The Hill: Was Loretta Lynch coordinating with James Comey in the Clinton investigation?

[AntonToo]

“cloud” is simply a reference to public facing hosting servers.

AOL emails were hosted on their server farm, accessible through internet.

When Powell used AOL his emails were stored on AOL servers, a password away from break in.

You are totally out to lunch and can’t meaningfully dispute anything I’m saying.

Did you bother to notice how the State Dept had no email capacity when Powell was in office? He was the first to ever use it.

did you notice how it is irrelevant? What you just said is completely beside the issue.

Powell either used private email system to conduct DoS business or he did not use private email system, available alternatives are MOOT.

Yes, he SET UP the State Dept email system you boob. It didn't exist prior to his arrival.

Aaaaand? How did it make his email use different from the perspective of the federal law?

Because the Feds had to work out how those laws would apply to email.

Yea? Keep going, don't hold back now:

What and WHEN did they work it out to make Clinton's email handling different from Powell's?

In 2014 Feds revised and clarified the rules around email use:

Hillary Clinton’s Personal Email Use Came Before Recent Rule Changes

 

[Wyatt earp]

Did you bother to notice how the State Dept had no email capacity when Powell was in office? He was the first to ever use it.

did you notice how it is irrelevant? What you just said is completely beside the issue.

Powell either used private email system to conduct DoS business or he did not use private email system, available alternatives are MOOT.

Yes, he SET UP the State Dept email system you boob. It didn't exist prior to his arrival.

Aaaaand? How did it make his email use different from the perspective of the federal law?

Because the Feds had to work out how those laws would apply to email.

Yea? Keep going, don't hold back now:

What and WHEN did they work it out to make Clinton's email handling different from Powell's?

In 2014 Feds revised and clarified the rules around email use:

Hillary Clinton’s Personal Email Use Came Before Recent Rule Changes

And why did they have to add the rules you stupid fuck????



Because of Hillary

 

[Coyote]

The naval seaman that you're referring to (Kristian Saucier) absolutely "intended" to commit a crime. He didn't "accidentally" take 10 or so pictures of the submarine's classified engine system. He intentionally aimed his smartphone at the engine, and pressed the "Shutter" button - knowing that in doing so, he was violating the law.

And hillary intended to place classified documents on her unclassified server. Saucier had no intent to commit a crime. He DID commit the crime, but he was unaware that it was a crime to take those photo's. hillary, as the most "prepared POTUS candidate evah!" clearly DID know it was illegal, and furthermore, the sailor is not held up to nearly the same standard as the Sec of State, yet she was held to a LOWER standard than he was, and there's that little issue of those 33,000 subpoenad emails that were destroyed, along with the 13 blackberries that were hammered into bits. That is prima facie evidence that smacks that Reasonable Person right in the face. Don't ya think?

To add -

"Intention" isn't about knowing that you're breaking the law. It's about doing things on purpose. If you act, with the intention that a result should come from your action, the requirement for intent is satisfied.

Saucier didn't take those pictures by accident, he did it on purpose. That's where the idea of intent comes in.

There's no evidence that Clinton's spillage was intentional.

Yes, he intended to take the pictures, but he thought that as they were private, and were not going to be given to anyone beyond his friends and family that it was not a crime. Hillary KNEW that what she was doing was illegal (she is an attorney after all, she is ASSUMED to KNOW the law based on her classification as an expert). The most likely reason for her to set up the private server was to avoid FOIA requests. That is the only thing that makes any sort of sense.

Actually, from what I have read, the reason had more to do with her discomfort with technology and her reliance on others. There is no evidence of intent to break a law but plenty of her lack of tech.

That's ridiculous. If she didn't have the tech savvy, then she shouldn't have taken the job. But when you take such a job, you accept all responsibilities that go along with it.

That's like saying the bank robber was not responsible for the guard he shot. His only intent was to steal the money.

Then you better fire Trump because he isn't either. Trump and Clinton are very similar in this regard. Many of their generation aren't tech saavy and depend on others to sort it out for them - Clinton certainly did which is why she took Powell's advice. It's not a job requirement.

I think people hate Clinton so much they can't see beyond it.

 

[Coyote]

did you notice how it is irrelevant? What you just said is completely beside the issue.

Powell either used private email system to conduct DoS business or he did not use private email system, available alternatives are MOOT.

