FBI Director Comey says agency won’t recommend charges over Clinton email

originally posted by: Aazadan
Conveniently, this happens 40 hours before polls open, at the point where there's just not enough time to get the word out.

Yeah, right. Because no one watches or reads the news the day before and the day of the election.

*heavy snark*

originally posted by: kaylaluv
There's no such thing as a common interest with a country this diverse.

At one point in our history, voters actually voted on what was best for the country, not the individual. THAT was the binding common interest in our country.

The problem we have with modern times (and I'm talking the last 100 years or so) is that there's such a permeating apathy that has infected the American voter that I'm concerned that we'll never get that back. Politicians at the federal level have done such an effective job (Ds and Rs) at making citizens think that the government has all the answers for them that we have failed to use critical thinking skills for many, many election cycles, instead only worried about the false promises made or the ideology that we have latched onto, usually just for a handful of reasons that generally only affect the few.

So, no, I think that we have many common interests in this diverse country of ours, the problem is that the federal government needs to remember (or be reminded of) its place in the running of our nation. The Tenth Amendment is effectively obsolete anymore, so where diversity used to be a positive thing because states and cities were able to have some sort of semblance of a unique culture created by its diversity (New Orleans comes to mind), we now have an enormous federal government focused on making everyone think and act exactly the same.

Our country has lost its true diversity, and all that we have left is our freedom of thought--hence the stranglehold that many people place on their ideological beliefs. But, there is common ground in this nation--a lot of it, actually--we just can't see it through the forest of hyperbole that accompanies political ideology.

a reply to: Painterz

It may bother the DOJ, since the Hatch Act prohibits such actions.

BUT, if he didn't renew an investigation because it was right before the election--assuming the investigation is warranted--then that is also an action that could directly affect an election, albeit through an inaction (and it's his job to investigate these things, so he wouldn't be doing his job because of an election).

This is a catch-22 for Comey, and I think that he may find himself being the center of a different investigation because of this action, even though I think that it was the right call to make.

a reply to: Xcathdra

You know what still has me scratching my head?

If Hillary never did anything illegal, then why did *so* many of her staff take the 5th amendment before testifying before FBI or Congress?

I mean, if there was never anything illegal then they couldn't possible have incriminated themselves, right?

What's up with that?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Tempter

You can stop right there.

No, you can't.
You have to prove that she intended to transmit classified information to an unauthorized person.

when she asked her maid to print out her classified e-mails, um....that doesn't count right?
I can see how you could do that without intent.

originally posted by: Riffrafter
You know what still has me scratching my head?

Lice?

originally posted by: Riffrafter
If Hillary never did anything illegal, then why did *so* many of her staff take the 5th amendment before testifying before FBI or Congress?

A second question - If Clinton did nothing wrong then why did so many Democrats attack Comey? I think the correct term is "The lady doth protests to much".

originally posted by: Riffrafter
I mean, if there was never anything illegal then they couldn't possible have incriminated themselves, right?

Correct

originally posted by: Riffrafter
What's up with that?

A corrupt political system that thinks they dont answer to the people.

originally posted by: BlueAjah
Actually, Comey only said:
"we have not changed our conclusions expressed in July.”

He never said she was innocent, quite the opposite.
He only said that no prosecutor was going to prosecute.
And from what we know of the DOJ, that's certainly true.

He did not say she was innocent this time either.

Important distinctions. Other than reaffirming what was already said, in case some people on Main street didn't hear it the first time. Repetitive blamelessness, juuust b4 the (s)election.

originally posted by: Phage
No, you can't.
You have to prove that she intended to transmit classified information to an unauthorized person.

originally posted by: network dude
when she asked her maid to print out her classified e-mails, um....that doesn't count right?
I can see how you could do that without intent.

They dont have to prove intent. Intent is not an element of the statute. Gross negligence is and it spells out what mishandling classified info is and Clinton met that definition to a T.

a reply to: network dude

Sending classified emails to your daughter is ethical and legal?

originally posted by: Crumbles
a reply to: network dude

Sending classified emails to your daughter is ethical and legal?

If your last name is Clinton it is...

a reply to: Riffrafter

Or why was it necessary to grant 6 people immunity?

I mean, they don't grant immunity from innocence, do they?

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: Riffrafter

Or why was it necessary to grant 6 people immunity?

I mean, they don't grant immunity from innocence, do they?

...and everyone around Clinton pleading the 5th, lol. America is just another banana republic.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: Riffrafter

Or why was it necessary to grant 6 people immunity?

I mean, they don't grant immunity from innocence, do they?

...and everyone around Clinton pleading the 5th, lol. America is just another banana republic.

Sadly, it's starting to look that way.

The American people get to weigh in tomorrow to determine just what kind of nation we are. Reminds me of this quote I saw posted in another thread from an old statesman:

"There are four boxes to use in the defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order."

-Ed Howdershelt

a reply to: Xcathdra

Lice?

Really?

I'll assume you're a little tired and the "joke" just fell flat.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Tempter

You can stop right there.

No, you can't.
You have to prove that she intended to transmit classified information to an unauthorized person.

when she asked her maid to print out her classified e-mails, um....that doesn't count right?
I can see how you could do that without intent.

I think sarcasm without the *sarcasm* notifier may be lost on many this late in the process.

I'm still with you amigo...hang in there.

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: Riffrafter

Or why was it necessary to grant 6 people immunity?

I mean, they don't grant immunity from innocence, do they?

Well, apparently they do.

Up is down, black is white, etc.

Amazing times...

a reply to: Xcathdra

And another thing. How in the mf did they go thru 650k emails in less than a week?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: flice

Why the hell would Huma and Weiner keep a computer with "personal" mails... omg.

You don't have personal emails on your home computer?

No. Mail is generally stored on a mail server and served via web browser. Even when people have their own mail server and use clients to download and view files offline, the clients are usually setup to only store a set amount of mail locally. Generally 30 days. 650K email, compressed, and labeled "insurance file" is something completely different.

originally posted by: Crumbles
a reply to: network dude

Sending classified emails to your daughter is ethical and legal?

LOL, it depends on your "station".


I don't think you know whom it is we are discussing here. Wipe your feet on the way out.

a reply to: Xcathdra

You have proof of that do you?


No it's just one of those things that everybody knows huh?