US vs Flynn

[colfax_m]

Gross negligence appears in the law, yes, and carries penalties with it. I mean, whats the point here?

This is why Comey removed / changed the words 'Gross Negligence' regarding Hillary's crimes....

Because the phrase did not accurately reflect their decision making.

 

[sakinago]

He lied under oath. He was pressured by the DOJ which was, and is, headed up by republicans.

Comey admitted on TV that he sent people into the Trump administration when it was 3 days old in order to sabotage it.

Can you tell me what Flynn supposedly lied about?

I didn't think so.

How long his shoe laces were perhaps? Maybe he said his car was red when the dealership lists the color as "crimson"

“In 2017 he pleaded guilty to making false statements to the FBI in relation to the Special Counsel's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 elections.”

Hillary lied under oath too.

**** this one-sided shit.

Amazing how she was never charged for your imaginary allegations

Comey said confidential mail was found.

She said it wasn't there.

**** off.

Not just low level bullshit confidential material that shouldn’t even be confidential, they found plenty of that. But they found the highest level confidentiality where you aren’t allowed to create it digitally, you’re only allowed to read a hardcopy in a special room surrounded by a faraday cage where all electronics are banned. She was told that it could not be sent in email, that she had to read it in the special room, berated the person who told her that and made them send it in an email anyway...to her special server that we know was hacked by the Chinese. Which is one of the reasons we made the law that you have to use a government email address for work. Another reason is so you can’t destroy the evidence, which she also did. Compare the actual crime Hillary committed to the crimes they have to keep doing mental gymnastics to say that trump committed. It’s bonkers.

None of this is true.

View attachment 328727
View attachment 328728
From the IG himself. SAP, Special Access Privilege, is the term for the room I was talking about. Post proof before you make dumbass claims. Even if this wasn’t true, there’s minimum mandatory sentencing for even the lowest level classification. It was a crime to use her service for government work in the first place. She initially denied she did that, said it was personal stuff only. That was a lie. It morphed into she never used it for classified emails. That was a lie. She deleted 33,000 that she said were personal before she turned them over, which the FBI would never allow anyone else to do EVER, which also turned out to be a lie. I know the left has a magical ability to re-write history in their minds and block out whats reality like they’re in some sort of Scientology cult...but the real history is out there.

I'm aware that some of the information on her server was deemed SAP. However, that was not copied from any files, but a reference was made to this information. The part of your claim which was bullshit was her being told specific information could not be put in an email and berating people for not doing so. The other bullshit claim is that it was hacked by the Chinese, no such information exists. Another bullshit claim is that there is a law that you must use government email for work. Another bullshit claim is that she destroyed evidence.

She never claimed her server was only for personal use. She didn't delete 33,000 emails that were personal before she turned them over.

You've really jumbled up details.

The 33,000 emails were deleted after her lawyer sorted out and submitted the work related ones. It is not illegal to use personal email for government business. No then, not now. Government employees, up to and including Trump's own family continue to do so to this day. There was a reference of her emails being forwarded to a "Chinese" IP, a report which was based on misunderstanding and poor information. Emails were forwarded as part of a server migration.

Oh you have to be ******* kidding me. A “misunderstanding” or “glitch” caused Hillary’s emails to be forwarded to servers to a Chinese company with Chinese hardware and software that’s banned for use by government employees because we already know they are filled with spyware. All because that spokesperson of that state run company says “don’t worry, we no spy”. Her server was not approved, and she lied about classified emails being on there, as well as lied about classified emails being in the 33,000 deleted ones. The Olympic level of mental gymnastics here a astounding. Don’t believe the evidence in front of your eyes...just listen to how Hillary’s lawyers say it went down. Name another instance where the FBI subpoenaed evidence, let the party in questions lawyers comb over it and select what evidence to send over? FBI are the only ones who determine what is pertinent and what isn’t in every single case. This was the one case where they let the guilty party’s lawyers determine that, and then delete everything else. Why is that?

No glitch caused the emails to be forwarded because they weren’t forwarded to a Chinese company. This was a false report put out by shoddy right wing media and shot down by Republicans.

Senate investigators find no evidence China hacked Clinton server | CNN Politics

A long-running Republican-led investigation into the handling of classified information on Hillary Clinton's private email server did not find any evidence that China had successfully hacked the former secretary of state, confirming the findings of the FBI, according to a memo released by two...

www.cnn.com

The FBI never subpoenaed Clinton for emails. At the time Clinton told her staff to delete those emails, no one else did either.

Anytime anyone is subpoenaed, their lawyers determine what is relevant. That’s how subpoenas work.

