• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Ed Clintonemails.com: Who is Eric Hoteham Part 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
TheL8Elvis said:
Not that I am expecting much ... but some mea culpas would certainly be appropriate for many posters in this thread.

Hillary 2016 - not indicted yet :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

There were other posts, that a different opinion was displayed.

Interesting, that you did not link to the quote.
 
Last edited:
Comey again says that there would be no prosecution no matter the subject.

Guy questioning him is trying to get him to say Hillary is being treated special as she is facing no disciplinary action. Comey pointed out that she is out of government service and so she really can't any administrative action.
 
Last edited:
16.5 said:
Is it your statement, then, before this committee that secretary Clinton should have known not to send classified material and yet she did?” Walberg asked.

“Certainly she should have known not to send classified information,” Comey responded. “As I said, that's the definition of negligent. I think she was extremely careless. I have think she was negligent. That I could establish. What we can't establish is that she acted with the necessary criminal intent.”

Hillary for President, I'm Too Damn Dumb to Get Indicted!
Click to expand...

Dammit, we're back to the stupid campaign slogans again? First it was, she was going to get indicted, then it was not indicted yet, now you're actually insulting her for not getting indicted. Pathetic.
 
sunmaster14 said:
If he really said that, then my respect for him just dropped an order of magnitude. It's clearly false. Hillary was not prosecuted because it is too disruptive to the political process, and he felt that it is better to put the information out there and let the voters decide ....
Click to expand...
You have ZERO evidence for this. You simply made it up. WTF? This is critical thinking forum. Why would you just make **** up?

You're respect for the FBI director dropped because you believe you can read his mind. There aren't enough laughing dogs to respond to that.
 
sunmaster14 said:
If he really said that, then my respect for him just dropped an order of magnitude. It's clearly false. Hillary was not prosecuted because it is too disruptive to the political process, and he felt that it is better to put the information out there and let the voters decide (sort of like John Roberts' thinking with respect to the Obamacare mandate/"tax"). I think that's justifiable from a certain perspective. It sets a very bad precedent, however, and will make it much harder to protect classified information through use of the criminal statutes.
Click to expand...

And of course you have nothing to back this up, it's just more baseless assertion you're trying to pass off as fact. SOP, nothing to see here.
 
sunmaster14 said:
If he really said that, then my respect for him just dropped an order of magnitude. It's clearly false. Hillary was not prosecuted because it is too disruptive to the political process, and he felt that it is better to put the information out there and let the voters decide (sort of like John Roberts' thinking with respect to the Obamacare mandate/"tax"). I think that's justifiable from a certain perspective. It sets a very bad precedent, however, and will make it much harder to protect classified information through use of the criminal statutes.
Click to expand...
He most definitely said that nobody would face prosecution under the same circumstances. Under oath.

It is no surprise that you think that he perjured himself and is a corrupt liar.
 
DavidJames said:
HDS symptoms are quite varied.
Click to expand...

It's funny because the same people sitting here saying things like, "oh the FBI is just letting the voters decide" are the same people saying the FBI was a standup organization that wouldn't be swayed. Now they literally have to create conspiracies so as to not insult the FBI, but explain why they didn't pursue charges.

How the **** is this thread in any other location than the conspiracy theories section?

Go down the checklist:
Massive coverup requiring entirely too many people to be reasonable check
A shadowy evil villain gaining from their awesome scheme check
Accusations that a public meeting was really a secret meeting to confirm the coverup check
Multiple government agencies (FBI, DOJ, State Dept., Pres) involved conspiring together to keep it under wraps check

It's tailor made.
 
Last edited:
I think that Republicans are going to regret dragging Comey out to testify. *********** morons.
 
DavidJames said:
You have ZERO evidence for this. You simply made it up. WTF? This is critical thinking forum. Why would you just make **** up?

You're respect for the FBI director dropped because you believe you can read his mind. There aren't enough laughing dogs to respond to that.
Click to expand...

My evidence is that the FBI recently touted the conviction of a naval reservist who did something similar although he was not in a position to do nearly as much damage as the Secretary of State.

Without the threat of prosecution for gross negligence, i.e. without mens rea, the government's ability to enforce restrictions on handling classified information is eviscerated. There is no way he would let a rank and file employee skate on something so serious.
 
Tony Stark said:
He most definitely said that nobody would face prosecution under the same circumstances. Under oath.

It is no surprise that you think that he perjured himself and is a corrupt liar.
Click to expand...

I don't think he is a liar. Just delusional, or stupid.
 
sunmaster14 said:
My evidence is that the FBI recently touted the conviction of a naval reservist who did something similar although he was not in a position to do nearly as much damage as the Secretary of State.

Without the threat of prosecution for gross negligence, i.e. without mens rea, the government's ability to enforce restrictions on handling classified information is eviscerated. There is no way he would let a rank and file employee skate on something so serious.
Click to expand...
Yeah, same thing, lol. Whatever.
 
DavidJames said:
Yeah, same thing, lol. Whatever.
Click to expand...

I haven't been able to keep up, but didn't Comey explain explicitly why this is not like those other cases that have been prosecuted?

Again, it's a case of sunmaster14 knowing more about the meaning of "intent" than the director of the FBI.

This is quite a joke.
 
sunmaster14 said:
Without the threat of prosecution for gross negligence, i.e. without mens rea, the government's ability to enforce restrictions on handling classified information is eviscerated. There is no way he would let a rank and file employee skate on something so serious.
Click to expand...

Absolutely, he has read the standard of gross negligence right out of the statute.

f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
Click to expand...
 
16.5 said:
Absolutely, he has read the standard of gross negligence right out of the statute.
Click to expand...
Maybe Hillary paid him off. And the entire team who unanimously agreed that she shouldn't face charges.

LOL
 
Last edited:
DavidJames said:
It's fascinating watching people selectively cherry picking quotes, ignoring what isn't convenient.
Click to expand...

For 15 years I never put anyone on ignore. I felt it important to see everyone's view point. Finally I realized the value of some views can be measured in negative terms and were personally destructive.
Click to expand...

Fascinating!

Hee hee!:D:thumbsup::D

"f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both."

Fantastic!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom