•
•

Live Now - Mega ThreadFBI Press Conference Mega Thread (self.SandersForPresident)

SandersMod_Saruman が 投稿 - announcement

Live Stream

Please keep all related discussion here.

Yes, this is about the damned e-mails.

上位 200 件のコメント表示する 500
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

[–]Vermonty_PythonFrodo Baggins[M] [スコア非表示] stickied comment (52子コメント)

James Comey and the FBI have recommended that no criminal charges be brought against Secretary Clinton with respect to the handling of her private email server. This does not necessarily mean that the Department of Justice will follow their recommendation.

Comey also stated that there was a lot of carelessness involved, and that 110 classified emails were in fact sent from her private server at the time. But in spite of this carelessness and policy-breaking conduct, they still don't believe that a reasonable prosecutor would place charges against Clinton.

I'd like to note that I personally think James Comey and the FBI did everything by the book, and we should accept this from a legal standpoint. He is a consummate professional, and had zero reason to go easy on Clinton. He isn't the bad guy. Please don't act like he is the bad guy. He did his job and he did it well. I'd like to also note that this is my own stupid, personal opinion. According to some of you, it's apparently necessary for me to say that because I'm not allowed to have my own opinion and share it with you, or something.

That does not mean that her political reputation should be forgiven. There was massive negligence and arrogance and stupidity involved, but she did not commit enough wrongdoing for a reasonable charge to be brought against her.

Me personally? I don't want to put someone as careless as her in the White House.

EDIT: Sanders camp has said that FBI decision today does not affect decision to stay in the race. That means we need to KEEP FIGHTING, and ensure that we win as many platform victories as possible between now and the convention.

Sign the Petition. Tell the DNC Platform Committee that we do not want pro-TPP language in the Democratic Platform. And be sure to join the campaign's OFFICIAL social media push at Noon Eastern to spread the word!

[–]MaggieMags10 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

The only thing Clinton has every been a trailblazer or leader in is creating new ways for politicians to beat the system. I'm sure she and her staff are proud today of the new precedent they've established for future leaders of this once great country of the USA. I will be sickened to the core the next time I see Warren or Obama campaigning for her. I know this is cliche, but how can they live with themselves!!!!

[–]Klj126 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

I thought they were also investigating the clinton foundation?

[–]ShkeebsOhio - Bernie Squad - Lance Corporal [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

This is just so fucked. And the cycle continues...

[–]AbIeck [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I support their decision. They took their time and did it by the book.

[–]Lvl32Ranger [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Comey said exactly what he needed to help Trump get elected.

Recommending indictment could have led to a Bernie presidency.

Shredding Clinton but coming up short of recommending indictment lets her skirt by the convention but limp into the General.

[–]BillsFan90 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

So be it. Trump has my vote because we need to clear house in DC. I've never had greater disdain for a woman in my life then Clinton. You and I would have been put away no questions asked. 3 clear criminal violations

[–]SocksElGato [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Don't forget, if this was you or me, they would have thrown the book in your face so hard it would have pushed you into your jail cell.

[–]tomatosoup987 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Beginning of speech: "Extreme negligence with classified information is a violation of federal law."

End of speech: "Clinton and her staff were extremely careless with classified information. But no reasonable prosecutor would press charges in this case."

I mean, come on.

[–]Bernie_Triangle [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Indeed! I was watching the stream and until the halfway I said to my friend that she is going to get indicted. I mean, big part of the speech could not have been more gloomy.

[–]mengohmengohmeng [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

"They deleted all e-mails not produced to state, and the lawyers then cleaned their devices in such a way as to preclude complete forensic recovery."

How are Clinton's lawyers not responsible for obstruction of justice and federal investigation?

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

I just hope the people at Wikileaks got a hold of them.

[–]HereForTheJedi [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

I would not be surprised if her unfavorability ratings dip below Trump's after this, and I wouldn't be surprised if he starts to catch or pass her in the polls. MSM isn't spinning this like I thought, basically all their talking about is how this proved she's been lying the whole time.

[–]SisterRayVU [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Wanna bet $10 to a charity that Trump doesn't beat her?