Jesus Christ the gmail account got forwarded to Chinese servers. Servers that are banned in the US for state use because they are wrought with spyware. The PR agent of that company made the a statement that “we don’t spy” instead of “we didnt receive that info”. The person who made that special Gmail account was apprehended at the airport about a year later. This was after he sent his entire family back to his home country. Yes he was charged with something unrelated to being a spy (loose term also meaning someone knowingly or unknowingly working with foreign intelligence), that he indeed was guilty of, because it’s a very bad look to have a spy that high up in the state department. The same people in the FBI playing games with the word “hacked”, are implying that Chinese hacker nerds didn’t “Infiltrate” her system. Which isn’t what anybody was talking about. China read those emails. We know we had an intelligence leak with China because over 20 of our spy’s (again loose term meaning not in Hollywood James Bond definition of a spy) were killed within weeks of each other by China. This was one of the worst Intelligence failures since the bay of pigs. It’s possible it was unrelated to the Clinton emails, but that’d be the first place I’d look. The same people in the FBI playing around with the word “hacked” were the same ones playing around with the word intent in a case where there is no legal benchmark to prove intent. Even though intent is clearly implied because she instructed staffers to remove the classified SAP headings so that they could make a digital clone to send by email. Let alone the intent that comes with creating an entire server and email system where the only clear implied intent is to be the only one in control information outside of the usual pathways, otherwise you’d just use a gmail account. They also said they can’t justify prosecution because they’ve never prosecuted any similar cases, even though THERES NEVER BEEN A CASE THIS BAD BEFORE. Which is like saying we shouldn’t prosecute Jeffery Dhamer becuase we’ve never prosecuted anyone else for a crime of this sort. The only thing similar, and not even close to the degree of what Hillary did was Petreus sharing classified info with his girlfriend.

I get why we didn’t pursue Clinton that hard at the time, didn’t really like it though. Like with Nixon, we don’t want to set the precedent that can easily devolve into using the legal system, that can easily be abused, to win political battles that were lost in elections. But as more and more comes out with the FISA warrants, and the FBIs conduct, it’s becoming very apparent that’s what exactly has been going on with the Russian collusion investigation. Which is why I said we’re in a full blown prisoners dilemma. If you’re not familiar, look it up. Either we investigate and charge to fullest extent like the left attempted, and set the precedent for a devolving game of using the legal system to bash each other (even though this would a legit reason to do so)...or the left will continue their abuses since they got away with it this time. Maybe we do investigate and root out this corruption, but more likely that’ll devolve into a political back and forth. Or maybe we investigate, release info, don’t really pursue charges and hopefully enough American people recognize it for what it is and it’s reflected in the voting booth so it’s no longer a winning strategy, which on USMB doesn’t seem to be the case.

 

[iceberg]

HOWEVER - it now appears the FBI said "you will say this or you son goes to the slammer"

No. It appears the FBI said that you can plead guilty to a crime we both agree he committed or else the case against your son will continue. The FBI can’t throw anyone in the slammer who did not commit a crime.

FBI putting innoncent people in jail - Google Search

seems they do it a lot.

The FBI doesn’t prosecute. They don’t try. They don’t judge. They don’t deliver a verdict.

ok - so we're going to play semantics games. is that it? make a point then hide behind a word?

The point is that Flynn and his son were in trouble because of their lobbying was skirting the law.

ok. fine. i'll go with that and not worry about it. they're in trouble for this.

now, if they're in enough trouble to prosecute and jail him, and Flynn did in fact do all this, why the lies and deception? in my mind you're saying it's ok to break the law if you're after someone you *feel* has broken it too.

now if you're not saying that great. but it's coming across right now like you have zero issue with what the FBI did here.

 

[iceberg]

Gross negligence appears in the law, yes, and carries penalties with it. I mean, whats the point here?

This is why Comey removed / changed the words 'Gross Negligence' regarding Hillary's crimes....

Because the phrase did not accurately reflect their decision making.

but you also said a few replies ago, the wording didn't matter.

now, it does?

it can't only matter how you want it to. if it matters it carries a cost society has placed upon it we shouldn't be able to change because we don't like "something".

so at this point you've flipped position on whether or not the words used even matter.

at least that's how i'm reading it. doesn't matter what they call it, now they're calling it what accurately reflects the "non-crime".

 

[colfax_m]

Gross negligence appears in the law, yes, and carries penalties with it. I mean, whats the point here?

This is why Comey removed / changed the words 'Gross Negligence' regarding Hillary's crimes....

Because the phrase did not accurately reflect their decision making.

but you also said a few replies ago, the wording didn't matter.

now, it does?

it can't only matter how you want it to. if it matters it carries a cost society has placed upon it we shouldn't be able to change because we don't like "something".

so at this point you've flipped position on whether or not the words used even matter.

at least that's how i'm reading it. doesn't matter what they call it, now they're calling it what accurately reflects the "non-crime".

I’m saying this is a non-issue. The entire team including line DoJ prosecutors decided it was not appropriate to charge her with gross negligence.

The wording of his public statement would have no bearing on that decision.

 

[easyt65]

Because the phrase did not accurately reflect their decision making.

No, because the words mandated a crime with mandatory jail time.....

 

[easyt65]

I’m saying this is a non-issue.

Of course YOU are. Thanks for that UNSUPPORTED OPINION.

 

[colfax_m]

HOWEVER - it now appears the FBI said "you will say this or you son goes to the slammer"

No. It appears the FBI said that you can plead guilty to a crime we both agree he committed or else the case against your son will continue. The FBI can’t throw anyone in the slammer who did not commit a crime.

FBI putting innoncent people in jail - Google Search

seems they do it a lot.

The FBI doesn’t prosecute. They don’t try. They don’t judge. They don’t deliver a verdict.

ok - so we're going to play semantics games. is that it? make a point then hide behind a word?

The point is that Flynn and his son were in trouble because of their lobbying was skirting the law.

ok. fine. i'll go with that and not worry about it. they're in trouble for this.

now, if they're in enough trouble to prosecute and jail him, and Flynn did in fact do all this, why the lies and deception? in my mind you're saying it's ok to break the law if you're after someone you *feel* has broken it too.

now if you're not saying that great. but it's coming across right now like you have zero issue with what the FBI did here.

What lies and deception?

