Is It Now Time To Reevaluate Hillary Clinton?

[American Patriot]

James Comey overstepped his authority as director of the FBI by deciding not to indite Hillary Clinton. Comey is not the DOJ nor is he a prosecutor. It is obvious to even the casual observer that Ms. Clinton broke numerous laws and committed many felonies. Ask yourself this, if it had been you instead of Clinton who did these things what do you think would happen to you? It will probably not do much good to lock Ms. Clinton up and we may never get to the real evidence as political partisanship has protected Ms. Clinton on numerous occasions. The left will attempt to protect Ms. Clinton at all costs, however depending on the real evidence the FBI has Ms. Clinton could be in very hot water indeed. Clinton and her aids contrived a very complicated web of collusion and deception. Classified information was compromised and our nations security was put in grave danger. Ms. Clinton did these things to promote and empower her Foundation, where we now know she fleeced many factions out of millions of dollars for political favor. Ms. Clinton has a litany of questionable behaviors and she has been involved in other criminal behavior as well as a long list of scandals. When we take it all into account we must come to a decision about how to proceed with this person of very questionable character. Clinton as well as her aids need to be brought to account, indited if necessary, and prosecuted if required. This discussion about intent is meaningless as she either did these things or she did not. The FBI became politicized and Comey became compromised, then Clinton walked. Do you think you would have walked?

 

[Tor-Pete-O]

Do you think you would have walked?

No. And not just no..........HELL NO!

Did Christian Saucier walk?
Did Bradley Manning walk?
Is Edward Snowden free to walk in America?
What about Julian Assange?

She would be under the jail if she was anybody but Hilliary Clinton. Plain and simple

 

[Arkady]

James Comey overstepped his authority as director of the FBI by deciding not to indite Hillary Clinton.

No. Comey was fulfilling a customary role when he looked at the evidence, saw that there wasn't anything there to support indictment, and made his no-indictment recommendation. That part was ordinary enough. Where he overstepped his authority was in the way he did it. The ordinary way of handling that would be a low-key press release making the no-indictment recommendation, and briefly explaining why. The way Comey did it was to schedule a big press conference where he would step into the limelight and make the recommendation, before wandering far afield to try to trash Hillary Clinton on non-legal grounds (claiming she was careless, etc.) That's when he stepped beyond being a typical a-political law-enforcement official, and became a shameless hack for his party.

It is obvious to even the casual observer that Ms. Clinton broke numerous laws and committed many felonies

Actually, it's obvious to even the casual observer that it's highly unlikely she did. Probably no human being in the history of our species has ever been investigated as closely as Clinton. She's been under pretty much non-stop rabidly partisan investigation for a quarter century. That included investigations by Republican-controlled committees in the House and Senate, plus a hostile media, a special prosecutor, and an independent counsel, as well as the IG and FBI. Not only were these investigations run by all sorts of different outfits, many of them very well-resourced and powerful, but they came at her from all angles, investigating everything from old land deals and her law career to how she handles her email account. In all that time, nobody ever found any evidence of legal wrongdoing on her part. That doesn't prove she never broke the law. But it does mean it's highly unlikely she broke any major ones, because someone would have likely discovered it by now, given all that scrutiny. But the right-wing dummies really, really FEEL like she should be guilty of something, and they don't see why real world evidence and common sense should be allowed to trump their emotions.

Ask yourself this, if it had been you instead of Clinton who did these things what do you think would happen to you?

That's an easy one: absolutely nothing would have happened to me.... just as nothing happened to Colin Powell when he used an AOL account in a similar way, and didn't even bother complying with records retention requirements. The only reason that Clinton's non-criminal behavior became an obsessive national story for years is because of who she is. If it had been you or me, it never even would have come up.

