Loretta Lynch

[Straight Shooter]

Well I think our questions have been answered :dunno:
Premium Link Upgrade

 

[Mayhem]

She's not going to face charges because the State Dept. computer systems are so antiquated that there was nothing less secure about her private server. Possibly it was better. If they indict her, then all of this is made glaringly public.

 

[BCsSecretAlias]

Well I think our questions have been answered :dunno:
Premium Link Upgrade

They are answered for you only just now? They were answered for most observers months ago when this DOJ did not name an independent counsel.

 

[meesterperfect]

She's not going to face charges because the State Dept. computer systems are so antiquated that there was nothing less secure about her private server. Possibly it was better. If they indict her, then all of this is made glaringly public.

Oh so she was actually trying to do good by using an unsecured server out of her basement with top secret information that could seriously comprimise all of our lives because it was probably more secure than the the ones at the State Dept of the US Federal Government.
So it has nothing to do with taking massive bribes and huge amounts of money to be laundered through the clinton foundation or selling secrets to the highest bidder and other ******* goodies.
So THAT"S the reason she won't be indicted. Not because she's the trillionare money junkies who own the world's choice for the next puppet PREZ who will do exactly what they tell her to do for the next four years like they've done with the last 4 or 5 presidents.
That's a relief.

 

[BCsSecretAlias]

She's not going to face charges because the State Dept. computer systems are so antiquated that there was nothing less secure about her private server. Possibly it was better. If they indict her, then all of this is made glaringly public.

Now that's funny. I don't care who you are.

 

[Mayhem]

Oh so she was actually trying to do good by using an unsecured server out of her basement with top secret information that could seriously comprimise all of our lives because it was probably more secure than the the ones at the State Dept of the US Federal Government.
So it has nothing to do with taking massive bribes and huge amounts of money to be laundered through the clinton foundation or selling secrets to the highest bidder and other ******* goodies.
So THAT"S the reason she won't be indicted. Not because she's the trillionare money junkies who own the world's choice for the next puppet PREZ who will do exactly what they tell her to do for the next four years like they've done with the last 4 or 5 presidents.
That's a relief.

Yup, that about sums it up.

Y'know meester, what I find funny about your body of work is you seem to be under the impression that there are people in this section that are happy about Hildawg. You keep railing against her like you're talking to someone. Can you please point to the members here who made Hillary their first choice?

Now that's funny. I don't care who you are.

Yup, fuckin' hilarious. Just like like everything else she hasn't been indicted for. It's a hoot.

 

[Straight Shooter]

Yup, that about sums it up.

Y'know meester, what I find funny about your body of work is you seem to be under the impression that there are people in this section that are happy about Hildawg. You keep railing against her like you're talking to someone. Can you please point to the members here who made Hillary their first choice?

He's not the only one on here who does that

 

[Jagger69]

He's not the only one on here who does that

It happens with those who are constantly railing about Trump as well. I don't know many true conservatives that are exactly pleased over the presumptive republican nominee any more than a lot of true liberals are over Hillary. Bad and worse depending on your viewpoint.

 

[meesterperfect]

Mayhem It seemed that you were defending her or trying to put forth a legitimate excuse for her.
If I was mistaken I apologize.

Hey Jag. You did say we have a classic corrupt politician and an egomaniac to choose from and you aren't voting for neither.
Too bad everyone or at least many more won't be doing that.

In weighing the damage that can and or will be caused by HC or DT.
First to be clear I have strong concerns that TRump may be just another lion in a sheep costume.
Then again if he is so many "establishments" like Wall St Banks, israel and the israel lobby, politicians from both parties, Hollywood, the big 3 news networks, and other various Big Biz and power hungry billionaires who spend more time trying to control and influence for personal gain than enjoying their billions before they croak wouldn't be so against him.
Then again that could be part of the game theyre playing to make us believe we have a choice.

I wrote more than I wanted to there.
Basically with HC we know what we're gonna get. A bought and paid for politician and all that comes with it.
More war and attacks of countries who've done nothing to us, with a good chance of WWIII this time. More borrowing therefore inflation. More money going only up the ladder which cannot be sustained. An overall degredation of quality of life.
At least with Trump , if we go by what he says, he won't be invading and destroying foreign countries with borrowed money and he will do all he can for The People to have a beter life.
Unless he's just another shill then we're screwed either way but the smart bet here is clearly DT.

 

[Jagger69]

Hey Jag. You did say we have a classic corrupt politician and an egomaniac to choose from and you aren't voting for neither.
Too bad everyone or at least many more won't be doing that.

No, I did not say I will not be voting for Hillary but I will most definitely NOT be voting for Trump. If I thought my vote would make a difference in the outcome of whichever nominee is going carry Texas, I might feel compelled to hold my nose and vote for Clinton in spite of her obvious shortcomings. As it is, I may be in a position to vote my conscience (which one should always do regardless) and pull the lever for Gary Johnson. Classic libertarian who really defines who I am more than any other political philosophy. I believe in civil rights to an absolute degree but also want the government to stay out of my pocketbook (and my life in general) as much as possible. So, being a serious social liberal and a stoic fiscal conservative, he is the only candidate for whom I could vote without reservation. He won't win but at least my voice will be heard. I could also be persuaded to vote for Jill Stein (Green Party) but she has even less of a shot than Johnson. At the end of the day, what difference does my opinion make in the overall scheme of things? Not much, that's for sure. Neither does yours, by the way.

