• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

FBI will not recommend indictment for Hillary Clinton

Status
Not open for further replies.
Not sure if Trump dropping out would be a good or bad thing now...

Obviously good because Trump...

... but bad, because if Republicans put up a clean and sensible candidate at the convention, Hillary could actually lose.
 
So is this over? Legally I mean.

Obviously the Republicans will stay on this, but does this mean this issue it totally settled?
 
Moofers said:
So basically Comey said she was extremely negligent and careless, which would technically be felony territory, BUT still no charges. At one point he even said something like "If it were anyone else...." Granted I'm paraphrasing here, but that's what he said right? So what are we supposed to make of that? Because what I take away from that is that she's untouchable and it doesn't matter that she did something they wouldn't normally let people get away with.
Click to expand...

That's not what he was going for. He said something more like: "This does not mean there should not be consequences, but those consequences should be administrative, not criminal."
 
Moofers said:
So basically Comey said she was extremely negligent and careless, which would technically be felony territory, BUT still no charges. At one point he even said something like "If it were anyone else...." Granted I'm paraphrasing here, but that's what he said right? So what are we supposed to make of that? Because what I take away from that is that she's untouchable and it doesn't matter that she did something they wouldn't normally let people get away with.
Click to expand...

Direct quote, because your interpretation is counter to what he's saying:
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.
Click to expand...

Basically he's saying this kind of stuff gets you in trouble with your employer/potentially screws with security clearance, but he's talking about criminal repercussions.
 
Carpe Libertatem said:
The Democratic primary isn't a fully "direct primary" like the Republican one. It's actually probably the best way to reduce the ability of someone like Donald Trump to win the nomination.

I fully expect some changes to be made to the RNC nominating process before 2020.
Click to expand...

Oh for sure, unless they want a Trump to keep happening. The problem with the primaries, and like you said mainly the Republican one, is that they don't have to navigate the political world to get the nomination. It's a necessary skill to be able to wheel and deal with these people and I don't think anybody in the anti-establishment "movement" has that skill. Many seem pretty universally hated by the people they would be working with to run the country. Namely Trump and Cruz. For all of Clinton's negatives, she knows that world, and that's not a bad thing as much as some would like it to be.
 
Isn't it possible that Clinton might face security or administrative sanctions? The director hinted at that during the conference. It is just that the FBI can't make those decisions.

Or did I interpret that incorrectly
 
r/s4p is hilarious right now.

Did you guys know that instead of being indicted now she'll just be impeached during her first year in office?
 
KenzinFive said:
"OF COURSE the FBI wouldn't suggest charges because Obama is President and he tells them what to do!" or "OF COURSE the FBI wouldn't suggest charges because Bill Clinton met with Loretta Lynch!" or...
Click to expand...

I heard these exact points about 5 minutes ago on the other side of the office

couldn't help but laugh
 
DrForester said:
So is this over? Legally I mean.

Obviously the Republicans will stay on this, but does this mean this issue it totally settled?
Click to expand...
Legally yes, cause Loretta Lynch ain't going to do a damn thing.

Public opinion? Nope, that will last until after she is in office.
 
LOL you don't even have to know who's talking on CNN to know if they're a democrat or republican strategist my the first sentence out of their mouth.
 
DrForester said:
So is this over? Legally I mean.

Obviously the Republicans will stay on this, but does this mean this issue it totally settled?
Click to expand...

Technically, not totally. FBI outright said they are not recommending indictment, but there should still be consequences, and they also outlined details on misdemeanors and felonies, and what would qualify for them, so that the American people could realize the seriousness of this situation, as well stating that it's up to the justice department now.

So technically, we do have to wait and see if she gets consequences, and what those consequences will be.
 
Moofers said:
So basically Comey said she was extremely negligent and careless, which would technically be felony territory, BUT still no charges. At one point he even said something like "If it were anyone else...." Granted I'm paraphrasing here, but that's what he said right? So what are we supposed to make of that? Because what I take away from that is that she's untouchable and it doesn't matter that she did something they wouldn't normally let people get away with.
Click to expand...

