DC Tom Posted July 5, 2016 Share Posted July 5, 2016 So bottom line per #FBI Director Comey is that #Hillary was incompetent, has poor judgment, not criminal & should have known better I am really having difficulty parsing this intellectually. Since when does lack of intent excuse criminal conduct? “See, it’s fine. She was just ‘extremely careless’ with classified information............. She should be president.” Lack of intent almost always excuses criminal conduct. It's why there's charges like "involuntary manslaughter," and why the government has to "prosecute" rape accusations at the school administration level with Title IX rather than the criminal law level. And when it comes to mishandling classified info...even cases of extreme carelessness will rarely get someone more than fired. You'd have to demonstrate willful, treasonous intent to get an indictment - in this case, demonstrate that Hillary intended to provide classified information to third parties by putting it on an unsecured server and letting them hack it (a supposition denied by the mere presence of discussions about security entered in to evidence, indicating that they were aware of the risk and their intent was to protect info.) The far bigger issue was the gross and willful mishandling of federal records and keeping them from Congressional oversight...but c'mon, we all knew Her Royal Highness would skate on that - most people don't even understand that issue, let alone recognize the seriousness of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted July 5, 2016 Share Posted July 5, 2016 It's a funny old world. In the press conference, Comey said that every material statement made by Hillary Clinton in regards to her emails usage while Secretary of State is utterly false. Yes, tens of thousands of work related emails were not turned over the State Department. Yes, top secret information was sent over a very unsecure email system. Yes, her email server was not secured. Yes, foreign intelligence agencies have had access to her email. Yes, the classified information sent was known to be classified when it was sent. In short, not a single syllable Hillary Clinton has said about her actions is true. and yet the dems/media response is...............She was completely vindicated................ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 5, 2016 Share Posted July 5, 2016 What better way to celebrate than to go campaigning with Barack Obama? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted July 5, 2016 Share Posted July 5, 2016 Lack of intent almost always excuses criminal conduct. It's why there's charges like "involuntary manslaughter," and why the government has to "prosecute" rape accusations at the school administration level with Title IX rather than the criminal law level. And when it comes to mishandling classified info...even cases of extreme carelessness will rarely get someone more than fired. You'd have to demonstrate willful, treasonous intent to get an indictment - in this case, demonstrate that Hillary intended to provide classified information to third parties by putting it on an unsecured server and letting them hack it (a supposition denied by the mere presence of discussions about security entered in to evidence, indicating that they were aware of the risk and their intent was to protect info.) The far bigger issue was the gross and willful mishandling of federal records and keeping them from Congressional oversight...but c'mon, we all knew Her Royal Highness would skate on that - most people don't even understand that issue, let alone recognize the seriousness of it. For me the decision to install her own server was and is the larger question but apparently she didn't break a law in doing that either. Maybe we should buy stock in Dell and HP today. This has to be good for business. Servers for all politicians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 5, 2016 Share Posted July 5, 2016 For me the decision to install her own server was and is the larger question but apparently she didn't break a law in doing that either. Maybe we should buy stock in Dell and HP today. This has to be good for business. Servers for all politicians. I have my own server. Not illegal. I rarely use it for government work, though - and I have it designed that, when I do and the project ends, I can swap out and deliver the hard drive. Yes, I take my records management responsibilities more seriously than Her Royal Highness. Does that surprise anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted July 5, 2016 Share Posted July 5, 2016 What better way to celebrate than to go campaigning with Barack Obama? the news has been lighting her up here. Not one minute of statement without including her servers and such Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted July 5, 2016 Share Posted July 5, 2016 (edited) FBI Rewrites Federal Law to Let Hillary Off the Hook by Andrew C McCarthy There is no way of getting around this: According to Director James Comey (disclosure: a former colleague and longtime friend of mine), Hillary Clinton checked every box required for a felony violation of Section 793(f) of the federal penal code (Title 18): With lawful access to highly classified information she acted with gross negligence in removing and causing it to be removed it from its proper place of custody, and she transmitted it and caused it to be transmitted to others not authorized to have it, in patent violation of her trust. Director Comey even conceded that former Secretary Clinton was “extremely careless” and strongly suggested that her recklessness very likely led to communications (her own and those she corresponded with) being intercepted by foreign intelligence services. 