Yes, he SET UP the State Dept email system you boob. It didn't exist prior to his arrival.

Aaaaand? How did it make his email use different from the perspective of the federal law?

Because the Feds had to work out how those laws would apply to email.

Yea? Keep going, don't hold back now:

What and WHEN did they work it out to make Clinton's email handling different from Powell's?

In 2014 Feds revised and clarified the rules around email use:

Hillary Clinton’s Personal Email Use Came Before Recent Rule Changes

And why did they have to add the rules you stupid fuck????



Because of Hillary

No. Because of advancing technology. The same way we have to revise rules and laws regarding cellphones, warrents, etc etc - this stuff is constantly evolving.

 

[westwall]

And hillary intended to place classified documents on her unclassified server. Saucier had no intent to commit a crime. He DID commit the crime, but he was unaware that it was a crime to take those photo's. hillary, as the most "prepared POTUS candidate evah!" clearly DID know it was illegal, and furthermore, the sailor is not held up to nearly the same standard as the Sec of State, yet she was held to a LOWER standard than he was, and there's that little issue of those 33,000 subpoenad emails that were destroyed, along with the 13 blackberries that were hammered into bits. That is prima facie evidence that smacks that Reasonable Person right in the face. Don't ya think?

To add -

"Intention" isn't about knowing that you're breaking the law. It's about doing things on purpose. If you act, with the intention that a result should come from your action, the requirement for intent is satisfied.

Saucier didn't take those pictures by accident, he did it on purpose. That's where the idea of intent comes in.

There's no evidence that Clinton's spillage was intentional.

Yes, he intended to take the pictures, but he thought that as they were private, and were not going to be given to anyone beyond his friends and family that it was not a crime. Hillary KNEW that what she was doing was illegal (she is an attorney after all, she is ASSUMED to KNOW the law based on her classification as an expert). The most likely reason for her to set up the private server was to avoid FOIA requests. That is the only thing that makes any sort of sense.

Actually, from what I have read, the reason had more to do with her discomfort with technology and her reliance on others. There is no evidence of intent to break a law but plenty of her lack of tech.

That's ridiculous. If she didn't have the tech savvy, then she shouldn't have taken the job. But when you take such a job, you accept all responsibilities that go along with it.

That's like saying the bank robber was not responsible for the guard he shot. His only intent was to steal the money.

Then you better fire Trump because he isn't either. Trump and Clinton are very similar in this regard. Many of their generation aren't tech saavy and depend on others to sort it out for them - Clinton certainly did which is why she took Powell's advice. It's not a job requirement.

I think people hate Clinton so much they can't see beyond it.

No, I think we despise her because she's despicable.

 

[Coyote]

To add -

"Intention" isn't about knowing that you're breaking the law. It's about doing things on purpose. If you act, with the intention that a result should come from your action, the requirement for intent is satisfied.

Saucier didn't take those pictures by accident, he did it on purpose. That's where the idea of intent comes in.

There's no evidence that Clinton's spillage was intentional.

Yes, he intended to take the pictures, but he thought that as they were private, and were not going to be given to anyone beyond his friends and family that it was not a crime. Hillary KNEW that what she was doing was illegal (she is an attorney after all, she is ASSUMED to KNOW the law based on her classification as an expert). The most likely reason for her to set up the private server was to avoid FOIA requests. That is the only thing that makes any sort of sense.

Actually, from what I have read, the reason had more to do with her discomfort with technology and her reliance on others. There is no evidence of intent to break a law but plenty of her lack of tech.

That's ridiculous. If she didn't have the tech savvy, then she shouldn't have taken the job. But when you take such a job, you accept all responsibilities that go along with it.

That's like saying the bank robber was not responsible for the guard he shot. His only intent was to steal the money.

Then you better fire Trump because he isn't either. Trump and Clinton are very similar in this regard. Many of their generation aren't tech saavy and depend on others to sort it out for them - Clinton certainly did which is why she took Powell's advice. It's not a job requirement.

I think people hate Clinton so much they can't see beyond it.

No, I think we despise her because she's despicable.

 

[westwall]

Yes, he intended to take the pictures, but he thought that as they were private, and were not going to be given to anyone beyond his friends and family that it was not a crime. Hillary KNEW that what she was doing was illegal (she is an attorney after all, she is ASSUMED to KNOW the law based on her classification as an expert). The most likely reason for her to set up the private server was to avoid FOIA requests. That is the only thing that makes any sort of sense.

