BREAKING NEWS: Hillary will NOT be Indicted!!!

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

37 minutes ago, FATCAT said:

Apparently ignorance is a defense for gross negligence.

No honey. Motive is.

[JGD 12,101]

38 minutes ago, Morphine Prince said:

As if your candidate cares about minorities 

 

 

[JusKeepBreathin 19,311]

55 minutes ago, TrumpAteMyHeart said:

Wow, America has truly turned into a second world country. The corruption and favoritism is so obvious. Our justice system is broken, completely. General Patraeus got punished for far less. Young black men who get caught smoking weed get locked for no reason while this crook gets to walk away freely even though she put our country's security in jeopardy in order to get a few coins. We are doomed.

Who can take you seriously with your screen name? This just in, Trump will be found guilty of fraud. 

[JusKeepBreathin 19,311]

41 minutes ago, LebaneseDude said:

The best part about all this is that now there's literally nothing stopping the Queen  

Add this to the list.

100 Million .

[Slayer 9,227]

I haven't really been following this because American politics is just a clusterfvck of nonsense, but why is everybody getting so riled up about some emails?  

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

23 minutes ago, etron said:

I haven't really been following this because American politics is just a clusterfvck of nonsense, but why is everybody getting so riled up about some emails?  

Cause they're all suddenly experts in computer security.

Also it's Clinton.

And people don't think they're brainwashed into believing Hillary is "corrupt" 

[En_Sabah_Nur 9,366]

29 minutes ago, LebaneseDude said:

Cause they're all suddenly experts in computer security.

Also it's Clinton.

And people don't think they're brainwashed into believing Hillary is "corrupt" 

Especially when Chump LITERALLY lies every damn day, multiple times a day at that.!  

 

[Lion Heart 15,041]

Hillary Clinton may not face charges over her email practices as secretary of state, but she may not be in the clear just yet.

FBI Director James Comey said Tuesday that "no charges are appropriate" against Clinton for her handling of classified information on private email servers. The Department of Justice will make the final call on prosecution.

While she may not see charges, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee will face even more scrutiny after Comey's assessment of her practices.

Comey said Clinton and her team were "extremely careless," but added that there was not clear evidence that they intended to violate the law. That appears to clash with Clinton's view of her habits, as she replied "no" when asked by CNBC in March if her email practices were sloppy.

"There was not a single one of those that was marked classified," she said. 

However, Comey said the investigation showed that 110 emails in 52 email chains were determined to include classified information at the time they were received.

Clinton and her staff could have violated certain laws even if they did not intend to do so, said Jacob Frenkel, a former Department of Justice attorney. He said possible ignorance or negligence can still lead to charges in some cases.

"I think the Department of Justice senior prosecutors certainly can review this. And I think there is a basis for the Department of Justice to come to a different conclusion," he told CNBC's "Squawk Alley."

In a statement after Comey's remarks, a Clinton spokesman said the campaign is "pleased" with the announcement.

"As the Secretary has long said, it was a mistake to use her personal email and she would not do it again. We are glad that this matter is now resolved," the statement said.

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/05/clinton-may-not-face-charges-but-shes-not-off-the-hook-in-email-scandal.html?%3Fsource=Twitter

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

How did you miss the giant thread in World News?  

[uo111 5,283]

I don't think anyones gonna be suprised by that.

You'd have to be an idiot to think that they would go after someone like her, regardless of what she did.

[Lion Heart 15,041]

2 minutes ago, LebaneseDude said:

How did you miss the giant thread in World News?  

Damn. No wonder I missed it: It's kind of in the wrong section and I was looking for "FBI" and completely missed it. 

[holy scheisse 23,072]

does it matter that there wasn't evidence she was intentionally trying to break the rules? cause she broke them anyway//

[Luiz 4,253]

for the Little Trumpsters and BernieHoes 

 

 

 

[Goosey 3,017]

@LebaneseDude

 

You have been saying Hillary did nothing wrong, that she was not incompetent or careless—but the FBI Director just released this statement. Explain!

 

"Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

... any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position ... should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation ...

None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers ...

... even if information is not marked “classified” in an e-mail, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it.

... we did not find direct evidence that Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail domain, in its various configurations since 2009, was successfully hacked. But, given the nature of the system and of the actors potentially involved, we assess that we would be unlikely to see such direct evidence. We do assess that hostile actors gained access to the private commercial e-mail accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account. We also assess that Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent. She also used her personal e-mail extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related e-mails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail account."

 

 

 

[Goosey 3,017]