Page 1 of 5
#1
The FBI Director, James Comey, just finished speaking. I think he did a rather good job, and he was very explanatory of the entire process and how they came to their conclusions.

I don't have an article to give, but I'm sure I will within 10 minutes. Here are the spark notes.

o Hilary had several instances of classified information on her personal email server
o The server was rebuilt and at times unprotected throughout the period of 2009-2014
o They found emails that were deleted that were not provided by Hilary.
o They found no reason to believe she did not include the emails purposely
o Explanation was that they appeared to be deleted as anyone else would delete work emails.
o They found no reason to believe that classified information was intentionally mishandled.
o They did find that, due to the classification level, that this was a gross negligence of important info.
o They could not find direct evidence, but recognize the very likely probability that her server was accessed by a 3rd party.
o Based on all the information, they do not recommend the Dept. of Justice prosecute Secretary Clinton.

For those who are clueless, Hilary was being investigated for transferring classified files and discussing classified material on her personal servers, rather than using the proper and protected government channels of communication, yielding in a huge security risk for the US.


EDIT: Alright, here's an article. There were more, but they were all from shit sources.

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/05/fbi-director-james-comey-has-concluded-the-investigation-into-clintons-emails.html

FBI Director James Comey said his office is not recommending that prosecutors bring charges against Hillary Clinton for handling of classified information in connection to her use of private email servers.
Comey began his Tuesday address by explaining what investigators found during their investigation. He said that the investigation showed that 110 emails in 52 email chains were determined to include classified information at the time they were received.

Comey also said the FBI assessed that there was no direct evidence that Clinton's personal email domain was hacked. It is possible, however, that hostile actors gained access, he added.

He characterized the investigation findings as showing that Clinton and her team were "extremely careless" but he said there was no clear evidence they intended to violate the law.

Still, Comey said the FBI's recommendation is that Clinton no face criminal charges for her actions.

"Our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case," he said.

The FBI interviewed Democratic U.S. presidential candidate Clinton for three and a half hours on Saturday as part of the probe into her use of a private email server while serving as secretary of state, her campaign said.

The interview at FBI headquarters in Washington followed a week of intense public focus on the investigation and on Clinton's viability as a presidential candidate, with four months to go to the election. Her campaign has tried for months to downplay the controversy as a distraction.

In an interview broadcast on MSNBC, Clinton said she was happy to do the FBI interview, which her spokesman earlier described as "voluntary."

"I've been answering questions for over a year" regarding the private email server, Clinton said.

It was not clear if the questioning of Clinton signaled an imminent conclusion to the investigation in a pivotal time for the presidential race. It does follow FBI interviews of several of Clinton's former staff members, as well as her top aide Huma Abedin.

Clinton is expected to be formally nominated as the Democratic candidate for the Nov. 8 presidential election at the party's convention in less than four weeks. The former secretary of state is currently the front-runner for the White House with polls showing her leading presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump.

In a tweet on Saturday, Trump said it was "impossible for the FBI not to recommend criminal charges against Hillary Clinton. What she did was wrong!"

Last edited by JustRooster at Jul 5, 2016,
#3
Or slap the witch on the wrist at least!
Last edited by EyeNon15 at Jul 5, 2016,
#4
in b4 the conspiracy theories change to fit new circumstances
Quote by Skibolky
No one can really fuck with the power of empathy.
#5
Didn't he say in the beginning that gross negligence was enough cause for, at least, a misdemeanor conviction? As I was watching it, his continued use of neglect made it seem like she was going to get hit with a misdemeanor at the minimum.
Quote by EndTheRapture51
Anyway I have technically statutory raped #nice

Quote by EndThecRinge51
once a girl and i promised to never leave each other

since that promise was broken

i dont make promises any more
#7
Quote by megano28
Didn't he say in the beginning that gross negligence was enough cause for, at least, a misdemeanor conviction? As I was watching it, his continued use of neglect made it seem like she was going to get hit with a misdemeanor at the minimum.


