I suppose in the real world that’s true, but there are costs to doing such things. Besides, Obama is going to make Clinton fight her own battles. He’s not going to take a hit to his legacy by taking such a cowardly action himself. Clinton doesn’t care about appearances, let her take revenge herself.
Sure is funny how Trump found religion about retaining emails A good read and a little clip to show how impressed the judiciary is with Trump’s claims:
Strange thing.
Clinton is accused of potentially keeping classified information on a private server, and potentially emailing people about public business off the record. She has never actually been charged with any crime, never mind being found guilty of anything.
Trump, on the other hand has two real criminal cases pending against him, one for fraud (Trump ‘university’) and one for rape.
Apparently, to the US media, the one is very, very, very serious and the other is a storm in a teacup. Except they’ve got it the wrong way round. Talk about media bias!
No - I’ll never understand American politics, or American lack of common sense.
For real. I wish I lived in your country, where politics was all reasonable and common sense was a universal birthright!
Er…what country is that, again?
With any luck, Clinton will be arrested before Election Day. Let’s all cross our fingers.
The investigation should never have been stopped in the first place and she should already have gone to jail.
Every last public official would, if their emails and other communications were dumped out into the public square, be mightily embarrassed, if not criminally culpable.
There is nothing in the Clinton email situation that is criminal except, if you look at it with partisan eyes, having a private server after such time as it was decided by congress? that all public officials must use government servers…
Why, then, are any of the contents of anyone’s communication devices, including emails, released for public consumption? Why is the opposition so unable to mount an attack on Clinton’s proposed actions as POTUS that they can only continue to stomp on the depleted subject of ‘emails, emails, emails’?
Why would any FBI director think it was ethical or, even, legal to insinuate at any point, let alone now, that there may be damning information in a laptop not even belonging to HRC? Damned foolish, I say.
I want Clinton in the White House, attempting to get the Democrat Platform implemented. I want Trump to pay huge sums in damages for his shady business practices and long ago diddling of a child, if that can be proved to the satisfaction of a civil court.
If I get my wish, fine. But recent events are just more evidence of the low IQ of many voters and the absolute slavish dedication of the news media to trying to drag every candidate through the mud for the sake of ratings.
So when even a Republican stooge FBI director says there was no case for prosecution, they should have pressed on? What would you have charged her with?
The FBI determined she definitely did keep classified information on a private server, and that lied when she said she hadn’t. That is not in dispute. The FBi’s decision not to prosecute was based largely on Comey’s reading of what her intentions were.
In converse, Trump is facing lawsuits, not criminal cases. Since pretty much anyone can file suit against anyone for anything, the fact that someone is being sued doesn’t mean much, especially since the rape suit was already dismissed once.
You may want to get the facts clear before forming opinions.
It might help you understand if you got the facts straight. As you say, Clinton has not been criminally charged with anything. But that’s also true of Trump. There is a civil laws suit pending re Trump U, but no criminal charges. Nor has he been charged with rape.
More than two - he’s up on fraud and racketeering charges in California and fraud in New York for his University, plus the rape case - but IIRC they’re all civil cases at this point, not criminal. I suspect there’s also some sort of tax fraud charge coming with regard to the Trump Foundation given some of the more blatant abuses, but again I doubt there’s anything that would land him in jail - a big fine will likely be the outcome of any wrongdoing identified.
And of course the various lawsuits for non-payment and assorted other misbehaviors roll on. I read recently he’s got 75 lawsuits currently outstanding against him. I guess that just shows what a great businessman he is.
We don’t actually know if Trump is being criminally investigated. Outside the world of Clinton double standards, prosecutors don’t normally hold press conferences about such things. The NY AG is investigating the Trump Foundation, including potential criminal conduct in bribing Pam Bondi in FL.
It’s also worth pointing out that a lot of the rest of furt’s post is false. The FBI did not determine that Clinton lied, no matter how many times Drudge tries to tell you that. And the determination that there wasn’t enough evidence to prosecute is not fairly described as “Comey’s reading of what her intentions were.”
The “no intent” sophistry trotted out never made any sense. Intent has got nothin’ to do with it. Negligence with respect to handling classified data, compartmentalized data, satellite imagery etc etc is just jaw droppingly stupid. It’s simply inexplicable why anyone would do something like this.
The question of whether Reid’s claim is politically smart or not is separate from the question of whether it has merit. IANAL, but Richard Painter is, and in that capacity he obviously feels it does. The central question is not the impact of Comey’s letter which is obvious, but his intent in writing it, and specifically what appears to be a crafted vagueness, where he must surely have known that the worst possible interpretations would be put on a statement that contains virtually no actual information, and which could have been phrased in much more neutral and less ominous terms.
Comey’s judgment is sufficiently in question that it’s not unreasonable IMHO to have it looked at by the Office of Special Counsel WRT the Hatch Act, and he should also be required (IMHO) to issue a much more specific clarifying statement to put to rest some of the really absurd spin that the Republicans are putting on it. The public is entitled to a fair and impartial presentation of the facts, not Trump’s typically delusional version of them. The silence from Comey as Trump spins this into one whopper of a lie after another is extraordinary.
No criminal intent.
I
t’s notbreally sophistry, it’s precedent. Comey explaned it:
This story was only on page 10 of the Monday edition of the Houston Chronicle,fyi.
The “no intent” sophistry trotted out by Director Comey never made any sense. Intent has no relevance whatsoever with respect to negligence when handling sensitive top secret and confidential data, sources, methods, human assets, satellite imagery. It’s just jaw droppingly stupid that anyone thought this was OK. The unsecured servers alone are felonies, it’s all black letter federal law laid out in the USC 18
Whatever the latest atrocities have been revealed by investigators in the kiddie diddling Weiner case must be REALLY bad, for this to come out 11 days before the election, so bad they couldn’t ignore it, spin it, etc. The alternative - doing nothing, was far worse.
If you wanna hang your hat on the fact that Comey was too discreet to use the word “lie,” knock yourself out.
A distinction without a difference. There is no excuse. Numerous people are in prison for doing far less, in any case. The whole thing is absolutely absurd and surreal on its face, that anyone would try to defend these actions.
You have to be careful, furt. While those statements were not true, we don’t know that Clinton intentionally lied. It’s an important distinction in this type of discussion.
Innocent until proven guilty is for proud conservative Americans. Liberals/communists are automatically guilty, and don’t deserve due process or even a trial. Execute them all!