FBI recommends no charges against Mrs Clinton: let the accusations begin. Will this help or hurt HRC?

[laughing dog]

Today,

.Mr. Comey rebuked Mrs. Clinton as being “extremely careless” in using a personal email address and server for sensitive information, declaring that an ordinary government official could have faced administrative sanction for such conduct.

To warrant a criminal charge, Mr. Comey said, there had to be evidence that Mrs. Clinton intentionally sent or received classified information — something that the F.B.I. did not find. “Our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case,” he said at a news conference.

(source: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/06/us/politics/hillary-clinton-fbi-email-comey.html.

Of course, this will not stop the Hillary haters from their accusations of conspiracies or cover-ups or whatever, but do you think this ends up helping, hurting or doing nothing for Mrs. Clinton campaign for the POTUS?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Today,

.Mr. Comey rebuked Mrs. Clinton as being “extremely careless” in using a personal email address and server for sensitive information, declaring that an ordinary government official could have faced administrative sanction for such conduct.

To warrant a criminal charge, Mr. Comey said, there had to be evidence that Mrs. Clinton intentionally sent or received classified information — something that the F.B.I. did not find. “Our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case,” he said at a news conference.

(source: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/06/us/politics/hillary-clinton-fbi-email-comey.html.

Of course, this will not stop the Hillary haters from their accusations of conspiracies or cover-ups or whatever, but do you think this ends up helping, hurting or doing nothing for Mrs. Clinton campaign for the POTUS?

I think the email thing isn't on anyone's radar except the right-wing.

 

[none]

^^

 

[fromderinside]

Trump on Clinton FBI announcement: 'The system is rigged' http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/trump-fbi-investigation-clinton-225105

Says Petraeus charged for much less.

Really Donald? Petreaus knowingly mishandled classified material while none of Hillary's email was classified at the time of using in email. That's far less?

Petraeus pleads guilty to mishandling classified material, will face probation https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...6dbf20-e8f5-11e4-aae1-d642717d8afa_story.html

Donald sez what he thinks, er, Donald sez what he thinks without having a clue.

Do we need another foreign policy like that of Johnson or Bush in the WH?

HRC is helped not by no charges, but, by Trump accusations of rigged system. Takes the steam out of any leadership advantage he may have had.

 

[Derec]

Bill read Loretta the riot act and so Hillary is let off the hook. Even though FBI found over a hundred email chains that were classified at the time of sending (refuting Hillary's apologetics that they were only classified later), including some that were top secret. And setting up a homebrew server was definitely "intentional and willful". How could it be otherwise? How do you accidentally set up a server?
We really need an independent prosecutor to look into this case. David Patreus was prosecuted for less.

- - - Updated - - -

Of course, this will not stop the Hillary haters from their accusations of conspiracies or cover-ups or whatever, but do you think this ends up helping, hurting or doing nothing for Mrs. Clinton campaign for the POTUS?

It is obviously a cover-up. And no matter what Hillary's supproters do not care that she showed extremely poor judgment. I mean if she can't even handle email why should we trust her with the nuclear football?

 

[ksen]

Really Donald? Petreaus knowingly mishandled classified material while none of Hillary's email was classified at the time of using in email. That's far less?

I don't think that part is accurate.

 

[Derec]

Petreaus knowingly mishandled classified material

So did Hillary.

while none of Hillary's email was classified at the time of using in email. That's far less?

Yes they were. FBI clearly said that many emails that were classified at the time of sending were found on her server.
That refutes Hillary's chief defense.

Do we need another foreign policy like that of Johnson or Bush in the WH?

Clinton's foreign policy wasn't that stellar either. He failed to get Bin Laden and he took the side of Albanian Islamists in the Kosovo conflict.
Like Bill

so Hillary

HRC is helped not by no charges, but, by Trump accusations of rigged system. Takes the steam out of any leadership advantage he may have had.

