Quote (IceMage @ Oct 19 2016 12:03pm)

I laugh every time you post that.

I haven't followed the FBI decision that closely, but didn't she escape charges because the FBI wasn't able to prove intent, whereas in other cases they were able?

Quote (IceMage @ 19 Oct 2016 13:03)

I laugh every time you post that.

I haven't followed the FBI decision that closely, but didn't she escape charges because the FBI wasn't able to prove intent, whereas in other cases they were able?

Quote (excellence @ Oct 19 2016 09:57am)

Lol 0-3 noobie still crying about Trump's "preferential treatment" when the FBI director called (C)linton extremely careless and unreasonable, and if it were anyone else acting a fool with classified info they'd be punished accordingly. Like one soldier who had his ability to get a security clearance yanked til the end of time, and the other who's doing a 1-year stint in the doghouse.

Never forget your candidate is too stupid to understand classified markings (thus the lack of intent lmao) and blames Lincoln for her conflicting policy positions depending on the avg net worth of the crowd she is screeching to.

Obligatory: thanks for another fuckin laugh!!!

Quote (thesnipa @ Oct 19 2016 09:59am)

Both are criminals, one's dangerous, the other is more dangerous.

But please Jay tell us more about Hillary's ability to bring a dead bird back to life with only a touch and a gentle tear.

Quote (Pollster @ Oct 19 2016 11:32am)

I don't actually have anything to say in response.

Quote (Pollster @ Oct 19 2016 12:32pm)

As usual this is just blather, it's hard to even know how to respond to it. Clinton didn't break a law, period. No amount of your whining is going to change that fact. You can set up inane counter-factuals all you want but the FBI director himself told you why that would be pointless when he was explaining why what you're claiming isn't true. Talking in circles while you're stripping things hilariously out of context before reinventing them into totally new events is just a complete waste of time -- is this what you people do while I'm busy winning elections?



Stop embarrassing yourself.

Quote

(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

Quote (Santara @ Oct 19 2016 11:38am)

The FBI director told us it would be pointless prosecuting because she "didn't intend" to harm the United States.



Where in this statute does it appear to care whether she intended to or not?

Quote (thesnipa @ Oct 19 2016 12:44pm)

people keep talking about intent, i thought this all rested on a DA's definition of gross negligence.

And lets not forget that while its common knowledge that the Clinton's destroyed computers and emails, there is not proof that would cause a DA to raise charges against her for it. The utter lack of precedent doesn't help.

Quote (j0ltk0la @ Oct 11 2016 12:06am)

Trump isn't scared to stand up for what he believes in, even if it means bending the rules a little bit.

It's the kind of guts needed to be President of America.

Quote (Pollster @ 19 Oct 2016 13:32)

As usual this is just blather, it's hard to even know how to respond to it. Clinton didn't break a law,

complete waste of time -- is this what you people do while I'm busy winning elections?.

Quote (thesnipa @ 19 Oct 2016 13:36)

For once.