 

[gipper]

You’re dreaming if you think the Trump administration is going to prosecute Obama’s people. They won’t, because they know the succeeding D administration might do it to them, whether justified or not.

There's only 1 thing wrong with your post....

After over 4 years of failed / illegal investigations coup attempts Obama and the Democrats came up with zero crimes, zero evidence, and zero witnesses......while there is enough criminal evidence against Obama's administration and Democrats that Barr / Durham could perp-walk them today if the investigation was over.

I don’t disagree, but you missed my point. Donnie’s people aren’t going to prosecute O’s people for the coup attempt. They are just appeasing you with propaganda.

 

[iceberg]

Gross negligence appears in the law, yes, and carries penalties with it. I mean, whats the point here?

This is why Comey removed / changed the words 'Gross Negligence' regarding Hillary's crimes....

Because the phrase did not accurately reflect their decision making.

but you also said a few replies ago, the wording didn't matter.

now, it does?

it can't only matter how you want it to. if it matters it carries a cost society has placed upon it we shouldn't be able to change because we don't like "something".

so at this point you've flipped position on whether or not the words used even matter.

at least that's how i'm reading it. doesn't matter what they call it, now they're calling it what accurately reflects the "non-crime".

I’m saying this is a non-issue. The entire team including line DoJ prosecutors decided it was not appropriate to charge her with gross negligence.

The wording of his public statement would have no bearing on that decision.

"the entire team" - it was strozk who said to change it.

words matter. they required action if "gross negligence" was used. it was changed to be a slap on the wrist and not require mandatory additional action. now since the person who did this has been fired due to bias against trump, then yes i question why this was done too.

 

[sakinago]

He lied under oath. He was pressured by the DOJ which was, and is, headed up by republicans.

Comey admitted on TV that he sent people into the Trump administration when it was 3 days old in order to sabotage it.

Can you tell me what Flynn supposedly lied about?

I didn't think so.

How long his shoe laces were perhaps? Maybe he said his car was red when the dealership lists the color as "crimson"

“In 2017 he pleaded guilty to making false statements to the FBI in relation to the Special Counsel's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 elections.”

Hillary lied under oath too.

**** this one-sided shit.

Amazing how she was never charged for your imaginary allegations

Comey said confidential mail was found.

She said it wasn't there.

**** off.

Not just low level bullshit confidential material that shouldn’t even be confidential, they found plenty of that. But they found the highest level confidentiality where you aren’t allowed to create it digitally, you’re only allowed to read a hardcopy in a special room surrounded by a faraday cage where all electronics are banned. She was told that it could not be sent in email, that she had to read it in the special room, berated the person who told her that and made them send it in an email anyway...to her special server that we know was hacked by the Chinese. Which is one of the reasons we made the law that you have to use a government email address for work. Another reason is so you can’t destroy the evidence, which she also did. Compare the actual crime Hillary committed to the crimes they have to keep doing mental gymnastics to say that trump committed. It’s bonkers.

None of this is true.

are you saying no confidential information was found on her server? this is what i understand you to say.

Absolutely not. But there are too many details in the post above that are incorrect. I was being too broad to say none of this is true. I should have said "almost none of this is true".

hey - i am going by what you say, not what you mean. i asked, not assumed, so we could clear that up. that is all. would you rather i just attack you for saying a blanket statement that was untrue?

now - would you agree that comey, who said this information was on there, was reported to have initially called it "gross negligence" yet strozk had it rephrased to "extreme carelessness"?

bear with me - i do not want to argue over assumptions but i want to clarify your stance so i know what we're actually discussing / debating.

The wording of the statement is irrelevant. The decision not to prosecute based on gross negligence statute is well explained in Congressional testimony and the IG report. The gross negligence statute has never been used in isolation, and only used in conjunction with far more serious crimes on a handful of situations. The statute was probably overly vague and they had doubts whether it was even constitutional based on that. Charging her based solely on the gross negligence statute would have been treating Clinton differently than anyone else.

I already acknowledged my statement was overly broad. You’re correct. My mistake.

if it doesn't matter, then why change it?

it is *not* irrelevant. from what i've read and been told, "Gross Negligence" carries specific penalties that must be handed down when applied to this situation.

from thehill.com:

Early Comey draft accused Clinton of gross negligence on emails

An early draft of former FBI Director James Comey’s statement closing out the Hillary Clinton email case accused the former secretary of State of having been “grossly negligent” in handling classified information, newly

thehill.com

"The change is significant, since federal law states that gross negligence in handling the nation’s intelligence can be punished criminally with prison time or fines. "

where as being "careless" doesn't carry the same punishable impact.

do you wish to stay with "the wording is irrelevant"?

my take on your wording is either "never been used in isolation" or "more serious" crimes. if either of these are true then why didn't comey know it already? also, if the working is irrelevant, why does your very next statement defend the very change you say doesn't matter?

and i've blown past the "overstatement". i do that a lot also and i just wanted to narrow the focus down - not harp on it all day long. thank you for narrowing it down.

They changed it because it would have been confusing for people like yourself. That’s what you do during drafting. You make the language clearer and less confusing. You fix errors.

The point is that the draft has no bearing on their decision as much as you want to twist it.

Right, they removed the legal term gross negligence to make it less confusing...not because it’s the exact language used to describe when to prosecute the law.

 

[iceberg]

HOWEVER - it now appears the FBI said "you will say this or you son goes to the slammer"

No. It appears the FBI said that you can plead guilty to a crime we both agree he committed or else the case against your son will continue. The FBI can’t throw anyone in the slammer who did not commit a crime.