Actually, from what I have read, the reason had more to do with her discomfort with technology and her reliance on others. There is no evidence of intent to break a law but plenty of her lack of tech.

That's ridiculous. If she didn't have the tech savvy, then she shouldn't have taken the job. But when you take such a job, you accept all responsibilities that go along with it.

That's like saying the bank robber was not responsible for the guard he shot. His only intent was to steal the money.

Then you better fire Trump because he isn't either. Trump and Clinton are very similar in this regard. Many of their generation aren't tech saavy and depend on others to sort it out for them - Clinton certainly did which is why she took Powell's advice. It's not a job requirement.

I think people hate Clinton so much they can't see beyond it.

No, I think we despise her because she's despicable.

You may certainly laugh but I told my wife to do some real research and if she could find ONE thing that hillary had done completely on her own after spending all of that time in government i would vote for her. My wife is a damned good researcher and after a week she said, "well hell. I can't vote for her now. She has done nothing for anyone except herself."

And that is the story of hillary clinton. She hasn't a single accomplishment to her name. Not one.

 

[Coyote]

Actually, from what I have read, the reason had more to do with her discomfort with technology and her reliance on others. There is no evidence of intent to break a law but plenty of her lack of tech.

That's ridiculous. If she didn't have the tech savvy, then she shouldn't have taken the job. But when you take such a job, you accept all responsibilities that go along with it.

That's like saying the bank robber was not responsible for the guard he shot. His only intent was to steal the money.

Then you better fire Trump because he isn't either. Trump and Clinton are very similar in this regard. Many of their generation aren't tech saavy and depend on others to sort it out for them - Clinton certainly did which is why she took Powell's advice. It's not a job requirement.

I think people hate Clinton so much they can't see beyond it.

No, I think we despise her because she's despicable.

You may certainly laugh but I told my wife to do some real research and if she could find ONE thing that hillary had done completely on her own after spending all of that time in government i would vote for her. My wife is a damned good researcher and after a week she said, "well hell. I can't vote for her now. She has done nothing for anyone except herself."

And that is the story of hillary clinton. She hasn't a single accomplishment to her name. Not one.

I wasn't laughing to be mean but because the phrase came off funny

I don't hate her - I don't think she was the best candidate but she was better than what we got. I just don't get the irrational hate of some towards her because it's a hatred willing to not only tolerate but fertilize conspiracy theories. She's not Hitler. There are worse people out there by far in politics right now. Frankly - I would ask the same thing. Has Trump done anything for anyone except himself at the time of his candidacy?

 

[The Original Tree]

You lie!

Hillary was an expert with technology

She destroyed 17 Devices and Bleach Bitted 33,000 Emails.

That’s impressive!

And hillary intended to place classified documents on her unclassified server. Saucier had no intent to commit a crime. He DID commit the crime, but he was unaware that it was a crime to take those photo's. hillary, as the most "prepared POTUS candidate evah!" clearly DID know it was illegal, and furthermore, the sailor is not held up to nearly the same standard as the Sec of State, yet she was held to a LOWER standard than he was, and there's that little issue of those 33,000 subpoenad emails that were destroyed, along with the 13 blackberries that were hammered into bits. That is prima facie evidence that smacks that Reasonable Person right in the face. Don't ya think?

To add -

"Intention" isn't about knowing that you're breaking the law. It's about doing things on purpose. If you act, with the intention that a result should come from your action, the requirement for intent is satisfied.

Saucier didn't take those pictures by accident, he did it on purpose. That's where the idea of intent comes in.

There's no evidence that Clinton's spillage was intentional.

Yes, he intended to take the pictures, but he thought that as they were private, and were not going to be given to anyone beyond his friends and family that it was not a crime. Hillary KNEW that what she was doing was illegal (she is an attorney after all, she is ASSUMED to KNOW the law based on her classification as an expert). The most likely reason for her to set up the private server was to avoid FOIA requests. That is the only thing that makes any sort of sense.

Actually, from what I have read, the reason had more to do with her discomfort with technology and her reliance on others. There is no evidence of intent to break a law but plenty of her lack of tech.

That's ridiculous. If she didn't have the tech savvy, then she shouldn't have taken the job. But when you take such a job, you accept all responsibilities that go along with it.