[–]BillsFan90 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

If the people still have a say (the vote counts) Trump will beat her. When wikileaks publishes the proof she should have been indicted after she's confirmed the nominee at the convention, her charade will all be over. The DNC and RNC both take massive hits and we start fresh with an imperfect candidate but one who we know sides with the people.

[–]HereForTheJedi [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Totally. Which charity do you want to chose?

[–]spooed [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

If they think this will stop me from farting at the convention, they are sorely mistaken.

[–]libbyfinch [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

So the AG said she would go with whatever the Feds say and also Hillary said she would keep Loretta as the AG. Seems like that meeting wasn't about grandchildren after all.

[–]_XSC_ [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Well I'm surprised but this is the status quo I assume.

She's gonna get caught lacking at some point during her presidency if she is elected. She'll get grilled and she'll gain scrutiny against her unless her first term as president there is enough social change that people begin to give her passes. What is the number for her unfavorables? I just refuse to believe she is going to be a good president, I feel like we'll get into another war under her wing.

All I know is that I did my best, I voted for the candidate that shared my same world views and I did everything within my power to vote for the person that I thought the American People would prosper under.

[–]ShkeebsOhio - Bernie Squad - Lance Corporal [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

I'm shocked. I have no words

[–]HereForTheJedi [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I would be less shocked if they just came out and said, "We do not recommend that the AG prosecute Hillary Clinton." The fact that everything he said leading up to saying they do not recommend prosecution basically sounded like they would recommend prosecution/proved she did everything and worse that we thought and that she's been blatantly lying this whole time is what has me completely amazed by this whole thing.

[–]rehi3 [スコア非表示]  (7子コメント)

Can you sue the government?!

[–]Zanctmao [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Yes anyone can sue for anything. But to what end?

Taxpayer standing doesn't exist, so you'd have to prove that you have been personally damaged. Further, the decision to prosecute is discretionary, so you'd have to prove abuse of discretion, which is a really, really high bar.

Basically you can sue, but you'd be tossed out on your ear before the first hearing.

[–]-mattybatty- [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Nope! Unless the government allows itself to be sued. It is called sovereign immunity. link

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

Actually you can sue the government, but they make it so you lose every time.

[–]teamfranken91 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Yes, but only because it lets you.

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

Yes, but you'll lose.

[–]forbernie2016 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

probably. Can you sue a democratic nominee?

[–]SisterRayVU [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

You need a specific injury. You don't have one.

[–]NeilPoonHandler [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Welp, that's disappointing. Not surprising, though.

[–]xx_rudyh_xx [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

welp, can't say I'm surprised.

fuk

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

FBI states that Hillary acted very carelessly and recklessly in regards to how she handled classified information.

that statement may have just won Trump the presidency.

PLEASE RUN THIRD PARTY BERNIE!!!!!!

[–]fpsdende [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Rigged System

[–]eking85Florida [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

FBI told Hillary to cut it out or else next time they'll punish her

[–]rehi3 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I have never felt so disenfranchaised in my whole life. I feel like all and my rights as a citizen were violated and I was the one blamed for it.

[–]FunnelVortexWisconsin [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

We now need to all vote for Berniecrats down ticket to soften the blows Clinton will inflict upon us.

[–]6ThePrisoner [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Do you think she's going to win after this? The attacks are far too easy against her.

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

I guess I am in denial, but sadly it now seems like Trump is going to win the election.

Sigh, what happened to this country?

[–]Facts_About_Cats [スコア非表示]  (11子コメント)

I think this is the key sentence:

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.

Is there a term for this, like "prosecutorial precedent"?

[–]Maniak_France [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

The term you're looking for is "bullshit".

He started by reminding everyone that the FBI is not making the final call, just a recommendation, and then he said that they decided to recommend doing nothing because they didn't expect the DoJ to charge Clinton.

How's that for second guessing?

It's not their place to make the final decision, as he said, but they made their recommendation based on what they expect this outside decision to be, rather than based on the evidence he laid out during the previous 15 minutes?

Yeah.

Bullshit.

[–]bluefishredfish89 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

I think it's just precedent, e.g. "there is no precedent for a charge based on this type of evidence."