FBI putting innoncent people in jail - Google Search

seems they do it a lot.

The FBI doesn’t prosecute. They don’t try. They don’t judge. They don’t deliver a verdict.

ok - so we're going to play semantics games. is that it? make a point then hide behind a word?

The point is that Flynn and his son were in trouble because of their lobbying was skirting the law.

ok. fine. i'll go with that and not worry about it. they're in trouble for this.

now, if they're in enough trouble to prosecute and jail him, and Flynn did in fact do all this, why the lies and deception? in my mind you're saying it's ok to break the law if you're after someone you *feel* has broken it too.

now if you're not saying that great. but it's coming across right now like you have zero issue with what the FBI did here.

What lies and deception?

um...seriously?

ok. i'll play a bit more.

Home | Sara A. Carter

Taking Back The Story

saraacarter.com

focus on the 302 activity - is this proper? not worried about the setup accusation at this point. you are either saying the 302 mishandling was in fact proper, or that people are lying and it didn't happen.

 

[iceberg]

Because the phrase did not accurately reflect their decision making.

No, because the words mandated a crime with mandatory jail time.....

is there a link to show that if she were charged with "gross negligence" she'd have specific penalties that are automatic? i can't find that but i thought at one time it was there.

 

[easyt65]

I don’t disagree, but you missed my point. Donnie’s people aren’t going to prosecute O’s people for the coup attempt. They are just appeasing you with propaganda.

Hard to argue so far as the investigation continues, and no one has been held accountable.

I don't know what is more frightening....

1) This overwhelming, undeniable mountain of evidence of crimes and treason in the largest criminal political scandal in US history without any being held accountable...

...or 2) the fact that so many hopelessly, indoctrinated sheep are okay with nothing done to these world-class traitors not being held accountable.

 

[sakinago]

He lied under oath. He was pressured by the DOJ which was, and is, headed up by republicans.

Comey admitted on TV that he sent people into the Trump administration when it was 3 days old in order to sabotage it.

Can you tell me what Flynn supposedly lied about?

I didn't think so.

How long his shoe laces were perhaps? Maybe he said his car was red when the dealership lists the color as "crimson"

“In 2017 he pleaded guilty to making false statements to the FBI in relation to the Special Counsel's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 elections.”

Hillary lied under oath too.

**** this one-sided shit.

Amazing how she was never charged for your imaginary allegations

Comey said confidential mail was found.

She said it wasn't there.

**** off.

Not just low level bullshit confidential material that shouldn’t even be confidential, they found plenty of that. But they found the highest level confidentiality where you aren’t allowed to create it digitally, you’re only allowed to read a hardcopy in a special room surrounded by a faraday cage where all electronics are banned. She was told that it could not be sent in email, that she had to read it in the special room, berated the person who told her that and made them send it in an email anyway...to her special server that we know was hacked by the Chinese. Which is one of the reasons we made the law that you have to use a government email address for work. Another reason is so you can’t destroy the evidence, which she also did. Compare the actual crime Hillary committed to the crimes they have to keep doing mental gymnastics to say that trump committed. It’s bonkers.

None of this is true.

View attachment 328727
View attachment 328728
From the IG himself. SAP, Special Access Privilege, is the term for the room I was talking about. Post proof before you make dumbass claims. Even if this wasn’t true, there’s minimum mandatory sentencing for even the lowest level classification. It was a crime to use her service for government work in the first place. She initially denied she did that, said it was personal stuff only. That was a lie. It morphed into she never used it for classified emails. That was a lie. She deleted 33,000 that she said were personal before she turned them over, which the FBI would never allow anyone else to do EVER, which also turned out to be a lie. I know the left has a magical ability to re-write history in their minds and block out whats reality like they’re in some sort of Scientology cult...but the real history is out there.

I'm aware that some of the information on her server was deemed SAP. However, that was not copied from any files, but a reference was made to this information. The part of your claim which was bullshit was her being told specific information could not be put in an email and berating people for not doing so. The other bullshit claim is that it was hacked by the Chinese, no such information exists. Another bullshit claim is that there is a law that you must use government email for work. Another bullshit claim is that she destroyed evidence.

She never claimed her server was only for personal use. She didn't delete 33,000 emails that were personal before she turned them over.

You've really jumbled up details.

The 33,000 emails were deleted after her lawyer sorted out and submitted the work related ones. It is not illegal to use personal email for government business. No then, not now. Government employees, up to and including Trump's own family continue to do so to this day. There was a reference of her emails being forwarded to a "Chinese" IP, a report which was based on misunderstanding and poor information. Emails were forwarded as part of a server migration.

Oh you have to be ******* kidding me. A “misunderstanding” or “glitch” caused Hillary’s emails to be forwarded to servers to a Chinese company with Chinese hardware and software that’s banned for use by government employees because we already know they are filled with spyware. All because that spokesperson of that state run company says “don’t worry, we no spy”. Her server was not approved, and she lied about classified emails being on there, as well as lied about classified emails being in the 33,000 deleted ones. The Olympic level of mental gymnastics here a astounding. Don’t believe the evidence in front of your eyes...just listen to how Hillary’s lawyers say it went down. Name another instance where the FBI subpoenaed evidence, let the party in questions lawyers comb over it and select what evidence to send over? FBI are the only ones who determine what is pertinent and what isn’t in every single case. This was the one case where they let the guilty party’s lawyers determine that, and then delete everything else. Why is that?

No glitch caused the emails to be forwarded because they weren’t forwarded to a Chinese company. This was a false report put out by shoddy right wing media and shot down by Republicans.

Senate investigators find no evidence China hacked Clinton server | CNN Politics

A long-running Republican-led investigation into the handling of classified information on Hillary Clinton's private email server did not find any evidence that China had successfully hacked the former secretary of state, confirming the findings of the FBI, according to a memo released by two...

www.cnn.com

The FBI never subpoenaed Clinton for emails. At the time Clinton told her staff to delete those emails, no one else did either.

Anytime anyone is subpoenaed, their lawyers determine what is relevant. That’s how subpoenas work.

Congressional investigators find irregularities in FBI’s handling of Clinton email case

Republicans on key congressional committees say they have uncovered new irregularities and contradictions inside the FBI’s probe of Hillary Clinton’s email server.For the first time, investigators …

thehill.com

yet we have all these one-offs in handling this "one" case you say isn't that important.

Timeline of Hillary Clinton's email scandal

A timeline of Hillary Clinton's email scandal.

www.cnn.com

2014
2014 -- The State Department requests that all former secretaries of state "submit any records in their possession for proper preservation."
Also in 2014, at the request of the State Department, Clinton hands over 55,000 pages — approximately 30,000 emails. Left out were emails deemed by her and her staff to be "personal."

why does SHE get to decide what is PERSONAL?

and i'm not going to play one sided word games. the state dept asked for them and her "delete" activities came after this point.

Everyone in government decides what is and isn’t personal and what needs to be submitted. Do you think the government employs people to do this for every employee? Obviously not. This is pretty standard.

Virtually all people in government use a personal email, for personal things, and a work email for work things....like most people do. It’s a lot easier to keep the spam out of your work email.

 

[colfax_m]

He lied under oath. He was pressured by the DOJ which was, and is, headed up by republicans.

Comey admitted on TV that he sent people into the Trump administration when it was 3 days old in order to sabotage it.

Can you tell me what Flynn supposedly lied about?

I didn't think so.

How long his shoe laces were perhaps? Maybe he said his car was red when the dealership lists the color as "crimson"

“In 2017 he pleaded guilty to making false statements to the FBI in relation to the Special Counsel's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 elections.”

Hillary lied under oath too.

**** this one-sided shit.

Amazing how she was never charged for your imaginary allegations

Comey said confidential mail was found.

She said it wasn't there.

**** off.

Not just low level bullshit confidential material that shouldn’t even be confidential, they found plenty of that. But they found the highest level confidentiality where you aren’t allowed to create it digitally, you’re only allowed to read a hardcopy in a special room surrounded by a faraday cage where all electronics are banned. She was told that it could not be sent in email, that she had to read it in the special room, berated the person who told her that and made them send it in an email anyway...to her special server that we know was hacked by the Chinese. Which is one of the reasons we made the law that you have to use a government email address for work. Another reason is so you can’t destroy the evidence, which she also did. Compare the actual crime Hillary committed to the crimes they have to keep doing mental gymnastics to say that trump committed. It’s bonkers.

None of this is true.

View attachment 328727
View attachment 328728
From the IG himself. SAP, Special Access Privilege, is the term for the room I was talking about. Post proof before you make dumbass claims. Even if this wasn’t true, there’s minimum mandatory sentencing for even the lowest level classification. It was a crime to use her service for government work in the first place. She initially denied she did that, said it was personal stuff only. That was a lie. It morphed into she never used it for classified emails. That was a lie. She deleted 33,000 that she said were personal before she turned them over, which the FBI would never allow anyone else to do EVER, which also turned out to be a lie. I know the left has a magical ability to re-write history in their minds and block out whats reality like they’re in some sort of Scientology cult...but the real history is out there.

I'm aware that some of the information on her server was deemed SAP. However, that was not copied from any files, but a reference was made to this information. The part of your claim which was bullshit was her being told specific information could not be put in an email and berating people for not doing so. The other bullshit claim is that it was hacked by the Chinese, no such information exists. Another bullshit claim is that there is a law that you must use government email for work. Another bullshit claim is that she destroyed evidence.

She never claimed her server was only for personal use. She didn't delete 33,000 emails that were personal before she turned them over.

You've really jumbled up details.

The 33,000 emails were deleted after her lawyer sorted out and submitted the work related ones. It is not illegal to use personal email for government business. No then, not now. Government employees, up to and including Trump's own family continue to do so to this day. There was a reference of her emails being forwarded to a "Chinese" IP, a report which was based on misunderstanding and poor information. Emails were forwarded as part of a server migration.

Oh you have to be ******* kidding me. A “misunderstanding” or “glitch” caused Hillary’s emails to be forwarded to servers to a Chinese company with Chinese hardware and software that’s banned for use by government employees because we already know they are filled with spyware. All because that spokesperson of that state run company says “don’t worry, we no spy”. Her server was not approved, and she lied about classified emails being on there, as well as lied about classified emails being in the 33,000 deleted ones. The Olympic level of mental gymnastics here a astounding. Don’t believe the evidence in front of your eyes...just listen to how Hillary’s lawyers say it went down. Name another instance where the FBI subpoenaed evidence, let the party in questions lawyers comb over it and select what evidence to send over? FBI are the only ones who determine what is pertinent and what isn’t in every single case. This was the one case where they let the guilty party’s lawyers determine that, and then delete everything else. Why is that?

