FBI is wrapping up e-mail investigation with no evidence Clinton willfully violated the law

[Fair&Balanced]

ANY Sec of State who in fact transmitted classified information via nonsecure communications should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, I don't give a flying fuck what political party they were in, nor any other excuse.

US Officials Report No Evidence Hillary Clinton Broke The Law, Will Right-Wing Media Listen?

Conservative Media Conspiracy Theories Doused By The Facts
US Officials Report No Evidence Hillary Clinton Broke The Law, Will Right-Wing Media Listen?

Blog ››› May 5, 2016 10:15 PM EDT ››› TYLER CHERRY

Once again, that article says that there is no evidence that she WILLFULLY broke the law.

That is NOT how the laws on mishandling classified information work. There is no requirement to prove she purposely mishandled anything. Even if one classified email ACCIDENTALLY appeared on her server, she's guilty of a crime.

Benghazi ........................................

Nice attempt to deflect, but you'll in fact not find any posts from me about such.

Now, answer my question. Do you understand that it is irrelevant whether she willfully broke the law or not? That's a simple yes or no question.

PROVE IT....

every single lawyer that has defended those charged with top secret violations that have spoken up on this case have STATED that it has to be knowingly and willfully committed or severely gross negligence, in order for the gvt to prosecute.

18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information

 

[Skylar]

I said the video didn't add anything to that there were no sources and you came back with yes they did, they cited anonymous sources. I don't know what you even thing you're arguing right now

You said the article only cited Clinton aides.

So the article only cited Clinton aides saying there was no evidence and the video added zero to that

As my quote demonstrates, you were obviously wrong. The article cited officials in the investigation.

The interviews, we’re told, are focused on whether classified information was mishandled, and the security of the server. So far officials tell us, no, there is no evidence of criminal wrongdoing at this point in the investigation, but, again, the investigation is not over.

CNN Reports FBI Has Found ‘No Criminal Wrongdoing’ in Hillary Clinton Email ‘Investigation’

Ignore as you will. It really doesn't matter.

Whatever, you're into word parsing at a level you lost my interest

CNN cited US officials briefed on the investigation. You know it. I know it. Now so does everyone else.

The FBI does not brief people outside the justice department about ongoing investigations PERIOD. And no one from the Justice Department is going to say no laws were broken here at this juncture of the investigation.

Says who?

And have you noticed how often you quote yourself?

 

[Fair&Balanced]

I said the video didn't add anything to that there were no sources and you came back with yes they did, they cited anonymous sources. I don't know what you even thing you're arguing right now

You said the article only cited Clinton aides.

So the article only cited Clinton aides saying there was no evidence and the video added zero to that

As my quote demonstrates, you were obviously wrong. The article cited officials in the investigation.

The interviews, we’re told, are focused on whether classified information was mishandled, and the security of the server. So far officials tell us, no, there is no evidence of criminal wrongdoing at this point in the investigation, but, again, the investigation is not over.

CNN Reports FBI Has Found ‘No Criminal Wrongdoing’ in Hillary Clinton Email ‘Investigation’

Ignore as you will. It really doesn't matter.

Whatever, you're into word parsing at a level you lost my interest

CNN cited US officials briefed on the investigation. You know it. I know it. Now so does everyone else.

The FBI does not brief people outside the justice department about ongoing investigations PERIOD. And no one from the Justice Department is going to say no laws were broken here at this juncture of the investigation.

sooooooooo, every single one of those right wing media outlets like FOX News were lying to ALL of you for nearly a year on this Hillary email thing???? ALL of their supposed sources were filling you and their watchers with bull crud?

hmmmmm.........

What? You are obviously an angry liberal, if you can't , or won't calm down and have a rational discussion, just don't bother responding to me okay. thanks..

 

[Skylar]

US Officials Report No Evidence Hillary Clinton Broke The Law, Will Right-Wing Media Listen?