When the head of DOJ takes marching orders from the husband of the person under investigation then the system is clearly rigged.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Bill read Loretta the riot act and so Hillary is let off the hook. Even though FBI found over a hundred email chains that were classified at the time of sending (refuting Hillary's apologetics that they were only classified later), including some that were top secret. And setting up a homebrew server was definitely "intentional and willful". How could it be otherwise? How do you accidentally set up a server?
We really need an independent prosecutor too look into this case. David Patreus was prosecuted for less.

And yet the W Admin went unprosecuted for Iraq.

- - - Updated - - -

Bill read Loretta the riot act and so Hillary is let off the hook. Even though FBI found over a hundred email chains that were classified at the time of sending (refuting Hillary's apologetics that they were only classified later), including some that were top secret. And setting up a homebrew server was definitely "intentional and willful". How could it be otherwise? How do you accidentally set up a server?
We really need an independent prosecutor to look into this case. David Patreus was prosecuted for less.

- - - Updated - - -

Of course, this will not stop the Hillary haters from their accusations of conspiracies or cover-ups or whatever, but do you think this ends up helping, hurting or doing nothing for Mrs. Clinton campaign for the POTUS?

It is obviously a cover-up. And no matter what Hillary's supproters do not care that she showed extremely poor judgment. I mean if she can't even handle email why should we trust her with the nuclear football?

Yes, because she'll just put the codes out there in the open. Seriously?

 

[Derec]

Yes, because she'll just put the codes out there in the open. Seriously?

Well she might mix them up with her yoga routines like she did with all these classified emails.

 

[fromderinside]

Bill read Loretta the riot act and so Hillary is let off the hook. Even though FBI found over a hundred email chains that were classified at the time of sending (refuting Hillary's apologetics that they were only classified later), including some that were top secret. And setting up a homebrew server was definitely "intentional and willful". How could it be otherwise? How do you accidentally set up a server?
We really need an independent prosecutor to look into this case. David Patreus was prosecuted for less.

So this, then in the same statement, is irrelevant?

In our system, the prosecutors make the decisions about whether charges are appropriate based on evidence the FBI has helped collect. Although we don’t normally make public our recommendations to the prosecutors, we frequently make recommendations and engage in productive conversations with prosecutors about what resolution may be appropriate, given the evidence. In this case, given the importance of the matter, I think unusual transparency is in order.

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.
In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here.

You just don''t use information accurately at all Derec.

 

[Ford]

Bill read Loretta the riot act and so Hillary is let off the hook.

Loretta was not the one investigating the matter. The FBI - headed by lifelong Republican and former Bush administration Deputy AG Comey - was the agency in charge of doing all the fact-finding. Comey did not recommend charges, as they could not find sufficient evidence of criminal wrongdoing.

You may now continue with your tantrum.

 

[fromderinside]

Really Donald? Petreaus knowingly mishandled classified material while none of Hillary's email was classified at the time of using in email. That's far less?

I don't think that part is accurate.

My reading of his statement suggests none of the data when she sent it was so marked at the time she sent it. He distinguishes classified by responsible authorities which often occurs after it is seen by top officials but before it is finalized as classified by the responsible agent.

So she may have played a bit fast and loose as the state Department seems to often do, but. she apparently acted within the existing culture.

 

[laughing dog]

Bill read Loretta the riot act and so Hillary is let off the hook.

You need to provide actual evidence that Mr. Clinton read Ms. Lynch "the riot act". Then you need to make a cogent argument as to why Ms. Lynch would listen or "obey" Mr. Clinton.

It is obviously a cover-up. And no matter what Hillary's supproters do not care that she showed extremely poor judgment. I mean if she can't even handle email why should we trust her with the nuclear football?

Because nuclear war is a completely different issue than privacy vs. transparency.

 

[Derec]

Loretta was not the one investigating the matter. The FBI - headed by lifelong Republican and former Bush administration Deputy AG Comey - was the agency in charge of doing all the fact-finding. Comey did not recommend charges, as they could not find sufficient evidence of criminal wrongdoing.