No glitch caused the emails to be forwarded because they weren’t forwarded to a Chinese company. This was a false report put out by shoddy right wing media and shot down by Republicans.

Senate investigators find no evidence China hacked Clinton server | CNN Politics

A long-running Republican-led investigation into the handling of classified information on Hillary Clinton's private email server did not find any evidence that China had successfully hacked the former secretary of state, confirming the findings of the FBI, according to a memo released by two...

www.cnn.com

The FBI never subpoenaed Clinton for emails. At the time Clinton told her staff to delete those emails, no one else did either.

Anytime anyone is subpoenaed, their lawyers determine what is relevant. That’s how subpoenas work.

Jesus Christ the gmail account got forwarded to Chinese servers. Servers that are banned in the US for state use because they are wrought with spyware. The PR agent of that company made the a statement that “we don’t spy” instead of “we didnt receive that info”. The person who made that special Gmail account was apprehended at the airport about a year later. This was after he sent his entire family back to his home country. Yes he was charged with something unrelated to being a spy (loose term also meaning someone knowingly or unknowingly working with foreign intelligence), that he indeed was guilty of, because it’s a very bad look to have a spy that high up in the state department. The same people in the FBI playing games with the word “hacked”, are implying that Chinese hacker nerds didn’t “Infiltrate” her system. Which isn’t what anybody was talking about. China read those emails. We know we had an intelligence leak with China because over 20 of our spy’s (again loose term meaning not in Hollywood James Bond definition of a spy) were killed within weeks of each other by China. This was one of the worst Intelligence failures since the bay of pigs. It’s possible it was unrelated to the Clinton emails, but that’d be the first place I’d look. The same people in the FBI playing around with the word “hacked” were the same ones playing around with the word intent in a case where there is no legal benchmark to prove intent. Even though intent is clearly implied because she instructed staffers to remove the classified SAP headings so that they could make a digital clone to send by email. Let alone the intent that comes with creating an entire server and email system where the only clear implied intent is to be the only one in control information outside of the usual pathways, otherwise you’d just use a gmail account. They also said they can’t justify prosecution because they’ve never prosecuted any similar cases, even though THERES NEVER BEEN A CASE THIS BAD BEFORE. Which is like saying we shouldn’t prosecute Jeffery Dhamer becuase we’ve never prosecuted anyone else for a crime of this sort. The only thing similar, and not even close to the degree of what Hillary did was Petreus sharing classified info with his girlfriend.

I get why we didn’t pursue Clinton that hard at the time, didn’t really like it though. Like with Nixon, we don’t want to set the precedent that can easily devolve into using the legal system, that can easily be abused, to win political battles that were lost in elections. But as more and more comes out with the FISA warrants, and the FBIs conduct, it’s becoming very apparent that’s what exactly has been going on with the Russian collusion investigation. Which is why I said we’re in a full blown prisoners dilemma. If you’re not familiar, look it up. Either we investigate and charge to fullest extent like the left attempted, and set the precedent for a devolving game of using the legal system to bash each other (even though this would a legit reason to do so)...or the left will continue their abuses since they got away with it this time. Maybe we do investigate and root out this corruption, but more likely that’ll devolve into a political back and forth. Or maybe we investigate, release info, don’t really pursue charges and hopefully enough American people recognize it for what it is and it’s reflected in the voting booth so it’s no longer a winning strategy, which on USMB doesn’t seem to be the case.

This is like a pile of confused talking points. You’ve gotten so many threads mixed up, it’s like right wing media conspiracy spaghetti. Almost entirely incorrect.

 

[easyt65]

is there a link to show that if she were charged with "gross negligence" she'd have specific penalties that are automatic? i can't find that but i thought at one time it was there.

There were several threads on it at the time, and each contained a wealth of links. Here's a few of them I could find in just a very quick look-back/search:

"Grossly negligent," the language dropped from the draft, is a term that carries with it legal ramifications. "

The wording was changed because the use of 'gross negligence' meant there was absolute solid justification for indicting Hillary, while 'extremely careless; would surely have been dropped / dismissed, whichis that they all wanted.

GROSS NEGLIGENCE:
- Intentional use of an unauthorized, unapproved, unencrypted illegal personal server used to illegally store TOP SECRET SPECIAL-COMPARTMENTLIZED INFOTMATION (TS-SCI) information she KNEW she was not supposed to have access to or in her possession after she stepped down as Secretary of State.
*** These actions / the evidence proves Hillary and her team INTENTIONALLY violated numerous laws to include Illegal Possession of classified, Illegal storage of classified, Illegal handling of classified...

- Hillary's server illegally containing TS-SCI Information was found in the BATHROOM CLOSET (unsecured - crime), of a small IT company that did not even have the security clearances required to have the server in their possession (crime) let along access it and provide IT support to it )crime)

- Evidence and even the testimony of former FBI Comey under oath before Congress proved Hillary and her team INTENTIONALLY withheld and attempted to destroy thousands of official, subpoenaed govt documents she attempted to destroy after calling them 'personal' documents.....crimes of violations against the FOIA & FRA...not to mention Obstruction.

Then there was / is the destruction of numerous devices, theft of govt sim cards, and other crimes of Obstruction, illegal destruction of govt property / classified govt devices, etc...

