FBI on Clinton

[newtogolf]

27 minutes ago, Elmer said:

That Navy engineer is in no way comparable to Hillary. Stop with the false equivalency!

The Engineer was "downloading classified briefings and digital records onto his personal electronic devices. He carried the materials off base and brought them back to the U.S. when his deployment ended."

His INTENT was to down load classified record and material and take it home.

Hillary, like it or not, as Secretary of State simply was careless in her use of an unsecured server.
Part of her job was to send, receive and maintain these emails.
You can not compare Hillary to Petraeus, snowden or this engineer!
Now had Hillary downloaded the classified information and given them to a friend to be used as a coffee table book, you might have a comparison.

but the facts and intent are not the same!

And Hillary didn't delete all the emails on her server to obstruct justice or lie about her personal servers having classified emails on them.   She's just misunderstood.  

[saevel25]

7 minutes ago, newtogolf said:

And Hillary didn't delete all the emails on her server to obstruct justice or lie about her personal servers having classified emails on them.   She's just misunderstood.  

From the FBI her email server was set up to whip clean old emails after a period of time. This is common practice on most email servers. I can set up the same thing with my gmail or work email. 

 

[newtogolf]

8 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

From the FBI her email server was set up to whip clean old emails after a period of time. This is common practice on most email servers. I can set up the same thing with my gmail or work email. 

 

It's not common practice on government email systems where everything must be archived.  She also bulk deleted 30,000 emails she claimed were personal but there was no way to ensure that is true.  

[Elmer]

14 minutes ago, newtogolf said:

It's not common practice on government email systems where everything must be archived.  

I know on my govt server only important emails are archived.
All others are wiped out after 90 days!

Chances are any of the deleted emails were either unimportant or redundant!

Edited July 7, 2016 by Elmer

[newtogolf]

9 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

From the FBI her email server was set up to whip clean old emails after a period of time. This is common practice on most email servers. I can set up the same thing with my gmail or work email. 

 

Quote

The State Department is responsible for transferring records to the National Archives and Records Administration after a federal employee’s departure.

 

[saevel25]

I am listening to the grilling the FBI Director getting grilled by the Congress today. 

In the opening statement the FBI Director stated that only once in the last 90+ years has the DOJ ever brought criminal charges against a person who had gross negligence in mishandling classified information. That case was in the context of espionage. Gross negligence, meaning mishandling classified information with out the intent required for criminal charges. 

Another answer given, and a lawyer one. The FBI Director said the DOJ would only proceed with criminal charges if there was no reasonable doubt that a criminal act was committed. In our law system, for certain charges to be brought, there needs to be the intent in the crime. Basically they could not prove intent to do harm. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea

"the act is not culpable unless the mind is guilty". Thus, in jurisdictions with due process, there must be an actus reus, or "guilty act", accompanied by some level of mens rea to constitute the crime with which the defendant is charged 

On a side note, in the next few hours or days Hillary's testimony before congress will be investigated. The FBI Director stated that congress must petition the FBI to start an investigation. That is why the FBI has not looked into Hillary's testimony before congress. She might be brought up on perjury charges. Which would be highly ironic that is why Bill got put through the impeachment process. 

 

[rehmwa]

17 hours ago, Gunther said:

Have you seen the polls?  A good 15-20% remain undecided, which is many millions.

I posit that they claim to be undecided, but have already picked one or the other and just have the good send to be too ashamed to admit it.......  (Just confirming you are familiar with my normal wryness in posting)

[Elmer]

4 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

I am listening to the grilling the FBI Director getting grilled by the Congress today. 

In the opening statement the FBI Director stated that only once in the last 90+ years has the DOJ ever brought criminal charges against a person who had gross negligence in mishandling classified information. That case was in the context of espionage. Gross negligence, meaning mishandling classified information with out the intent required for criminal charges. 