Oh lord, people just hear what they want to hear at this point. Don't be surprised if in 3 months the revisionist memory of people recall the FBI director recommending charges but nothing happened.
 
HUELEN10 said:
Exactly. In other words, the American people have to decide if they want someone as commander in chief that has repeatedly in their career put national security at risk, even while visiting foriegn lands.

She needs consequences, the FBI Director said their should be, because what she did was absolutely disgusting and deplorable in terms of national security and transparency.

Some people would say this isn't a good show of character for a candidate. I base myself more on facts and policies than character, but it is still something that the people need to consider.
Click to expand...

2jvGboA.jpg


It's gone. You need to move on.
 
Moofers said:
So basically Comey said she was extremely negligent and careless, which would technically be felony territory, BUT still no charges. At one point he even said something like "If it were anyone else...." Granted I'm paraphrasing here, but that's what he said right? So what are we supposed to make of that? Because what I take away from that is that she's untouchable and it doesn't matter that she did something they wouldn't normally let people get away with.
Click to expand...

lol, he didn't say "we're not recommending charges because she's untouchable," he said that the situation as-is could merit internal administrative action but not criminal charges, which is what the FBI probe was all about in the first place.
 
Tragicomedy said:
Since you clearly have zero experience in dealing with classified information, let me enlighten you a bit.

I've conducted four investigations for accidental/negligent discharge of classified data...in 2016. This stuff happens all the time, and it completely comes down to the circumstances of the event as to whether or not we do a damn thing about it. I've had people carry a backpack full of classified data outside of a SCIF environment. We bring the hammer down for that.

People sending TS data over NIPR can be a serious event, depending on who the recipients were, whether or not we can establish positive control of the distro chain, and explanation for how the data came to be on an unclassified system.

If Hillary and company were discussing TS initiatives and programs in veiled, roundabout terminology, it's fucking nothing. If Hillary was forwarding improperly marked emails that she received on her Blackberry, the originator will be investigated and may have disciplinary action. If Hillary is literally purposefully copying/pasting or typing data she knows is TS into her BB, then she should have charges.

From what we've heard on this case, we know it's not option C. So we're left with fucking nothing.

If you want to use this as a stump for a racist, misogynistic, thin-skinned, uneducated asshole to be president, be my guest. Join Trump in putting on clown shoes while you're at it.
Click to expand...

This!
 
Armadilo said:
Dude was like if it was anybody else they would get in trouble but its Hillary Clinton so we'll let it slide. BUT Don't do IT!
Click to expand...

Moofers said:
So basically Comey said she was extremely negligent and careless, which would technically be felony territory, BUT still no charges. At one point he even said something like "If it were anyone else...." Granted I'm paraphrasing here, but that's what he said right? So what are we supposed to make of that? Because what I take away from that is that she's untouchable and it doesn't matter that she did something they wouldn't normally let people get away with.
Click to expand...

That was in reference to internally-handled sanctions or consequences, not the FBI's investigation.
 
Moofers said:
So basically Comey said she was extremely negligent and careless, which would technically be felony territory, BUT still no charges. At one point he even said something like "If it were anyone else...." Granted I'm paraphrasing here, but that's what he said right? So what are we supposed to make of that? Because what I take away from that is that she's untouchable and it doesn't matter that she did something they wouldn't normally let people get away with.
Click to expand...
No, he said she was kinda negligent and careless, not extremely. And that's why it's not felony territory. A few random emails carrying data that was considered classified or top secret being sent to the correct people on an unsecured server, that's gotta happen all the time. She didn't leak classified details to the public, she didn't have thousands of emails of insecure classified info, she didn't try to cover anything up, she didn't do anything purposefully wrong, all she did was send a very small number of emails in an insecure manner. Oh no, throw her in jail for making a mistake!

