•
•

FBI Directer Comey announcement re:Clinton emails Megathread (self.politics)

lotrouble[M] が 投稿

並べ替え:
新着 (提案されたアイデア)
ベストトップ論争中古い順Q&A
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]LarsThorwald [スコア非表示]  (19子コメント)

The problem I am seeing in this thread is that there is a group of people who think she broke the law, and when the FBI Director (a lifelong Republican and former Deputy Attorney General under Ashcroft) says she didn't break the law, those people -- who aren't lawyers -- think the law is being corrupted. This is why I let doctors assess my health, not people on the internet who think they are doctors or know medicine.

[–]_unclejimmy_ [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Are you trying to talk sense into this subreddit? Good Luck.

[–]itag67 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Go ahead then and vote for the person who handles classified information with utter disregard for the security of the United States. She didn't do it intentionally after all. Maybe she'll start a needless war or incite Putin to attack the US. It's cool, though, because the FBI wouldn't indict her for it.

[–]cozye [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

He did say she broke the law. He said that he wouldn't recommend charges. The two are not mutually exclusive.

At this point, it'is undisputed whether or not she broke the law.

" To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now. "

"No individual should be too big to jail." - H

[–]daywalkin_ginge [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I'm rather angry that she wasn't indicted. It's not for any political reason in particular... I just can't honestly believe that if this was any regular person, they'd not be headed to trial.

I agree that if the FBI Director says that no law was broken, or if not enough clear evidence is present, that a person shouldn't be taken to trial. ...this case just seems...odd that neither of the two scenarios above isn't true to some extent. Being extremely careless should have its own set of repercussions, to an extent.

[–]cccp_redr4bbit [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

He said there was evidence of potential violations. So there's that.

[–]Sauronsballs [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

He literally said that she broke the law, but that they weren't going to recommend charges because it's fucking well Hillary Clinton.

[–]druuconian [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

But these people assured me that they were doctors! And as we all know, anonymous people on reddit cannot tell a lie.

[–]ImRickStevesBitch [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Then the judge who gave the swimmer rapist guy 3 months was right? Is that your opinion?

EDIT: I'm guessing your opinion is "experts are right when they agree with me."

[–]RazgrizInfinity [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

With all due respect, OUI/DUI/DWI, manslaughter, hit-and-run, and other 'I didnt mean to's say otherwise about breaking the law.

[–]Hootinger [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

He did say the law was broken, just that she didnt have intent. I think you can see why there are issues here. She broke the law but setting up a private server and sending classified info over it. This from both the FBI director and State Dept IG. I dont know how you intentionally do that (setting up the server, clicking send) but then it isnt intent when the FBI director talks about it. You can see that clearly politics might be involved.

[–]netsuad [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

The difference is doctors aren't controlled by the wealthy who "donate" to things like the Clinton Foundation

[–]WhySoJovial [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Proof doesn't matter these days, apparently. You don't need proof to put Clinton behind bars, nor to accuse people in government of being bought and paid for.

We used to be proud of our system which required proof. Now, it's trials in the streets and the mobs demand their due.

[–]tron3030 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

And the Director of the FBI is?

[–]noahcallaway-wa [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

You really think Comey — James Comey — has been bought by the Clintons?

Really?

[–]none31415 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.