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

[boedicca]

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.

It wasn't Comey's call to exercise prosecutorial discretion.

Just sayin'.

 

[K9Buck]

It wasn't Comey's call to exercise prosecutorial discretion.

Just sayin'.

Yep. Absolute fact. The fix was in even before the so-called "investigation" began.

 

[iceberg]

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.

please.

anyone that hated hillary already did long before trump called her out on it.

 

[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"?

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

I don't know. Look at the liberals here proclaiming that Hillary did no wrong.

 

[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.

It wasn't Comey's call to exercise prosecutorial discretion.

Just sayin'.

Actually it was, once Lynch was out. It shouldn't have been. He said he deferred to DOJ prosecutors' recommendations of no prosecution. That's my recollection anyway.

 

[boedicca]

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.

It wasn't Comey's call to exercise prosecutorial discretion.

Just sayin'.

Actually it was, once Lynch was out. It shouldn't have been. He said he deferred to DOJ prosecutors' recommendations of no prosecution. That's my recollection anyway.

No. If Lynch excused herself, then the authority would go to someone else in the AG structure, not the FBI.

 

[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.

I don't know. Look at the liberals here proclaiming that Hillary did no wrong.

Again, we know they're ignorant then and don't live in reality.

 

[jc456]

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.

It wasn't Comey's call to exercise prosecutorial discretion.

Just sayin'.

Actually it was, once Lynch was out. It shouldn't have been. He said he deferred to DOJ prosecutors' recommendations of no prosecution. That's my recollection anyway.

it isn't his position no matter what he said.

 

[K9Buck]

No. If Lynch excused herself, then the authority would go to someone else in the AG structure, not the FBI.

Correct, Lynch never recused herself, as Sessions did for the "collusion" investigation. There was NO WAY Obama was going to leave the "investigation" to someone that might actually be objective.

 

[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.

It wasn't Comey's call to exercise prosecutorial discretion.

Just sayin'.

Actually it was, once Lynch was out. It shouldn't have been. He said he deferred to DOJ prosecutors' recommendations of no prosecution. That's my recollection anyway.

No. If Lynch excused herself, then the authority would go to someone else in the AG structure, not the FBI.

It was screwy, but you are "sort of" incorrect.
F.B.I. Director James Comey Recommends No Charges for Hillary Clinton on Email

 

[boedicca]

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.

It wasn't Comey's call to exercise prosecutorial discretion.

Just sayin'.

Actually it was, once Lynch was out. It shouldn't have been. He said he deferred to DOJ prosecutors' recommendations of no prosecution. That's my recollection anyway.

No. If Lynch excused herself, then the authority would go to someone else in the AG structure, not the FBI.

It was screwy, but you are "sort of" incorrect.
F.B.I. Director James Comey Recommends No Charges for Hillary Clinton on Email

His reasoning was that no prosecutor would prosecute.

Sorry, that's not true.

And Comey is a political hack. I'm really looking forward to the IG bringing charges against him after he is done with McCabe.

 

[jc456]

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.

It wasn't Comey's call to exercise prosecutorial discretion.

Just sayin'.

Actually it was, once Lynch was out. It shouldn't have been. He said he deferred to DOJ prosecutors' recommendations of no prosecution. That's my recollection anyway.

No. If Lynch excused herself, then the authority would go to someone else in the AG structure, not the FBI.

It was screwy, but you are "sort of" incorrect.
F.B.I. Director James Comey Recommends No Charges for Hillary Clinton on Email

It would be nice to know people actually know our laws and the responsibilities of our elitists.

 

[there4eyeM]

Who cares about Hillary's emails now? She's history, for one thing. For another, her much bigger crime, and one she shares with the President and company at that time, is the illegal invasion of Iraq. If she or the others from that era deserve jail time for anything, it is for that.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

This is just common knowledge and, yet, there are countless liberals here and elsewhere that claim it never happened. James Comey testified to Congress that she transmitted and received classified material on her private server. Are the liberals that deny this fact just astoundingly ignorant or are they just liars?

Why do conservatives not understand this fails as a straw man fallacy.

 

[jc456]

This is just common knowledge and, yet, there are countless liberals here and elsewhere that claim it never happened. James Comey testified to Congress that she transmitted and received classified material on her private server. Are the liberals that deny this fact just astoundingly ignorant or are they just liars?

Why do conservatives not understand this fails as a straw man fallacy.

 

[BlindBoo]

Then James Comey claimed that he wouldn't support prosecuting her because he didn't believe that Hillary "intended" to do anything malicious.

In reality he said a little more than that.

"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."

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

 

[jc456]

Then James Comey claimed that he wouldn't support prosecuting her because he didn't believe that Hillary "intended" to do anything malicious.

In reality he said a little more than that.

"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."

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

still not his call.

 

[bendog]

Sessions shouldn't have recused. LOL

 

[AntonToo]

No. If Lynch excused herself, then the authority would go to someone else in the AG structure, not the FBI.

Correct, Lynch never recused herself, as Sessions did for the "collusion" investigation. There was NO WAY Obama was going to leave the "investigation" to someone that might actually be objective.

Lynch was not personally involved in the email issue.

Sessions on the other hand was involved and in fact got caught lying to congress about this issue during confirmation.

 

[boedicca]

No. If Lynch excused herself, then the authority would go to someone else in the AG structure, not the FBI.

Correct, Lynch never recused herself, as Sessions did for the "collusion" investigation. There was NO WAY Obama was going to leave the "investigation" to someone that might actually be objective.

Lynch was not involved in email issue.

Sessions was involved in Russian issue and in fact got caught lying to congress during confirmation.

LAIR.

Lynch's meeting with Bubba is evidence of collusion to cook the books on the email probe (and likely the Clinton Foundation one as well).