Now, if that classified info DID get out into the public, that would be different. But it didn't, it just "could have".
 
Eidan said:
They said she was careless with her emails.

They essentially called her a baby boomer.
Click to expand...

Being careless with classified material will get anyone with a clearance at minimum a revoked clearance and likely fired. That would make you a terrible government employee by definition.
 
HUELEN10 said:
Technically, not totally. FBI outright said they are not recommending indictment, but there should still be consequences, and outlined details misdemeanors and felonies, as well stating that it's up to the justice department now.

So technically, we do have to wait and see if she gets consequences, and what those consequences will be.
Click to expand...

....... Why the fuck would there be MISDEMEANORS AND FELONIES without indictment?
 
LOL, just saw some of the director's conference. He said that any reasonable person in her position wouldn't have done what she did.

Hillary really loves putting her trust issues in doubt.
 
MajorMane said:
Except the FBI Director did say that "no reasonable person" in this position would have exchanged in emails such as this. I think it's fair that you would expect her to be aware of it and not partake, even if it sounds like the security culture in the State Department is god awful.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what else he was supposed to say but she's clearly not the only one who has done this. Just the fact numerous other entities were in those email chains, saw her private address, and still didn't think to say (or not say in this instance) anything speaks to how unreasonable the behavior was at the time.

Everything looks unreasonable in hindsight in these situations.
 
riskVSreward said:
Hillary could personally murder a family of 4 and people would still be like... "but Trump..."

She really lucked out to be running against the end of the world.
Click to expand...


Yes because the next step from having a crappy ITSec team is murdering innocents


KVRSNMB.gif
Click to expand...

HUELEN10 said:
Technically, not totally. FBI outright said they are not recommending indictment, but there should still be consequences, and outlined details misdemeanors and felonies, as well stating that it's up to the justice department now.

So technically, we do have to wait and see if she gets consequences, and what those consequences will be.
Click to expand...

It's over, Huelen. Let it die.

She is on a plane with the GOATUS right now and is about to do her world tour. The DOJ is gonna use the FBI notes for firewood.
 
Moofers said:
So basically Comey said she was extremely negligent and careless, which would technically be felony territory, BUT still no charges. At one point he even said something like "If it were anyone else...." Granted I'm paraphrasing here, but that's what he said right? So what are we supposed to make of that? Because what I take away from that is that she's untouchable and it doesn't matter that she did something they wouldn't normally let people get away with.
Click to expand...

"To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences."

https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/p...lary-clintons-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system

Pretty much, yeah.
 
Any regular employee would be facing termination due to this. Hillary is just too big to fail. It sucks but that's the system.
 
Torokil said:
"To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences."

https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/p...lary-clintons-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system

Pretty much, yeah.
Click to expand...
No, his full explanation was that the "consequences" still shouldn't be criminal charges. He didn't say that in similar circumstances for someone else they would recommend charges, he said consequences administratively but not criminal.

Tragicomedy said:
Since you clearly have zero experience in dealing with classified information, let me enlighten you a bit.

I've conducted four investigations for accidental/negligent discharge of classified data...in 2016. This stuff happens all the time, and it completely comes down to the circumstances of the event as to whether or not we do a damn thing about it. I've had people carry a backpack full of classified data outside of a SCIF environment. We bring the hammer down for that.

People sending TS data over NIPR can be a serious event, depending on who the recipients were, whether or not we can establish positive control of the distro chain, and explanation for how the data came to be on an unclassified system.

If Hillary and company were discussing TS initiatives and programs in veiled, roundabout terminology, it's fucking nothing. If Hillary was forwarding improperly marked emails that she received on her Blackberry, the originator will be investigated and may have disciplinary action. If Hillary is literally purposefully copying/pasting or typing data she knows is TS into her BB, then she should have charges.

From what we've heard on this case, we know it's not option C. So we're left with fucking nothing.