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

That's not what precedent usually means, which is stare decisis.

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

Sort of ... you have to go by what judges have determined as a matter of law in previous similar cases in your estimation of whether or not you have probably cause to bring a case. If there had been previous cases where a judge held that a certain behavior did not meet the statutory definition of the crime, you would not bring a case. The prosecutor makes the decision on whether or not to bring a case based on these types of determinations, as do the police (or FBI).

[–]JohnhavenMaine [スコア非表示]  (6子コメント)

Here is the thing though to the Clinton supporters, they just said that they are recommending that she NOT be charged. Okay. But that she definitely did commit multiple felonies she just didn't "mean to". Okay. I get that too. However, here is what that leads to - That just means that this prosecutor won't prosecute. The concept of Double Jeopardy only applies if you are prosecuted and win so this will be followed by an official Presidential pardon to ensure that a potentially angry future Republican administration can't then come along and prosecute those charges. When was the last time someone ran for President that had previously been pardoned by POTUS for potential felony charges? The last time that is even close is LBJ pardoning Nixon.

[–]toomuchtodotodayFlorida [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Wouldn't files need to be charged for the pardon? Therefore, for her pardon to be bulletproof, she'd need the very charges filed that would ruin her chances for nomination.

[–]JohnhavenMaine [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

No. The FBI is saying there is plenty of evidence to bring charges but under the circumstances they do not believe this to be a criminal thing so they don't recommend them. That's cool. The NEXT administration could totally feel different about that so you have to either bring the charges and be vindicated OR be pardoned by the only authority that could be higher than this which is Obama before he leaves (or also, oddly, herself if she won.)

[–]WattstickMichigan [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

You need new evidence that "blows the whole thing open" Sounds like Comey was saying they did a very thorough investigation and there was nothing there that could provide probable cause that a crime was committed.

[–]JohnhavenMaine [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

No not at all. He says that there is ample evidence to bring charges but they will not recommend that they do so because it isn't criminal in nature. You don't need new evidence to change your mind on this later. Double Jeopardy doesn't apply here and since charges aren't being brought there isn't any kind of protection for Clinton. There could possibly be a statue of limitations that they could just wait out but with a potential Republican administration that could be claim that this was politically motivated and decide to bring charges that weren't before and be able to do so in only six months from now, she would need a presidential pardon for protection.

[–]Facts_About_Cats [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

so this will be followed by an official Presidential pardon to ensure that a potentially angry future Republican administration can't then come along and prosecute those charges

That's fucking interesting, man.

[–]JohnhavenMaine [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Yeah I'm trying to look up the OFFICIAL statutes that the FBI is going to say that she violated and what the limitations are on those. If they fall under federal laws dealing with treason I don't think there will be a statute of limitations so she will NEED a pardon because even if she wins and serves two terms, the next administration could still bring the charges and she can't pardon herself.

Edit: actually, scratch that. A president CAN pardon themselves except for impeachment so she could just hold back. Either she loses and Obama pardon's herself or she wins and pardon's herself when she's done serving.

[–]HellenKellerSwag [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

How is it legal to do this but if you work for the Department of Defense you'll go to jail? It seems like arbitrary standards we are allowing for the safe keep of all government information.

[–]thatobviouswall [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Are you referring to General p Petraeus?

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

I thought of him as an example but you have to sign a contract saying you can't use any external devices with their computers let alone create an unissued or sanctioned server that has zero security.

[–]Harvickfan4Life [スコア非表示]  (13子コメント)

This really just shows the Clinton's really are above the law. Disgraceful

[–]Nate_W [スコア非表示]  (12子コメント)

Or that all along, the people who pretended to know something about the FBI investigation and knew she was guilty were just... wrong.

I'm not sure why you would take reddit's word about whether she broke the law over the FBI director who spent a year investigating's word.

[–]sammysfw [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

He conceded that she broke the law, but he declined to prosecute. It's not like this hasn't happened before...

[–]Nate_W [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

He conceded that she broke the law

No he didn't. The closest he comes to saying that is:

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

That's conceding there is evidence of breaking the law but also not enough evidence that any case would ever be brought much less that she would be found guilty based on that evidence.