Another answer given, and a lawyer one. The FBI Director said the DOJ would only proceed with criminal charges if there was no reasonable doubt that a criminal act was committed. In our law system, for certain charges to be brought, there needs to be the intent in the crime. Basically they could not prove intent to do harm. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea

"the act is not culpable unless the mind is guilty". Thus, in jurisdictions with due process, there must be an actus reus, or "guilty act", accompanied by some level of mens rea to constitute the crime with which the defendant is charged 

On a side note, in the next few hours or days Hillary's testimony before congress will be investigated. The FBI Director stated that congress must petition the FBI to start an investigation. That is why the FBI has not looked into Hillary's testimony before congress. She might be brought up on perjury charges. Which would be highly ironic that is why Bill got put through the impeachment process. 

 

No she was guilty of being lazy and careless. She should be dragged out into the street and shot in front of the American People!
This will teach federal employees about following protocol.
This will teach the entitled elite 1% about equal justice!!!!!

 

[newtogolf]

2 minutes ago, Elmer said:

No she was guilty of being lazy and careless. She should be dragged out into the street and shot in front of the American People!
This will teach federal employees about following protocol.
This will teach the entitled elite 1% about equal justice!!!!!

 

She wasn't careless or lazy she considers herself above the law.  

No need to shoot her, I'd be happy if she suffered for 5 years in an orange jump suit and prison cell.  

[Gunther]

3 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

I posit that they claim to be undecided, but have already picked one or the other and just have the good send to be too ashamed to admit it.......  (Just confirming you are familiar with my normal wryness in posting)

Yes, a wry guy you are, but I did think you were serious in that post.  There are some in the camp you describe but still many millions that could go either way or stay home.

I know of 2 people who would have otherwise not voted but because of Comey's press conference, are now going to vote Trump (at least they say they are).  This pissed people off.  Trump needs to manage it better than he has and I'm not sure he can.

[rehmwa]

8 minutes ago, Gunther said:

Yes, a wry guy you are, but I did think you were serious in that post.  There are some in the camp you describe but still many millions that could go either way or stay home.

I know of 2 people who would have otherwise not voted but because of Comey's press conference, are now going to vote Trump (at least they say they are).  This pissed people off.  Trump needs to manage it better than he has and I'm not sure he can.

I can't vote for either of them still - the more time passes the less I think of either of them.  It's painful.  One of them will have to do something exceptionally good or exceptionally bad for me to give a vote to anyone but the Libertarian - I just want the philosophy to be in future debates.  (People don't even know what it is)

"voting for the lesser of two evils" used to just be a figurative statement, I can't believe it's now a literal statement.

[newtogolf]

The bigger issue aside, I like FBI Director Comey, he seems to be sincere and honestly reporting what he and his team found as a result of the investigation.   He's sitting at that desk being played by both sides and maintaining an extremely high level of professionalism.  

[NJpatbee]

1 hour ago, Elmer said:

No she was guilty of being lazy and careless. She should be dragged out into the street and shot in front of the American People!
This will teach federal employees about following protocol.
This will teach the entitled elite 1% about equal justice!!!!!

 

I do not believe she was lazy since it took a planned effort to set up her own servers to control who has access to her information rather than use the secured servers provided by the government.  She also definitely lied repeatedly regarding the existence of classified information on her servers to the American people but it will be interesting to review the details of her testimony on the matter.  An interesting twist is that if any of us had been so careless with classified information we would not get a top secret clearance afterwards.  If she is elected President what will the FBI do regarding investigating her for clearance? 

Well, as the Chinese curse says, "May you live in interesting times". 

[newtogolf]

5 minutes ago, NJpatbee said:

I do not believe she was lazy since it took a planned effort to set up her own servers to control who has access to her information rather than use the secured servers provided by the government.  She also definitely lied repeatedly regarding the existence of classified information on her servers to the American people but it will be interesting to review the details of her testimony on the matter.  An interesting twist is that if any of us had been so careless with classified information we would not get a top secret clearance afterwards.  If she is elected President what will the FBI do regarding investigating her for clearance? 

Well, as the Chinese curse says, "May you live in interesting times". 

Unless her existing clearance is revoked, Clinton won't be investigated, she will be required to take an oath to secure sensitive and classified documents and information.  She's already considered vetted

[jsgolfer]

2 hours ago, Elmer said:

That Navy engineer is in no way comparable to Hillary. Stop with the false equivalency!

The Engineer was "downloading classified briefings and digital records onto his personal electronic devices. He carried the materials off base and brought them back to the U.S. when his deployment ended."