That's like saying the bank robber was not responsible for the guard he shot. His only intent was to steal the money.

Then you better fire Trump because he isn't either. Trump and Clinton are very similar in this regard. Many of their generation aren't tech saavy and depend on others to sort it out for them - Clinton certainly did which is why she took Powell's advice. It's not a job requirement.

I think people hate Clinton so much they can't see beyond it.

 

[westwall]

That's ridiculous. If she didn't have the tech savvy, then she shouldn't have taken the job. But when you take such a job, you accept all responsibilities that go along with it.

That's like saying the bank robber was not responsible for the guard he shot. His only intent was to steal the money.

Then you better fire Trump because he isn't either. Trump and Clinton are very similar in this regard. Many of their generation aren't tech saavy and depend on others to sort it out for them - Clinton certainly did which is why she took Powell's advice. It's not a job requirement.

I think people hate Clinton so much they can't see beyond it.

No, I think we despise her because she's despicable.

You may certainly laugh but I told my wife to do some real research and if she could find ONE thing that hillary had done completely on her own after spending all of that time in government i would vote for her. My wife is a damned good researcher and after a week she said, "well hell. I can't vote for her now. She has done nothing for anyone except herself."

And that is the story of hillary clinton. She hasn't a single accomplishment to her name. Not one.

I wasn't laughing to be mean but because the phrase came off funny

I don't hate her - I don't think she was the best candidate but she was better than what we got. I just don't get the irrational hate of some towards her because it's a hatred willing to not only tolerate but fertilize conspiracy theories. She's not Hitler. There are worse people out there by far in politics right now. Frankly - I would ask the same thing. Has Trump done anything for anyone except himself at the time of his candidacy?

Since he was elected he has absolutely helped millions of Americans.

 

[eddiew37]

Then you better fire Trump because he isn't either. Trump and Clinton are very similar in this regard. Many of their generation aren't tech saavy and depend on others to sort it out for them - Clinton certainly did which is why she took Powell's advice. It's not a job requirement.

I think people hate Clinton so much they can't see beyond it.

No, I think we despise her because she's despicable.

You may certainly laugh but I told my wife to do some real research and if she could find ONE thing that hillary had done completely on her own after spending all of that time in government i would vote for her. My wife is a damned good researcher and after a week she said, "well hell. I can't vote for her now. She has done nothing for anyone except herself."

And that is the story of hillary clinton. She hasn't a single accomplishment to her name. Not one.

I wasn't laughing to be mean but because the phrase came off funny

I don't hate her - I don't think she was the best candidate but she was better than what we got. I just don't get the irrational hate of some towards her because it's a hatred willing to not only tolerate but fertilize conspiracy theories. She's not Hitler. There are worse people out there by far in politics right now. Frankly - I would ask the same thing. Has Trump done anything for anyone except himself at the time of his candidacy?

Since he was elected he has absolutely helped millions of Americans.

lol lol yes all million and billionaires

 

[Dschrute3]

Of course. She knew in advance that Clinton would skate. There was no credible investigation.

 

[Dschrute3]

Abusing and using the FISA courts to target your political enemies, Doc?????

Yeah, it does make Watergate look like small potatoes. Clearly the Obama Administration ordered surveillance against the opposition party's candidate. It's as Un-American as it gets. But will anyone be held accountable? Sadly, i doubt it. The NWO Global Elite scum are running the show. Trump never stood a chance.

 

[eddiew37]

Abusing and using the FISA courts to target your political enemies, Doc?????

Yeah, it does make Watergate look like small potatoes. Clearly the Obama Administration ordered surveillance against the opposition party's candidate. It's as Un-American as it gets. But will anyone be held accountable? Sadly, i doubt it. The NWO Global Elite scum are running the show. Trump never stood a chance.

when will you repubs spout anything but your bullshit?

 

[Dale Smith]

Abusing and using the FISA courts to target your political enemies, Doc?????

Yeah, it does make Watergate look like small potatoes. Clearly the Obama Administration ordered surveillance against the opposition party's candidate. It's as Un-American as it gets. But will anyone be held accountable? Sadly, i doubt it. The NWO Global Elite scum are running the show. Trump never stood a chance.

when will you repubs spout anything but your bullshit?

Edds, the prior administration weaponized the FISA courts, the DOJ and the FBI to go after anyone that might pose a threat to Hillary Clinton.....the evidence is blatantly obvious.