It would be like in Donald Trump's rape of a 13 year old case where there is obviously evidence of his being guilty, but no one actually expects him to be convicted.

[–]SisterRayVU [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

The FBI doesn't prosecute. You're really just proving the point that people on reddit don't know what they're talking about.

[–]grammercali [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Comey's conduct in the John Ashcroft incident was the the height of integrity, sad that people will now impugn his integrity because they didn't get their way.

[–]DJ2x [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

I hold in higher regards the future of our people than the integrity of one man.

[–]ifitdontfit [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

He specifically said she was guilty, but it wasn't a case that could be prosecuted.

[–]Nate_W [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

No. He didn't.

At least not guilty of crimes. Maybe you are using the words differently than most people.

[–]DJ2x [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Comey stated several times that she violated laws, but then went on to recommend no charges on the basis of 'no ill intent'.

[–]Nate_W [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

No. He didn't. The closest he comes is saying:

"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"

Saying there is evidence of and saying there is guilt are two different things. Saying that there is "no reasonable prosecutor" who would bring a case is saying more about guilt than the first part.

[–]AlkezoCalifornia [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2071

Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.

Its not hard. Those emails she deemed private were still under her government email account and thus public records.

[–]Nate_W [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

And yet, people who actually understand the law and how it is applied don't think she broke the law here.

Its not hard.

The director of the FBI disagrees with you and specifically says he thinks no reasonable prosecutor would bring charges. So if you think it's obviously in the other direction, you're probably wrong.

[–]snowplusbrdIllinois - Bernie Squad - Private First Class [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Me for the last 30 minutes

[–]ScrupulousVoter2 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Why did she do it?

This is the one thing I wish Comey had highlighted - she didn't do this to leak information to Russia (or Wikileaks or ... ) but to DELIBERATELY avoid Freedom of Information Act laws. In other words, while she was fine with foreign actors knowing her business, she wanted to hide it from the American public.

She was up to sketchy business - most likely coordinating political activity, helping friends and future campaign donors, giving the Clinton Foundation a leg up - and wanted to hide it.

You heard Comey mention that records that we required to be retained were destroyed either through incompetence or in a way that intent would be hard to prove. While deleting government records is an actionable offense, as Comey noted, it wasn't one to be prosecuted via criminal statute.

He also inferred that while those emails might have contained evidence of criminal acts that a more serious charge - like obstruction of justice - without clear evidence there was, again, nothing to prosecute.

So, while Clinton, her staff and the State Department, in general, were negligent ("extremely careless") and reckless, her lawyers and aides were quite competent in obscuring intent and deleting evidence.

Ironic that today is the 50th anniversary of FOIA.

[–]urkspleen [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

In a same country, this should be enough to end a campaign. The big issue here is not the recommendedation...I'm not a legal expert, I trust that if the FBI had a case they would push. The big issue is that what Clinton did was so dumb that she should be nowhere near responsibility, but the voters don't seem to care. We need better voters.

[–]SocksElGato [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

We need informed voters that give a shit. If she thinks she's going to win the backing from Bernie supporters after this decision, she's sorely mistaken.

[–]Gilbygil11 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

What the fuck?!? The director actually uses the phrase "extreamly careless" in her handling of the emails. That is the god damn standard. Fuck this Banana Republic of a government we have.

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

Banana Republic

we're a politically unstable country depending on one main export?

[–]bernietaughtme [スコア非表示]  (9子コメント)

I don't know about y'all but I'm feeling extremely betrayed by Obama.

[–]mxjxs91Michigan [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

It took until now for you?

[–]bernietaughtme [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Yea, part of me thought this was just a shenanigan to look good. Thought he'd said Something really nice to Bernie that day in the garden. Really had a different vision.

[–]kitemasaki [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Amen.

Seriously, US citizens are a joke. There is no follow-up on policy and platform promises made during an election. Obama has failed almost every single one.

[–]dnivi3Norway [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

Why? Feel betrayed by Comey, not Obama.

