BREAKING NEWS: Hillary will NOT be Indicted!!!

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

3 minutes ago, Goosey said:

@LebaneseDude

 

You have been saying Hillary did nothing wrong, that she was not incompetent or careless—

 

I never said she wasn't careless.

I just said she didn't do anything criminal which is what the investigation was about.

Also I'd avoid trying to use this report as some kind of justification for anything other than it is being a vindication of Clinton. This is a high profile case and so the FBI cannot afford seeming lenient. "Extremely" is a vague quantifier. 

They basically said she's innocent but people cannot try to do the same thing as the motive wasn't there. It's a deterrence.

Maybe it's nothing but the person who issued this report is an avid Republican so I'd take the report as a final "**** You" to Clinton when they failed to prove anything.

[Goosey 3,017]

7 minutes ago, LebaneseDude said:

I never said she wasn't careless.

I just said she didn't do anything criminal which is what the investigation was about.

Also I'd avoid trying to use this report as some kind of justification for anything other than it is being a vindication of Clinton. This is a high profile case and so the FBI cannot afford seeming lenient. "Extremely" is a vague quantifier. 

They basically said she's innocent but people cannot try to do the same thing as the motive wasn't there. It's a deterrence.

Maybe it's nothing but the person who issued this report is an avid Republican so I'd take the report as a final "**** You" to Clinton when they failed to prove anything.

They didn't say she's innocent of wrongdoing, they said they don't have enough evidence of intent to make a winning criminal case. Small but important difference. They did imply she does not deserve to be given top secret security clearances.

"To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now."

The FBI can't give her security or administrative sanctions (not their job and she isn't Secretary of State) but they implied she deserves them.

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

5 minutes ago, Goosey said:

they said they don't have enough evidence of intent to make a winning criminal case. 

That's exactly what I'm saying  

5 minutes ago, Goosey said:

They did imply she does not deserve to be given top secret security clearances.

"To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now."

The FBI can't give her security or administrative sanctions (not their job and she isn't Secretary of State) but they implied she deserves them.

Wonderful and the statement is also another deterrent like I said before.

Yes individuals are "often" subject to these sanctions but if you think Hillary is going to be subject to one then you are going to be disappointed.

And yes it has to do with the fact that she is a politician and no it's not because of corruption. It's because she has had an illustrious career so her one ****up is not going to justify stripping her of confidence.

---

Honestly you need to stop going after Hillary and start defending Trump because he's in deep **** right now.

[Sara 1,144]

Hillary has been accused of a lot of things.  But charged with none of them.

If you started off not liking Hillary to begin with, then you were inclined to believe every accusation, and from your point of view it looks like she's gotten away again and again and again.

If you started off liking Hillary to begin with, then you believe all these accusations are witch hunts, and she's being unfairly attacked again and again and again.

So that's why we have such a huge divide of opinion.   There are precious true facts, and lots of Faux News out there.

 

 

 

[Goosey 3,017]

1 minute ago, LebaneseDude said:

That's exactly what I'm saying  

They do have enough evidence to create an administrative case. For example, it would have been entirely appropriate to fire her! But as I said, it's the FBI, that's not their job. Still, they showed she may have compromised national security.

2 minutes ago, LebaneseDude said:

Wonderful and the statement is also another deterrent like I said before.

Yes individuals are "often" subject to these sanctions but if you think Hillary is going to be subject to one then you are going to be disappointed.

And yes it has to do with the fact that she is a politician and no it's not because of corruption. It's because she has had an illustrious career so her one mistake is not going to justify anything.

---

Honestly you need to stop going after Hillary and start defending Trump because he's in deep **** right now.

In trouble? Over the sheriff's star, or something new? Anyhow: "USA TODAY/Suffolk Poll: Clinton's lead over Trump narrows to 5 points"

 

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

2 minutes ago, Goosey said:

They do have enough evidence to create an administrative case. For example, it would have been entirely appropriate to fire her! But as I said, it's the FBI, that's not their job. Still, they showed she may have compromised national security.

In trouble? Over the sheriff's star, or something new? Anyhow: "USA TODAY/Suffolk Poll: Clinton's lead over Trump narrows to 5 points"

 

Yes she would have been fired but she's not working there now. They can also fine her but that's ultimately irrelevant.

Stop quoting national polls and look at the state-level polls. Hillary is widening her lead in purple states. Florida, Michigan, Ohio, and NH are basically blue states right now.

