda thing your tech people handle..

Do think trump, Bush , obama , Clinton ANY politician sets up and maintains their servers?!?!

Lol..

Of course not...


Since the server predated the policy, there are oodles of polltential reasons they didn’t swap..

The tech guy might not have gotten the memo..

We are not talking about rape and murder here..

We are talking about an IT issue ..

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
When was the last time we prosecuted a bigwig politician for a clerical error???


Because that’s what the “hillary’s Private server” stuff is.. a clerical error, not a moral crime...


All hillary actually did was fail to swap to a government server when whatever memo to do so was put out..

The first question I need to ask is do you think all the illegal/wrong doings and activities both Clintons have been accused of over the decades are all false?

If you do then I guess we have no reason for a debate, but if you think they might have done some pretty sketchy things over the years then you should understand that it is not always possible to get them on the true illegal activities as much as associated illegal actives. As example, Al Capone went to jail due to tax evasion and not the 1000s of other heinous crimes he was a part of.

originally posted by: RickinVa
Look the bottom line is this:

Hillary Clinton signed a legal agreement with the US Government saying that she had been briefed and understood fully the laws and regulations concerning safe storage, safe guarding and dissemination of classified information, whether it was marked or unmarked.

This is a 100% undeniable fact.


She then proceeded to violate damn near every law and regulation concerning classified information.

And people claim there was no intent.


She either falsely signed a government document, or she was lying when she said she didn't know information was classified because it wasn't marked.

Spin it all you want, but that is how the cookie crumbles.

Edit to please the cherrypickers

The key part here is there's simply no way she couldn't have known. It's not like she was new to this. She had been a Senator for 8 years with a security clearance. You could line up hundreds of witnesses to come in and testify about the training they receive and whether they would have known xyz was legal or illegal. It's a slam dunk case.

a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

No ones ignoring me. I don't know these damn people, their politicians, I don't hang out with such low class POS.

Your moral relativism is what is typical of a biased individual trying to justify the actions of their hero.

This is simple. Everyone with a security clearance hears and knows the same thing.

It is illegal to mishandle classified information.

Mishandling classified info is NOT a procedural error, it's a crime. It matters not the precedence for prosecuting anybody based on role. It's a crime. We are briefed on it. We sign contracts about it. When we compromise classified information, it's a crime.

Either she knowingly mishandled classified information or she was too incompetent to know how to handle it. Either way, it's a crime.