If you want to use this as a stump for a racist, misogynistic, thin-skinned, uneducated asshole to be president, be my guest. Join Trump in putting on clown shoes while you're at it.
Click to expand...
Lmao
 
Brannon said:
I think we've had just about enough of "experts".









oh god even in this context that's a douchey thing to say.
Click to expand...

I only watched it 5 minutes just to see how salty they were. Their collective maturity is less than that of a screaming child who just got told by their parents that they can't have a piece of candy.
 
perfectchaos007 said:
This was the expected outcome in the investigation but she still royally fucked up.
Click to expand...
She and a whole bunch of other people. It sounds like private servers for the Sec of State have been SOP for 20 or 30 years for convenience. The whole IT dept has been screwing up.
 
Moofers said:
So basically Comey said she was extremely negligent and careless, which would technically be felony territory, BUT still no charges. At one point he even said something like "If it were anyone else...." Granted I'm paraphrasing here, but that's what he said right? So what are we supposed to make of that? Because what I take away from that is that she's untouchable and it doesn't matter that she did something they wouldn't normally let people get away with.
Click to expand...

No, none of this is correct.

Let's go to the record!

https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/p...lary-clintons-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system

comey said:
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.
Click to expand...

Comey says that the FBI has never brought a case for gross negligence based on just being "extremely careless." Gross negligence doesn't just mean fucking up, it's a legal term. In the context of these prosecutions in the past, it has meant negligence to the point that one can infer intentional misconduct. The FBI doesn't find that to be the case -- basically, Hillary didn't go "nah fuck security," she just had a terrible understanding of IT and a lousy IT team. That's dumb but not illegal.

Comey goes on to say that people who commit similar activities usually get sanctioned. In other words, if you worked for State and you did this, you might be written up, or have your security clearance revoked, or I guess even fired (although sanctioned usually doesn't rise to that level). That makes sense, like, obviously they don't want people forwarding shit to their private email server and if they catch you they will tell you to quit that shit and possibly you'll get in trouble. But you won't go to prison.
 
perfectchaos007 said:
This was the expected outcome in the investigation but she still royally fucked up.
Click to expand...

Exactly. And that's why I'm leery to vote for her, lesser evil or not. Why should I trust someone that doesn't want to stick to FoIA?
 
Tragicomedy said:
Since you clearly have zero experience in dealing with classified information, let me enlighten you a bit.

I've conducted four investigations for accidental/negligent discharge of classified data...in 2016. This stuff happens all the time, and it completely comes down to the circumstances of the event as to whether or not we do a damn thing about it. I've had people carry a backpack full of classified data outside of a SCIF environment. We bring the hammer down for that.

People sending TS data over NIPR can be a serious event, depending on who the recipients were, whether or not we can establish positive control of the distro chain, and explanation for how the data came to be on an unclassified system.

If Hillary and company were discussing TS initiatives and programs in veiled, roundabout terminology, it's fucking nothing. If Hillary was forwarding improperly marked emails that she received on her Blackberry, the originator will be investigated and may have disciplinary action. If Hillary is literally purposefully copying/pasting or typing data she knows is TS into her BB, then she should have charges.

From what we've heard on this case, we know it's not option C. So we're left with fucking nothing.

If you want to use this as a stump for a racist, misogynistic, thin-skinned, uneducated asshole to be president, be my guest. Join Trump in putting on clown shoes while you're at it.
Click to expand...
Excellent post.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

cologne-age 2.0: Recommend and share fragrances here.
2
74
1K
IDKFA replied
NBA guard Terry Rozier arrested by FBI in point shaving scandal. The proof is hilarious.
2 3
111
2K
StreetsofBeige replied
Soundbar recommendations?
15
255
SScorpio replied
Recommendations for really good medieval movies with a lot of combat
42
3K
Disciple of MSSP replied
Recommended Smart Watches (not Apple)
5
864
Sticks replied
Top Bottom