Anyone else disappointed in Wikileaks?

[Alex.]

IMO people have been hoping that Wikileaks, the only avenue for Hillary's disgrace at the time, would detail conduct and communication that would destroy her. There is so much on the table , in public, right now. The only way to vote for Hillary is to be morally complicit in her untoward and careless acts.

While Wikileaks is always welcome, at this point, it is unnecessary.

 

[IanC]

Comey said Clinton was guilty last summer

Please provide a quote of his pronouncement of her guilt.

Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System — FBI

Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past.

In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here.

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.

End quote

Guilty but in this case we choose not to prosecute. Whitewash.

 

[IanC]

IMO people have been hoping that Wikileaks, the only avenue for Hillary's disgrace at the time, would detail conduct and communication that would destroy her. There is so much on the table , in public, right now. The only way to vote for Hillary is to be morally complicit in her untoward and careless acts.

While Wikileaks is always welcome, at this pint, it is unnecessary.

Exactly. Guilty of crimes that others would have been sanctioned for, but in her case no prosecution. Not exactly a ringing exoneration. More like a lumpy rug.

 

[Alex.]

IMO people have been hoping that Wikileaks, the only avenue for Hillary's disgrace at the time, would detail conduct and communication that would destroy her. There is so much on the table , in public, right now. The only way to vote for Hillary is to be morally complicit in her untoward and careless acts.

While Wikileaks is always welcome, at this pint, it is unnecessary.

Exactly. Guilty of crimes that others would have been sanctioned for, but in her case no prosecution. Not exactly a ringing exoneration. More like a lumpy rug.

Should Hillary get in, her presidency will be one scandal after another and she will be an ineffectual president. She truly is hated.

 

[jillian]

^^^these two haven't been paying any attention^^^

poor baby...they only posted garbage that matters to trumpsters and conspiracy loons. normal people don't much care.

 

[Rozman]

When they drop like 30,000 every day....
It's kind of like lets go back to Netflix and see whats going on with stranger things....
A bit of overkill....

 

[AmericanFirst1]

^^^these two haven't been paying any attention^^^

If the public isn't aware of them, they don't really count.

Where are they?

You need to crawl out of your hole. Been reported on the news.

 

[AmericanFirst1]

^^^these two haven't been paying any attention^^^

poor baby...they only posted garbage that matters to trumpsters and conspiracy loons. normal people don't much care.

You calling crooks normal? Nothing normal about libtards.

 

[Alex.]

^^^these two haven't been paying any attention^^^

poor baby...they only posted garbage that matters to trumpsters and conspiracy loons. normal people don't much care.

Jillianfries: dishonest "people don't pay much care"

^^^
Truest words ever posted.

 

[BlindBoo]

Comey said Clinton was guilty last summer

Please provide a quote of his pronouncement of her guilt.

Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System — FBI

Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past.

In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here.

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.

End quote

Guilty but in this case we choose not to prosecute. Whitewash.

It did not rise to the level set out in the statute, as he plainly stated:

"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."

If he had said she handled it in a grossly negligent way there'd be a crime. He didn't. As much as it appears he wanted too, he didn't pronounce her guilt.

 

[BlindBoo]

IMO people have been hoping that Wikileaks, the only avenue for Hillary's disgrace at the time, would detail conduct and communication that would destroy her. There is so much on the table , in public, right now. The only way to vote for Hillary is to be morally complicit in her untoward and careless acts.

While Wikileaks is always welcome, at this pint, it is unnecessary.

Exactly. Guilty of crimes that others would have been sanctioned for, but in her case no prosecution. Not exactly a ringing exoneration. More like a lumpy rug.

Should Hillary get in, her presidency will be one scandal after another and she will be an ineffectual president. She truly is hated.

Congress can't be more obstructive that they were with President Obama for the last 6 years. If they don't get some business done the country might have a surprise in store for them in 2018.

 

[Nosmo King]

Time is running out. Where's the bombshells?

Seems that wikileaks is only valued when it is a political mudslinger. When they were divulging national security secrets, you hated them.

Odd, isn't it? the level of crass hypocrisy.

 

[Alex.]

IMO people have been hoping that Wikileaks, the only avenue for Hillary's disgrace at the time, would detail conduct and communication that would destroy her. There is so much on the table , in public, right now. The only way to vote for Hillary is to be morally complicit in her untoward and careless acts.

While Wikileaks is always welcome, at this pint, it is unnecessary.

Exactly. Guilty of crimes that others would have been sanctioned for, but in her case no prosecution. Not exactly a ringing exoneration. More like a lumpy rug.

Should Hillary get in, her presidency will be one scandal after another and she will be an ineffectual president. She truly is hated.

Congress can't be more obstructive that they were with President Obama for the last 6 years. If they don't get some business done the country might have a surprise in store for them in 2018.

I honestly do not see anything positive getting done in the next four years , perhaps yes with Trump if he has the right people in his corner.

 

[AntonToo]

Wrong, I am pro Trump. I want to see something that Clinton supporters can't ignore. Trump only wins if Clinton loses the support of her base.

No matter what is shown regarding Hillary each individual will choose to ignore or not. I just spoke with someone who did vote for Hillary and now regrets it after the FBI announcement. Wikileaks is only one means used to expose that horrible woman.

FBI has so far not found new evidence against Hillary, and all Comey said was that they found some emails that MAY contain something new, so wtf is your friend regretting?

My friend, an attorney, examined the facts and feels that Hillary is scum.

Dumbass, I just explained to you the facts - NO NEW EVIDENCE HAS BEEN FOUND AGAINST HILLARY AT THE TIME OF COMEY'S LETTER. None, Zero, Zilch.

Now wtf is it that your lawyer friend knows about this that other lawyers, or people don't?

No new evidence has been released. It is difficult to discern the reasons why an independent investigation decided that evidence in one case needed to be called to the attention of a different, and closed, investigation. Zealous or overzealous? We will find out sooner or later but not in time for the election. Where does the precautionary principle land for this case?

No, you aren't paying attention - at the time of writing his letter Comey had no idea what is in the emails and he didn't even get a warrant for FBI to to even BEGIN to look at them until middle of last Sunday, the 30th.

This is why his letter was so damaging and inappropriate. It was vaguely written, released 11 days before election and didn't spell out exactly what Comey was saying and exactly what he was NOT saying.

People simply ASSumed based on Comey's credibility is that if he refocused on Hillary's case and even sent out a letter, then it must've been because of some new found evidence against Hillary, BUT IT WAS NOT. He simply said that new emails MAY contain something, not that they DID contain something.

Comey failed American public, he failed investigation and he undermined FBI's credibility as independent, a-political institution.

 

[emilynghiem]

Time is running out. Where's the bombshells?

Did it ever occur to you that someone who is willing to commit a FELONY--has an AGENDA--and a person that is so technology advanced that they could hack into secure Government computers---would also be able to add & delete context?

17 intelligence agencies, both private and government have stated these email hacks are coming from Russia. You'll note they're not hacking into RNC computers.

They want DONALD TRUMP bad, who has repeatedly snuggled up to Putin in numerous comments and even at one time is on video for encouraging Russia to do a cyber attack on the United States-(the State Department) to find more Clinton emails.
Yes, 17 intelligence agencies really did say Russia was behind hacking

You Reich wingers really aren't the sharpest knives in the drawer, are you?

A neuroscientist explains what may be wrong with Trump supporters’ brains
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/10/04/trump-polls-immigration-taxes-column/72755896/

Dear oreo If so, the Clinton defense would have already argued all this was planted.
I don't think you can fake emails where Hillary Clinton communicated with Chelsea and others IMMEDIATELY
that they knew the Benghazi attacks were terrorist attacks originally. Then the whole video
focus was used as a distraction. That's one example.

Sure just like with Bill Clinton's take on what is the meaning of is,
they could get away with arguing all their emails were doctored or implanted.
That could create enough reasonable doubt to get them off like OJ did.

Is that what you want for America.
To be a country of taking the Fifth Amendment to avoid incrimination,
where we censor and lose our own First Amendment right to say what's really going on???

 

[emilynghiem]

Time is running out. Where's the bombshells?

Did it ever occur to you that someone who is willing to commit a FELONY--has an AGENDA--and a person that is so technology advanced that they could hack into secure Government computers---would also be able to add & delete context?

17 intelligence agencies, both private and government have stated these email hacks are coming from Russia. You'll note they're not hacking into RNC computers.

They want DONALD TRUMP bad, who has repeatedly snuggled up to Putin in numerous comments and even at one time is on video for encouraging Russia to do a cyber attack on the United States-(the State Department) to find more Clinton emails.
Yes, 17 intelligence agencies really did say Russia was behind hacking

You Reich wingers really aren't the sharpest knives in the drawer, are you?

A neuroscientist explains what may be wrong with Trump supporters’ brains
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/10/04/trump-polls-immigration-taxes-column/72755896/

oreo as for your additional point on what is wrong with Trump supporters brains
there are two separate groups with separate problems

1. the independent types who don't follow Constitutional laws are just as dependent on
Trump as a media star to tell them and lead them around
as with Obama voters who depend on a leader to represent them and feel empowered.
neither has knowledge or empowerment through Constitutional laws on authority
and contractual enforcement between ppl and govt by those principles and processes.

The left wing Obama voters who depend on party leaders
are just as enslaved by popular media and party politics as the same on the Trump supporter side.

that's one group, and they are both annoying the heck out of people
trying to do all the work the right way to fix and run govt by the rules

2. the conservatives Christians and Constitutionalists who still commit
to working with the given system of govt, and support Trump as interfering less
and enabling this work to get done more than Clinton will whose politics have obstructed it.

Group 1 are the people who think everything is decided by elections
and once you get into office you can push and pass whatever you want,
and you use media to push that agenda so you get elected and have power

Group 2 are the people trying to rein in this govt run amok approach,
and supporting Trump is the better alternative to enforcing Constitutional
limits and process, because he will comply with those authorities,
while Clinton has too many contacts and conflicts of interest
where the Democrats keep bypassing the checks on govt they deem as obstructions.

I think you are talking about what is wrong with the thinking of the people
in Group 1. And both sides are asking that of the Obama voters and the Trump
voters who don't get that the govt is authorized by Constitutional laws and structure
and is not up to the whims of the President to pass whatever executive orders they want.

As for Group 2: again both sides argue the other party is the one
doing more of the corrupting and obstructing of the process.
As a Constitutionalist, and a Democrat, I have honestly found more
consistency among conservatives Republicans and Libertarians
on Constitutional education empowerment and enforcement,
and little to none organized or encouraged on the liberal side.

I have worked to try to organize this myself, but find too much
emphasis is put on the political clout and power of the Obamas
and Clintons who use the party to push for offices and benefits
for themselves, even Sanders has been argued as selling out for this.
to the point they sacrifice the principles and interests of the very
party members they are supposed to represent when they accept
those votes and donations.

now it is argued the sellouts in the GOP are just as bad or worse
if they have more money. but the Democrats are actually richer
and the poor people they harm are the extremes of poverty,
and cannot afford this like the wealthier citizens being robbed.

so the damage is worse among the Democrats, and the exploitation
of Obama voters for lack of constitutional education and empowerment
is worse than anything Trump says to exploit the celebrity media
politics and those followers. the poor harmed by Democrats
and that corruption and exploitation is far more damaging
and harder to reverse. but that's the battle I fight every day
and just about lost at this point. I am asking for help but
may collapse and lose everything I was trying to work on
because there is no help from Democrats who keep benefiting
off the game the way it is played. if we keep rewarding that,
we keep losing our shirts, while the people in the game will say otherwise.

 

[IanC]

No matter what is shown regarding Hillary each individual will choose to ignore or not. I just spoke with someone who did vote for Hillary and now regrets it after the FBI announcement. Wikileaks is only one means used to expose that horrible woman.

FBI has so far not found new evidence against Hillary, and all Comey said was that they found some emails that MAY contain something new, so wtf is your friend regretting?

My friend, an attorney, examined the facts and feels that Hillary is scum.

Dumbass, I just explained to you the facts - NO NEW EVIDENCE HAS BEEN FOUND AGAINST HILLARY AT THE TIME OF COMEY'S LETTER. None, Zero, Zilch.

Now wtf is it that your lawyer friend knows about this that other lawyers, or people don't?

No new evidence has been released. It is difficult to discern the reasons why an independent investigation decided that evidence in one case needed to be called to the attention of a different, and closed, investigation. Zealous or overzealous? We will find out sooner or later but not in time for the election. Where does the precautionary principle land for this case?

No, you aren't paying attention - at the time of writing his letter Comey had no idea what is in the emails and he didn't even get a warrant for FBI to to even BEGIN to look at them until middle of last Sunday, the 30th.

This is why his letter was so damaging and inappropriate. It was vaguely written, released 11 days before election and didn't spell out exactly what Comey was saying and exactly what he was NOT saying.

