(07-06-2016 11:09 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 10:55 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 10:51 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 10:49 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 10:41 AM)solohawks Wrote:  If you believe no charges should have been brought against Hilary Clinton, than please answer this question honestly

If you or someone you know had done what she did at a lower ranking level than Secretary of State, would you be getting off with zero criminal or civil punishment?

What exactly did she do? Be specific.

Go listen to the first 15 minutes of the FIB director's announcement. He listed everything she did.

Go listen to the last 15 minutes of what he said. He said no charges should be filed.

That's not what he said at all and furthermore, it isn't his job to decide if charges should be filed or not. That lies with the prosecutors.

"In our system, the prosecutors make the decisions about whether charges are appropriate based on evidence the FBI has helped collect."

Then you shouldnt care that he made that statement because that wont be his call anyway.

(07-06-2016 11:09 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 10:55 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 10:51 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 10:49 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 10:41 AM)solohawks Wrote:  If you believe no charges should have been brought against Hilary Clinton, than please answer this question honestly

If you or someone you know had done what she did at a lower ranking level than Secretary of State, would you be getting off with zero criminal or civil punishment?

What exactly did she do? Be specific.

Go listen to the first 15 minutes of the FIB director's announcement. He listed everything she did.

Go listen to the last 15 minutes of what he said. He said no charges should be filed.

That's not what he said at all and furthermore, it isn't his job to decide if charges should be filed or not. That lies with the prosecutors.

"In our system, the prosecutors make the decisions about whether charges are appropriate based on evidence the FBI has helped collect."

Yes, but doesn't law enforcement often "advise" or "recommend" what a punishment should be? I know prosecutors don't need to follow any such advice, etc but he was clearly advising not to prosecute even though he listed reasons she should be.

(07-06-2016 11:11 AM)Greenroom Wrote:  The answer is NO. Even Fox News cannot find one case like this one that the person was tried.

"Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past." FBI Comey (Republican)

I think she should be in jail, but how our system works, she is a free to run for President of the United States, even though she could not get clearance for a low level job in the Fed Govt.

Here's the problem, a number of statutes she violated expressly state intent is not necessary.

It is neither the FBI's nor Comey's job to evaluate the case from the point of view of a prosecutor. Their job is to find the facts and report them to the prosecutor who then makes the decision whether or not to pursue charges.

Comey is basically saying, "Here are the facts. They are enough to support prosecution and conviction. But the AG has told me that she will not pursue the case regardless. Therefore, I am recommended that charges not be pursued."

As for the statement that even Fox News can't find a case where anyone was prosecuted for a similar offense, I guess all the cases cited here and elsewhere that people were prosecuted did not have Fox News as their source.

(07-06-2016 11:08 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 11:05 AM)solohawks Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 11:00 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 10:56 AM)solohawks Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 10:49 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  What exactly did she do? Be specific.

I'm asking a serious question but I'll expand and play along.
If you or someone you know had done what THE FBI DIRECTOR SPENT 15 MINUTES SAYING she did at a lower ranking level than Secretary of State, would you be getting off with zero criminal or civil punishment

Someone at a lower level would not have access to that kind of information.

Relevance?

If someone at a lower level set up a private email server and used that server to conduct government business and while doing so emailed classified government documentation, would they be let off without any criminal or civil penalty.

From what understand, the previous two SofS did the same thing without criminal charges so yes.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...same-thin/

Your understanding is wrong. Care to change your answer

(07-06-2016 11:16 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  It is neither the FBI's nor Comey's job to evaluate the case from the point of view of a prosecutor. Their job is to find the facts and report them to the prosecutor who then makes the decision whether or not to pursue charges.

Comey is basically saying, "Here are the facts. They are enough to support prosecution and conviction. But the AG has told me that she will not pursue the case regardless. Therefore, I am recommended that charges not be pursued."

As for the statement that even Fox News can't find a case where anyone was prosecuted for a similar offense, I guess all the cases cited here and elsewhere that people were prosecuted did not have Fox News as their source.

Do you have evidence that proves that the AG told him to say that?

(07-06-2016 11:11 AM)Greenroom Wrote:  The answer is NO. Even Fox News cannot find one case like this one that the person was tried.

"Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past." FBI Comey (Republican)

I think she should be in jail, but how our system works, she is a free to run for President of the United States, even though she could not get clearance for a low level job in the Fed Govt.

I heard oreiley say something similar. How is what clinton did not similar to the two prominent navy examples I have seen floating around

(07-06-2016 11:18 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 11:16 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  It is neither the FBI's nor Comey's job to evaluate the case from the point of view of a prosecutor. Their job is to find the facts and report them to the prosecutor who then makes the decision whether or not to pursue charges.

