rickyp wrote:Anyway since Comey is not recommending any charges on the email issue as of this morning, will Clinton Derangement Syndrome make your head explode now?

Nothing you posted refuted anything I posted. In the meantime, is Chris Cizilla infected with CDS?

Here's the good news for Hillary Clinton: The FBI has recommended no charges be brought followings its investigation of the former secretary of state's private email server.

Here's the bad news: Just about everything else.

FBI Director James Comey dismantled large portions of Clinton's long-told story about her private server and what she sent or received on it during a stirring 15-minute news conference following which he took no questions. While Comey exonerated Clinton legally speaking, he provided huge amounts of fodder that could badly hamstring her in the court of public opinion.

Most importantly, Comey said the FBI found 110 emails on Clinton's server that were classified at the time they were sent or received. That stands in direct contradiction to Clinton's repeated insistence she never sent or received any classified emails. And, it even stands in contrast to her amended statement that she never knowingly sent or received any classified information.

Comey condemned Clinton and her top aides as "extremely careless" in how they handled classified information during her time as the head of the State Department, adding: "Any reasonable person … should have known that an unclassified system was no place" for that sort of information.

There was more — much more. Comey said Clinton had used not one but multiple private email servers during her time at State. He said Clinton used multiple email devices during that time. (She had offered her desire to use a single device for "convenience" as the main reason she set up the private server.) He noted that the lawyers tasked by Clinton with sorting her private emails from her professional ones never actually read all of the emails (as the FBI did in the course of its investigation). Comey said that while the FBI found no evidence that Clinton's private server was hacked by foreign governments, it was "possible" that it had been. He argued that the Clinton lawyers had deleted emails as personal that contained professional content and that while the FBI found some of those emails in its investigation, it was certainly possible more existed that they were unable to track down.

Basically, Hillary lied about everything and was careless, even reckless with very classified information. That should go right to the top of her qualifications.

Fates source

The Clinton Foundation’s finances are so messy that the nation’s most influential charity watchdog put it on its “watch list” of problematic nonprofits last month.

Charity Naivgator which Fate's source suppossedly says thinks CF finances are messy.
What does it mean that this organization isn’t rated?

It simply means that the organization doesn’t meet our criteria. A lack of a rating does not indicate a positive or negative assessment by Charity Navigator

It refutes the story entirely Fate.

As for the fall out from the email investigation? Not much.
It won't keep her from the White House.

Trumps scandals are lining up at the door and much easier for the average person to understand He's a con artist.

rickyp wrote:Fates source

The Clinton Foundation’s finances are so messy that the nation’s most influential charity watchdog put it on its “watch list” of problematic nonprofits last month.

Charity Naivgator which Fate's source suppossedly says thinks CF finances are messy.
What does it mean that this organization isn’t rated?

It simply means that the organization doesn’t meet our criteria. A lack of a rating does not indicate a positive or negative assessment by Charity Navigator

It refutes the story entirely Fate.

No. It doesn't. Let the reader decide.

As for the fall out from the email investigation? Not much.
It won't keep her from the White House.

Maybe, maybe not.

Question: do you suppose someone at a low-level in the State Department or in the military who handled the highest classifications of national secrets in a manner that Comey described as "extremely careless" would lose their security clearance?

That is a yes/no question. Please summon all your ability and answer it.

Trumps scandals are lining up at the door and much easier for the average person to understand He's a con artist.

For anyone with an IQ of 70 or above, this is easy to understand: Hillary lied. A lot. To every American. Every time she opened her yap about the email situation.

For example: https://www.facebook.com/GOP/videos/10154149145885090/

Clinton Foundation's tax form from 2014

http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments/2014/311/580/2014-311580204-0c3ee98d-9.pdf

48% net profit margin would put it at one of the most profitable operating corporations in America if it were public, but that's another story.

LIMBO....

That's what Bill Clinton succeeded in doing when he boarded the AG's plane. He knew that in doing so it would force her hand to accept the FBI's findings making it impossible for her to pass any kind of independent judgement.

The Clinton worshippers will label me a conspiricist for saying it but here goes.....it drove Bill crazy that there were two "independent" entities with the potential to stop his, not Hillary's mind you, re-entry into the White House/DC and world stage. So he took one of those entities out, the one that really mattered.