[–]bernietaughtme [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

Betrayed of course by Comey but Obama for just watching this go down and go as far as to campaign for the candidate supposedly least like him. Wasn't he all about the same sorts of things Bernie was for? That was back when we didn't pay attention to the corruption of donor money and election fraud

[–]Fenris_uy [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

Bernie is not the candidate, why would Obama campaign for him right now?

Obama stayed neutral during the primary, and after the primary was resolved, he started campaigning for the presumptive Democrat nominee.

[–]bernietaughtme [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Clinton is not the candidate either. Why would he campaign for her? Edit: is it so wrong to take a stand outside of the Wall Street interests? Why is integrity and morality so frowned upon? He could've endorsed Bernie based on Bernie's progressive platform & the fact that he polls so highly against Trump

[–]Fenris_uy [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Clinton is the presumptive nominee, she got the most pledged delegates. So in tradition, the Democratic party treats that person as their candidate. Because if they wait until after the convention, they lose a couple of months of campaign time.

He could not endorse anyone during the primary, a Democrat president is the supposed leader of the Democratic party. He might like Bernie more than Clinton. But he is a politician first, and it's in his best interest to keep his party in power.

[–]bernietaughtme [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I do not believe she got the most pledged delegates in a democratic manner and that disturbs me greatly

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

What the fuck?

[–]Acpt7567California [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

I wonder if people will start to come for Comey's head and force a resignation?

[–]BRFan [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

lol WWBD

[–]Acpt7567California [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

He pissed off the left and right with this, I wouldn't be surprised.

[–]BRFan [スコア非表示]  (12子コメント)

This is infuriating because it feels like someone of lower socioeconomic standing would face charges and a harder life for much less.

[–]KatanaPigNew York [スコア非表示]  (11子コメント)

He basically did say that.

"To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences."

[–]Fenris_uy [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

This is what he said

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.

She is not in the SoS so they can't fire her. At most they can revoke her security clearance is she still has one, but she will get one right back if she gets elected.

[–]KatanaPigNew York [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

Correct. The point still stands, however.

[–]Fenris_uy [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

No, he said that another person would also not face charges.

[–]KatanaPigNew York [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Except he didn't.

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.

If we want to be very specific and stick strictly to his wording, that isn't what he said.

[–]Fenris_uy [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

He didn't said that they get charged, so how do conclude that the often means that there are times were charges are filled?. It could be that sometimes, they don't even get sanctions.

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

Well I guess that depends on the interpretation, which we clearly agree on. Hopefully he, or someone else with similar background, can clarify that for us.

[–]BRFan [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Wow so basically they don't want to say they don't have the authority to prosecute someone who did what she did, but she is above the law...

[–]psychologystTennessee [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

I thought he was referring to someone still employed by the State Department since those are administrative consequences.

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

It's really up to him to clarify if he chooses. What this looks like to me is not that he was bought, but that he was heavily pressured into not recommending an indictment. He basically laid out every law and rule that was broken and told us that because of who she is she isn't facing consequences. In the event he was under pressure, this is the best he can do to stay true to what he personally actually believes.

Again, it's up to him to clarify, but this is just my personal read on it.

[–]kiramis [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Bernie please run on the Green Party ticket.

[–]Facts_About_Cats [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

One conclusion from this is that you can commit perjury (lie to Congress and the FBI) and you won't be prosecuted for that as long as the prosecutors will probably not prosecute you.

You won't be prosecuted for technically breaking laws as long as the prosecutors will probably not prosecute you. It's kind of circular.

[–]FlyingRock [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

So... You have to be filthy rich?

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

Reading over Comey's statement more carefully, I think this is the key sentence:

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.

Is there a term for this, like "prosecutorial precedent"?

[–]AndyKLives [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

I've never been this ashamed of my country in my entire life. It's like an episode of the twilight zone where everyone finds out the clintons have gained control of the entire government and are going to run a ring of crime and corruption using the system they created to avoid any possible legal repurcussions while likely pursuing their political enemies by using the same rigged system. They want us to vote for the lesser of two evils, but Trump is starting to look like he's the one. Too bad he's also in on it.

