Trump declares James Comey 'should have never exonerated' Hillary Clinton

I believe in principle and justice. A murderer in some other state is not a threat to me either but I would still want them in jail. Hillary must pay for her crimes.

LOCK. HER. UP.

She's currently fundraising in Beverly hills today. I'm not convinced she's done.
 
Neither you & Trump understand the law, then. It centers around intent, and there wasn't compelling evidence for intent. As much as you want there to be.

What nonsense....Intent ?.....

Thats the first thing the cop asked the driver..."Did you intend to speed?".....No? ok, you're free to go....

Did you intend to hit and kill that kid with your car?....No? ok, on your way then.....

Did you intend to steal that merchandise you put in your pocket before you left the store ?...No....ok, have a nice day....

Did you intend to hurt that man when you hit him with that bat ?....No....ok, sorry to question your motives....

I can't believe you're such a fuckin' idiot.....
 
What nonsense....Intent ?.....

Thats the first thing the cop asked the driver..."Did you intend to speed?".....No? ok, you're free to go....

Did you intend to hit and kill that kid with your car?....No? ok, on your way then.....

Did you intend to steal that merchandise you put in your pocket before you left the store ?...No....ok, have a nice day....

Did you intend to hurt that man when you hit him with that bat ?....No....ok, sorry to question your motives....

I can't believe you're such a fuckin' idiot.....

"In practice, however, law enforcement officials have set a high bar for prosecuting violations of those laws, looking for clear criminal intent, which Comey said was absent in the Clinton case"

http://time.com/4394178/hillary-clinton-email-fbi-investigation/

Love the speeding analogy though. More brilliance from bravs.

You don't know anything.
 
Bradley Manning, who provided classified information to Wikileaks in 2010.Hillary Clinton said then:
“The United States strongly condemns the illegal disclosure of classified information. It puts people’s lives in danger, threatens our national security, and undermines our efforts to work with other countries to solve shared problems. … I have directed that specific actions be taken at the State Department, in addition to new security safeguards at the Department of Defense and elsewhere to protect State Department information so that this kind of breach cannot and does not ever happen again.”
in April 2014 Clinton argued that when he moved classified material from a secure U.S. government system onto his personal device and then traveled to China and Russia, those countries were likely able to obtain the data – whether he meant to turn it over or not. In short, she said, the intentions of the person in possession of the material do not matter:
“I think turning over a lot of that material—intentionally or unintentionally, because of the way it can be drained—gave all kinds of information, not only to big countries, but to networks and terrorist groups and the like,” [Clinton] said. …

“When I would go to China or I would go to Russia,” she said, “we would leave all my electronic equipment on the plane with the batteries out, because this is a new frontier and they're trying to find out not just about what we do in our government … they were going after the personal emails of people who worked in the State Department.”

So it bears repeating....

I can't believe you're such a fuckin' idiot.....
 
Yeah, well - the Federal Bureau of Investigation differs.

Sorry 'bout that.

Comey differs, not the FBI.....the plain fact is 'intent' has nothing to do with a persons guilt or innocence when they break a law....

Thats real life....hundreds, if not thousands of people are doing time right now regardless of their intent or motive or lack of motive, when they broke the law.....even being ignorant of the fact that you broke a law in no defense and no excuse....

and as I proved in #48, even Hillary Clinton agrees with my conclusion.....

You're such a toady you'll grasp at any straw to protect a Democrat....you're a partisan that ignores facts....
 
Comey differs, not the FBI.....the plain fact is 'intent' has nothing to do with a persons guilt or innocence when they break a law....

Thats real life....hundreds, if not thousands of people are doing right now regardless of their intent when they broke the law.....

and as I proved in #48, even Hillary Clinton agrees with my conclusion.....

You're such a toady you'll grasp at any straw to protect a Democrat....you're a partisan that ignores facts....

It's naïve and uninformed to try to compare laws regarding assault and speeding w/ the Espionage Act. It wasn't just Comey - there was plenty of precedent for the consideration of intent.

You simply don't understand the law. And really - the "toady" stuff...coming from YOU?
 
It's naïve and uninformed to try to compare laws regarding assault and speeding w/ the Espionage Act. It wasn't just Comey - there was plenty of precedent for the consideration of intent.

You simply don't understand the law. And really - the "toady" stuff...coming from YOU?

Is intent in the statute?
 
Let me refresh your memory, dudette.

"During Donald Trump's successful White House campaign, his massive crowds thundered: "Lock her up. Lock her up."

What he didn't say was that, as president, he would not have the authority to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate Hillary Clinton, much less jail her, as Trump threatened during a debate. That's the jurisdiction of the U.S. Justice Department, which is supposed to work outside the influence of politics.

Now that he's won the election, the president-elect is sending a signal both to Congress and, perhaps even his incoming attorney general, that it's no longer politically beneficial to try to prosecute the former Democratic presidential nominee.

In a Tuesday meeting with editors and reporters at the New York Times, Trump said he doesn’t “want to hurt the Clintons, I really don’t. She went through a lot and suffered greatly in many different ways.”