Comey is basically saying, "Here are the facts. They are enough to support prosecution and conviction. But the AG has told me that she will not pursue the case regardless. Therefore, I am recommended that charges not be pursued."

As for the statement that even Fox News can't find a case where anyone was prosecuted for a similar offense, I guess all the cases cited here and elsewhere that people were prosecuted did not have Fox News as their source.

Do you have evidence that proves that the AG told him to say that?

No, I have evidence as to what he actually said. He said it for some reason. Do you have another reason why he would say that?

(07-06-2016 11:13 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 11:11 AM)Greenroom Wrote:  The answer is NO. Even Fox News cannot find one case like this one that the person was tried.

"Although there is evidence of
violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past." FBI Comey (Republican)

I think she should be in jail, but how our system works, she is a free to run for President of the United States, even though she could not get clearance for a low level job in the Fed Govt.

Here's the problem, a number of statutes she violated expressly state intent is not necessary.

The thick-skulled home team fans can't seem to get their head around the fact that that laugh track presser yesterday only focused on one of at least a half dozen statutes that the rest of us would have had filed against us where intent is not required at all.

Try being negligent on your tax return and telling the IRS you did not intend to break the statute.

(07-06-2016 11:20 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 11:13 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 11:11 AM)Greenroom Wrote:  The answer is NO. Even Fox News cannot find one case like this one that the person was tried.

"Although there is evidence of
violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past." FBI Comey (Republican)

I think she should be in jail, but how our system works, she is a free to run for President of the United States, even though she could not get clearance for a low level job in the Fed Govt.

Here's the problem, a number of statutes she violated expressly state intent is not necessary.

The thick-skulled home team fans can't seem to get their head around the fact that that laugh track presser yesterday only focused on one of at least a half dozen statutes that the rest of us would have had filed against us where intent is not required at all.

Try being negligent on your tax return and telling the IRS you did not intend to break the statute.

You mean you still think politicians follow the same rules as the rest of us? Oh thats precious.

(07-06-2016 11:16 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  It is neither the FBI's nor Comey's job to evaluate the case from the point of view of a prosecutor. Their job is to find the facts and report them to the prosecutor who then makes the decision whether or not to pursue charges.

Comey is basically saying, "Here are the facts. They are enough to support prosecution and conviction. But the AG has told me that she will not pursue the case regardless. Therefore, I am recommended that charges not be pursued."

As for the statement that even Fox News can't find a case where anyone was prosecuted for a similar offense, I guess all the cases cited here and elsewhere that people were prosecuted did not have Fox News as their source.

He never said they were enough for a conviction. In fact he implied they weren't when he said no reasonable prosecutor would bring the case.

But again... let's all just continue to believe that the Republican FBI director has been corrupted and doing this to cover for the Clintons. There is plenty of good ammo for republicans to use against Clinton in this, but my guess is instead of talking about that they'll run their usual conspiracy theory nonsense and the voters will see right through it.

No reasonable prosecutors would bring it because they know they'd be in private practice in 6 months.

(07-06-2016 11:21 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 11:20 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 11:13 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 11:11 AM)Greenroom Wrote:  The answer is NO. Even Fox News cannot find one case like this one that the person was tried.

"Although there is evidence of
violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past." FBI Comey (Republican)

I think she should be in jail, but how our system works, she is a free to run for President of the United States, even though she could not get clearance for a low level job in the Fed Govt.

Here's the problem, a number of statutes she violated expressly state intent is not necessary.

The thick-skulled home team fans can't seem to get their head around the fact that that laugh track presser yesterday only focused on one of at least a half dozen statutes that the rest of us would have had filed against us where intent is not required at all.

Try being negligent on your tax return and telling the IRS you did not intend to break the statute.

You mean you still think politicians follow the same rules as the rest of us? Oh thats precious.

The fact is that there are those that still support them even knowing what you posted above is true is asinine.

(07-06-2016 11:24 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 11:21 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 11:20 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 11:13 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 11:11 AM)Greenroom Wrote:  The answer is NO. Even Fox News cannot find one case like this one that the person was tried.

"Although there is evidence of
violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past." FBI Comey (Republican)

I think she should be in jail, but how our system works, she is a free to run for President of the United States, even though she could not get clearance for a low level job in the Fed Govt.

Here's the problem, a number of statutes she violated expressly state intent is not necessary.

The thick-skulled home team fans can't seem to get their head around the fact that that laugh track presser yesterday only focused on one of at least a half dozen statutes that the rest of us would have had filed against us where intent is not required at all.

Try being negligent on your tax return and telling the IRS you did not intend to break the statute.

You mean you still think politicians follow the same rules as the rest of us? Oh thats precious.

The fact is that there are those that still support them even knowing what you posted above is true is asinine.

Consider the choices and elect the lesser of two evils.

(07-06-2016 11:21 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 11:20 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 11:13 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 11:11 AM)Greenroom Wrote:  The answer is NO. Even Fox News cannot find one case like this one that the person was tried.

"Although there is evidence of
violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past." FBI Comey (Republican)

I think she should be in jail, but how our system works, she is a free to run for President of the United States, even though she could not get clearance for a low level job in the Fed Govt.

Here's the problem, a number of statutes she violated expressly state intent is not necessary.

The thick-skulled home team fans can't seem to get their head around the fact that that laugh track presser yesterday only focused on one of at least a half dozen statutes that the rest of us would have had filed against us where intent is not required at all.

Try being negligent on your tax return and telling the IRS you did not intend to break the statute.

You mean you still think politicians follow the same rules as the rest of us? Oh thats precious.

So you have no problem with unequal application of the law?

(07-06-2016 11:34 AM)solohawks Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 11:21 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 11:20 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 11:13 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 11:11 AM)Greenroom Wrote:  The answer is NO. Even Fox News cannot find one case like this one that the person was tried.

"Although there is evidence of
violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past." FBI Comey (Republican)

I think she should be in jail, but how our system works, she is a free to run for President of the United States, even though she could not get clearance for a low level job in the Fed Govt.

Here's the problem, a number of statutes she violated expressly state intent is not necessary.

The thick-skulled home team fans can't seem to get their head around the fact that that laugh track presser yesterday only focused on one of at least a half dozen statutes that the rest of us would have had filed against us where intent is not required at all.

Try being negligent on your tax return and telling the IRS you did not intend to break the statute.

You mean you still think politicians follow the same rules as the rest of us? Oh thats precious.

So you have no problem with unequal application of the law?

There is nothing I can do about it so I dont even get upset about it. There are haves and have nots in this country. Its always been that way.

(07-06-2016 10:49 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  What exactly did she do? Be specific.

Comey told you.

(07-06-2016 10:55 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 10:51 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Go listen to the first 15 minutes of the FIB director's announcement. He listed everything she did.

Go listen to the last 15 minutes of what he said. He said no charges should be filed.

That negates all the crimes he listed she committed how?

(07-06-2016 11:00 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Someone at a lower level would not have access to that kind of information.

Who exactly do you think she was sharing this information back and forth with?

(07-06-2016 11:02 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  I think the investigation led by a republican should be accepted. End of story.

You know we do accept it right? We agree and have been saying all along she committed the crimes the investigation says she committed.

(07-06-2016 11:08 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  From what understand, the previous two SofS did the same thing without criminal charges so yes.

Then after all this time you still don't understand. You should be to embarrassed to keep admitting that.

(07-06-2016 11:42 AM)Paul M Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 10:49 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  What exactly did she do? Be specific.

Comey told you.

(07-06-2016 10:55 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 10:51 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Go listen to the first 15 minutes of the FIB director's announcement. He listed everything she did.

Go listen to the last 15 minutes of what he said. He said no charges should be filed.

That negates all the crimes he listed she committed how?

(07-06-2016 11:00 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Someone at a lower level would not have access to that kind of information.

Who exactly do you think she was sharing this information back and forth with?

(07-06-2016 11:02 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  I think the investigation led by a republican should be accepted. End of story.

You know we do accept it right? We agree and have been saying all along she committed the crimes the investigation says she committed.

(07-06-2016 11:08 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  From what understand, the previous two SofS did the same thing without criminal charges so yes.

Then after all this time you still don't understand. You should be to embarrassed to keep admitting that.

Crimes she committed? What crimes has she been convicted of?

If you witnessed somebody murder your mother but they decide not to prosecute them for whatever reason would that sit well with you? Everything Comey laid out there is A FACT AND is illegal but for some reason they wont take her to task on it.

(07-06-2016 11:46 AM)Hood-rich Wrote:  If you witnessed somebody murder your mother but they decide not to prosecute them for whatever reason would that sit well with you? Everything Comey laid out there is A FACT AND is illegal but for some reason they wont take her to task on it.

Valid point, but that is not the question. Would someone like us be charged. IF the head of the FBI who is a Republican states, that no reasonable prosecutor would press charges. Why would that change for someone like you or me. What's funny is if it was your or me, it would not of gone this far. We would be fired and that would be the end of it, unless you profited off from it.