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. 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. The idea is that by knocking down a crime the prosecution does not allege and cannot prove, the defense may confuse the jury into believing the defendant is not guilty of the crime charged. Judges generally do not allow such sleight-of-hand because innocence on an uncharged crime is irrelevant to the consideration of the crimes that actually have been charged. It seems to me that this is what the FBI has done today. It has told the public that because Mrs. Clinton did not have intent to harm the United States we should not prosecute her on a felony that does not require proof of intent to harm the United States. Meanwhile, although there may have been profound harm to national security caused by her grossly negligent mishandling of classified information, we’ve decided she shouldn’t be prosecuted for grossly negligent mishandling of classified information. Finally, I was especially unpersuaded by Director Comey’s claim that no reasonable prosecutor would bring a case based on the evidence uncovered by the FBI. To my mind, a reasonable prosecutor would ask: Why did Congress criminalize the mishandling of classified information through gross negligence? The answer, obviously, is to prevent harm to national security. So then the reasonable prosecutor asks: Was the statute clearly violated, and if yes, is it likely that Mrs. Clinton’s conduct caused harm to national security? If those two questions are answered in the affirmative, I believe many, if not most, reasonable prosecutors would feel obliged to bring the case. Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/437479/fbi-rewrites-federal-law-let-hillary-hook FBI Director Comey’s Remarks Were Devastating to Hillary, Ron Radosh writes. But.........it won't be spun that way by the DNC/MSM . Edited July 5, 2016 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 5, 2016 Share Posted July 5, 2016 (edited) Well-orchestrated few days for the left. AG Lynch and husband of person under FBI investigation have private meeting on an airplane. Next day, person under FBI investigation volunteers to meet with the FBI to answer questions. Long three-day weekend. Tuesday morning starts with FBI saying that even though Hillary did enough to get convicted, she won't be convicted. Tuesday afternoon has Barack Obama telling everyone that even though the FBI finds Hillary a clusterphuck of a Sec of State, he thinks she's ready to take over his spot. I'm sure America will stand up to this as soon as we get another tweet from Donald Trump. . From CBS News...... But since we dropped all pretense today, for America........I guess it's no real surprise. Edited July 5, 2016 by LABillzFan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted July 5, 2016 Share Posted July 5, 2016 Please watch................ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbkS26PX4rc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 5, 2016 Share Posted July 5, 2016 Dear Leftists...do you still support the hypocrites? Here...read this. SACRAMENTO, CA—Bryan H. Nishimura, 50, of Folsom, pleaded guilty today to unauthorized removal and retention of classified materials, United States Attorney Benjamin B. Wagner announced. U.S. Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman immediately sentenced Nishimura to two years of probation, a $7,500 fine, and forfeiture of personal media containing classified materials. Nishimura was further ordered to surrender any currently held security clearance and to never again seek such a clearance. According to court documents, Nishimura was a Naval reservist deployed in Afghanistan in 2007 and 2008. In his role as a Regional Engineer for the U.S. military in Afghanistan, Nishimura had access to classified briefings and digital records that could only be retained and viewed on authorized government computers. Nishimura, however, caused the materials to be downloaded and stored on his personal, unclassified electronic devices and storage media. He carried such classified materials on his unauthorized media when he traveled off-base in Afghanistan and, ultimately, carried those materials back to the United States at the end of his deployment. In the United States, Nishimura continued to maintain the information on unclassified systems in unauthorized locations, and copied the materials onto at least one additional unauthorized and unclassified system. Nishimura’s actions came to light in early 2012, when he admitted to Naval personnel that he had handled classified materials inappropriately. Nishimura later admitted that, following his statement to Naval personnel, he destroyed a large quantity of classified materials he had maintained in his home. Despite that, when the Federal Bureau of Investigation searched Nishimura’s home in May 2012, agents recovered numerous classified materials in digital and hard copy forms. The investigation did not reveal evidence that Nishimura intended to distribute classified information to unauthorized personnel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted July 5, 2016 Share Posted July 5, 2016 Dear Leftists...do you still support the hypocrites? Here...read this. Here in the United $tates of America, money talk$. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted July 5, 2016 Share Posted July 5, 2016 (edited) Dear Leftists...do you still support the hypocrites? Here...read this. Lap dog excrement Comey evidently has no Google because he couldn't find this. #bringbackournishimura Edited July 5, 2016 by 4merper4mer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 5, 2016 Share Posted July 5, 2016 Brutally honest article here. The country will yawn...but no matter how you it's a bad day for 'merica. Really bad day. The fact that Clinton is who she is undoubtedly is what caused the FBI to accord her the massive benefit of the doubt when assessing her motives, when finding nothing that was — in the words of Comey — “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.” But a system that accords treatment based on who someone is, rather than what they’ve done, is the opposite of one conducted under the rule of law. It is, instead, one of systemic privilege. As Thomas Jefferson put it in a 1784 letter to George Washington, the ultimate foundation of any constitutional order is “the denial of every preeminence.” Hillary Clinton has long been the beneficiary of this systemic privilege in so many ways, and today, she received her biggest gift from it yet. The Obama-appointed FBI director gave a press conference showing that she recklessly handled top-secret information, engaged in conduct prohibited by law, and lied about it repeatedly to the public. But she won’t be prosecuted or imprisoned for any of that, so Democrats are celebrating. But if there is to be anything positive that can come from this lowly affair, perhaps Democrats might start demanding the same reasonable leniency and prosecutorial restraint for everyone else who isn’t Hillary Clinton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 5, 2016 Share Posted July 5, 2016 AP Fact Check: FBI Determined Hillary Lied and Lied and Lied and Lied. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 5, 2016 Share Posted July 5, 2016 AP Fact Check: FBI Determined Hillary Lied and Lied and Lied and Lied. But she's vindicated, because the FBI found she didn't do anything wrong! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted July 5, 2016 Share Posted July 5, 2016 Please watch................ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbkS26PX4rc That's a beauty, short and to the point. So what happened today was Comey laid out the case with a number of facts but he simply wasn't permitted to make any recommendation other than the one he made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted July 6, 2016 Share Posted July 6, 2016 AP Fact Check: FBI Determined Hillary Lied and Lied and Lied and Lied. It was a vast right wing conspiracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 6, 2016 Share Posted July 6, 2016 But she's vindicated, because the FBI found she didn't do anything wrong! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juror#8 Posted July 6, 2016 Share Posted July 6, 2016 (edited) Conspiracy, boogey man, conspiracy!! Bwahahahaha!!!!! Dont be mad. Get drunk, find a thot and catch a lay. But more on that later ... If the "conspiracy" involves a republican, it's a leftist media creation. No more on that later. "Paper chasin tell that paper 'look I'm right behind ya,' bittcch real g's move in silence like 'lasagna'." Marinate on that later. And somebody in here said that lack of intent almost always excuses criminal culpability. That would be interesting ... well except for strict liability offenses. Or else what do you make of all the 21 year old thots that are in prison for riding some 17 year old d when the 17 year showed a fake id that showed his age as 21. Or all those jackasses who are in jail for dui offenses or vehicular manslaughter ... That's a lot to be outside the "almost always" category. Mmmmm 21 year old thots ... Later bitches. Edited July 6, 2016 by Juror#8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 6, 2016 Share Posted July 6, 2016 Conspiracy, boogey man, conspiracy!! Bwahahahaha!!!!! If the "conspiracy" involves a republican, it's a leftist media creation. "Paper chasin tell that paper 'look I'm right behind ya,' bittcch real g's move in silence like 'lasagna'." Marinate on that. And somebody in here said that lack of intent almost always excuses criminal culpability. That would be interesting ... well except for strict liability offenses. Or else what do you make of all the 21 year old thots that are in prison for riding some 17 year old d when the 17 year showed a fake id that showed his age as 21. Or all those jackasses who are in jail for dui offenses or vehicular manslaughter ... That's a lot to be outside the "almost always" category. Mmmmm 21 year old thots ... Note to self: Juror #8 holds his liquor like John Wawrow. Caption the photo: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts