Why do liberals not believe that Hillary transmitted classified docs on her private server?

[K9Buck]

Again, you don't know what you are talking about. There was no such law.

There's no law against federal employees transmitting classified material on private servers? You've officially gone off the rails.

 

[AntonToo]

Sorry, game over.

Now you're grasping for straws.

Retard IT'S OVER.

There is no discussion of re-opening the email case by anyone in Trump's FBI or Justice Department.

 

[K9Buck]

She didn't, that's a fact. She apologized and admitted to that fact.

Huh? If she didn't, then why did she apologize? And if she didn't, why did Comey testify to Congress that she did?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Sorry, game over.

Now you're grasping for straws.

The FBI Director acknowledged that Hillary broke the law but then said he wouldn't recommend an indictment because he didn't believe Hillary had any malicious intention. Hillary should have been prosecuted. Anyone else would have been prosecuted.

For her to be prosecuted someone would have to sign under penalty of perjury the acts you, and others, accuse her of doing. Since those who would sign such an affidavit have been exposed to the the law and the penalty for perjury, no none did.

 

[K9Buck]

Retard IT'S OVER.

Typical liberal response when their argument inevitably falls apart.

 

[Wry Catcher]

She didn't, that's a fact. She apologized and admitted to that fact.

Huh? If she didn't, then why did she apologize? And if she didn't, why did Comey testify to Congress that she did?

Are you playing stupid, or on some level do you know this topic way is beyond your abilities to comprehend?

 

[bendog]

I'm not sure the law is unconstitutional for failing to specify there must be an intent to disseminate secret information or not, because there is an intent element in simply pushing the send button for the elec message. But, you are right that Comey declined to prosecute supposedly because Hill lacked specific intent to disclose secret matl.

It's against the law to transmit or receive classified material on a private server, period.

I agree she broke the law, but simply because a law exists is not a reason to argue against prosecutorial discretion. It's against the law to sell weed in Colorado, but the feds don't prosecute it.

Thus, the fact that Hill broke a law is not the really relevant question as to whether she should have been prosecuted.

It most probably was a crime for Trump to seek to give something to the Russian spy for dirt on Hill, but I doubt you want him prosecuted for that. I don't. Not for that.

 

[K9Buck]

For her to be prosecuted someone would have to sign under penalty of perjury the acts you, and others, accuse her of doing.

 

[boedicca]

It's not that the Progs don't believe it...they want the rest of us to not believe it.

That's why McCabe spiked the investigation.

 

[K9Buck]

I agree she broke the law...

Congratulations. The first honest statement by a liberal in this thread. Thank you. It's refreshing.

 

[AntonToo]

Retard IT'S OVER.

Typical liberal response when their argument inevitably falls apart.

How about you stop running your mouth and take a friendly bet with me?

If Clinton gets charged on email handling within a year - you win, I admit to being an idiot.
If she doesn't I win and you admit to being an idiot.

What say you? Trump kept chanting Hillary for prison when he ran for president and it's now his appointees that run DOJ and FBI....so where is the case?

 

[jc456]

This is a rhetorical thread.

 

[bendog]

I agree she broke the law...

Congratulations. The first honest statement by a liberal in this thread. Thank you. It's refreshing.

I didn't vote for Hillary. I detest Trump and he's no conservative.

 

[K9Buck]

If Clinton gets charged on email handling within a year - you win, I admit to being an idiot. If she doesn't I win and you admit to being an idiot. What say you?

Where did I claim that Hillary was going to be charged?

By the way, I don't think you're an idiot. I just think you're a partisan Democrat and you see things through that lense. And I believe that's a BIG problem in American politics on both sides of the political aisle.

 

[K9Buck]

This is a rhetorical thread.

No it's not. I encounter liberals all the time that claim Hillary never transmitted any classified material through her private server in spite of the FACT that James Comey testified to Congress that she DID. How is that "rhetorical"?

 

[AntonToo]

If Clinton gets charged on email handling within a year - you win, I admit to being an idiot. If she doesn't I win and you admit to being an idiot. What say you?

Where did I claim that Hillary was going to be charged? .

Therefore GAME OVER dumbass.

Top prosecutor at FBI, a Republican no less, rejected your arguments, said bringing criminal charges would be inappropriate.

Discussion is now moot.

 

[bendog]

Retard IT'S OVER.

Typical liberal response when their argument inevitably falls apart.

How about you stop running your mouth and take a friendly bet with me?

If Clinton gets charged on email handling within a year - you win, I admit to being an idiot.
If she doesn't I win and you admit to being an idiot.

What say you?

First of all, Trumpbots are not honest on Hillary. Don't even go there. Secondly, the real issue with Hillary is that Obama should have told her to ex-nay on the Foundation or go back to the Senate. Sending an email that happened to have "secret" stamped on some attachment was, and is, irrelevant to what people actually found objectionable. Hillary didn't disclose state secrets or help hack an election. She is unworthy to be President, and she will never be President. You're right: it's ovah.

 

[AntonToo]

Retard IT'S OVER.

Typical liberal response when their argument inevitably falls apart.

How about you stop running your mouth and take a friendly bet with me?

If Clinton gets charged on email handling within a year - you win, I admit to being an idiot.
If she doesn't I win and you admit to being an idiot.

What say you?

First of all, Trumpbots are not honest on Hillary. Don't even go there. Secondly, the real issue with Hillary is that Obama should have told her to ex-nay on the Foundation or go back to the Senate. Sending an email that happened to have "secret" stamped on some attachment was, and is, irrelevant to what people actually found objectionable. Hillary didn't disclose state secrets or help hack an election. She is unworthy to be President, and she will never be President. You're right: it's ovah.

Nope, people rarely know much of anything re details - the mere fact of FBI Director coming out a week before election and announcing to the world that Hillary is under investigation was enough for her to lose a very close election. It re-enforced all the suspicions seeded by non-stop CROOKED HILLARY! barrage during campaign.

 

[K9Buck]

Therefore GAME OVER dumbass.

 

[jc456]

This is a rhetorical thread.

No it's not. I encounter liberals all the time that claim Hillary never transmitted any classified material through her private server in spite of the FACT that James Comey testified to Congress that she DID. How is that "rhetorical"?

well you have to know they are pulling your chain right? there can't be that stupid of a person.