The left will attempt to protect Ms. Clinton at all costs

Protect her from what? There's no evidence she did anything wrong. There's a reason "lock her up" was just a rallying cry Trump used to evoke hard-ons from his dumbest supporters, rather than an actual campaign promise he'd feel compelled to pursue once he became president. Trump knows perfectly well Clinton didn't commit a crime. He was hoping the imbeciles he'd convinced otherwise would let it drop before he had to produce. But they're pretty thick-skulled, so it can take a while for them to comprehend their marching orders.

Ms. Clinton did these things to promote and empower her Foundation

As a reminder, the Clinton Foundation wasn't actually run by the Clintons. Sure, they set it up, and helped to fund it. But none of the Clinton family served in any officer role in the foundation, and they were greatly outnumbered on the board by independent directors. It wasn't at all like the Trump Foundation -- an operation run by the immediate Trump family, for the benefit of the Trump family. The Clinton Foundation was run by a bunch of highly respected people over whom the Clintons had no control. If you're eager to see a prosecution for abuse of a "charitable" foundation, you're obviously looking in the wrong place. Look at the unaudited Trump foundation, which his crooked family used for self-dealing. That's going to be much more fertile ground than looking at a highly respected, independently run, and professionally audited charity like the Clinton Foundation.

 

[Arkady]

No. And not just no..........HELL NO!

Did Christian Saucier walk?
Did Bradley Manning walk?
Is Edward Snowden free to walk in America?
What about Julian Assange?

She would be under the jail if she was anybody but Hilliary Clinton. Plain and simple

If she were anybody other than a Clinton, nobody would even be trying to pretend she'd committed a crime with such a profound lack of any supporting evidence. But the right-wingers are utterly deranged when it comes to the Clintons.

 

[resident_evil]

James Comey overstepped his authority as director of the FBI by deciding not to indite Hillary Clinton. Comey is not the DOJ nor is he a prosecutor. It is obvious to even the casual observer that Ms. Clinton broke numerous laws and committed many felonies. Ask yourself this, if it had been you instead of Clinton who did these things what do you think would happen to you? It will probably not do much good to lock Ms. Clinton up and we may never get to the real evidence as political partisanship has protected Ms. Clinton on numerous occasions. The left will attempt to protect Ms. Clinton at all costs, however depending on the real evidence the FBI has Ms. Clinton could be in very hot water indeed. Clinton and her aids contrived a very complicated web of collusion and deception. Classified information was compromised and our nations security was put in grave danger. Ms. Clinton did these things to promote and empower her Foundation, where we now know she fleeced many factions out of millions of dollars for political favor. Ms. Clinton has a litany of questionable behaviors and she has been involved in other criminal behavior as well as a long list of scandals. When we take it all into account we must come to a decision about how to proceed with this person of very questionable character. Clinton as well as her aids need to be brought to account, indited if necessary, and prosecuted if required. This discussion about intent is meaningless as she either did these things or she did not. The FBI became politicized and Comey became compromised, then Clinton walked. Do you think you would have walked?

Comey needs prison time. His non-prosecution of Hillary clearly reveals double dealing and political graft. His pardoning of Hillary is unpardonable. IRSGate and a bunch of other similar selective prosecution shows there is one rule for you and me and another for them.

 

[as seen on tv]

go by the book:

- name special prosecutor
- appropriate chain of custody for physical evidence (hard drives, printouts, NSA intercepts, etc)
- empanel a grand jury to hear the evidence, and recommend whether the defendants should be charged
- separate charges for each defendant, to encourage those who are willing to cooperate to do so, rather than having their fates tied to another defendant.

 

[marvin martian]

As a reminder, the Clinton Foundation wasn't actually run by the Clintons. Sure, they set it up, and helped to fund it. But none of the Clinton family served in any officer role in the foundation, and they were greatly outnumbered on the board by independent directors.

I used to think you were just pretending to be that naive, but now I know it's no act.