 

[meesterperfect]

I know.
My main point I guess was vote for who you think would be the best choice.
But me, I've lost about 95% of my confidence in the US voting system.
Especially this year seeing how HC took so many states over Sanders.
No way I'm buying that a person who I've never heard one person in my life say anything positive about and who can barely fill very small venues beat a person who has a huge following and fills very large venues over and over.
There are now lawsuits over voter fraud in almost every state she won too.
Pretty obvious our vote means little or nothing now. Very sad, very scary.

 

[sean miguel]

So the FBI Director gives a press conference this morning where he lays out exactly how Hillary and her staff knowingly broke the law and how it was actually worse than first thought but his recommendation is that no criminal charges be filed because "no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case" ??? Based on the findings he stated, there's not only enough for an indictment but a conviction.


Not surprising. I didn't believe Hillary would be indicted anyways, but watching that press conference it was like this was some fucked up bizarro alternate universe. It's no wonder the American public is fed up with this ****. Throw the bums out. There's two sets of standards going on here. Comey flat out admits it when he said others who would do the same would not necessarily fail to be prosecuted for it.

I just feel sorry for that *****, whose head ended up in the Director's bed this morning.

 

[Ace Boobtoucher]

It's not often that you'll see the AG and the Director of the FBI use the twinkie defense for someone they should be prosecuting.

 

[Johan]

So the FBI Director gives a press conference this morning where he lays out exactly how Hillary and her staff knowingly broke the law and how it was actually worse than first thought but his recommendation is that no criminal charges be filed because "no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case" ??? Based on the findings he stated, there's not only enough for an indictment but a conviction.

Seems like you did not understood what he said

"There is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information"
[...]
"any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation"
[...]
the FBI could not find a case in the past that would support bringing criminal charges based upon the facts. The bureau did not find clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information or vast quantities of material, or indications of disloyalty to the U.S. or efforts to obstruct justice


So, in essence, Yes she did something that were wrong but non, she did not broke any laws.


But I understand why, as republicans, you are no satisfied : in lees than a week, we had another Benghazi report concluding that there was "wrongdoings" and this.
For years, Republcans have been trying to do all they could to eliminate Hillary from the election 'cause they knew the can't win against her. And now they realise it's been all in vain.

 

[Ace Boobtoucher]

He never said she didn't break the law. He said she was grossly incompetent and extremely careless. That should instill confidence in the electorate. The FBI just admitted the candidate is stunningly incompetent and because of her ineptitude, she gave national secrets to hostile entities.

 

[sean miguel]

Johan, read the statute, intent is not necessary to be in ********* of it and what's the difference between "extreme carelessness" and "gross negligence"?

Greater legal minds than you or I are confounded by this recommendation.


But politics rule. Be careful, because this may work in Trump's favor. If she hasn't been charged this time there's no double jeopardy when this gets re-examined by a new FBI Director and AG under a President Trump.

 

[Straight Shooter]

Wait til BC reacts to this

 

[BCsSecretAlias]

Wait til BC reacts to this

There is no reason to react. Either way she skates. Comey fell on the ***** and saved Obama the political damage of having to pardon her. Nothing to see here. The FBI was previously above politics. That is no longer the case. The Special Agent in Orlando has proven that.

 

[Jagger69]

He never said she didn't break the law. He said she was grossly incompetent and extremely careless. That should instill confidence in the electorate. The FBI just admitted the candidate is stunningly incompetent and because of her ineptitude, she gave national secrets to hostile entities.

This. She certainly risked exposing classified information to enemies of the USA and that, to me, is unforgivable. :goodpost:

Trump, in typical fashion, is blowing this significant PR opportunity by lamenting this consequence as a "rigged" outcome when he would be much better served to simply underscore how the FBI investigation's conclusion is strikingly demonstrative of her lack of presidential attributes. Dude is trying to tweet his way into the oval office....not a sound strategy. If incompetency were against the law the majority of congress would be doing time. This conclusion of the investigation simply serves to further illustrate Hillary's lack of qualification when it comes to the attributes that are needed to be POTUS....specifically, using sound judgment. Mistakes I can forgive but negligence and incompetence are deal-killers from my viewpoint. Results of actions that are negligent or incompetent in nature differ greatly from those that have malicious prior intent and aforethought.

I don't want either Clinton or Trump to be president and I am not voting for either of them. Unfortunately, history says that one of them will ultimately be chosen and that is a sad reality indeed.

 

[BCsSecretAlias]

Mohammed Atta was careless with a 767 and Timothy McVeigh was careless with his truck bomb.