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news.../11/22/donald-trump-hillary-clinton/94266466/


Dude Trump is right on track to do what he said.............Step one is FIRE COMEY, step 2 is on the way
 
It's naïve and uninformed to try to compare laws regarding assault and speeding w/ the Espionage Act. It wasn't just Comey - there was plenty of precedent for the consideration of intent.

You simply don't understand the law. And really - the "toady" stuff...coming from YOU?

These idiots really don't understand how the law works.

Comey and the FBI used case history and legal precedent to determine the need for proof of intent. They reviewed every previous case in the twentieth century, going back to WWII I think, and at no time has there ever been anyone prosecuted under the espionage act, for unintentionally mishandling classified information, and without a demonstrable intent to break the law and harm national security.

And as far as all this BS about prosecuting Comey, I'm sure he didn't make the decision on his own. I'm sure there were a fairly large number of high level FBI personnel who arrived at the decision not to recommend charging Clinton with him.

Wing nuts are just rabid goofballs.
 
These idiots really don't understand how the law works.

Comey and the FBI used case history and legal precedent to determine the need for proof of intent. They reviewed every previous case in the twentieth century, going back to WWII I think, and at no time has there ever been anyone prosecuted under the espionage act, for unintentionally mishandling classified information, and without a demonstrable intent to break the law and harm national security.

And as far as all this BS about prosecuting Comey, I'm sure he didn't make the decision on his own. I'm sure there were a fairly large number of high level FBI personnel who arrived at the decision not to recommend charging Clinton with him.

Wing nuts are just rabid goofballs.

So you are saying that Hillary did not intend to set up an illegal server, which means that she hired someone to do this by accident. Then you are saying that she did not intend to delete 33,000 emails AFTER Congress requested them. All these things happened without intent?

Seriously only a schizophrenic could assume that to be true.

Have you ever accidentally hired someone to set up a computer server in your basement?
 
Not in the statute, but you need to look at SCOTUS rulings on cases relating to the Espionage Act for established precedent when it comes to invoking intent.

But NOVA would probably call SCOTUS a "bunch of idiots."

What would you call these people exactly

Ruth-Bader-Ginsburg-101016.jpg


0803-elena-kagan-supreme-court_full_600.jpg


original.jpg
 
These idiots really don't understand how the law works.

Comey and the FBI used case history and legal precedent to determine the need for proof of intent. They reviewed every previous case in the twentieth century, going back to WWII I think, and at no time has there ever been anyone prosecuted under the espionage act, for unintentionally mishandling classified information, and without a demonstrable intent to break the law and harm national security.

And as far as all this BS about prosecuting Comey, I'm sure he didn't make the decision on his own. I'm sure there were a fairly large number of high level FBI personnel who arrived at the decision not to recommend charging Clinton with him.

Wing nuts are just rabid goofballs.

A useful idiot like you, don't understand how politics works....

David Petraeus saw his career come to an end for mishandling classified information.


Bill Clinton’s National Security Adviser guilty of Destroying Documents in National Archives: “Sandy Berger … pleaded guilty in 2005 to illegally sneaking classified documents from the National Archives by stuffing papers in his suit. He later destroyed some of them in his office and lied about it.”


Scooter Libby got it worst of all. And he did virtually nothing.

Libby was the Bush aide who went to prison for having a bad memory. He was hunted down and persecuted by Peter Fitzgerald who was looking for the scalp of the person who allegedly leaked the name of Valerie Plame, which he already knew because Richard Armitage admitted he outed Palme....

Peter Van Buren, a foreign service officer for Hillary’s State Department, was fired and his security clearance revoked for quoting a Wikileaks document AFTER publishing a book critical of Clinton. In fact, the Washington Post reported that one of his firing infractions was “showing ‘bad judgement’ by criticizing Clinton and then-Rep. Michele Bachmann on his blog.”

John Deutch, CIA director under President Clinton, was found to have classified information on a government-owned computer in his home several days after he left the CIA. He had to be pardoned in the middle of plea negotiations by Hillary’s husband.

“An FBI search of Nishimura’s home turned up classified materials, but did not reveal evidence he intended to distribute them.” The exact words used to clear Hillary of her misdeeds. Instead, Nishimura was sentenced to two years probation, fined $7,500, and had to surrender his security clearance.

Petty Officer First Class Kristian Saucier allegedly used a cellphone camera to take photos in the classified engine room of the nuclear submarine where he worked as a mechanic, the USS Alexandria, then destroyed a laptop, camera and memory card after learning he was under investigation. He was indicted on one felony count of unlawful retention of national defense information and another felony count of obstruction of justice. (Hillary destroyed 30,000 email under congressional subpoena...)

Jessica Lynn Quintana, a former worker at the Los Alamos National Laboratory, pleaded guilty in federal court to “knowingly removing classified information from the national security research laboratory, after she took home sensitive documents and data from the lab last year.”
 
Last edited:
Back
Top