As Comey testified under oath before Congress, all of this was NOT 'Extreme Carelessness' - it was all calculated, intended Obstruction, and other crimes.....that at the very 'BEST' could be argued to be 'GROSS NEGLIGENCE'....needing no 'intent' and punishable by jail time.....

Source explains why Comey didn't use 'grossly negligent' to describe Clinton

www.cnn.com

Here's more:

Dismissed FBI agent changed Comey's language on Clinton emails to 'extremely careless': report

The former FBI official, who was recently fired from special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia team over messages critical of President Trump, repo

thehill.com

One source told the news outlet that electronic records reveal that Strzok changed the language from "grossly negligent" to "extremely careless," scrubbing a key word that could have had legal ramifications for Clinton. An individual who mishandled classified material could be prosecuted under federal law for "gross negligence."

 

[easyt65]

Virtually all people in government use a personal email, for personal things, and a work email for work things....like most people do. It’s a lot easier to keep the spam out of your work email.

People who are officially 'Read-Out' of TOP SECRET-ENSITIVE COMPATMENTALIZED INFORMATION (TS-SCI) are NOT allowed to have access to, have copies of, or even TALK about that information again.

They do NOT have unauthorized, unencrypted, unsecured personal server containing TS-SCI classified data / e-mails / files, servers that are kept in bathroom closets of companies that do not have the legal security clearances to have them in their possession.

MOST people in govt obey the FOIA and FRA and don't intentionally HIDE or try to DELETE this information to keep it from being archived as required by the law.

MOST people OBEY the laws pertaining possession of classified information, handling of classified information, storage of classified information, storage and handling of TOP SECRET and TS-SCI information, use of classified govt devices, storage oc classified device, legal authorized destruction of devices, archival of all official govt files/data/e-mails....

...and more.

Had a friend of mine who places a 'SECRET' file in his briefcase, DROVE it to a conference 4 hrs away in another state, in a secure facility. When he got there he opened up the case, pulled out the folder marked SECRET, and pout it on his desk. A Lt Col standing beside him reported the 'illegal handling'...and in less than 2 hours this expert who had worked in this job for over 30 years was fired, his badges stripped, read his rights, the conclusion was made that the info never left his possession so National security was not compromised so he would not be prosecuted......all in 2 hours......and that was SECRET data, not TOP SECRET of even TS-SCI.

HIS 'crime' was extreme carelessness.....old, wasn't thinking. The crimes Hillary and her team committed were shown to be intentional, calculated, that she intentionally lied to Congress, and committed thousands of criminal counts

 

[Dick Foster]

You’re dreaming if you think the Trump administration is going to prosecute Obama’s people. They won’t, because they know the succeeding D administration might do it to them, whether justified or not.

What kind of dope are you smoking and where did you get it ?

 

[sakinago]

He lied under oath. He was pressured by the DOJ which was, and is, headed up by republicans.

Comey admitted on TV that he sent people into the Trump administration when it was 3 days old in order to sabotage it.

Can you tell me what Flynn supposedly lied about?

I didn't think so.

How long his shoe laces were perhaps? Maybe he said his car was red when the dealership lists the color as "crimson"

“In 2017 he pleaded guilty to making false statements to the FBI in relation to the Special Counsel's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 elections.”

Hillary lied under oath too.

**** this one-sided shit.

Amazing how she was never charged for your imaginary allegations

Comey said confidential mail was found.

She said it wasn't there.

**** off.

Not just low level bullshit confidential material that shouldn’t even be confidential, they found plenty of that. But they found the highest level confidentiality where you aren’t allowed to create it digitally, you’re only allowed to read a hardcopy in a special room surrounded by a faraday cage where all electronics are banned. She was told that it could not be sent in email, that she had to read it in the special room, berated the person who told her that and made them send it in an email anyway...to her special server that we know was hacked by the Chinese. Which is one of the reasons we made the law that you have to use a government email address for work. Another reason is so you can’t destroy the evidence, which she also did. Compare the actual crime Hillary committed to the crimes they have to keep doing mental gymnastics to say that trump committed. It’s bonkers.

None of this is true.

View attachment 328727
View attachment 328728
From the IG himself. SAP, Special Access Privilege, is the term for the room I was talking about. Post proof before you make dumbass claims. Even if this wasn’t true, there’s minimum mandatory sentencing for even the lowest level classification. It was a crime to use her service for government work in the first place. She initially denied she did that, said it was personal stuff only. That was a lie. It morphed into she never used it for classified emails. That was a lie. She deleted 33,000 that she said were personal before she turned them over, which the FBI would never allow anyone else to do EVER, which also turned out to be a lie. I know the left has a magical ability to re-write history in their minds and block out whats reality like they’re in some sort of Scientology cult...but the real history is out there.

I'm aware that some of the information on her server was deemed SAP. However, that was not copied from any files, but a reference was made to this information. The part of your claim which was bullshit was her being told specific information could not be put in an email and berating people for not doing so. The other bullshit claim is that it was hacked by the Chinese, no such information exists. Another bullshit claim is that there is a law that you must use government email for work. Another bullshit claim is that she destroyed evidence.

She never claimed her server was only for personal use. She didn't delete 33,000 emails that were personal before she turned them over.

You've really jumbled up details.

The 33,000 emails were deleted after her lawyer sorted out and submitted the work related ones. It is not illegal to use personal email for government business. No then, not now. Government employees, up to and including Trump's own family continue to do so to this day. There was a reference of her emails being forwarded to a "Chinese" IP, a report which was based on misunderstanding and poor information. Emails were forwarded as part of a server migration.