Conservative Media Conspiracy Theories Doused By The Facts
US Officials Report No Evidence Hillary Clinton Broke The Law, Will Right-Wing Media Listen?

Blog ››› May 5, 2016 10:15 PM EDT ››› TYLER CHERRY

Once again, that article says that there is no evidence that she WILLFULLY broke the law.

That is NOT how the laws on mishandling classified information work. There is no requirement to prove she purposely mishandled anything. Even if one classified email ACCIDENTALLY appeared on her server, she's guilty of a crime.

Benghazi ........................................

Nice attempt to deflect, but you'll in fact not find any posts from me about such.

Now, answer my question. Do you understand that it is irrelevant whether she willfully broke the law or not? That's a simple yes or no question.

PROVE IT....

every single lawyer that has defended those charged with top secret violations that have spoken up on this case have STATED that it has to be knowingly and willfully committed or severely gross negligence, in order for the gvt to prosecute.

18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information

You insist you know better than the legal experts that contradict you.

We'll soon see what your opinions are worth, won't we?

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

How fucking pathetic must anyone be to site "anonymous sources" as proof of anything.

who "Gruccifer"...?

Hillary Clinton is under shrill partisan attack by the same old same old Benghazi screamers and Truthers the Swift-boat grifters hustlers and night-riders of this election cycle...

Get Real Deal with Madam President

 

[Fair&Balanced]

Once again, that article says that there is no evidence that she WILLFULLY broke the law.

That is NOT how the laws on mishandling classified information work. There is no requirement to prove she purposely mishandled anything. Even if one classified email ACCIDENTALLY appeared on her server, she's guilty of a crime.

Benghazi ........................................

Nice attempt to deflect, but you'll in fact not find any posts from me about such.

Now, answer my question. Do you understand that it is irrelevant whether she willfully broke the law or not? That's a simple yes or no question.

PROVE IT....

every single lawyer that has defended those charged with top secret violations that have spoken up on this case have STATED that it has to be knowingly and willfully committed or severely gross negligence, in order for the gvt to prosecute.

18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information

You insist you know better than the legal experts that contradict you.

We'll see what your opinions are worth, won't we?

I just quoted the actual fucking law to you. Read it you fucking idiot, it's quite clear.

Now, after reading the law understand that not every violation of the laws is prosecuted and lack of prosecution doesn't mean a law wasn't violated. Although in this case I don't think that will happen.

 

[Redfish]

ANY Sec of State who in fact transmitted classified information via nonsecure communications should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, I don't give a flying fuck what political party they were in, nor any other excuse.

US Officials Report No Evidence Hillary Clinton Broke The Law, Will Right-Wing Media Listen?

Conservative Media Conspiracy Theories Doused By The Facts
US Officials Report No Evidence Hillary Clinton Broke The Law, Will Right-Wing Media Listen?

Blog ››› May 5, 2016 10:15 PM EDT ››› TYLER CHERRY

Once again, that article says that there is no evidence that she WILLFULLY broke the law.

That is NOT how the laws on mishandling classified information work. There is no requirement to prove she purposely mishandled anything. Even if one classified email ACCIDENTALLY appeared on her server, she's guilty of a crime.

Benghazi ........................................

Nice attempt to deflect, but you'll in fact not find any posts from me about such.

Now, answer my question. Do you understand that it is irrelevant whether she willfully broke the law or not? That's a simple yes or no question.

PROVE IT....

every single lawyer that has defended those charged with top secret violations that have spoken up on this case have STATED that it has to be knowingly and willfully committed or severely gross negligence, in order for the gvt to prosecute.

Bullshit, I held top secret and SAP clearances for years, a violation does not have to be knowing or willing or grossly negligent. If I did what she did, I would be typing this from a jail cell.

your head is so far up Hillary's fat butt that you cant see reality.

 

[Care4all]

US Officials Report No Evidence Hillary Clinton Broke The Law, Will Right-Wing Media Listen?

Conservative Media Conspiracy Theories Doused By The Facts
US Officials Report No Evidence Hillary Clinton Broke The Law, Will Right-Wing Media Listen?

Blog ››› May 5, 2016 10:15 PM EDT ››› TYLER CHERRY

Once again, that article says that there is no evidence that she WILLFULLY broke the law.

That is NOT how the laws on mishandling classified information work. There is no requirement to prove she purposely mishandled anything. Even if one classified email ACCIDENTALLY appeared on her server, she's guilty of a crime.

Benghazi ........................................

Nice attempt to deflect, but you'll in fact not find any posts from me about such.

Now, answer my question. Do you understand that it is irrelevant whether she willfully broke the law or not? That's a simple yes or no question.

PROVE IT....

every single lawyer that has defended those charged with top secret violations that have spoken up on this case have STATED that it has to be knowingly and willfully committed or severely gross negligence, in order for the gvt to prosecute.

18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information

uhhhh, did you read the very first sentence in your link?

 

[Skylar]

Benghazi ........................................

Nice attempt to deflect, but you'll in fact not find any posts from me about such.

Now, answer my question. Do you understand that it is irrelevant whether she willfully broke the law or not? That's a simple yes or no question.

PROVE IT....

every single lawyer that has defended those charged with top secret violations that have spoken up on this case have STATED that it has to be knowingly and willfully committed or severely gross negligence, in order for the gvt to prosecute.

18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information

You insist you know better than the legal experts that contradict you.

We'll see what your opinions are worth, won't we?

I just quoted the actual fucking law to you. Read it you fucking idiot, it's quite clear.

And as mos of the legal experts asked on the topic agree, its a stretch to apply it to a SOS's communication with her own aides, rather than an enemy nation.

You insist you know better.

We'll see what your opinion is worth. Just remember.....I told you so.

 

[Care4all]

US Officials Report No Evidence Hillary Clinton Broke The Law, Will Right-Wing Media Listen?

Conservative Media Conspiracy Theories Doused By The Facts
US Officials Report No Evidence Hillary Clinton Broke The Law, Will Right-Wing Media Listen?

Blog ››› May 5, 2016 10:15 PM EDT ››› TYLER CHERRY

Once again, that article says that there is no evidence that she WILLFULLY broke the law.

That is NOT how the laws on mishandling classified information work. There is no requirement to prove she purposely mishandled anything. Even if one classified email ACCIDENTALLY appeared on her server, she's guilty of a crime.

Benghazi ........................................

Nice attempt to deflect, but you'll in fact not find any posts from me about such.

Now, answer my question. Do you understand that it is irrelevant whether she willfully broke the law or not? That's a simple yes or no question.

PROVE IT....

every single lawyer that has defended those charged with top secret violations that have spoken up on this case have STATED that it has to be knowingly and willfully committed or severely gross negligence, in order for the gvt to prosecute.

Bullshit, I held top secret and SAP clearances for years, a violation does not have to be knowing or willing or grossly negligent. If I did what she did, I would be typing this from a jail cell.

your head is so far up Hillary's fat butt that you cant see reality.

yeah, sure, whatever....

 

[Fair&Balanced]

Nice attempt to deflect, but you'll in fact not find any posts from me about such.

Now, answer my question. Do you understand that it is irrelevant whether she willfully broke the law or not? That's a simple yes or no question.

PROVE IT....

every single lawyer that has defended those charged with top secret violations that have spoken up on this case have STATED that it has to be knowingly and willfully committed or severely gross negligence, in order for the gvt to prosecute.

18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information

You insist you know better than the legal experts that contradict you.

We'll see what your opinions are worth, won't we?

I just quoted the actual fucking law to you. Read it you fucking idiot, it's quite clear.

And as mos of the legal experts asked on the topic agree, its a stretch to apply it to a SOS's communication with her own aides, rather than an enemy nation.

You insist you know better.

We'll see what your opinion is worth. Just remember.....I told you so.

You won't quote one single legal expert who says that having classified information on an unclassified email server is not a violation of the law dude. Not one.

It is a matter of record that the law was violated here. That isn't even at question. The question is, Was Hillary at fault, PERIOD. That's the part you don't seem to understand , all the "legal experts" who are defending her, they aren't arguing that the law wasn't violated, because it was, they are arguing that Hillary was not responsible for the material being on the unclassified server.

Seriously, if you're too stupid to understand the actual topic , why are you even posting, go post in the tv forum or something.

 

[Skylar]

US Officials Report No Evidence Hillary Clinton Broke The Law, Will Right-Wing Media Listen?

Conservative Media Conspiracy Theories Doused By The Facts
US Officials Report No Evidence Hillary Clinton Broke The Law, Will Right-Wing Media Listen?

Blog ››› May 5, 2016 10:15 PM EDT ››› TYLER CHERRY

Once again, that article says that there is no evidence that she WILLFULLY broke the law.

That is NOT how the laws on mishandling classified information work. There is no requirement to prove she purposely mishandled anything. Even if one classified email ACCIDENTALLY appeared on her server, she's guilty of a crime.

Benghazi ........................................

Nice attempt to deflect, but you'll in fact not find any posts from me about such.

Now, answer my question. Do you understand that it is irrelevant whether she willfully broke the law or not? That's a simple yes or no question.

PROVE IT....

every single lawyer that has defended those charged with top secret violations that have spoken up on this case have STATED that it has to be knowingly and willfully committed or severely gross negligence, in order for the gvt to prosecute.

Bullshit, I held top secret and SAP clearances for years, a violation does not have to be knowing or willing or grossly negligent. If I did what she did, I would be typing this from a jail cell.

your head is so far up Hillary's fat butt that you cant see reality.

Says you, citing you. And you're a notoriously shit source on the law. The glorious lack of other prosecutions for other SOS's who did the same thing demonstrates that you don't know what you're talking about.

 

[Redfish]

Once again, that article says that there is no evidence that she WILLFULLY broke the law.

That is NOT how the laws on mishandling classified information work. There is no requirement to prove she purposely mishandled anything. Even if one classified email ACCIDENTALLY appeared on her server, she's guilty of a crime.

Benghazi ........................................

Nice attempt to deflect, but you'll in fact not find any posts from me about such.

Now, answer my question. Do you understand that it is irrelevant whether she willfully broke the law or not? That's a simple yes or no question.

PROVE IT....

every single lawyer that has defended those charged with top secret violations that have spoken up on this case have STATED that it has to be knowingly and willfully committed or severely gross negligence, in order for the gvt to prosecute.

Bullshit, I held top secret and SAP clearances for years, a violation does not have to be knowing or willing or grossly negligent. If I did what she did, I would be typing this from a jail cell.

your head is so far up Hillary's fat butt that you cant see reality.

yeah, sure, whatever....

is that your purple face trying to look out of Hillary's ass?

Breaking the law does not have to be willful be indictable. "but officer I didn't willfully run the red light" are you always as stupid as you are in this thread?

 

[Fair&Balanced]

Once again, that article says that there is no evidence that she WILLFULLY broke the law.

That is NOT how the laws on mishandling classified information work. There is no requirement to prove she purposely mishandled anything. Even if one classified email ACCIDENTALLY appeared on her server, she's guilty of a crime.

Benghazi ........................................

Nice attempt to deflect, but you'll in fact not find any posts from me about such.

Now, answer my question. Do you understand that it is irrelevant whether she willfully broke the law or not? That's a simple yes or no question.

PROVE IT....

every single lawyer that has defended those charged with top secret violations that have spoken up on this case have STATED that it has to be knowingly and willfully committed or severely gross negligence, in order for the gvt to prosecute.

Bullshit, I held top secret and SAP clearances for years, a violation does not have to be knowing or willing or grossly negligent. If I did what she did, I would be typing this from a jail cell.

your head is so far up Hillary's fat butt that you cant see reality.

yeah, sure, whatever....

Have you ever received a briefing on the proper way to handle classified information? Don't bother , it's obvious you haven't.

Let's say you work for the State Department and you have classiied material in your briefcase, and you stop off for a drink on your way home from work. Let's say you accidently leave the bar without your briefcase.

Let's now say the next day you realize such and report it to your superiors. Guess what happens? You violated the law and will lose your security clearance, your job, and possibly your freedom.


speaking of that, here is another interesting question. What if the FBI stripped Hillary of her security clearance? Could a person who isn't eligible for a security clearance become President?

 

[Redfish]

Once again, that article says that there is no evidence that she WILLFULLY broke the law.

That is NOT how the laws on mishandling classified information work. There is no requirement to prove she purposely mishandled anything. Even if one classified email ACCIDENTALLY appeared on her server, she's guilty of a crime.

Benghazi ........................................

Nice attempt to deflect, but you'll in fact not find any posts from me about such.

Now, answer my question. Do you understand that it is irrelevant whether she willfully broke the law or not? That's a simple yes or no question.

PROVE IT....

every single lawyer that has defended those charged with top secret violations that have spoken up on this case have STATED that it has to be knowingly and willfully committed or severely gross negligence, in order for the gvt to prosecute.

Bullshit, I held top secret and SAP clearances for years, a violation does not have to be knowing or willing or grossly negligent. If I did what she did, I would be typing this from a jail cell.

your head is so far up Hillary's fat butt that you cant see reality.

Says you, citing you. And you're a notoriously shit source on the law. The glorious lack of other prosecutions for other SOS's who did the same thing demonstrates that you don't know what you're talking about.

Gen Patreaus was convicted of much less than what Hillary has done. Snowden did less damage to national security than Hillary.

I get it that she is your hope for the future, but she is a criminal, deal with it.

 

[kaz]

I said the video didn't add anything to that there were no sources and you came back with yes they did, they cited anonymous sources. I don't know what you even thing you're arguing right now

You said the article only cited Clinton aides.

So the article only cited Clinton aides saying there was no evidence and the video added zero to that

As my quote demonstrates, you were obviously wrong. The article cited officials in the investigation.

The interviews, we’re told, are focused on whether classified information was mishandled, and the security of the server. So far officials tell us, no, there is no evidence of criminal wrongdoing at this point in the investigation, but, again, the investigation is not over.

CNN Reports FBI Has Found ‘No Criminal Wrongdoing’ in Hillary Clinton Email ‘Investigation’

Ignore as you will. It really doesn't matter.

Whatever, you're into word parsing at a level you lost my interest

CNN cited US officials briefed on the investigation. You know it. I know it. Now so does everyone else.

The FBI does not brief people outside the justice department about ongoing investigations PERIOD. And no one from the Justice Department is going to say no laws were broken here at this juncture of the investigation.

sooooooooo, every single one of those right wing media outlets like FOX News were lying to ALL of you for nearly a year on this Hillary email thing???? ALL of their supposed sources were filling you and their watchers with bull crud?

hmmmmm.........

Yep, they were wrong because anonymous sources told you they were. Check and mate, nicely played ...

 

[Care4all]

PROVE IT....

every single lawyer that has defended those charged with top secret violations that have spoken up on this case have STATED that it has to be knowingly and willfully committed or severely gross negligence, in order for the gvt to prosecute.

18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information

You insist you know better than the legal experts that contradict you.

We'll see what your opinions are worth, won't we?

I just quoted the actual fucking law to you. Read it you fucking idiot, it's quite clear.

And as mos of the legal experts asked on the topic agree, its a stretch to apply it to a SOS's communication with her own aides, rather than an enemy nation.

You insist you know better.

We'll see what your opinion is worth. Just remember.....I told you so.

