(07-04-2016 11:52 AM)Dasville Wrote:  

(07-04-2016 10:29 AM)Max Power Wrote:  http://www.dailynewsbin.com/news/msnbc-c...iry/25073/

Sorry conservatives, but the FBI is responsible and won't be bringing flimsy charges against Hillary and waste taxpayer resources like with the House Benghazi investigation just so you clowns can win political points. Expect the announcement to come just before the convention.

Both CNN and MSNBC are reporting it as fact. That is fact.

Sources tell CNN's Evan Perez: expectation is that there will be announcement of no charges in Clinton email probe w/in next two weeks or so
-- @teddydaviscnn

somehow ...
expectation morphed into fact ...

THE CLINTON NEWS NETWORK

It is amazing that some would rather believe that someone committed crimes and will get away with it rather than be thankful that an investigation conducted by ethical professionals has concluded that no crimes had been committed. Talk about ya'll's favorite expression, team over country.

(07-04-2016 04:06 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  It is amazing that some would rather believe that someone committed crimes and will get away with it rather than be thankful that an investigation conducted by ethical professionals has concluded that no crimes had been committed. Talk about ya'll's favorite expression, team over country.

We're talking about Hillary, not Wall Street bankers.

(07-04-2016 04:06 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  It is amazing that some would rather believe that someone committed crimes and will get away with it rather than be thankful that an investigation conducted by ethical professionals has concluded that no crimes had been committed. Talk about ya'll's favorite expression, team over country.

AG DOJ answers to Obama. FBI does not indict.

(07-04-2016 04:06 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  It is amazing that some would rather believe that someone committed crimes and will get away with it rather than be thankful that an investigation conducted by ethical professionals has concluded that no crimes had been committed. Talk about ya'll's favorite expression, team over country.

Except the facts out there specifically point to a crime. Of that, there is no dispute.

If you go 70 in a 55 you're speeding. Not getting a ticket does not mean you did not speed. Now you could argue going 67 in a 65 is not worthy of a ticket but please don't pretend it's not speeding.

Her mail server process classified documents. Even *1* is a crime and Hillary before starting her post as SOS signed a statement saying she knew what was and was not classified.

Wonder how many people her incompetence will get killed when she's president (not that Max cares).

(07-04-2016 04:17 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  Except the facts out there specifically point to a crime. Of that, there is no dispute.

If you go 70 in a 55 you're speeding. Not getting a ticket does not mean you did not speed. Now you could argue going 67 in a 65 is not worthy of a ticket but please don't pretend it's not speeding.

Her mail server process classified documents. Even *1* is a crime and Hillary before starting her post as SOS signed a statement saying she knew what was and was not classified.

I made a mistake ... Won't do it again.
-- Hillary Clinton

SO SORRY

(07-04-2016 04:17 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(07-04-2016 04:06 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  It is amazing that some would rather believe that someone committed crimes and will get away with it rather than be thankful that an investigation conducted by ethical professionals has concluded that no crimes had been committed. Talk about ya'll's favorite expression, team over country.

Except the facts out there specifically point to a crime. Of that, there is no dispute.

If you go 70 in a 55 you're speeding. Not getting a ticket does not mean you did not speed. Now you could argue going 67 in a 65 is not worthy of a ticket but please don't pretend it's not speeding.

Her mail server process classified documents. Even *1* is a crime and Hillary before starting her post as SOS signed a statement saying she knew what was and was not classified.

Except no.

You guys are the definition of team over country.

(07-04-2016 02:51 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(07-04-2016 02:43 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Why would anyone, including libs, want a president that as SOS that installed a private server to handle all government emails?
From day 1 she wanted to avoid all future FOIA matters. Zero secure channels. Beyond being incompetent and criminal.

Because "their team" over country.

This all day.

(07-04-2016 04:06 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  It is amazing that some would rather believe that someone committed crimes and will get away with it rather than be thankful that an investigation conducted by ethical professionals has concluded that no crimes had been committed. Talk about ya'll's favorite expression, team over country.

