I don't know NEARLY enough about the technical stuff to conclude, for myself, if laws were broken, of if she received preferential treatment. This FBI director is known as being a straight shooter (I think). I had long ago accurately concluded about the character of this woman and her husband, this does very little to move the needle either way for me.

The FBI did say she was extremely careless in her handling of sensitive material. Is that who we want as POTUS when, whether she will say it or not, the civilized world is at war with jihadists? In a fair world, having the FBI say that you can't be trusted to handle sensitive intelligence, should be more than enough to lead people to conclude that she isn't nearly up for the job. She doesn't have the brains, she doesn't have the character.

And the fact that the FBI would release this, right after her husband had a secret meeting with the AG, is mind-boggling. The optics could not be more sleazy.

She's a moron, and she's morally bankrupt. I knew that already, and if anything, the outcome of this scandal (the latest of many) cements that.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.

Makes you wonder if this is the time, dunnit

I never thought that criminal charges would stick in this case. That said, based on Comey's scathing report on Hillary's carelessness her security clearance should be revoked at the very least. Any other government executive or employee would lose their clearance in a case like this for sure.

I just listened to the FBI briefing. The director said explicitly, that they found dozens of emails that were flagged as classified (or something like that) at the time she sent them to her personal server. Again, I'm not expert on these things, but doesn't that mean she lied? Hasn't her defense been all along, that she sent nothing that was classified at the time it was sent?

Read the transcript of the FBI directors announcement.
It was an indictment of her character and judgment.
She also lied about most things , including whether they were classified as top-secret or classified at the time they were sent ( well over 100 ) and the FBI found thousands of more emails that were work related that were not released by Hillary .
He even said that with the given evidence, anybody else could face charges.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Not necessarily, you could easily pass along an email thread containing classified information without even knowing it.

I've read that one "should have known" incident was discussing a public NYT article about drone strikes simply because the drone program was classified. Big whoop...

I'm glad they did the detailed investigationand that they found no evidence of intentional wrongdoing or cover up...conspiracy theories be dammed. You should also put the FBI comments on context of the IG report calling out lax information handling at State well before Clinton.

Fundamentally there's not a lot of new info here aside from the fact that the issue isn't worthy of prosecution...

So can you inform us of all the significant cases where "peasants" were prosecuted for unintentional mishandling of intelligence information?

Here ya go - I know you will find problems with it though

http://www.navytimes.com/story/milit...lker/30907091/

Because I like you I'll give you a mulligan. This is your oppy to bring some game...do it!

You don't need to show intent. She showed gross negligence.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Huh?
The FBI stated it was illegal but legally speaking the story is dead , HUH?

Yes it shows she has a nose bigger than Pinocchio, and this is the person half of our country wants as POTUS :tm::fishslap:

That's not how the law works.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You are completely out of your gourd. She said that 0 emails were flagged as classified or higher, when she sent. There were over 100. The FBI director said no reasonable person could have failed to know they were being reckless. She's a pathological liar.

But when you won't concede she lied about the sniper attack, I guess denying that she lied here is nothing.

The FBI has concluded that she was extremely careless with the handling of sensitive information.

John Deutsch
Sandy Berger

Yes it is
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

This is a quote from the FBI director today....

"Our investigation looked at whether there is evidence classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on that personal system, in violation of a federal statute making it a felony to mishandle classified information either intentionally or in a grossly negligent way, or a second statute making it a misdemeanor to knowingly remove classified information from appropriate systems or storage facilities."

What part of "violation of a federal statute making it a felony to mishandle classified information.....in a grossly negligent way" don't you understand????



Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

As I suspected Some are unable to accept she didn't commit a crime and is not going to jail and this saddens them .. for me the issues has never been what she and her people did wasn't stupid or irresponsible and I dont disagree with those who feel that way .. My argument has always against the Jail time crowd like birthers no mater the evidence it's in their heads

I only hope that those who hate Hillary would put the same effort looking into the Donald and his Trustworthiness experience his knowledge of world politics his Maybe Crimes and temperament to be POTUS.. and have the same frank conversation ..just an idea

Spence - believe me as I have worked in this field all my working life. I've known plenty of examples where a silly mistake with classified information even with no "intent" has resulted in loss of job, security clearance, and those involved can never pass a background check again for government work. My guess is someone in Hillary's state dept office will be the fall guy and lose their job to protect her. I mean how can a potential POTUS not pass a background check?

That's not what the FBI determined at all however it does sadden me that she won't be going to jail ....for this crime at least .
I'm holding out hope that karma and justice eventually catch up to her .
Question ... Does it sadden you that she lied through her teeth ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Comey said she broke laws and the laws she broke are felonies, he said he did not have something that was prosecutable.

BTW - a lot of us that think Hillary is unfit to be president feel Trump is unfit to be president. So get off your high horse.

And isn't the FBI basically making the case she lied under oath ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The anti-Hilary posters all have, looked negatively into the Donald's reputation, but a choice has to be made. Hillary already has a political resume which is one of failed policies and a rigid temperament to stick to and defend those policies, which should be enough to say no to her.

better to have tried and failed, then not having tried at all.

Now they look worse to people like me who are not asleep

He didn't say that was the finding, that was the initial inquiry...which they found didn't have sufficient evidence to prosecute.

Deutsch? Nothing happened, he's still in good standing.

Berger? There you have intentional theft of classified material, lying about the theft and destruction of the documents. And for all that he got a slap on the wrist.

Swing, and a miss...

This is not what Comey said.

i.e. the felony standard for gross negligence was not met.

Extreme carelessness !!
That is the definition of gross negligence .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

He did not, specifically he said there was evidence of "potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information."

That's not the same thing as saying Clinton committed a felony.

Nothing happened? He lost his security clearance, which was unprecedented for someone in his position. And he was negotiating a plea deal with prosecutors at the time he was pardoned by President Clinton. By the way, no one from the CIA was consulted or informed that he was going to be pardoned on Clintons last day in office. I certainly wouldn't say he's in good standing.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

He stated that classified material WAS found on her server....

So SOMEONE is guilty of intentionally or negligently mis-handling classified material.

So who is it???
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Now her camp is saying they may keep lynch as ag? If that's true, Hilary has tons of contempt for all of us. Is she that brazen?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

and


I would venture to say she would not be able to pass a Top Secret Clearance Test at this point and how can you elect a candidate for President that doesn't have one?

Considering the IG report showed a history of sloppy information handling well before Clinton, the amount of classified information was fairly low, there isn't any malicious intent and that it doesn't appear anything bad is known to happen as a result...I doubt we'll ever know.

It's not like they're going to go make an example of people when the policies have already been tightened up.

I'm note sure that's such a clean cut decision. Executives are often given more wiggle room on matters like this out of respect for the weight and complexities of their responsibilities...and in this case responsibilities born out of public service rather than shareholders.

It's called a bribe .
If Hillary gets in she will nominate Obama and then Lynch for SCJ
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"Public Service " lmao
Yea she only got mega mega wealthy off her " public service "
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So you agree that would be a double standard?

It looks like it was temporarily Suspended and he got it back. His case does appear to be a bit different though, Deutsch was routinely using non-classified systems to knowingly process large volumes of classified information. It was intentional, not a small volume of classified information spilling into an unclassified system which from what I understand is quite common.