You won't quote one single legal expert who says that having classified information on an unclassified email server is not a violation of the law dude. Not one.

It is a matter of record that the law was violated here. That isn't even at question. The question is, Was Hillary at fault, PERIOD. That's the part you don't seem to understand , all the "legal experts" who are defending her, they aren't arguing that the law wasn't violated, because it was, they are arguing that Hillary was not responsible for the material being on the unclassified server.

Seriously, if you're too stupid to understand the actual topic , why are you even posting, go post in the tv forum or something.

hey dude,

you are the one that posted the link to this supposed law that was broken...but FAILED at reading comprehension of the very first sentence of the law.... where was the intent to deliver this top secret info to the enemy kiddo?

that's your problem, not mine or Hillary's.

 

[kaz]

I said the video didn't add anything to that there were no sources and you came back with yes they did, they cited anonymous sources. I don't know what you even thing you're arguing right now

You said the article only cited Clinton aides.

So the article only cited Clinton aides saying there was no evidence and the video added zero to that

As my quote demonstrates, you were obviously wrong. The article cited officials in the investigation.

The interviews, we’re told, are focused on whether classified information was mishandled, and the security of the server. So far officials tell us, no, there is no evidence of criminal wrongdoing at this point in the investigation, but, again, the investigation is not over.

CNN Reports FBI Has Found ‘No Criminal Wrongdoing’ in Hillary Clinton Email ‘Investigation’

Ignore as you will. It really doesn't matter.

Whatever, you're into word parsing at a level you lost my interest

CNN cited US officials briefed on the investigation. You know it. I know it. Now so does everyone else.

The FBI does not brief people outside the justice department about ongoing investigations PERIOD. And no one from the Justice Department is going to say no laws were broken here at this juncture of the investigation.

Says who?

And have you noticed how often you quote yourself?

Anonymous sources, irrefutable sources according to you ...

 

[Fair&Balanced]

18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information

You insist you know better than the legal experts that contradict you.

We'll see what your opinions are worth, won't we?

I just quoted the actual fucking law to you. Read it you fucking idiot, it's quite clear.

And as mos of the legal experts asked on the topic agree, its a stretch to apply it to a SOS's communication with her own aides, rather than an enemy nation.

You insist you know better.

We'll see what your opinion is worth. Just remember.....I told you so.

You won't quote one single legal expert who says that having classified information on an unclassified email server is not a violation of the law dude. Not one.

It is a matter of record that the law was violated here. That isn't even at question. The question is, Was Hillary at fault, PERIOD. That's the part you don't seem to understand , all the "legal experts" who are defending her, they aren't arguing that the law wasn't violated, because it was, they are arguing that Hillary was not responsible for the material being on the unclassified server.

Seriously, if you're too stupid to understand the actual topic , why are you even posting, go post in the tv forum or something.

hey dude,

you are the one that posted the link to this supposed law that was broken...but FAILED at reading comprehension of the very first sentence of the law.... where was the intent to deliver this top secret info to the enemy kiddo?

that's your problem, not mine or Hillary's.

18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information


Show me where in that law intent is required.

 

[kaz]

Once again, that article says that there is no evidence that she WILLFULLY broke the law.

That is NOT how the laws on mishandling classified information work. There is no requirement to prove she purposely mishandled anything. Even if one classified email ACCIDENTALLY appeared on her server, she's guilty of a crime.

Benghazi ........................................

Nice attempt to deflect, but you'll in fact not find any posts from me about such.

Now, answer my question. Do you understand that it is irrelevant whether she willfully broke the law or not? That's a simple yes or no question.

PROVE IT....

every single lawyer that has defended those charged with top secret violations that have spoken up on this case have STATED that it has to be knowingly and willfully committed or severely gross negligence, in order for the gvt to prosecute.

18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information

uhhhh, did you read the very first sentence in your link?

uhhh, did you read the ops link where no sources were provided when you declared victory?