United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: FBI recommends no charges against Clinton in email probe
Source:
Politico
URL Source: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/ ... -clinton-in-email-probe-225102
Published: Jul 5, 2016
Author: Staff
Post Date: 2016-07-05 11:24:44 by redleghunter
Keywords: None
Views: 4886
Comments: 42
FBI Director James Comey announced that an investigation has uncovered that while Hillary Clinton “used several different” email servers and numerous devices during her time as secretary of state, the agency is not recommending the Justice Department bring charges against Clinton. “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 deciding whether to bring charges,” Comey said. Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/fbi-recommends-no-charges-against-clinton-in-email-probe-225102#ixzz4DY3MXmnE Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook Poster Comment: The fix is in.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 42.
#11. To: redleghunter (#0)
Well, Comey hardly had good words for her calling her actions as extremely careless. I can't see why that doesn't rate being grossly negligent which rates a criminal action. I'm sure the overall message will be, it's over, let's just move on.
I'm sure the overall message will be, it's over, let's just move on. When I was active duty as a commissioned officer and if I violated security protocols for compartmentalized TS information, I would be in Leavenworth right now. It would not matter if I was 'sloppy' or 'did not know', I would be gone to the big house in Kansas. I had a fellow LTC who served with me. He accidentally sent SECRET NOFORN (no foreign disclosure) to an allied section in Afghanistan. He realized his error, went to the allied fax in time to receive the data, purged the fax cache on both sides but still was officially reprimanded in writing; security clearance revoked; sent back home to the States in disgrace and issued a relief for cause evaluation report. They let him retire, but he will never get that clearance back and his job opportunities limited. That is what happened to an officer with a stellar record, over 25 years in the Army who indeed made a mistake which investigators said did not compromise the NOFORN information. CID even opened an espionage investigation (he was cleared of that) as STANDARD procedure given the nature of the information involved and who was at the receiving end. None of the above even a recommendation for Hitlery. At the MINIMUM she should have her security clearance revoked and not reissued. She has demonstrated she cannot safeguard classified information and should never be in a position handling highly sensitive information ever again.
Yes, I was an officer in the AF once upon a time, and worked on a secure base in a secure building, and just leaving a "confidential" (not secret or top secret) document on a table for a few minutes in that very secure environment was a severe issue. And you have Hillary sending top secret information over a private unauthorized email server with no safeguards, and the reaction is "nothing to see here folks; move along."
There is a 'valid' explanation only the power elite understand:
That's pretty good ... The facial expression is so fitting. Good job ...
On another site we have a .gov shrill telling other posters that in fact our elected power elite are above the law they are just fine with that. Here is one exchange and my response: From dgiharris Hmm mm good point. Okay, how about this line of attack. The criteria to be president as defined by the Constitution entails getting votes. Your credit history, high school gpa, physical fitness level and ability to "normally" qualify for a security clearance are irrelevant as far as the actual Constitutional requirements are concerned. The people voting will know all that stuff and if they choose you despite that baggage than that choice overrides other qualifiers that would be in effect for typical jobs. dgiharris, Today at 12:45 AM My response: Of course Central Clearance overlooks a lot for politicians when it comes to personal indiscretions. If they did not Bush (drunk driving) and Obama (undisclosed foreign travel) would not get a security clearance without a waiver. That is not the point and your approach is missing the point. Neither Bush nor Obama demonstrated prior to their swearing in that they were incompetent managers of the nation's highest secrets. Comey's comments yesterday read like a relief for cause evaluation report. Comey made it clear that from the FBI's perspective they would not prosecute, however he made it clear Hillary Clinton, her staff and most of the Dept of State were incompetent. I guess Hillary can go on the campaign trail now and say "officially I'm not a crook, just incompetent." Guess she is good to go as that NOW seems to be a requirement for higher office in our government within the Beltway. redleghunter You all should view some of the comments over at this thread Christian Forums liberal comments
That is the correct takeaway, incompetency. It is the weapon that Comey handed the anti-clintonistas already locked and loaded. Some indignation must be shown towards Comey so it will not appear that his lack of action is approved and accepted. But a frontal attack on Comey should not take place, take the loaded weapon Comey provided and use it against Hillary….fire for effect. Attack over and over and over….keep firing at the incompetency. I posted a similar message to Stone here.
Agree
There are no replies to Comment # 42. End Trace Mode for Comment # 42.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#17. To: no gnu taxes, tomder55, nolu chan (#11)
Well, Comey hardly had good words for her calling her actions as extremely careless. I can't see why that doesn't rate being grossly negligent which rates a criminal action.
#21. To: redleghunter (#17)
#24. To: no gnu taxes (#21)
And you have Hillary sending top secret information over a private unauthorized email server with no safeguards, and the reaction is "nothing to see here folks; move along."
#25. To: redleghunter (#24)
#38. To: Gatlin, tomder55, SOSO, GarySpFc, liberator (#25)
#41. To: redleghunter, tomder55, SOSO, GarySpFc, liberator (#38)
Comey's comments yesterday read like a relief for cause evaluation report. Comey made it clear that from the FBI's perspective they would not prosecute, however he made it clear Hillary Clinton, her staff and most of the Dept of State were incompetent.
#42. To: Gatlin (#41)
Replies to Comment # 42.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]