EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 4156
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
| ||
|
DickMcFanny
Ireland1076 Posts
I think Ted Cruz is an evil, pathetic liar, but equating "You can't choose the right bathroom and can't get married" with "You will be stoned or thrown off a large building" is just so dishonest. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15713 Posts
On July 05 2016 23:56 xDaunt wrote: So Comey is going to make a statement. I'm guessing that there will be no charges. *heavy breathing* I am almost positive nothing will happen, but I can't help but sweat bullets. Trump will be president if he presses charges. That's totally fucking wild. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15713 Posts
On July 06 2016 00:08 xDaunt wrote: Uh oh, he's listing a bunch of emails that were sent/received that were classified at the time. Where are you seeing this? | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
http://www.nbcnews.com/video/watch-live-fbi-director-comey-makes-statement-322521155994 Summary: 1. Some emails up-classified and down-classified; some classified emails exchanged on the servers. 2. Some deleted emails, a few of them classified, nothing deliberate and mostly reasonable factors (e.g. server moves). 3. No evidence of hacking by foreign agents, but no way to tell if it would have happened anyways. 4. Despite misconduct, nothing significant enough to recommend criminal charges. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15713 Posts
Woooooooooooooooooooohoooooooooooooooooo All legal matters are now behind Clinton and the media machine can blast everything else in people's ears from here until November. Phew! | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On July 06 2016 00:16 xDaunt wrote: Ok, so he lays out the case for gross negligence, but then recommends no charges. From the context of his rationale for his decision I took that he sees misconduct but not enough to make a legal case for that is likely to succeed. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15713 Posts
On July 06 2016 00:19 LegalLord wrote: I wouldn't really call that a shining endorsement on the part of Comey. It won't sink her but it certainly isn't going to leave her exonerated either. Even if she wins it doesn't make her popular and that's going to have a long term effect. She was sloppy, but not criminal. That's a key distinction with how people say to put her in prison etc. The FBI says no charges. Media flooding can overcome this, IMO. More importantly, there is no more events to take place. The media has nothing to use the emails for at this point, as the verdict has been made. There's no more suspense. The media has no incentive to flare the issue up. They will find another thing to latch onto. *THAT* is what is important here. The media will play a huge role here. | ||
|
Silvanel
Poland4731 Posts
| ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15713 Posts
On July 06 2016 00:29 xDaunt wrote: What he basically said is that there is evidence of gross negligence, but, because there is no history of prosecution in purely gross negligence cases (supposedly there has always been some kind of intentional misconduct attendant to the gross negligence), he is not recommending prosecution. Pretty weak if you ask me. This would have been a case fought to the bone. As I understand, proving intent in this case would have been nearly impossible. It may be ethical to force her into a trial as punishment, but that's not how the law works. The FBI realized it would lose a lot of credibility and bite to lose a case like this. And they would have lost, for sure. The FBI was saving itself by not going after our glorious goddess. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18832 Posts
| ||
|
zeo
Serbia6298 Posts
On July 06 2016 00:29 xDaunt wrote: What he basically said is that there is evidence of gross negligence, but, because there is no history of prosecution in purely gross negligence cases (supposedly there has always been some kind of intentional misconduct attendant to the gross negligence), he is not recommending prosecution. Pretty weak if you ask me. They were never going to really prosecute her, she is protected by the very top of the country. If Trump gets elected they can just reopen the case and do it right without fear for their jobs. They also found no evidence to prosecute Pablo Escobar in Columbia once upon a time. | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
| ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On July 06 2016 00:31 Mohdoo wrote: This would have been a case fought to the bone. As I understand, proving intent in this case would have been nearly impossible. It may be ethical to force her into a trial as punishment, but that's not how the law works. The FBI realized it would lose a lot of credibility and bite to lose a case like this. And they would have lost, for sure. The FBI was saving itself by not going after our glorious goddess. "Under political pressure, after laying out a rock solid case for gross misconduct on the part of Hillary Clinton and her corrupt administration as Secretary of State, the FBI decided not to recommend an indictment of Hillary Clinton. The FBI itself has made the case, and Obama's appointed staff will certainly choose to avoid prosecution. However, make no mistake, the FBI's testimony does corroborate the fact that Hillary Clinton is a criminal and belongs in prison, and this only adds to the list of crimes that she has been able to use her corrupt political influence to worm herself out of." - Republicans everywhere That would probably be quite effective, and it's not entirely wrong either. | ||
| ||