His INTENT was to down load classified record and material and take it home.

Hillary, like it or not, as Secretary of State simply was careless in her use of an unsecured server.
Part of her job was to send, receive and maintain these emails.
You can not compare Hillary to Petraeus, snowden or this engineer!
Now had Hillary downloaded the classified information and given them to a friend to be used as a coffee table book, you might have a comparison.

but the facts and intent are not the same!

Of course on the same day the FBI report broke and what should be a embarrassing news day for Hillary, Trump pee's in his own well by complimenting Saddam

I think Comey said "Extremely Careless".  Part of her job was not to send classified information through an unsecured server.  

She didn't have to download the information, she had it on her phone.  

Not sure I said anything about Petraeus or Snowden or any other people who have been convicted (Sandy Berger, Alberto Gonzalez and others).  Only thing about the navy engineer, was that they found no intent to distribute the information externally, same as Clinton.  You and I can disagree on whether downloading to your personal computer is that vastly different from it being sent directly to your personal phone.  It would have been nice to have her held accountable (not criminal) like anyone else who would've done the same thing.

But in reality I could care less, I find the entire email fiasco, nothing but a big chuckle.  The presidential election is going to be great theater.  You have two very untrustworthy and offensive people running for the highest profile job in the world.  I can't wait. Bring the Popcorn! 

Trump says stupid things all the time, the Saddam quote being one of the dumbest, almost like he is trying to lose the election.

[Elmer]

15 minutes ago, jsgolfer said:

I think Comey said "Extremely Careless".  Part of her job was not to send classified information through an unsecured server.  

She didn't have to download the information, she had it on her phone.  

Not sure I said anything about Petraeus or Snowden or any other people who have been convicted (Sandy Berger, Alberto Gonzalez and others).  Only thing about the navy engineer, was that they found no intent to distribute the information externally, same as Clinton.  You and I can disagree on whether downloading to your personal computer is that vastly different from it being sent directly to your personal phone.  It would have been nice to have her held accountable (not criminal) like anyone else who would've done the same thing.

But in reality I could care less, I find the entire email fiasco, nothing but a big chuckle.  The presidential election is going to be great theater.  You have two very untrustworthy and offensive people running for the highest profile job in the world.  I can't wait. Bring the Popcorn! 

Trump says stupid things all the time, the Saddam quote being one of the dumbest, almost like he is trying to lose the election.

I only mentioned Petraeus or Snowden, because I am seeing a lot of internet Meme's and other outrage that these 2 were charged and HRC was not.
HOwever both  Petraeus or Snowden passed the information on to unapproved 3rd parties.

There was an article out today that indicated if Hillary was running against anyone else she would be in trouble.
I am starting to believe DT is a plant for HRC!
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/436740/donald-trump-bill-clinton-plant-theory-marcy-kaptur-speculates

[Gunther]

1 hour ago, rehmwa said:

I can't vote for either of them still - the more time passes the less I think of either of them.  It's painful.  One of them will have to do something exceptionally good or exceptionally bad for me to give a vote to anyone but the Libertarian - I just want the philosophy to be in future debates.  (People don't even know what it is)

"voting for the lesser of two evils" used to just be a figurative statement, I can't believe it's now a literal statement.

Ha, for me this is the 3rd straight election where the lesser of 2 evils is quite literal.  Couldn't decide in '08 so I sat that one out.  Wasn't a fan of Romney in '12 but he was clearly the lesser.  I believe many of our problems would be gone had he been elected but the immigration issue would remain.  

And this year I view Trump as the lesser of 2 evils only because I know he loves his country and will do his best to get her wheels back on while the other thinks her country is the root of all the world's ailments and will continue to try to diminish her.

[saevel25]

After listening to Comey, I believe him in what he says. Meaning, that he was 100% impartial. That he did not collaborate with the White House or with the Clinton's. That his decision was based on what he believed was the law, the judicial history of the law, and the evidence provided to him.  

That being said, I can disagree with his interpretation of the word intent, how the law is read, or if the criminal intent should be part of the law.

As it is, with judicial history, you will not likely see this being a criminal crime unless congress changes the statute.