No, a misdemeanor would be be unknowingly committing an infraction. Gross negligence, per the wording, is still a felony.
Last edited by JustRooster at Jul 5, 2016,
#8
Yeah, as long as it was merely "extremely careless" instead of grossly negligent I guess it's no big deal...

Although I'd be hard pressed to find the difference between the two.

Apparently it's ok to commit otherwise criminal acts if you didn't really mean to, you were just extremely careless. Good to know.

I don't suggest any of the common folk try that.
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
#9
Aren't there federal laws that govern negligent handling of sensitive information and are applicable in this case?

If the issue is intent I mean. I read up a while ago that it would amount to a misdemeanor. What's their basis in recommending no prosecution? I don't get it
#10
Id like to know what is the actual law is, because......

"To warrant a criminal charge, Mr. Comey said, there had to be evidence that Mrs. Clinton intentionally sent or received classified information —"

Wtf? Is there any other law in USA that relies on intent this way?


Even laws that have "intent" in the name don't rely on intent this way
Last edited by EyeNon15 at Jul 5, 2016,
#11
Quote by ali.guitarkid7
Aren't there federal laws that govern negligent handling of sensitive information and are applicable in this case?


Yes. Most of which are directly applicable to this situation. Hence the outrage.
#12
Quote by ali.guitarkid7
What's their basis in recommending no prosecution? I don't get it


I'm pretty sure you actually do get it, as do the rest of us that aren't in the tank for Hillary.

And it's pretty damn disheartening.
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
#13
ayyy lmao rule of law wat is that even
Quote by Skibolky
No one can really fuck with the power of empathy.
#15
Quote by JustRooster
Yes. Most of which are directly applicable to this situation. Hence the outrage.

What statutes are they and how do they define the infractions? What qualities do they need to possess to amount to either "gross negligence" or misdemeanor mishandling? Does this not possess those qualities or does he see no point in charging her with the misdemeanor?


Also is the director's recommendation binding? (i.e. not a recommendation lol)
#16
Quote by bdof
I'm terribly surprised right now...


I actually am. I had more faith in the FBI and my Gov't than was apparently warranted. It's not a mistake I'll make again.

Quote by ali.guitarkid7

Also is the director's recommendation binding? (i.e. not a recommendation lol)


The Attorney General stated last week that she would accept whatever the recommendation was. No, it's not binding per se, but given the outcome it's clear that it might as well be.

As to the laws.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793

http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=89d1a4ae6290a53421ed13224cf39735&mc=true&node=se36.3.1236_122&rgn=div8

and the Freedom of Information Act, several counts.
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
Last edited by Arby911 at Jul 5, 2016,
#17
Quote by ali.guitarkid7
What statutes are they and how do they define the infractions? What qualities do they need to possess to amount to either "gross negligence" or misdemeanor mishandling? Does this not possess those qualities or does he see no point in charging her with the misdemeanor?


Also is the director's recommendation binding? (i.e. not a recommendation lol)


Google them, dawg. I'm busy.

And it's not binding. It is, by definition, a recommendation.
#18
Untouchable just like ol' Bill anyone else would be tried and incarcerated, ignorance of the law has never been an excuse in the U.S. and specifically using your personal e-mail sever for government business sounds like intent to me. This woman can play stupid all she wants but she knows exactly what she is doing every step of the way cool and calculated this one is ust like the current Liar in Cheif that is in the White House now The FBI does not want too recommend filing charges now because it is too close to the election and prosecuting Hillary would be tantamount to handing the Presidency directly to Trump.

There is a long history of double standards in America when it comes to polticians, celebrities and the 1% in general who are above the law or so it would seem, so this is not really shocking.
"A well-wound coil is a well-wound coil regardless if it's wound with professional equipment, or if somebody's great-grandmother winds it to an old French recipe with Napoleon's modified coffee grinder and chops off the wire after a mile with an antique guillotine!"
- Bill Lawrence

Come and be with me
Live my twisted dream
Pro devoted pledge
Time for primal concrete sledge

Last edited by Evilnine at Jul 5, 2016,
#19
I was really hoping that the outcome would be "Hillary is very old so she doesn't quite understand computers yet." but alas, tis even more messy.