But lets look carefully at the FBI's role. Bill knew that the FBI was playing the role of investigator only. He knew that the FBI would not be making a recommendation of action to be taken against Hilary. He knew that this was the role of the AG. So by eliminating the AG's role, the only official political body able to take a punitive stance toward Hilary, Bill successfully created a status of LIMBO.

The FBI would not be making a recommendation on what steps to take to punish Hilary. That was the role of the AG. But the AG has been placed in checkmate, so much so, that she publicly threw up the smoke screen in response to Bill's tarmac visit by saying she would accept the FBI's findings and proceed with their recommendations. Wait a minute, by their own admission, the FBI was simply conducting a criminal investigation, not dishing out punishment, not taking on the role of offering recommendations.

Conclusion...the FBI, not charged with taking any action against Hilary, releases their findings with a nebulous nod to the fact that "no reasonable litigator" would bring a case against Hilary. Really?

That's it folks. Game over. Bill wins. Again.

Bill successfully neutralized the only official political body that could have taken action. So now? No one can take action.

What I can not understand is how Bill is getting away with this, how Hilary could erase thousands of emails once she knew she was caught and get away with it, how Loretta Lynch hasn't submitted her resignation by now and gets away with remaining in her office.

In the last few months I have moved quite far along the spectrum of no longer believing in American democracy. I think it is honestly failing.

What's crazy is that those responsible for what I am now calling the demise of democracy in America actually believe that the American public is so stupid that they WILL get away with this. Apparently they're right. Sure hate radio and hate TV talking heads will jump up and down but make no mistake, other than blow off a lot of hot air, nothing will happen to this family that is clearly above the rule of law.

ADD/HDD America may note the Clinton Family missteps but then it's back to the television set and next week's paycheck.

Before I finish, Rickp asked if I noticed Bill's physical decline. Rickp, I could care less. This is the most conniving politician I have ever observed. This man will be at death's door and still working his connections to position himself toward more and more and more and more and more and more.

And curious that Obama immediately jumped into action as soon as his legacy could be perceived by the public to remain in tact.

Folks, we just got bamboozled. What's so insulting is that Bill thinks he fooled everyone.

Oh and by the way, if anyone out there thinks that Bill's visit to the AG's plane was to say hi, I have a bridge in New York I'd like to sell you.

What we have witnessed this week is American Pageantry at its worst.

dag hammarsjkold wrote:Folks, we just got bamboozled. What's so insulting is that Bill thinks he fooled everyone.

Oh and by the way, if anyone out there thinks that Bill's visit to the AG's plane was to say hi, I have a bridge in New York I'd like to sell you.

What we have witnessed this week is American Pageantry at its worst.

While I am not as cynical as Dag, no one can convince me that Hillary was treated the way anyone else would have been. That fact alone is condemnatory of our system of justice.

The way it has always been and probably always will be. I am sure minority communities laugh when they see conservatives complaining about unequal treatment here.

freeman3 wrote:The way it has always been and probably always will be. I am sure minority communities laugh when they see conservatives complaining about unequal treatment here.

I find it odd that liberals (you are the second friend I've had do this in two days) point to bad behavior (or injustice) as a means of justifying bad behavior (or injustice).

the fact that a Korean woman got probation for shooting Latasha Harlins in the back in no way justifies thinking Hillary should get away with what she did.

Unequal justice:

Consider the extant case of Kristian Saucier, a sailor who unwisely decided to use his cellphone to take a few photographic mementos of his tour of duty on board a submarine. The photographs allegedly include classified systems within the ship. Saucier is not accused of transmitting the photographs, unsecurely or otherwise. Saucier’s case didn’t involve “vast quantities of materials,” exposed or not. Nevertheless, Saucier has been charged under 18 USC 793 (e), and has accepted responsibility for those violations in an agreement with prosecutors.

Saucier did attempt to render his storage of the photographs unusable and inaccessible after suspicion arose. However, there seems to be little difference between Saucier’s attempts and the efforts by Clinton’s team to “wipe” her server rather than submit it to the State Department when requested — actually, a number of servers, as Comey pointed out. If Saucier’s actions amount to obstructing justice, then shouldn’t Clinton’s?

“Clearly, a double standard [exists],” Saucier’s attorney Derrick Hogan told me hours after Comey’s statement. “To me, there’s really nothing that Mrs. Clinton did that was any different than what Mr. Saucier did.” Saucier currently faces 63 to 78 months in prison for the 793(e) violations.