 

[SouthernBoyI]

James Comey overstepped his authority as director of the FBI by deciding not to indite Hillary Clinton. Comey is not the DOJ nor is he a prosecutor. It is obvious to even the casual observer that Ms. Clinton broke numerous laws and committed many felonies. Ask yourself this, if it had been you instead of Clinton who did these things what do you think would happen to you? It will probably not do much good to lock Ms. Clinton up and we may never get to the real evidence as political partisanship has protected Ms. Clinton on numerous occasions. The left will attempt to protect Ms. Clinton at all costs, however depending on the real evidence the FBI has Ms. Clinton could be in very hot water indeed. Clinton and her aids contrived a very complicated web of collusion and deception. Classified information was compromised and our nations security was put in grave danger. Ms. Clinton did these things to promote and empower her Foundation, where we now know she fleeced many factions out of millions of dollars for political favor. Ms. Clinton has a litany of questionable behaviors and she has been involved in other criminal behavior as well as a long list of scandals. When we take it all into account we must come to a decision about how to proceed with this person of very questionable character. Clinton as well as her aids need to be brought to account, indited if necessary, and prosecuted if required. This discussion about intent is meaningless as she either did these things or she did not. The FBI became politicized and Comey became compromised, then Clinton walked. Do you think you would have walked?

Trey don't play!
SB

 

[Arkady]

I used to think you were just pretending to be that naive, but now I know it's no act.

You can confirm what I've said with your own research. The officers of the Clinton Foundation are publicly listed, as are the board members, as are the findings of its independent auditor. You'll see that, unlike in the case of the Trump Foundation, the Clinton Foundation was run by people outside the family, with only a minority role of family members on the board.

 

[SouthernBoyI]

You can confirm what I've said with your own research. The officers of the Clinton Foundation are publicly listed, as are the board members, as are the findings of its independent auditor. You'll see that, unlike in the case of the Trump Foundation, the Clinton Foundation was run by people outside the family, with only a minority role of family members on the board.

Yep
Like Comeys brother.

SB

 

[Arkady]

Yep
Like Comeys brother.

SB

No, very much unlike that. Peter Comey works for DLA Piper, a global law firm with thousands of attorneys and tens of thousands of clients. One client is the Clinton Foundation, for whom they did some tax work. Peter Comey is a real estate lawyer and so they wouldn't have been his client and there's no sign he had any interaction with them at all.

This was just one of those goofy "throw everything against the wall and hope something sticks" attacks we see from shitty propaganda outlets like Breitbart. They know their audience of brain-dead conservative drones well, so they know that if they can find any "six degrees of Kevin Bacon" style link between a person they want to smear and the Clintons, that'll be sufficient for the dummies. "Well, Comey's brother works at a firm where another department did some work for the Clinton Foundation, which was set up by the Clintons, therefore Comey can't be trusted." It's pathetic. Obviously, with a firm as huge as DLA piper, you could find ties to just about any large organization in the country, including Trump's.

In fact, there's a much closer tie there. DLA Piper has done REAL ESTATE WORK for Trump, meaning it's much more likely that Peter Comey has a personal stake in making sure things go well for the Trump Organization than that he'd have a personal stake in what some other practice group was doing on the tax front:

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20070113/ISSUE01/100027082/dumped-by-trump

DLA Piper, represents the Trump project
​

So, did Peter Comey's interest in Trump's real estate schemes influence his brother's decision to intervene in the election to get Trump elected?

Right-wingers never think that kind of thing through, because they're deeply stupid people. They hear a Breitbarter or Sarah Palin spout of some ridiculous conspiracy theory and they just take it as fact. How they manage to make it through the world with brains that dysfunctional is the real mystery.

 

[Tor-Pete-O]

If she were anybody other than a Clinton, nobody would even be trying to pretend she'd committed a crime with such a profound lack of any supporting evidence. But the right-wingers are utterly deranged when it comes to the Clintons.

Did she have classified information on a server outside of the governments secure network, knowledge and security purview?

Was she conducting government business on an unauthorized illegally set up server to evade FOIA requests and the scrutiny that comes with it?