Even if Hillary doesn't get charged with anything, do the american people really want a person that makes mistakes with sensitive information?

It's ludicrous. People make mistakes, but presidents should not make mistakes. Especially with something so easily not to fuck up with like email.
Last edited by severed-metal at Jul 5, 2016,
#20
Quote by severed-metal
I was really hoping that the outcome would be "Hillary is very old so she doesn't quite understand computers yet." but alas, tis even more messy.

Even if Hillary doesn't get charged with anything, do the american people really want a person that makes mistakes with sensitive information?

It's ludicrous. People make mistakes, but presidents should not make mistakes. Especially with something so easily not to fuck up with like email.


I agree with why would anyone want this woman in the White House, but there were no mistakes made by her she knew full well what she was doing she has been involved in politics way to long to play dumb she just feels that the laws do not apply to her and apparently she is right on that note, alas there are still sheeple out there that will vote for her, ignorance is bliss!
"A well-wound coil is a well-wound coil regardless if it's wound with professional equipment, or if somebody's great-grandmother winds it to an old French recipe with Napoleon's modified coffee grinder and chops off the wire after a mile with an antique guillotine!"
- Bill Lawrence

Come and be with me
Live my twisted dream
Pro devoted pledge
Time for primal concrete sledge

Last edited by Evilnine at Jul 5, 2016,
#22
Quote by Dreadnought
Oh well as long as it wasn't intentional
ikr, but hey she was really classy and forthcoming about the whole situation at least right?


"Every day I wonder how many things I am dead wrong about."
#23
Quote by ali.guitarkid7
I found this statute which requires intent:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1924

It's pretty vague

How the fuck are they defining "intentional mishandling" though? Intent to remove and retain or knowledge of its legality or...? Like on what basis or evidence does the FBI conclude it was unintentional, and unintentional of what?


There are very, very specific guidelines on how to handle classified documents. All government employees with any sort of security clearance must undergo comprehensive training on these guidelines. Her intent wasn't to release or share any data, but she knowingly mishandled the information.
#24
Quote by Evilnine
Untouchable just like ol' Bill anyone else would be tried and incarcerated, ignorance of the law has never been an excuse in the U.S. and specifically using your personal e-mail sever for government business sounds like intent to me. This woman can play stupid all she wants but she knows exactly what she is doing every step of the way cool and calculated this one is ust like the current Liar in Cheif that is in the White House now The FBI does not want too recommend filing charges now because it is too close to the election and prosecuting Hillary would be tantamount to handing the Presidency directly to Trump.

There is a long history of double standards in America when it comes to polticians, celebrities and the 1% in general who are above the law or so it would seem, so this is not really shocking.

Ignorance of the law and/or negligence, is an excuse pretty much everywhere. You can't be jailed for tax evasion if you can prove no intent to evade. Lots of crimes require evidence of intent
#25
Can they investigate this investigation?

Quote by JustRooster
There are very, very specific guidelines on how to handle classified documents. All government employees with any sort of security clearance must undergo comprehensive training on these guidelines. Her intent wasn't to release or share any data, but she knowingly mishandled the information.

Well it falls on the district attorney now, I presume. Although I also presume that the director's recommendation can be used to dismiss the case in court?
#26
Quote by JustRooster
No, a misdemeanor would be be unknowingly committing an infraction. Gross negligence, per the wording, is still a felony.
Quote by Arby911
Yeah, as long as it was merely "extremely careless" instead of grossly negligent I guess it's no big deal...

Although I'd be hard pressed to find the difference between the two.

Apparently it's ok to commit otherwise criminal acts if you didn't really mean to, you were just extremely careless. Good to know.

I don't suggest any of the common folk try that.


Yeah, all of this

I didn't want her to burn prior to this, but this is just embarrassing
Quote by EndTheRapture51
Anyway I have technically statutory raped #nice

Quote by EndThecRinge51
once a girl and i promised to never leave each other

since that promise was broken

i dont make promises any more
#27
Quote by ali.guitarkid7
Can they investigate this investigation?