It’s worth noting, too, that Saucier is still an active-duty sailor. The Department of Defense could have handled this case within its own chain of command, especially since Saucier has taken responsibility for the violations. Instead, the DoJ has pursued this case — a rather remarkable rebuttal to Comey’s inexplicable surrender.

It’s not the only case, either. Bryan Nishamura, a Navy reservist, got convicted of mishandling classified information that he downloaded to his own devices and retained. Despite never having attempted to transmit them, the DoJ got its conviction on a misdemeanor count, resulting in a fine and probation for Nishamura.

But, above all, why should "special justice" be required to make someone politically viable to run for President? Why not Biden? Warren? Anyone but Clinton?

It is a sad day, no a tragic day, for America that these are our two candidates. Neither is worthy. Trump is a -10 and Hillary is -50. I refuse to vote for a less than zero candidate.

She should be tried.

I'm not excusing it. I don't think she should have been convicted of a crime, anyway. I did find Bill's meeting with Lynch to be appalling. It's just that there is an awful amount of injustice out there. Someone who is white and middle-class to upper-class typically is not subject to it like those in minority communities are. Prosecutors don't like to take on the powerful unless they have back-up. Here there was none. That being said, there never was a convincing showing that Hillary should be charged so any preferential treatment she got does not change that salient fact.

I am most bothered about Bill's meeting with the AG with no adverse consequences. That was unbelievably arrogant and while again I don't believe Hillary should have been charged Bill's meeting with the AG undermines faith in government.

By the way, the difference in the cases you cited is intent. Those that got charged intentionally obtained classified information and took it with them. Clinton and her team were sloppy with classified information--that's more like negligence.

freeman3 wrote:I'm not excusing it. I don't think she should have been convicted of a crime, anyway. I did find Bill's meeting with Lynch to be appalling. It's just that there is an awful amount of injustice out there. Someone who is white and middle-class to upper-class typically is not subject to it like those in minority communities are. Prosecutors don't like to take on the powerful unless they have back-up. Here there was none. That being said, there never was a convincing showing that Hillary should be charged so any preferential treatment she got does not change that salient fact.

I am most bothered about Bill's meeting with the AG with no adverse consequences. That was unbelievably arrogant and while again I don't believe Hillary should have been charged Bill's meeting with the AG undermines faith in government.

What adverse consequence should have happened?

I think he should be banned from working on the campaign. But I don't see the mechanism for doing that.

freeman3 wrote:I am most bothered about Bill's meeting with the AG with no adverse consequences. That was unbelievably arrogant and while again I don't believe Hillary should have been charged Bill's meeting with the AG undermines faith in government.

How about dangling the idea that she might be kept on as AG?

By the way, the difference in the cases you cited is intent. Those that got charged intentionally obtained classified information and took it with them. Clinton and her team were sloppy with classified information--that's more like negligence.

Wait. So, setting up several different servers is not intent? Turning down a government cell phone is not intent? Emailing in places she was told not to is not intent? Setting up differing systems for having the servers destroyed is not intent? Having lawyers devise a set of rules to determine what was/was not work-related was not intent?

Furthermore, anyone still in the employ of the government would be stripped of her clearance and disciplined. What Hillary is asking for is the HIGHEST clearance in all the land and a reward.

That is insane.

Is it a crime to cavort with the husband of someone that is being investigated by your agency? Is it bad protocol?

Freeman, you are a lawyer. What is the penalty if you were to do that?

At the absolute very least, the Clintons should be on the hook for paying for the FBI investigation. There is certainly plenty of $ in their "foundation" they could use to cover costs. There is no way the American public should have to pay for this investigation that she caused by her own admitted poor judgement. According to Comey, in a normal situation there would be restitution and/or punishment of some kind for someone guilty of gross negligence.

Pay for the investigation!

At this point I'd like to know if American military has anything akin to Germany's Operation Valkyrie in place?

Does anyone here know?

When the justice system utterly fails the nation, what recourse is there? Yesterday our elected officials and their elected flunkies have demonstrated that we are no longer living in a democracy.

Maybe Thomas Jefferson was right?

We have had 13. states independant 11. years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century and a half for each state. What country ever existed a century and a half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it's natural manure