James Comey Press Con. At 11am

[*michaelsean*]

(07-05-2016, 04:17 PM)bfine32 Wrote: As I've said since jump. Her best defense is stupidity. 

You don't need intent, but I don't get the no intent. She certainly set up the server on purpose. But like I said, no way they are indicting the nominee.

Edit:This was supposed to be in response to Dino's post.

[GMDino]

(07-05-2016, 07:56 PM)michaelsean Wrote: You don't need intent, but I don't get the no intent.  She certainly set up the server on purpose.  But like I said, no way they are indicting the nominee.

Edit:This was supposed to be in response to Dino's post.

Certainly she did.  But all along this has been whether she did it to hide anything.  Apparently there was no intent to do that.

[JustWinBaby]

"No reasonable prosecutor would bring a case"

I can think of at least a few unreasonable prosecutors they could get from Ferguson or Baltimore.

[GMDino]

(07-05-2016, 08:02 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: "No reasonable prosecutor would bring a case"

I can think of at least a few unreasonable prosecutors they could get from Ferguson or Baltimore.

Do you think no one should have been charged at all in the Gray case?

[JustWinBaby]

(07-05-2016, 08:11 PM)GMDino Wrote: Do you think no one should have been charged at all in the Gray case?

With murder?  No

[GMDino]

(07-05-2016, 08:34 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: With murder?  No

But charges should have been brought.

[Nebuchadnezzar]

There will be tremendous pressure on Loretta Lynch to take this evidence to the Grand Jury.

The evidence laid out in that speech is going to force the public to put pressure on Lynch to present the evidence.

This isn't over yet.

[GMDino]

[Nebuchadnezzar]

Question: Did Hilary Clinton commit a crime?

[*bfine32*]

(07-05-2016, 09:53 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: Question: Did Hilary Clinton commit a crime?

Of course Hillary Clinton committed a crime; the FBI said as much. She was just right in her assumption that she was above the law. I can only assume that the lies she said in public were not repeated when she was questioned in private by the FBI.

WTS, I don't think anything further should be done. The FBI has recommended no charges and we must abide by the decision. Every vote in November for her will be an act to show that you agree with their decision. 

[Rotobeast]

(07-05-2016, 03:22 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: It was stupid and potentially unethical (certainly so in my opinion as it seems clear she tried to skirt transparency laws), but not illegal.

Is that a sexist term ?

(I know it's a reach for a joke, but it seems like a word that would be scrutinized.)
(Also felt like quoting you to say "Hi"..... Hi !)
(That was weird, wasn't it ?)
(These parentheses are getting out of control.)
(((They look like shark gills, you know.)))
((((((HELP!!!))))))

(07-05-2016, 09:39 PM)GMDino Wrote:

Dang.... pulling out some Jack Kirby.

[JustWinBaby]

(07-05-2016, 09:37 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: There will be tremendous pressure on Loretta Lynch to take this evidence to the Grand Jury.

I don't see how.  Comey is highly respected, and while you can argue he was really saying she should be indicted, he also went out of his way to say why he recommended she not be.

I think the one thing that is really damning to your theory is that he started out with "I've had no conversations about this, or direction....no one knows what I'm about to say...."  If his intent was to indicate he felt she should be indicted, then he did a pretty poor job of it - and especially I'm sure he could have dropped that opening statement.

Probably the only way to reconcile everything he said is that he believes there should be an indictment, but he also acknowledges nothing would come of it (hence why no reasonable DA would take the case).  Essentially he's saying it stinks to high hell, but you can't prove criminality beyond a reasonable doubt.

[BmorePat87]

(07-05-2016, 07:56 PM)michaelsean Wrote: You don't need intent, but I don't get the no intent.  She certainly set up the server on purpose.  But like I said, no way they are indicting the nominee.

Edit:This was supposed to be in response to Dino's post.

I think the emphasis was on the sharing of the information. Was there criminal intent to share state secrets and risk national security or was there overly reckless conduct?

[JustWinBaby]

(07-06-2016, 12:46 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I think the emphasis was on the sharing of the information. Was there criminal intent to share state secrets and risk national security or was there overly reckless conduct?

Well, the standard is gross negligence....and it sure sounded like that was what Comey was describing.  But apparently that standard doesn't apply to very high ranking officials (but generals, sure).

Honestly, as Comey was ticking off the various issues I was thinking "wow, I can't believe he's actually going to recommend an indictment".

[BmorePat87]

(07-06-2016, 02:38 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Well, the standard is gross negligence....and it sure sounded like that was what Comey was describing.  But apparently that standard doesn't apply to very high ranking officials (but generals, sure).

Honestly, as Comey was ticking off the various issues I was thinking "wow, I can't believe he's actually going to recommend an indictment".

Can't compare the two. One gave them to a mistress/journalist. The other to her employees.

[McC]

(07-06-2016, 12:46 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I think the emphasis was on the sharing of the information. Was there criminal intent to share state secrets and risk national security or was there overly reckless conduct?

If the best that can be said about her is gross incompetence, that's not exactly a ringing endorsement for a presidential candidate.  Millions of idiots will still vote for her as she wings her way across the USA on AF1.

[McC]

(07-05-2016, 09:53 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: Question: Did Hilary Clinton commit a crime?

Well, that depends.  Is stupid a crime?

[GMDino]

(07-06-2016, 08:09 AM)McC Wrote: If the best that can be said about her is gross incompetence, that's not exactly a ringing endorsement for a presidential candidate.  Millions of idiots will still vote for her as she wings her way across the USA on AF1.

Hyperbole.

Oh, and she went to one state (a one way trip) on Air Force 1.

And her campaign payed for it.

But I know you hate her...not her politics...but her.  So I'm not going to try and change your mind.

[BengalHawk62]

I've said it since the beginning of this whole email saga: there was never going to be an indictment because there was nothing there to warrant an indictment. it partisan politics and the GOP was in it for the points. Admittedly good strategy, btw-which they probably scored.  Same goes/went for Benghazi. Unfortunately for them, the far right of their party is psychotic and the primaries spit out possibly the worst Presidential candidate in history, so its all wasted.  I wager polls will show a shift to Gary Johnson in the short term, but Hillary still wins the Presidency in an electoral landslide.  There's just ultimately not enough people that are going to be swayed by this or Benghazi to make any significant difference. 

[GMDino]

I shared this on FB too.

So y'all can go out and see justice served.

https://www.fbijobs.gov/