Were classified documents illegally forwarded and found on her assistants husbands personal laptop computer? A guy without a security clearance?

Yes and yes and yes. She is a felon.

If it were me or you we'd be VERY incarcerated and you being a "lawyer" know that to be true.

 

[Arkady]

Did she have classified information on a server outside of the governments secure network, knowledge and security purview?

She had a private server. It was outside the government network. It had some government security (e.g., the physical server had secret service protection). Many in government were aware of it.

Was she conducting government business on an unauthorized illegally set up server to evade FOIA requests and the scrutiny that comes with it?

No. She was conducting government business on a private server, but there's no evidence it was done to evade FOIA requests, any more than was the case with the countless other officials in the Bush and Obama administrations who used private emails for public business.

Were classified documents illegally forwarded and found on her assistants husbands personal laptop computer?

No. There was no sign that forwarding them was illegal.

She is a felon.

No. As you'll recall, after an absurdly close investigation, even the Republican head of the FBI had to recommend no indictment, because there's simply no evidence to support the idea that any felony was committed.

If it were me or you we'd be VERY incarcerated

No. If it were you or me, there never would have been an issue. It only became an issue because Clinton decided to run for president, and the Republicans needed a scandal to use against her, because that's how their machine works. Since they were unable to find any actual scandal to use as fuel, they settled for pretending there was something outrageous about her email server. The dummies fell for it, but in the end it fizzled completely, from a legal perspective.

However, it was never meant to have any legal legs. The Republicans knew from the start there was no there there, on the legal front. It wasn't about getting a conviction; it was about convincing the idiots in the conservative public that she'd done something shifty. That's why they dropped it after the election was over. It had served its purpose, and continuing to probe would just make it increasingly obvious they'd been obsessing over nothing.

 

[marvin martian]

You can confirm what I've said with your own research. The officers of the Clinton Foundation are publicly listed, as are the board members, as are the findings of its independent auditor. You'll see that, unlike in the case of the Trump Foundation, the Clinton Foundation was run by people outside the family, with only a minority role of family members on the board.

Thanks for proving my point.

 

[Arkady]

Thanks for proving my point.

I didn't. You just weren't smart enough to think it through. Try harder.

 

[Tor-Pete-O]

She had a private server. It was outside the government network. It had some government security (e.g., the physical server had secret service protection). Many in government were aware of it.



No. She was conducting government business on a private server, but there's no evidence it was done to evade FOIA requests, any more than was the case with the countless other officials in the Bush and Obama administrations who used private emails for public business.



No. There was no sign that forwarding them was illegal.



No. As you'll recall, after an absurdly close investigation, even the Republican head of the FBI had to recommend no indictment, because there's simply no evidence to support the idea that any felony was committed.



No. If it were you or me, there never would have been an issue. It only became an issue because Clinton decided to run for president, and the Republicans needed a scandal to use against her, because that's how their machine works. Since they were unable to find any actual scandal to use as fuel, they settled for pretending there was something outrageous about her email server. The dummies fell for it, but in the end it fizzled completely, from a legal perspective. But it was never meant to have any legal legs. The Republicans knew from the start there was no there there, on the legal front. It wasn't about getting a conviction; it was about convincing the idiots in the conservative public that she'd done something shifty. That's why they dropped it after the election was over. It had served its purpose, and continuing to probe would just make it increasingly obvious they'd been obsessing over nothing.

Bullshit. All 3 points I listed are against federal law. There is no question she violated federal laws.

Period.

If you had classified governmental information on your personal computer you would go to jail for it.

Period.

 

[marvin martian]

I didn't. You just weren't smart enough to think it through. Try harder.

Oh no, you did indeed. More so now that you've proved you're too dumb to even realize it.

 

[Arkady]

Oh no, you did indeed.

