FBI completes Clinton email probe, recommends no criminal charges

Rana said:
No, I clearly heard them lie, but whether they broke a law can only be determined by a court of law.
Click to expand...

Did you also hear Bill Clinton and others democrats LIE in those infamous quotes that have been posted a thousand times....?? From 1995 up to and including 2002
 
Trump: FBI decision on Clinton emails was 'rigged

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...inton-emails-was-rigged/ar-AAi7M8q?li=BBnb7Kz

53d5da6b-3dc4-4620-a439-e063df5bbea5.jpg
 
Rana said:
It doesn't mean she did, either, that can only be determined by a judge or a jury of her peers, correct?
Click to expand...

she can only be convicted by a jury or judge......any one of us can make the determination for ourselves based on the evidence before us......sort of like the liberals did for Travon Martin......
 
anatta said:
complete wrong regarding "intent" once AGAIN READING iS FUNDAMENTAL!
apparently the "vast quantities" threshold was not met ( for indictment) for the gross negligence criteria.
To be clear - gross negligence does NOT REQUIRE INTENT.
The rest of your blathering about "intent is very important blah blah is superfluous worthlessness i.e. your typical 'reasoning'.
++
You are now 100% truly insane to say ISIS is not an existential threat -do you comprehend what ISIS uses to justify it's existence?
Why it's "terrorism" is embraced by jihadists worldwide?? WTF is ISIS's endgame but an apocalypse??
Left unchecked how long would it take to aquire the caliphate? It's got presences all over the ME -not just Iraq and Syria
and Libya, and Somalia, and Nigeria,and Pakistan and India, and Afghanistan..Yemen..now Saudi Arabia..
++
Nobody claimed SA was "as vulnerable" now - the claim was keep digging at it and it can be..it'shas much more vulnerabilities
then just counting how many Princes there are in how many posts.
It has a potential to drop as fast as anyplace given the enabling circumstances.
Once again you cannot connect dots. You can see a static situation on a good day ( rare) but you cannot see how factors interrelate.
and because you are so freaking dense - you miss concepts.
Click to expand...
Again, you couldn't be more incorrect.
The entire reason that no charges will be filed is because they could find no criminal intent. From the director's own mouth.


You are so fucking funny with your connect the dots bullshit.

I see complex patterns in thick deep layers, you failingly attempt to connect dots.
 
This must be the thread to go to where one can refresh themselves with the tears of Trumptards and cons.

Keep them coming kids


5e3db78223384664e718c3130081afa1.jpg
SO QUENCHING!​
 
Rune said:
Again, you couldn't be more incorrect.
The entire reason that no charges will be filed is because they could find no criminal intent. From the director's own mouth.
Click to expand...
yet, by the directors own mouth, it seemed that others would still be facing some sort of penalty, having done the same exact thing, but shown no 'intent'. why is that?
 
SmarterthanYou said:
yet, by the directors own mouth, it seemed that others would still be facing some sort of penalty, having done the same exact thing, but shown no 'intent'. why is that?
Click to expand...

What an outrageous statement. You almost have to wonder if the FBI director was under political pressure to not reccomend an indictment, so he decided to get up there and spout nonsense to make someone pay. I don't believe the guy is that dumb or incompetent.

Notice he didn't take any questions. Probably a good move on his part. And note that AG Lynch is off the hook now. Just days after her little chat with Bill.

The whole thing stinks.
 
Rana said:
What a stupid analogy! lol I dare anyone to be water boarded and claim it isn't torture. It is demonstrably torture.

Apparently, you didn't get to interview all the people the FBI interviewed to come with their conclusions.
Click to expand...

But we didn't intend to torture them. Can you prove we did?
 
Rune said:
Again, you couldn't be more incorrect.
The entire reason that no charges will be filed is because they could find no criminal intent. From the director's own mouth.


You are so fucking funny with your connect the dots bullshit.

I see complex patterns in thick deep layers, you failingly attempt to connect dots.
Click to expand...
^ :rant:

are you still blathering about "intent?" do you KNOW what section of the Espionage act is even relevant?
Have you bothered to try and find out? ( no & no) or have you stuck your brain on MSNBC and let Howard Dean do it for you?
You are the most dumb ass worthless uninformed Goober I've ever com across online

here you go: see if you can comprehend English. 18 U.S. Code § 793 (f)

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793
(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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top