Jump to content









State: Benghazi emails involving Clinton recovered by FBI


webfact

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 140
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

18 hours ago, landtrout said:

 

    You stopped reading before you even got to the end of the sentence? Talk about "extremely careless"!

 

 Here, let me help you with the part that you apparently missed: "Though he described Clinton's actions as "extremely careless," FBI Director James Comey said his agents found no evidence that anyone intended to break the law and said "no reasonable prosecutor" would have brought a criminal case."

 

In the case of Hillary's horrible mishandling of classified material no intent is required, only negligence.  Destroying 30,000 emails is in itself motive, let alone sharing America's top secrets with Sydney Bloomenthal and the rest of the Clinton Foundation scum bags. 

 

The Clinton 'defense" only works for the Clinton's.  A Navy sailor was recently sentenced to jail for taking photos to show his friends, no intent shown to sell the secrets.  But justice was fairly applied to the sailor, doing a year of hard time, while the queen of corruption was given a pass by a rigged system.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/navy-sailor-hillary-defense-fails-year-prison-article-1.2758486

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, landtrout said:

 

    You stopped reading before you even got to the end of the sentence? Talk about "extremely careless"!

 

 Here, let me help you with the part that you apparently missed: "Though he described Clinton's actions as "extremely careless," FBI Director James Comey said his agents found no evidence that anyone intended to break the law and said "no reasonable prosecutor" would have brought a criminal case."

 

This question must have been answered previously but I cannot locate it.

 

It is understood that no one, ie hillary, intended to break the law; however, I am not clear on what she had intended to do.

 

Why did hillary make the decision to do this? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bassman said:

 

In the case of Hillary's horrible mishandling of classified material no intent is required, only negligence.  Destroying 30,000 emails is in itself motive, let alone sharing America's top secrets with Sydney Bloomenthal and the rest of the Clinton Foundation scum bags. 

 

The Clinton 'defense" only works for the Clinton's.  A Navy sailor was recently sentenced to jail for taking photos to show his friends, no intent shown to sell the secrets.  But justice was fairly applied to the sailor, doing a year of hard time, while the queen of corruption was given a pass by a rigged system.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/navy-sailor-hillary-defense-fails-year-prison-article-1.2758486

 

Members of the military are subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice as the laws that govern the military. UCMJ consciously does not have several constitutional protections and processes that citizens have, to include resident non-citizens. UCMJ is all about military discipline and winning wars.

 

It's been said that military justice is to justice as military music is to music.

 

Civilian employees of the U.S. Government or other private citizens are subject to laws we have seen enforced consistently.

 

Now we have FBI Director Comey's findings in this instance of Hillary Clinton while she had been SecState. It was Comey's third investigation of the Clintons. And it is the third time James Comey the lawyer-investigator found no charges to be filed.

 

The objections to HRC in this matter are political. The issue will be decided by the voters November 8th. The extremists in control of the 2016 Republican party will need to accept the final result, Putin-Assange-Wikileaks notwithstanding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Publicus said:

 

Members of the military are subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice as the laws that govern the military. UCMJ consciously does not have several constitutional protections and processes that citizens have, to include resident non-citizens. UCMJ is all about military discipline and winning wars.

 

It's been said that military justice is to justice as military music is to music.

 

Civilian employees of the U.S. Government or other private citizens are subject to laws we have seen enforced consistently.

 

Now we have FBI Director Comey's findings in this instance of Hillary Clinton while she had been SecState. It was Comey's third investigation of the Clintons. And it is the third time James Comey the lawyer-investigator found no charges to be filed.

 

The objections to HRC in this matter are political. The issue will be decided by the voters November 8th. The extremists in control of the 2016 Republican party will need to accept the final result, Putin-Assange-Wikileaks notwithstanding.

 

Interesting history there between Comey and Clintons and HSBC. 

 

Comey certainly knows how the game of politics works based on his bio. He was not a career FBI agent or prosecutor and his appointment was political.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Publicus said:

 

As I'd said and as quoted above, the entire matter is political.

 

Election Day is Tuesday November 8th.

 

Inauguration of the 45th Potus is at noon, January 20th 2017.

 

Well, the action itself is real and it was a violation...the manner in which the investigation has played out is entirely political.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, mesterm said:

Wonderful man. Not...just a criminal with an internet connection.

