No charges appropriate for Hillary Clinton email "problem" by Got Haggis? - TribalWar Forums
Click Here to find great hosting deals from Branzone.com


Go Back   TribalWar Forums > TribalWar Community > General Discussion
Reload this Page No charges appropriate for Hillary Clinton email "problem"
Page 1 of 18
Thread Tools
Got Haggis?
VeteranXV
Old
1 - 07-05-2016, 11:20
Reply With Quote
FBI just announced it would not be appropriate to bring charges against her for the email stuff, HOWEVER she had extremely poor judgement regarding sending email (or something along those lines).

I think its pretty obvious she has no clue how email works.

"extremely careless" were the words used
 
Got Haggis? is offline
 
Sponsored Links
Father Ruckus
VeteranXV
Old
2 - 07-05-2016, 11:23
Reply With Quote
The fix was in for a while.
 
Father Ruckus is offline
 
SuicideSnowman
VeteranXV
Old
3 - 07-05-2016, 11:23
Reply With Quote
Come on Russia don't disappoint us. Release those e-mails. Expose the corruption that the FBI is now taking a part of.
 
SuicideSnowman is offline
 
NightTrain
VeteranXV
Old
4 - 07-05-2016, 11:24
Reply With Quote
Putin wouldnt release them just hold them over her head for her entire presidency.
 
NightTrain is offline
 
Lord Elessar
or something³
Contributor
Old
5 - 07-05-2016, 11:26
Reply With Quote
Good job security move by the FBI.
 
Lord Elessar is offline
 
Fool
Whiny BitchX
Contributor
Old
6 - 07-05-2016, 11:26
Reply With Quote
Can't say I'm surprised. My favorite part was the admittance that were it anyone else they would've been prosecuted. The fix is in, welcome to total government corruption.
 
Fool is online now
 
burtrennalds
VeteranXV
Old
7 - 07-05-2016, 11:30
Reply With Quote
Woohoo
 
burtrennalds is offline
 
houston
VeteranXV
Old
8 - 07-05-2016, 11:30
Reply With Quote
You son of a ***** haggis, your thread is 2 minutes older than mine

this is OFN
 
houston is offline
 
havax
VeteranXV
Contributor
Old
9 - 07-05-2016, 11:31
Reply With Quote
yep, just as i thought.

past the corruption point of no return.

ggs america. was fun while it lasted.

see you on the front lines.
 
havax is offline
 
MadHatSam
VeteranX
Old
10 - 07-05-2016, 11:34
Reply With Quote
The rich and powerful have always been playing by a different set of rules. I can't believe anyone really thought she would face any charges.
 
MadHatSam is offline
 
buize
VeteranXV
Contributor
Old
11 - 07-05-2016, 11:36
Reply With Quote
"Nobody else is allowed to do this, you will be prosecuted. However in this case nobody is going to be prosecuted."
 
buize is offline
 
Fool
Whiny BitchX
Contributor
Old
12 - 07-05-2016, 11:37
Reply With Quote
It's honestly more about the obvious way it transpired. The DOJ would never prosecute, no matter what the recommendation was. Lynch could say otherwise, but the meeting with Bill, her initial appointment by Bill, her future SC appointment by Hillary screamed that she wouldn't. In order to save face by the DOJ, the FBI has to be the ones who take the hit. Most are low level bureaucrats whose names will be forgotten in a few months, and who will have shiny new positions by next year. The the confirmation bias will flood through the people. Those who know Hillary is a corrupt ***** will be certain now. Those who think Hillary is an innocent woman being targeted by vicious misogyny will say "see who cares about emails?" like the morons they are.
 
Fool is online now
 
slush
Veteran++
Old
13 - 07-05-2016, 11:37
Reply With Quote
Agree wit buize
 
slush is offline
 
slush
Veteran++
Old
14 - 07-05-2016, 11:43
Reply With Quote
i can say whatever i ****ing want *******
 
slush is offline
 
skizz
VeteranXV
Old
15 - 07-05-2016, 11:51
Reply With Quote
First Kevin Durant, now this!!!!!! What is wrong with this **** world.
 
skizz is offline
 
Fool
Whiny BitchX
Contributor
Old
16 - 07-05-2016, 11:53
Reply With Quote
I suppose it's true that the DOJ can prosecute anyway, Comey basically threw it all on them at the end of his speech, pointing out that people have suffered security sanctions for lesser infractions. She exercised gross negligence but we don't think she meant to be incompetent. Lynch will still use the recommendation as an out, but it'll come down hard on the DOJ.
 
Fool is online now
 
slush
Veteran++
Old
17 - 07-05-2016, 11:54
Reply With Quote
can ur post be any longer ffs!!
 
slush is offline
 
HumDumpin
VeteranXV
Old
18 - 07-05-2016, 11:56
Reply With Quote
Quote:
I Triggered a State Department Leak More Serious Than Hillary Clinton’s...

In February 1987, at the height of the Cold War, a top official at State caused a leak of extremely sensitive material, classified above top secret. It was distributed far and wide—to nearly every country in the world. And for that serious information breach—much worse than anything Clinton is accused of—he received nothing more than a letter warning him to be more circumspect in the future.
...
One month later, after much internal deliberation within Foggy Bottom, Spiers got his punishment: “Spokesman Charles E. Redman said the State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security will issue a letter to Ronald Spiers, undersecretary of state for management, advising him to exercise more caution in the future,” the AP reported. Redman called the incident “an infraction.” Importantly, he also said that a State Department analysis had concluded that none of the type could be read, even with advanced equipment—and thus no harm had been done. The bureau is under the jurisdiction of the undersecretary, and the press noted the irony of, in effect, Spiers’ sending the letter to himself, as both chief security officer and the department’s foremost security miscreant.
...

Thirty years later, you’d never know that Clinton’s violation was less serious than Spiers’. The media coverage is more insistent; government officials are more concerned. The departmental inspector general has chimed in critically, and the FBI and the Department of Justice have been brought into the case. And yet, look closer at the facts, and you will see there’s no evidence that Clinton’s email scandal constituted an information leak at all. None of the emails she sent or received contained material that was classified at the time, and there’s no evidence that anybody but the intended recipients ever read them.
Yes, Clinton violated a government record-keeping policy and showed poor judgment—but, as in the case of Spiers’ carelessness in the face of much higher stakes, there’s no evidence that national security was jeopardized because of Clinton’s actions. If Spiers wasn’t criminally prosecuted for his worse “infraction,” why would Hillary Clinton be prosecuted for hers?


Read more: I Triggered a State Department Leak More Serious Than Hillary Clintons - POLITICO Magazine
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook
 
HumDumpin is offline
 
Stealth
VeteranXV
Old
19 - 07-05-2016, 11:56
Reply With Quote
Hey guys we won't prosecute Hillary, but if you do what she did, you will be facing charges.

What?
 
Stealth is offline
 
Fool
Whiny BitchX
Contributor
Old
20 - 07-05-2016, 11:59
Reply With Quote
You're comparing redacted hard copies sent in the 80s to unsecured emails in 2015?
 
Fool is online now
 
Page 1 of 18
Reply


Go Back   TribalWar Forums > TribalWar Community > General Discussion
Reload this Page No charges appropriate for Hillary Clinton email "problem"

Social Website Bullshit

Tags
crying , crying republicans


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


AGENT: CCBot/2.0 (https://commoncrawl.org/faq/) / Y
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 17:14.