Oh you have to be ******* kidding me. A “misunderstanding” or “glitch” caused Hillary’s emails to be forwarded to servers to a Chinese company with Chinese hardware and software that’s banned for use by government employees because we already know they are filled with spyware. All because that spokesperson of that state run company says “don’t worry, we no spy”. Her server was not approved, and she lied about classified emails being on there, as well as lied about classified emails being in the 33,000 deleted ones. The Olympic level of mental gymnastics here a astounding. Don’t believe the evidence in front of your eyes...just listen to how Hillary’s lawyers say it went down. Name another instance where the FBI subpoenaed evidence, let the party in questions lawyers comb over it and select what evidence to send over? FBI are the only ones who determine what is pertinent and what isn’t in every single case. This was the one case where they let the guilty party’s lawyers determine that, and then delete everything else. Why is that?

No glitch caused the emails to be forwarded because they weren’t forwarded to a Chinese company. This was a false report put out by shoddy right wing media and shot down by Republicans.

Senate investigators find no evidence China hacked Clinton server | CNN Politics

A long-running Republican-led investigation into the handling of classified information on Hillary Clinton's private email server did not find any evidence that China had successfully hacked the former secretary of state, confirming the findings of the FBI, according to a memo released by two...

www.cnn.com

The FBI never subpoenaed Clinton for emails. At the time Clinton told her staff to delete those emails, no one else did either.

Anytime anyone is subpoenaed, their lawyers determine what is relevant. That’s how subpoenas work.

Jesus Christ the gmail account got forwarded to Chinese servers. Servers that are banned in the US for state use because they are wrought with spyware. The PR agent of that company made the a statement that “we don’t spy” instead of “we didnt receive that info”. The person who made that special Gmail account was apprehended at the airport about a year later. This was after he sent his entire family back to his home country. Yes he was charged with something unrelated to being a spy (loose term also meaning someone knowingly or unknowingly working with foreign intelligence), that he indeed was guilty of, because it’s a very bad look to have a spy that high up in the state department. The same people in the FBI playing games with the word “hacked”, are implying that Chinese hacker nerds didn’t “Infiltrate” her system. Which isn’t what anybody was talking about. China read those emails. We know we had an intelligence leak with China because over 20 of our spy’s (again loose term meaning not in Hollywood James Bond definition of a spy) were killed within weeks of each other by China. This was one of the worst Intelligence failures since the bay of pigs. It’s possible it was unrelated to the Clinton emails, but that’d be the first place I’d look. The same people in the FBI playing around with the word “hacked” were the same ones playing around with the word intent in a case where there is no legal benchmark to prove intent. Even though intent is clearly implied because she instructed staffers to remove the classified SAP headings so that they could make a digital clone to send by email. Let alone the intent that comes with creating an entire server and email system where the only clear implied intent is to be the only one in control information outside of the usual pathways, otherwise you’d just use a gmail account. They also said they can’t justify prosecution because they’ve never prosecuted any similar cases, even though THERES NEVER BEEN A CASE THIS BAD BEFORE. Which is like saying we shouldn’t prosecute Jeffery Dhamer becuase we’ve never prosecuted anyone else for a crime of this sort. The only thing similar, and not even close to the degree of what Hillary did was Petreus sharing classified info with his girlfriend.

I get why we didn’t pursue Clinton that hard at the time, didn’t really like it though. Like with Nixon, we don’t want to set the precedent that can easily devolve into using the legal system, that can easily be abused, to win political battles that were lost in elections. But as more and more comes out with the FISA warrants, and the FBIs conduct, it’s becoming very apparent that’s what exactly has been going on with the Russian collusion investigation. Which is why I said we’re in a full blown prisoners dilemma. If you’re not familiar, look it up. Either we investigate and charge to fullest extent like the left attempted, and set the precedent for a devolving game of using the legal system to bash each other (even though this would a legit reason to do so)...or the left will continue their abuses since they got away with it this time. Maybe we do investigate and root out this corruption, but more likely that’ll devolve into a political back and forth. Or maybe we investigate, release info, don’t really pursue charges and hopefully enough American people recognize it for what it is and it’s reflected in the voting booth so it’s no longer a winning strategy, which on USMB doesn’t seem to be the case.

This is like a pile of confused talking points. You’ve gotten so many threads mixed up, it’s like right wing media conspiracy spaghetti. Almost entirely incorrect.

Then rebut it. Did the emails get forwarded to Chinese made servers? Yes. I’m not asking if Chinese hackers infiltrated her system. Did Hillary in an email instruct her staffer to remove classified top secret SAP headings in order to send them by email? Yes. Was the same Hillary IT staffer that deleted the emails after they were requested the same one who was apprehended trying to flee the country for some shady money fraud charges? Yes. Is intent a legal benchmark for prosecuting what Hillary was accused of. No. Why was it the FBI decided to lean so heavily on intent in their infamous conclusion letter? Why did they also change the exact language gross negligence that is specifically stated in the very same law? Were there classified emails on the deleted emails that she claimed there wasn’t any? Yes. Did Hillary initially claim she did not use her server for classified information? Yes. Was this a lie? Yes. Again we have the email to prove she instructed a staffer to remove classified headings, including top secret SAP headings, so that they can be sent digitally. So why am I being the accused of propaganda when you’re the one using Hillary’s talking points after she was caught multiple times lying? “Cackle*cackle*, you mean like did I use a wipe? cackle*.” You actually bought that BS?