 

Quote

WikiLeaks has already aimed to influence the 2016 election. In July, the organization released a trove of emails hacked from the Democratic National Committee’s servers that showed Democratic staffers criticizing Sen. Bernie Sanders. Assange has defended the release of the emails, which prompted a flurry of resignations within the DNC. Assange has been accused of helping fuel conspiracy theories about the circumstances surrounding the death of Democratic staffer Seth Rich, who was killed in a mugging earlier this year.

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, mesterm said:

 

Assange has done a great service several times in exposing corrupt people in power. But sure, whatever gets Hillary elected.

People tend to focus on one or few "good" things he's done, and ignore all the bad things....hardly what I'd call a great service.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Assange is not an American who was given a television talk program on Moscow television broadcast nationally by Putin.

 

Wikileaks picked up Edward Snowden in Hong Kong and deposited him in Russia where Snowden remains on documents issued by the Russian Government.

 

The Russian cybertroopers' hacking of emails and documents in the election campaign has focused on the Democratic party only.

 

The Putin-Assange-Wikileaks axis is not going to hack the Benghazi Committee's confidential files written by Republicans in the US House for the numerous Benghazi committees they control and that have expended thousands of workhours and millions of dollars pursuing entirely political purposes, goals and ends.

 

Trump himself is in jeopardy of violating the Logan Act which prohibits private citizens engaging with a foreign government without authorisation when Trump called on Russia to release Democratic party emails and documents it obtained by cyber theft.

 

It is unmistakable the extreme right stops at nothing with more yet to come.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Publicus said:

 

 

Trump himself is in jeopardy of violating the Logan Act which prohibits private citizens engaging with a foreign government without authorisation when Trump called on Russia to release Democratic party emails and documents it obtained by cyber theft.

 

 

 

You are joking, right? 

 

That is great comedy if you are kidding us but its absurd if you are serious. You find a prosecutor anywhere that would pursue charges for the following:

 

Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing," Trump proposed from a podium at his Doral Resort. "I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Publicus said:

 

 


This thread seems to have gone down the rabid (not to be confused with rabbit) way with much of foaming at the mouth thus renders any attempt at sensible discussion (the kind that involves logical reasoning you know) futile. 

 

Let me just cut and paste (for some reason I could not do a "quote" because the previous quote was still stuck on at the top and I couldn't  quite get rid of it) one single post so far - post #71 - that hits the nail on the head:

 

"Let's face it, the Obama administration has stonewall every investigation into Clinton's misdeeds for a reason.
 
They have determined she will be President!  The FBI could produce video and eye witness accounts of H. Clinton involved in criminal activity and it would not make mainstream news or become a topic of conversation, not to mention never be seen in a court of law.
 
Regardless of which side of the political spectrum one aligns one's self, this is bad news and a sad state of affairs for the US and it's citizens.
"

 

Well said, Rod Gold!:thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Boon Mee said:

Meanwhile, Julian Assange. is sitting on the emails that will end (hopefully) this vile woman's plan to become president. :thumbsup:

 

The radical altright need their teddy bear to hold on to....one teddy bear after another in a long line of 'em that go bump on the right. Now it's the Russian bear they're cuddling up to. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The BBC has the most thorough explanation of the Clinton Private Email details that I found anywhere:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-31806907

 

i highly recommend everyone read this and draw your own conclusions instead of the hype. Personally, I found it much worse than what the media has released in bits & pieces.

 

Does it pass your own personal "sniff test? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ClutchClark said:

The BBC has the most thorough explanation of the Clinton Private Email details that I found anywhere:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-31806907

 

i highly recommend everyone read this and draw your own conclusions instead of the hype. Personally, I found it much worse than what the media has released in bits & pieces.

 

Does it pass your own personal "sniff test? 

What more do we need to know than the server was in a bathroom closet - unsecured and contained classified material not authorized?

In fact, Crooked Hillary (CH for short now) actually sent more docs through it after she was left her job as Sect. of State.:facepalm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Boon Mee said:

What more do we need to know than the server was in a bathroom closet - unsecured and contained classified material not authorized?

In fact, Crooked Hillary (CH for short now) actually sent more docs through it after she was left her job as Sect. of State.:facepalm:

 

I was unaware just how many classified documents were actually discovered AND that the FBI never could recover 1,000's more emails because she had already destroyed them.