Nope. Clearly what I posted completely obliterated the point you were trying to make. You just aren't bright enough to realize it. Don't give up, though. Mentally deficient people like you can substitute effort for native ability. Just keep trying and eventually you should spot your error. Good luck.

 

[SouthernBoyI]

No, very much unlike that. Peter Comey works for DLA Piper, a global law firm with thousands of attorneys and tens of thousands of clients. One client is the Clinton Foundation, for whom they did some tax work. Peter Comey is a real estate lawyer and so they wouldn't have been his client and there's no sign he had any interaction with them at all.

This was just one of those goofy "throw everything against the wall and hope something sticks" attacks we see from shitty propaganda outlets like Breitbart. They know their audience of brain-dead conservative drones well, so they know that if they can find any "six degrees of Kevin Bacon" style link between a person they want to smear and the Clintons, that'll be sufficient for the dummies. "Well, Comey's brother works at a firm where another department did some work for the Clinton Foundation, which was set up by the Clintons, therefore Comey can't be trusted." It's pathetic. Obviously, with a firm as huge as DLA piper, you could find ties to just about any large organization in the country, including Trump's.

In fact, there's a much closer tie there. DLA Piper has done REAL ESTATE WORK for Trump, meaning it's much more likely that Peter Comey has a personal stake in making sure things go well for the Trump Organization than that he'd have a personal stake in what some other practice group was doing on the tax front:

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20070113/ISSUE01/100027082/dumped-by-trump

DLA Piper, represents the Trump project
​

So, did Peter Comey's interest in Trump's real estate schemes influence his brother's decision to intervene in the election to get Trump elected?

Right-wingers never think that kind of thing through, because they're deeply stupid people. They hear a Breitbarter or Sarah Palin spout of some ridiculous conspiracy theory and they just take it as fact. How they manage to make it through the world with brains that dysfunctional is the real mystery.

Naaaa
I'm sure he colluded with all sorts of Crimminals...

Just like Obama and Hillary and all of em.

Yep they do this all the time on planes in bathrooms....

SB
Traitors need to be given a trial and hung

 

[Arkady]

There is no question she violated federal laws.

Even the Republican head of the FBI couldn't maintain that with a straight face. There simply was no evidence she did anything illegal.

By all means, if you can cite a person who has been indicted for doing what she did, do so. Comey's team busted their ass trying to find some precedent for indicting based on that fact pattern, but they came up dry.

If you had classified governmental information on your personal computer you would go to jail for it.

I have had classified government information on my personal computer. I did not go to jail for it. You were wrong.

Here, I'll demonstrate:



There, now you have classified information on your personal computer. It's sitting right there in your browser's cache, as an image file. Granted, this is really old information, but does that make you safe?

http://newsombudsmen.org/columns/a-threat-to-press-and-academic-freedom

This takes an even stranger turn when one considers that the policy may also be applied retroactively to information that entered the public domain legally but that the government later “reclassified.”... That’s right, “reclassified.” GWU researcher Matthew Aim has reported that in 1999 the government began classifying records that it had previously declassified and made public, such as a 1948 CIA director’s memo complaining about bad publicity. (Reclassification was affirmed in a 2009 presidential executive order.) .... this also included Korean War records that researchers had obtained copies of while they were officially declassified and legally in the public domain, and where they effectively remain despite “reclassification.”
​

As you can see from my link, even the Pentagon Papers, from 40 years ago, are implicated.

Of course, nobody would ever try to indict you based on having that on your computer, because merely having classified information on your personal computer isn't a crime. It's possible to have classified information on your computer without even realizing it -- material that you didn't see, or that you didn't realize was classified when you saw it, for example. With a few more minutes of poking around, I could do that to you, too. I could pull up one of these old public-domain documents that has been reclassified, and I could grab some information from it, and mention it to you, without mentioning it was classified. That would leave you with classified information on your computer without you even realizing it. There's a reason that's not a crime... if it were, you could turn anyone into a criminal simply by sending them an email.