People like you make me lose all hope on this nation.

The cons on here all want the DOJ to bring charges they can't prove just to harass Hillary and score political points. They know a jury won't convict her for sending information that wasn't marked classified. They don't care. They're bent on their witch-hunt. And they have the nerve to suggest it's Dems who value team over country.

(07-04-2016 04:59 PM)Max Power Wrote:  The cons on here all want the DOJ to bring charges they can't prove just to harass Hillary and score political points. They know a jury won't convict her for sending information that wasn't marked classified. They don't care. They're bent on their witch-hunt. And they have the nerve to suggest it's Dems who value team over country.

I'm a libertarian, not a Republican. I am voting for Gary Johnson, mot trump.

That said, it is obvious that Hillary broke the law. Several other people have been prosecuted for less, including general Petraeus. This is not a witch hunt. This is wanting a criminal to be prosecuted but knowing that she likely won't be due to political corruption. I have no faith in the federal government. It is incredibly corrupt.

I can't understand why Dems would cheer this result. Are you really naive enough to think that her actions are on the up and up?

Stop with the "wasn't marked classified" nonsense. Some were and it JUST DOES NOT EVEN MATTER if none were. And all you partisan hacks know this. But persist in telling what you know are lies.

(07-04-2016 04:59 PM)Max Power Wrote:  The cons on here all want the DOJ to bring charges they can't prove just to harass Hillary and score political points. They know a jury won't convict her for sending information that wasn't marked classified. They don't care. They're bent on their witch-hunt. And they have the nerve to suggest it's Dems who value team over country.

They chose not to charge her, simple as that. Anybody who has worked with classified info knows she committed muliple crimes.

(07-04-2016 04:06 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  It is amazing that some would rather believe that someone committed crimes and will get away with it rather than be thankful that an investigation conducted by ethical professionals has concluded that no crimes had been committed. Talk about ya'll's favorite expression, team over country.

Not beliefs. Crimes were committed. Fact.

(07-04-2016 04:51 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(07-04-2016 04:06 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  It is amazing that some would rather believe that someone committed crimes and will get away with it rather than be thankful that an investigation conducted by ethical professionals has concluded that no crimes had been committed. Talk about ya'll's favorite expression, team over country.

People like you make me lose all hope on this nation.

I'll continue to hope you will see the light and I'll always believe in this nation and it's people.

(07-04-2016 04:59 PM)Max Power Wrote:  They know a jury won't convict her for sending information that wasn't marked classified. ... And they have the nerve to suggest it's Dems who value team over country.

A day after assuming office as secretary of state, Clinton signed a Sensitive Compartmented Information Nondisclosure Agreement that laid out criminal penalties for “any unauthorized disclosure” of classified information.

“I understand that it is my responsibility to consult with appropriate management authorities in the Department … in order to ensure that I know whether information or material within my knowledge or control that I have reason to believe might be SCI,” the agreement says.
-- free beacon

REPEAT THE LIE OFTEN ENOUGH

(07-04-2016 05:04 PM)Paul M Wrote:  Stop with the "wasn't marked classified" nonsense. Some were and it JUST DOES NOT EVEN MATTER if none were. And all you partisan hacks know this. But persist in telling what you know are lies.

It absolutely matters, because for it to be a crime she has to transmit classified information KNOWINGLY. If it's not marked classified she might not KNOW it is classified. It's not that difficult a concept. You can say, "Oh well she signed this paper or took this hourlong class about what it means for something to be classified," but that doesn't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she knew at the time she sent those emails it was classified. And that's how criminal law works. You need to prove to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed a crime. You can prove she violated some department protocols, but if you're talking about criminal charges that's a much higher bar because you need to prove intent. And if you're not sure you can meet that bar as a prosecutor, you don't bring charges, because you're wasting resources. The feds have a reputation for only bringing charges if their case is airtight, so of course they would never bring charges here, and the fact it's Hillary the former SOS instead of Hillary the low level deskjockey doesn't matter.

What Petraeus sent was marked classified.