[–]gravybabies [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Im with you 100% except I really don't think Trump is in on it. Supposedly he really believes they are despicable scum. He didn't steal an election (he is probably the first genuinely elected nominee in a loooong time). We are in the twilight zone. We have been brainwashed by our government for many many years.The Clintons were just so reckless, in a time that communication is bountiful, that they have opened many eyes and, its up to us, but hopefully the start of the unraveling of the establishment empire.

[–]2000elisabeth [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

So was there any mention / confirmation of the other FBI investigation re: Clinton Foundation? It's the last straw, I know, but I just can't believe nothing will come of the e-mails, which seemed such a clear-cut case but it turns out, if your name is Clinton you can just store your top secret files in your own basement!

[–]BerningBrightly [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

for anyone who thought this was going to go differently you haven't been paying attention the last year of american politics

[–]BOX_OF_CATS [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I think we all knew it would turn out like this but it's still disappointing to see it all play out.

[–]FlyingRock [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Not just politics, I knew without a doubt nothing would happen the moment a 1% elite got caught raping a girl and faced little to no consequences by the law.

[–]Nate_W [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Are you talking about Donald Trump's rape case? That should probably be ignored for now unless something more comes of it, just like no one should have assumed Clinton was going to be prosecuted before now.

[–]IVDV [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."

Just because Hillary can, don't think you can!

[–]Acpt7567California [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Two tier justice system at work people, isn't it beautiful... He actually said in his speech if someone else had done what she did they would have received charges.... Land of the free huh.....

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

That's the exact fucking opposite of what he said, actually.

What Comey said was basically "Just because what you did wasn't illegal doesn't mean your boss can't discipline you for it. But we're the police, not your boss, so that's not what we do."

[–]writingtossTom Bombadil[M] [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Well, there it is.

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

Hillary Clinton was extremely careless with the safety of our country, but overly cautious to protect herself; extremely guarded with her paid speeches, used burn bags for schedules, noise distortion machines for her speeches to wealthy donors. No problem being overly cautious there.

[–]farfiman [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

EVERYTHING is corupt to the core.

[–]SocksElGato [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

There was carelessness involved in Clinton's part. That alone should speak for itself. They didn't want to cause commotion before the election if there was an indictment, but I almost guarantee that this will not go away easily after the election dust settles.

[–]kitemasaki [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Agree. Now that psychopath Trump has even more fodder to make him seem 'reasonable' as a choice. This is what we have come to as a nation, a racist xenophobic pathological liar is considered a toss up vote against a DNC nominee.

This does not bode well for our nation.

[–]sciencegood4u [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

Just enough to damage her in the general election, but not enough to damage her nomination.

[–]sut123Pennsylvania - Bernie Squad - Cadet [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Basically. I think some delegates might get wary of sending her to the general because of this, but probably not enough.

[–]mxjxs91Michigan [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

That's what I said earlier and got called out for it, this is exactly how I see it too. This is the pretty much the best thing that could have happened to Trump. The weakest candidate stays running against him, and the FBI basically told us "look, she can't even handle classified docs as the SOS, she's careless". Trump is going take that and use it against her.

[–]joannvmd [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Maybe yes, maybe no. He's most likely in on it too.

[–]hitch44Asia [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

I am so livid; livid beyond words. The FBI director basically said that she was extremely irresponsible and that foreign players could have gotten that info because of her carelessness.

So many people would have been hanged up by their balls for far less security lapses. I guess some people are indeed too big to jail.

[–]AlexanderMcNair [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Comey would have roasted her since he's been chasing her for decades, why wouldn't he do it now.

[–]MaddSim [スコア非表示]  (6子コメント)

http://www.navytimes.com/story/military/crime/2015/07/29/navy-engineer-sentenced-for-mishandling-classified-material/30862027/

[–]wasabianon [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

First, Navy. Covered under the UCMJ. Not a civilian.

Second, Nishimura plugged a USB drive into a classified system, and transferred information out of it. He knew what system he was moving information from.

Third, he knew it was classified, and knew it was against Navy regulations.

Fourth, to dispose of the information, he threw his equipment into a lake.

Result: tiny fine and two years probation.

[–]MaddSim [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

She used a PERSONAL SERVER(s) for Sec of State related emails. How is that not intent? What the hell did she think was going to go through that system? And Comey even said any reasonable person would have known that they were sending/receiving classified info.