Well it falls on the district attorney now, I presume. Although I also presume that the director's recommendation can be used to dismiss the case in court?


Given that Loretta Lynch is a Clinton insider and has been for years, I'd say it's a dead issue at this point.
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
#28
Quote by Arby911
Given that Loretta Lynch is a Clinton insider and has been for years, I'd say it's a dead issue at this point.


I don't know how it's at all okay for her not to be recused from this.
#30
In a sane country you would think that even without the prosecution, this would be enough to discourage enough voters from voting her and would effectively nullify her presidential bid.

HOWEVER

we are all so very stupid
My God, it's full of stars!
#31
Quote by Dreadnought
In a sane country you would think that even without the prosecution, this would be enough to discourage enough voters from voting her and would effectively nullify her presidential bid.

HOWEVER

we are all so very stupid


For our apathy and pacified nature; Trump and Hilary are exactly the candidates that we, as a country, deserve.
Last edited by JustRooster at Jul 5, 2016,
#33
David Burge ‏@iowahawkblog Jul 2
Yes, the same FBI that is about to let Hillary skate is the same one that prosecuted hundreds of teenagers for downloading music.

Ari Fleischer ‏@AriFleischer 2h2 hours ago
Bottom line: Hillary is reckless, careless and has poor judgement, but she's not a criminal. Which means she's likely to be our next POTUS.

Hillary Clinton’s email problems might be even worse than we thought
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/07/05/hillary-clintons-email-problems-might-be-even-worse-than-we-thought/

“Just to sum up: I would do various things very quickly.” - Donald Trump
#34
Quote by Dreadnought
In a sane country you would think that even without the prosecution, this would be enough to discourage enough voters from voting her and would effectively nullify her presidential bid.

HOWEVER

we are all so very stupid


To be fair, the other alternative is trump. At this point, anyone else would be worth it.
Quote by EndTheRapture51
Anyway I have technically statutory raped #nice

Quote by EndThecRinge51
once a girl and i promised to never leave each other

since that promise was broken

i dont make promises any more
#35
Quote by JustRooster
For our apathy and pacified nature; Trump and Hilary are exactly the candidates that we, as a country, deserve.
I tried the 'like' feature, and it felt weird.

Yea, I don't really see how she'll get nothing at all, and why would people vote for someone who was so "careless", along with the staff?
Quote by Fat Lard
Why would you spend tens of thousands of dollars to learn about a language you already speak? It was over before it even started dude

Quote by captainsnazz
brot pls
#36
Ignorance of the law and intent are never grounds for doing nothing.

If you're taxes are miscalculated you aren't just free and clear because you did it by accident. You still owe money.
#37
Quote by JustRooster
For our apathy and pacified nature; Trump and Hilary are exactly the candidates that we, as a country, deserve.


Man u takin that from me, I said that in #usa2016 months ago
My God, it's full of stars!
#38
Quote by EyeNon15
Ignorance of the law and intent are never grounds for doing nothing.

If you're taxes are miscalculated you aren't just free and clear because you did it by accident. You still owe money.

You aren't subject to prosecution though. What you're saying with this analogy is "Let's have Clinton promise not to store classified material on her private server again" lol, which contradicts how most feel about the lack of consequences

guys, I still don't understand: intent to what?
Last edited by ali.guitarkid7 at Jul 5, 2016,
#39
Lolmerica


y'all are so fucked
Quote by yellowfrizbee
What does a girl have to do to get it in the butt thats all I ever wanted from you. Why, Ace? Why? I clean my asshole every night hoping and wishing and it never happens.
Bitches be Crazy.

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ஜ۩۩ஜ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
#40
Quote by Dreadnought
Man u takin that from me, I said that in #usa2016 months ago


Haven't read that weeks in months. Too much righteousness.
Last edited by JustRooster at Jul 5, 2016,
Page 1 of 5