People simply ASSumed based on Comey's credibility is that if he refocused on Hillary's case and even sent out a letter, then it must've been because of some new found evidence against Hillary, BUT IT WAS NOT. He simply said that new emails MAY contain something, not that they DID contain something.

Comey failed American public, he failed investigation and he undermined FBI's credibility as independent, a-political institution.

You have your opinion, I have mine. I think something was seen 'unofficially' in the Weiner investigation and perhaps passed along to Comey, who then made a tough choice that will take him down but allow him to keep his personal dignity.

 

[emilynghiem]

FBI has so far not found new evidence against Hillary, and all Comey said was that they found some emails that MAY contain something new, so wtf is your friend regretting?

My friend, an attorney, examined the facts and feels that Hillary is scum.

Dumbass, I just explained to you the facts - NO NEW EVIDENCE HAS BEEN FOUND AGAINST HILLARY AT THE TIME OF COMEY'S LETTER. None, Zero, Zilch.

Now wtf is it that your lawyer friend knows about this that other lawyers, or people don't?

No new evidence has been released. It is difficult to discern the reasons why an independent investigation decided that evidence in one case needed to be called to the attention of a different, and closed, investigation. Zealous or overzealous? We will find out sooner or later but not in time for the election. Where does the precautionary principle land for this case?

No, you aren't paying attention - at the time of writing his letter Comey had no idea what is in the emails and he didn't even get a warrant for FBI to to even BEGIN to look at them until middle of last Sunday, the 30th.

This is why his letter was so damaging and inappropriate. It was vaguely written, released 11 days before election and didn't spell out exactly what Comey was saying and exactly what he was NOT saying.

People simply ASSumed based on Comey's credibility is that if he refocused on Hillary's case and even sent out a letter, then it must've been because of some new found evidence against Hillary, BUT IT WAS NOT. He simply said that new emails MAY contain something, not that they DID contain something.

Comey failed American public, he failed investigation and he undermined FBI's credibility as independent, a-political institution.

You have your opinion, I have mine. I think something was seen 'unofficially' in the Weiner investigation and perhaps passed along to Comey, who then made a tough choice that will take him down but allow him to keep his personal dignity.

Dear IanC and antontoo
Given that they couldn't even read the emails until after the warrant was issued and the permission obtained,
it can be argued this was politically motivated on both sides.
HOWEVER it seems MUCH LESS LIKELY that Comey would do that over nothing.
Common sense would tell you the pressure was the other way.
With all the pressure on people, it would be harder to do anything on the side of
investigating indicting Clinton or going in that direction WITHOUT REAL REASON OR CHANCE that this is of real significance. People take the path of least resistance,
and there is so much pressure to assume innocence until proven guilty,
especially with Clinton pushing for President, that even bigger pressure and
standard of proof is needed to go against that overwhelming pressure to pass the buck forward.

There is very very little chance that if there was very very little chance of wrongdoing,
that Comey would have released this publicly in advance. He could have
avoided it, then when this turned out to be nothing, no harm would be done.
That would have had much less consequences
than blowing this up before the election over nothing, which would be
committing political suicide twice.

Big note: From what I understand, just HAVING such emails on the third party laptop
IS ENOUGH to show there was lying going on. So anything they find is icing on the cake.

that's my understanding of why there was pressure on Comey to come forward.
the fact they had the laptop at all with emails on it that were through the private server,
that was enough to spell trouble, and everything else is just consequential to that fact.

 

[WaitingFor2020]

^^^these two haven't been paying any attention^^^

Maybe you aren't. Wikileaks has shown to be very partisan and a tool for Trump.

 

[WaitingFor2020]

IMO people have been hoping that Wikileaks, the only avenue for Hillary's disgrace at the time, would detail conduct and communication that would destroy her. There is so much on the table , in public, right now. The only way to vote for Hillary is to be morally complicit in her untoward and careless acts.

While Wikileaks is always welcome, at this pint, it is unnecessary.

Exactly. Guilty of crimes that others would have been sanctioned for, but in her case no prosecution. Not exactly a ringing exoneration. More like a lumpy rug.

Should Hillary get in, her presidency will be one scandal after another and she will be an ineffectual president. She truly is hated.

Congress can't be more obstructive that they were with President Obama for the last 6 years. If they don't get some business done the country might have a surprise in store for them in 2018.

Yup, regardless of who wins next week, the shit is going to hit the fan and heads will roll in the mid-terms. Soros and the Koch brothers combined can't put enough money into anybody's campaign to make this mess go away.