 

And her ridiculous excuse she only did this to save the inconvenience of carrying two phones. 

 

This is far more damning than the trickled out stories in the Press til now. 

 

The days of investigative journalism are certainly a thing of the past.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, smo said:


This thread seems to have gone down the rabid (not to be confused with rabbit) way with much of foaming at the mouth thus renders any attempt at sensible discussion (the kind that involves logical reasoning you know) futile. 

 

Let me just cut and paste (for some reason I could not do a "quote" because the previous quote was still stuck on at the top and I couldn't  quite get rid of it) one single post so far - post #71 - that hits the nail on the head:

 

"Let's face it, the Obama administration has stonewall every investigation into Clinton's misdeeds for a reason.
 
They have determined she will be President!  The FBI could produce video and eye witness accounts of H. Clinton involved in criminal activity and it would not make mainstream news or become a topic of conversation, not to mention never be seen in a court of law.
 
Regardless of which side of the political spectrum one aligns one's self, this is bad news and a sad state of affairs for the US and it's citizens.
"

 

Well said, Rod Gold!:thumbsup:

 

 

Things either side considers political against their opponent are settled on Election Day aka Polling Day, Tuesday November 8th. 

 

MSM have been distressing each side in the campaign, but, that the extremist rightwhingenoids are hotter under the collar about it is to  be expected given it's the quadrennial election of Potus.

 

It is normal and routine that, given Trump is consistently behind in virtually all reliable and reputable polling, the fringe whinge on the radical right are denying the polls and cussing MSM reporting. It is the standard stuff among the political paranoid right that everything or almost everything is a conspiracy against the good and honest people, i.e., those on the right fringe only and who are led this time by The Ignoramus Himself, Donald Trump.

 

Reality is the MSM have given each candidate unprecedented "free time" live during their speeches and their rally rousers so that Americans can hear and see each candidate directly in his/her own words, and so the voters themselves do in fact see the gestures which are either more or less, get a view of the crowds, see and hear the candidate straight on. Moreover, each candidate has given numerous one-on-one interviews to MSM. 

 

Voters continue to get politically produced and financed advertising. However, voters this election cycle are getting each candidate speaking live, speaking directly and often in full, and in real time, to either his/her own crowd or to a civil group and civil society groups. The extent of this new direct democracy development is unprecedented and it is excellent because the best thing to happen in this election is to give Trump a microphone and put him in front of a camera and then to read his suicidal Tweets. 

 

These realities help to know why Trump is running far behind Romney did in 2012 among almost every important Republican demographic group, starting with college educated white voters, the largest difference being among married white educated suburban Republican women. Trump is behind in this demographic that is easily won by the Republican for Potus, as occurred with McCain and with each Bush especially. In Pennsylvania for instance, the R for Potus needs to come out of the Philadelphia suburbs behind the D by no more than 10%, yet Trump in the Philly burbs is running 40% behind HRC. White married college educated suburban Republican women across the country wretch at Donald Trump as their party nominee. It is far too late for Trump to ever change the reality (which was always predictable and foreseeable).

 

Stick a fork in Trump cause he's done. The only hope the Radical Republican Party of 2016 has that Trump could win is to perform a lobotomy on him, and even then it would remain problematic.

Edited by Publicus
Revise
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Thursday, September 01, 2016 at 6:06 AM, Boon Mee said:

The Left's desperation is showing...:whistling:

 

Ha ha I asked James Carville what he thought of the post....

 

Political strategist James Carville tells Vanity Fair that the Republican party is committing suicide.

 

Said Carville: “I just didn’t think that a modern American party was capable of suicide. I thought that something would happen, that somebody would think of a way to stop this. And they couldn’t. I think that they wanted to but they couldn’t.”

 

He added: “And most of the Republicans that I talk to, which are quite a few, they are not so much worried about losing the election as I think they are about losing an entire generation. No one knows how much damage that Trump is going to cause the Republican Party beyond 2016. It is really something, to watch a party just march right over a cliff, and no one can stop them.”

 

Well, Jas. did say that although not to me specifically.

 

He wuz speaking to you individually and to the country itself.

 

The Republican party was formed out of the rubble of the Whig party shortly before the civil war. So it will be interesting to see what comes out of this Great Republican Train Wreck of 2016.

 

Btw, the post indicates a reality deficit of a severe proportion, depth and dimension.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...