 

[eddiew37]

Abusing and using the FISA courts to target your political enemies, Doc?????

Yeah, it does make Watergate look like small potatoes. Clearly the Obama Administration ordered surveillance against the opposition party's candidate. It's as Un-American as it gets. But will anyone be held accountable? Sadly, i doubt it. The NWO Global Elite scum are running the show. Trump never stood a chance.

when will you repubs spout anything but your bullshit?

Edds, the prior administration weaponized the FISA courts, the DOJ and the FBI to go after anyone that might pose a threat to Hillary Clinton.....the evidence is blatantly obvious.

maybe ,I just have a belief in America and the 30 some odd thousands of FBI who America counts on I just believe this scum in our WH will bash anything in his way even the FBI

 

[eddiew37]

Abusing and using the FISA courts to target your political enemies, Doc?????

Yeah, it does make Watergate look like small potatoes. Clearly the Obama Administration ordered surveillance against the opposition party's candidate. It's as Un-American as it gets. But will anyone be held accountable? Sadly, i doubt it. The NWO Global Elite scum are running the show. Trump never stood a chance.

when will you repubs spout anything but your bullshit?

Edds, the prior administration weaponized the FISA courts, the DOJ and the FBI to go after anyone that might pose a threat to Hillary Clinton.....the evidence is blatantly obvious.

you might be right dale but whats wrong with going after a lying sack of shit like trump who works hand in hand with putin

 

[Leo123]

you might be right dale but whats wrong with going after a lying sack of shit like trump who works hand in hand with putin

Because there is no proof. It's not even being investigated by Mueller anymore he's trying to go after obstruction of justice now. Hope he nails Hillary on that.

 

[Dale Smith]

Abusing and using the FISA courts to target your political enemies, Doc?????

Yeah, it does make Watergate look like small potatoes. Clearly the Obama Administration ordered surveillance against the opposition party's candidate. It's as Un-American as it gets. But will anyone be held accountable? Sadly, i doubt it. The NWO Global Elite scum are running the show. Trump never stood a chance.

when will you repubs spout anything but your bullshit?

Edds, the prior administration weaponized the FISA courts, the DOJ and the FBI to go after anyone that might pose a threat to Hillary Clinton.....the evidence is blatantly obvious.

maybe ,I just have a belief in America and the 30 some odd thousands of FBI who America counts on I just believe this scum in our WH will bash anything in his way even the FBI

The head is rotten at the top, Edds. Comey is as slimy as can be. He laundered drug money when he worked at HSBC, a CIA friendly bank. Mueller protected the Bushpuppet/neocons and squashed evidence concerning the events of 9/11. He also covered up the money laundering crimes of the CIA connected to the BCCI. We have the same fucking players every damn time in positions where they cover each other's asses. High level DNC members that have relatives in the D.C police department that have been complicit in the cover-up of the murder of Seth Rich. They are the fucking swamp gators and you don't know how deep this rabbit hole goes because if you knew the things I did? You would have the same sickening feeling in your stomach that I do on a daily basis. Child trafficking, gun running, drugs....all purposely brought into this country to fund black ops and keep this fiat currency system running while using CIA friendly financial institutions that "wash" the money......

Trump is no saint and I am sure that he has a gold plated "son-of-a-bitch" side to him.... but what I have gathered is that he is simply playing a part and it's the "white hats" that are really doing the work. He has the temperament and ego to try and pull off this attempt to drain this parasitic swamp "dry"...if I am wrong? I will be the first one to admit it. I am one of the "watchers" that is standing post. I will not be played for a chump again. I simply know too much and I view Trump with a very jaundiced eye. I am done dining on crow...........

 

[Markle]

Did Hillary "intent" to place classified documents on her unclassified server? That's not the foregone conclusion you act as if it is.

From what I've seen, it could just as easily be explained as spillage. Do you have any conclusive reason to say that it was intentional?

You know as well as anyone that laws were broken with the meeting on the tarmac as well as a dozen other places. You're simply another troll.

That is not necessarily true. It was absolutely unethical, but whether it was illegal or not is an open question.

In your opinion.

There were collusion and an offer made to re-nominate Loretta Lynch as Attorney General or perhaps even a higher position. Do I have proof? Nope. I have common sense and have followed the history of criminal activity and corruption surrounding the Clinton Cabal for decades.