[Sara 1,144]

3 hours ago, LebaneseDude said:

Tbh I feel that after spending over 100 million dollars and three decades investigating her, either she's the victim of a "vast right wing conspiracy" or she's a criminal mastermind that makes Machiavelli look like an amateur. Either way, she'll make a great president. 

I agree.  People talk about her like she's Cersei Lannister, which is giving her WAY too much credit and everyone else way too little credit.   This is Hillary we are talking about, who couldn't even give up her Blackberry for something better and more secure. 

If only we followed politics as closely as Game of Thrones....

 

 

[Goosey 3,017]

1 minute ago, LebaneseDude said:

Yes she would have been fired but she's not working there now. They can also fine her but that's ultimately irrelevant.

Stop quoting national polls and look at the state-level polls. Hillary is widening her lead in purple states. Florida and NH are basically blue states right now.

So it's not an indictment, but still a damning statement, and a small victory for those who don't like Hillary.

I looked at RealClearPolitics average national polls, and it's about the same, around 5 points (4.6 to be precise).

And remember what the polls said about Brexit... there's a silent majority out there, they might not want to support Trump publicly but could show up to vote.

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

2 minutes ago, Sara said:

I agree.  People talk about her like she's Cersei Lannister, which is giving her WAY too much credit and everyone else way too little credit.   This is Hillary we are talking about, who couldn't even give up her Blackberry for something better and more secure. 

If only we followed politics as closely as Game of Thrones....

 

 

LOL the analogy  

[windzo 811]

http://gph.is/29jxtEe

(how do I gif)

[En_Sabah_Nur 9,366]

47 minutes ago, Sara said:

Hillary has been accused of a lot of things.  But charged with none of them.

If you started off not liking Hillary to begin with, then you were inclined to believe every accusation, and from your point of view it looks like she's gotten away again and again and again.

If you started off liking Hillary to begin with, then you believe all these accusations are witch hunts, and she's being unfairly attacked again and again and again.

So that's why we have such a huge divide of opinion.   There are precious true facts, and lots of Faux News out there.

 

 

 

MTE!  I've been saying this same exact thing for forever now it seems like actually...  

 

[Adakam 2]

56 minutes ago, Goosey said:

So it's not an indictment, but still a damning statement, and a small victory for those who don't like Hillary.

I looked at RealClearPolitics average national polls, and it's about the same, around 5 points (4.6 to be precise).

And remember what the polls said about Brexit... there's a silent majority out there, they might not want to support Trump publicly but could show up to vote.

Well its only a small victory with those obsessed to attack her or calling the system "rigged" like sore losers do, but its a huge victory for her, and just like the closet trumpeteers you mention, this will bring out many voters that were holding off their vote until this thing resolution. becaue you can sugarcoat it as much as you want for your convenience, but at the end of the day, she is oficially not a criminal, and she keeps cleaning her name

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

Seethe Trump Fans  

Did people even continue to watch after he said they would recommend they not bring charges? If you didn't it sounds like "Shes guilty of this and this and this but we aren't bringing charges on her!" which DOES sound corrupt if you don't keep watching. Afterwards, he clearly explains that a lot of factors go into prosecution on cases like this, including precedent, the strength of the evidence, and criminal intent or lack of. They said that based on intent Clinton had no reason to want to jeopardize classified information and was probably acting as any reasonable e-mail user and deleting her emails periodically as the server became clustered. Importantly to note, on precedent they said in all of their investigations they could not find a case similar to this that would warrant criminal charges and they have no reason to basically make an example of out Hillary who has been a reputable public servant her entire life with a great track record. They also said they are sure that "no" prosecutor would charge someone for this and reassured everyone that the investigation was done independently.

Its not corrupt at all, they completely explained why they decided what they did. 

[Goosey 3,017]

35 minutes ago, Adakam said:

Well its only a small victory with those obsessed to attack her or calling the system "rigged" like sore losers do

I've heard many people here say that about Bush's win over Al Gore, or when Kazakh President Nazarbayev apologized for winning 97.7 percent of the vote, saying it would have "looked undemocratic" for him to intervene to make his victory more modest. Sore losers?

38 minutes ago, Adakam said:

this will bring out many voters that were holding off their vote until this thing resolution. becaue you can sugarcoat it as much as you want for your convenience, but at the end of the day, she is oficially not a criminal, and she keeps cleaning her name

I don't think many were holding off their vote based on the results of this, but we'll see.

[Katharine Hepburn 4,607]

6 hours ago, Morphine Prince said:

 

His campaign is so weak, he would have made a much better response at the start of the campaign