She is the cabinet level secretary in charge of FBi among others. That politics (and he tet-a-tete with Bill) did not influence the decision is a fairy tale. That's why we need a truly independent investigation into Hillary. I hear Ken Starr is available again.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Loretta was not the one investigating the matter. The FBI - headed by lifelong Republican and former Bush administration Deputy AG Comey - was the agency in charge of doing all the fact-finding. Comey did not recommend charges, as they could not find sufficient evidence of criminal wrongdoing.

She is the cabinet level secretary in charge of FBi among others. That politics (and he tet-a-tete with Bill) did not influence the decision is a fairy tale. That's why we need a truly independent investigation into Hillary. I hear Ken Starr is available again.

Okay, so the investigation was full force, going to charge Hillary Clinton until Bill Clinton met with the Attorney General, near the very end of the investigation?

 

[Derec]

You need to provide actual evidence that Mr. Clinton read Ms. Lynch "the riot act". Then you need to make a cogent argument as to why Ms. Lynch would listen or "obey" Mr. Clinton.

Do you really believe they were just talking about their grandchildren? If so I have some oceanfront property in Nebraska to sell you.

Because nuclear war is a completely different issue than privacy vs. transparency.

It's a bit of a hyperbole but only a little bit. The point is that if she is so careless with classified information, why should we give her the reins of the entire country?

 

[Ford]

That politics (and he tet-a-tete with Bill) did not influence the decision is a fairy tale.

Gosh Derec, I'm sure sorry you didn't get what you wanted, but you can't make things up and expect everyone else to believe them. The idea that former President Clinton could have a 30 minute convo with the current AG, who then went to the FBI director and told him to completely change his mind about the whole investigation is pure fantasy on your part.

You may now return to your little tantrum.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Today,
(source: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/06/us/politics/hillary-clinton-fbi-email-comey.html.

Of course, this will not stop the Hillary haters from their accusations of conspiracies or cover-ups or whatever, but do you think this ends up helping, hurting or doing nothing for Mrs. Clinton campaign for the POTUS?

I think the email thing isn't on anyone's radar except the right-wing.

Wellll..... My brother who is a rabid Berno bro was hoping she'd be indicted, drop out and Bernie would win the Democratic nomination by default. He's really PO'd she slipped the noose.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Do you really believe they were just talking about their grandchildren? If so I have some oceanfront property in Nebraska to sell you.

Because nuclear war is a completely different issue than privacy vs. transparency.

It's a bit of a hyperbole but only a little bit. The point is that if she is so careless with classified information, why should we give her the reins of the entire country?

Nothing can be a "little bit" of hyperbole.

She knew exactly what she was doing, there is no evidence that secrets were stolen, what she did wasn't out of context of previous Sec. of Defense (though outside the window of what the Obama Admin insisted on). Other Administrations have been guilty of far worse crimes than this and never were charged.

Get over it!

 

[laughing dog]

Do you really believe they were just talking about their grandchildren? If so I have some oceanfront property in Nebraska to sell you.

Translation - you have nothing but your tinfoil suspicions. More importantly, you have not presented a cogent argument as to why Ms. Lynch would obey Mr. Clinton's alleged demands. Nor have you presented evidence that Ms. Lynch or Bill Clinton have instructed or obstructed the FBI investigation or conclusions.

It's a bit of a hyperbole but only a little bit. The point is that if she is so careless with classified information, why should we give her the reins of the entire country?

"Classified information" describes a wide range of information. I have some personal knowledge of what constitutes "classified information". I once received a "classified" memo indicating that a previous memo was unclassified.
So without more information, I don't find that particular indiscretion bothersome.

I do think she showed poor judgment in using a personal email server for official business. And, I am not a big fan of Mrs. Clinton. But, at this point in time, given what I know about Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Trump, I would hold my nose and give the reins of this country to Mrs. Clinton.