[–]wasabianon [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Because the nature of the server isn't related to the laws around mishandling.

You aren't allowed to send classified information through official state.gov email either.

They're disconnected facts.

[–]kitemasaki [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

I am livid about what happened today as well, but this story is nothing like what is being discussed. This person knowingly took information and kept it...for whatever reasons. Clinton did not follow regulations and let information travel along unsecured routes. This is not the same thing.

Get your glasses on and examine what you post.

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

So she didn't knowingly set up the private server outside secure lines?

I guess I can see that. Why the other day I wasn't watching where I was going and accidentally had a house built. How careless of me.

[–]ITK_REPEATEDLY [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Small fine, security clearance revoked. If she were still in State department, we might've seen that happen. Problem with the engineer you posted is he willfully downloaded the information with intent. FBI is saying she was an idiot and passed it along with zero intent to cause a problem. Whether that's the case or not, FBI apparently feels they can't prove without a shadow of a doubt she did all of this shit with intent. We can all agree she's a fucking moron though.

[–]ColossalMistake [スコア非表示]  (7子コメント)

So she breaks the law dozens of times but because she didn't mean to she gets away with it?

Why even have a Justice department? There is no justice here.

[–]bluefishredfish89 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Our justice system actually embraces that view exactly. Our justice system works with the belief that "if you didn't mean to do it, you're less morally culpable than those who did."

That's why we have both murder and manslaughter as possible charges.

[–]AlexanderMcNair [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

She ain't evil just dumb.

[–]TooManyCookz [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Most people who are jailed are not evil...

[–]RizzpoochMassachusetts - Bernie Squad - Corporal [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Oh that's a relief! Let's make her Commander in Chief!

[–]AlexanderMcNair [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

when the other guy is Trump yeah, the GOP base really fucked over their party

[–]FlyingRock [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

For us the 99%.

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

This is just sad.

[–]The_Music [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Comey...

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

Well, guess the FBI won't have to worry about budget for the next four years if HRC makes it into office.

[–]kellysewradColorado [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

After meeting privately with Bill Clinton last week, Loretta Lynch said she would follow whatever the FBI recommended. This is not a coincidence.

[–]Newtwo88 [スコア非表示]  (25子コメント)

I hope this unites Bernie and Trump supports in either voting for Trump or a third party candidate. I will never EVER vote for Hillary.

[–]ERASERHEAD666 [スコア非表示]  (10子コメント)

Trump is the opposite of almost everything we stand for.

[–]Acpt7567California [スコア非表示]  (9子コメント)

And Hillary isn't? Not saying I'd ever support Trump , just saying Hillary is just as opposite Bernie as Trump.

[–]ERASERHEAD666 [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

I can't stand her but she's not trying to build a border wall or create a database of all Muslims in the country.

[–]Cho-ChangConnecticut [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

create a database of all Muslims in the country

Like this doesn't already exist

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

I'll take Trump saying what he'll do (and not getting away with it) over what Clinton doesn't say yet will do behind the scenes.

[–]AyesukuOhio - Bernie Squad - Gunnery Sergeant [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Have you looked at Jill Stein? She's not a perfect match for Bernie's platform but she's more in line with it than either the fascist bigot OR the criminal warmonger.

[–]FlyingRock [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Trump is even more so.. And this is coming from someone who will never vote for Hillary.

[–]Acpt7567California [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Actually on the TPP, and a few others him and Bernie share positions. Again I would never support Trump, just saying.

[–]FlyingRock [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

And Hillary shares women's rights and a few things with him as well.

[–]lex99California [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Ha, maybe Trump can give "sheriff stars" to all Bernie supporters!

[–]Jericho_Hill [スコア非表示]  (11子コメント)

They entirely opposite candidates. I could not ever believe a true Bernie supporter would turn to support Trump

[–]farhanorakzai [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

But we should support someone that's bought and paid for that will take us to war with Syria and Russia?

[–]Jericho_Hill [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Notsaying that. You could vote for Stein. THat makes logical sense.

コメントをもっと表示する (8 返事)

    コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

      コメントをもっと表示する (655 返事)