# FBI not recommending charges against Clinton **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [July 5, 2016, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-not-recommending-charges-against-clinton/759125 "2016-07-05T15:20:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 11
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-not-recommending-charges-against-clinton/759125/201 "2016-07-06T15:31:11Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > You were not expressing a view on how people would vote. You expressed the view that this report will just confirm what everyone knew already. In general, this is what I believe. I don’t believe that anything those supporters “knew” about Hillary will have changed in any significant way. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-not-recommending-charges-against-clinton/759125/202 "2016-07-06T15:34:07Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > You don’t have to pore over the report. The highlights of the press conference speech reported on the front page of every newspaper does the job. You mean the highlights that the people who were wrong in this thread would have read? Because I think you are proving my point. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-not-recommending-charges-against-clinton/759125/203 "2016-07-06T15:38:27Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > In general, this is what I believe. I don’t believe that anything those supporters “knew” about Hillary will have changed in any significant way. What this report should debunk pretty thoroughly is this idea that people are just out to get Clinton and that she’s a generally honest politician. Pretty much everything she said about her private account was a lie and Comey refuted them all, one by one. At this point there can be no doubt that she’s a habitual liar and that her own behavior is what leads to scandal. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-not-recommending-charges-against-clinton/759125/204 "2016-07-06T15:41:08Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > If any of those supporters indicate they’re less likely to vote for Clinton, or even say that their opinion of her has substantially changed, then I will consider changing my view. > [@El\_Kabong](#): > > . Does this whole affair affect my perception of her suitability for the office of President? Yep, but when the alternative is named Trump (or, frankly, most of the other mooks that he beat in the primaries), it’s not enough to change my vote. No worries about looking that up El\_Kabong. I agree that while there’s some similarities, the punishment dished out is an outlier -likely due to the sailors brazen attempts to hide what he did. Just for the record, I want Hillary to win. I did not want her indicted. Of the last four or five standing, her, Trump, Cruz, Sanders, Rubio, she’s the best for the job. But I don’t think it’s good to ignore reality here. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-not-recommending-charges-against-clinton/759125/205 "2016-07-06T15:43:50Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > You mean the highlights that the people who were wrong in this thread would have read? Because I think you are proving my point. No, I meant yesterday before people had read the highlights. ---
**Author:** ![aceplace57](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aceplace57/32/3500_2.png) [@aceplace57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aceplace57)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-not-recommending-charges-against-clinton/759125/206 "2016-07-06T15:47:12Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > What this report should debunk pretty thoroughly is this idea that people are just out to get Clinton and that she’s a generally honest politician. Pretty much everything she said about her private account was a lie and Comey refuted them all, one by one. > > At this point there can be no doubt that she’s a habitual liar and that her own behavior is what leads to scandal. Well said She’s drawn controversy throughout her career. Often claiming her enemies attacks were only political. There’s certainly an element of truth there. But her manipulations, lies, and half truths help create these situations. Then it becomes a political attack. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-not-recommending-charges-against-clinton/759125/207 "2016-07-06T15:50:33Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > What this report should debunk pretty thoroughly is this idea that people are just out to get Clinton and that she’s a generally honest politician. Pretty much everything she said about her private account was a lie and Comey refuted them all, one by one. As politifact reports many times already, yes, Clinton has problems, but generally she is indeed more honest. > **[17 times Donald Trump said one thing and then denied it](https://www.politifact.com/article/2016/jul/06/17-things-donald-trump-said-and-then-denied-saying/)** > > Donald Trump once claimed to have "the world’s greatest memory," but he seems to suffer bouts of amnesia when it comes t > **[Fact-checking Donald Trump's speech about Hillary Clinton](https://www.politifact.com/article/2016/jun/22/fact-checking-donald-trumps-speech-about-hillary-c/)** > > Donald Trump hammered Hillary Clinton’s character, judgment and policy record in a speech the day after Clinton made the > [@adaher](#): > > At this point there can be no doubt that she’s a habitual liar and that her own behavior is what leads to scandal. Doubtful as this also ignores that the unhinged attacks against Clinton are real. Still it does not refutes the mistakes made, but as the FBI told us, there is no good evidence of criminal intent. By contrast Trump and many republicans do tell us that they will change the law to allow criminal behavior, as in torture. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-not-recommending-charges-against-clinton/759125/208 "2016-07-06T16:09:08Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > No worries about looking that up El\_Kabong. I agree that while there’s some similarities, the punishment dished out is an outlier -likely due to the sailors brazen attempts to hide what he did. > > Just for the record, I want Hillary to win. I did not want her indicted. Of the last four or five standing, her, Trump, Cruz, Sanders, Rubio, she’s the best for the job. But I don’t think it’s good to ignore reality here. The whole affair? Of course the whole affair hurt Hillary, I just don’t think yesterday did particularly. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-not-recommending-charges-against-clinton/759125/209 "2016-07-06T16:10:10Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > What this report should debunk pretty thoroughly is this idea that people are just out to get Clinton and that she’s a generally honest politician. Pretty much everything she said about her private account was a lie and Comey refuted them all, one by one. > > At this point there can be no doubt that she’s a habitual liar and that her own behavior is what leads to scandal. I’m not sure if anyone really thought “she’s a generally honest politician”, but this doesn’t change my opinion that many people are really out to get her. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-not-recommending-charges-against-clinton/759125/210 "2016-07-06T16:11:20Z")
There’s no doubt that a lot of the attacks used on Clinton are baloney. That’s true of every politician. There has not been a high profile politician in our history who has not had really weird accusations thrown at them, from McCain starting the Forrestal fire to Obama being a gay Muslim to John Kerry faking his medals. But when stuff sticks, it sticks for a reason. It’s very rare that a politician is damaged by a scandal that isn’t legit. Politicians escape blame for real scandals far more often than they receive blame for fake ones. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-not-recommending-charges-against-clinton/759125/211 "2016-07-06T16:30:27Z")
I don’t think the two are related, but this coming on the heels of Loretta Lynch having a meeting with Bill Clinton is such bad timing. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-not-recommending-charges-against-clinton/759125/212 "2016-07-06T16:33:51Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > There’s no doubt that a lot of the attacks used on Clinton are baloney. That’s true of every politician. There has not been a high profile politician in our history who has not had really weird accusations thrown at them, from McCain starting the Forrestal fire to Obama being a gay Muslim to John Kerry faking his medals. I defy you to find a politician that has received attacks of this level for literally decades and remained standing at the end of it. > [@](#): > > But when stuff sticks, it sticks for a reason. Because people want to believe it. What? You didn’t actually think the truth of the allegations had anything to do with it, did you? Right now, on this board and elsewhere, the outcome of the FBI investigation is being spun in all sorts of ways, from “See? She’s completely innocent!” to “Reality disagrees with the bullshit I believe, therefore the system is rigged!”. Stuff sticks because people want it to stick. > [@](#): > > It’s very rare that a politician is damaged by a scandal that isn’t legit. Uh-huh. Ask John McCain how that worked out in 2000. Or John Kerry in 2004. > [@](#): > > Politicians escape blame for real scandals far more often than they receive blame for fake ones. Cite? ---
**Author:** ![Jophiel](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jophiel/32/66_2.png) [@Jophiel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jophiel)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-not-recommending-charges-against-clinton/759125/213 "2016-07-06T16:37:03Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > You don’t have to pore over the report. The highlights of the press conference speech reported on the front page of every newspaper does the job. _Stern Rebuke, But No Charges For Clinton_ - NY Times _FBI Won’t Recommend Charges Against Clinton Over Private Email Use_ - Wall Street Journal _No Charges, No Vindication for Clinton in Email Case_ - LA Times _Not Charged but ‘Careless’_ - Chicago Tribune That was just a few print headlines I could easily find. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-not-recommending-charges-against-clinton/759125/214 "2016-07-06T16:45:15Z")
_Clinton avoids charges, but rebuke casts shadow_- Houston Chronicle, but from the Washington Post sub-title: FBI director slams her judgement, management of state secrets Last paragraph before the refer “he systematically obliterated many of the key defenses Clinton and her advisors have offered to reassure the public” ---
**Author:** ![MaxTheVool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9fc29f/32.png) [@MaxTheVool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MaxTheVool)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-not-recommending-charges-against-clinton/759125/215 "2016-07-06T16:53:19Z")
> [@control-z](#): > > Disgusting IMO. It always amazes me how immune to prosecution top leaders have become, especially the Clintons. You mean the Clinton who became the second president in history to be impeached? That Clinton? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-not-recommending-charges-against-clinton/759125/216 "2016-07-06T17:02:47Z")
Question, raised before but unanswered: Does the SecState have any authority in the matter of classification? It would seem to me that in matters of diplomacy, she is, by the very nature of her position, somewhat empowered. If she says a matter is beneath such concern, too trivial to be secret, does that have any authority? And if the thing classified is a matter of public record, if the cat is already out of the bag, can it legitimately be regarded as illegal to discuss what everybody already knows? And if SecState has no such authority, who does? Who is empowered to overrule her decision on classification? ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-not-recommending-charges-against-clinton/759125/217 "2016-07-06T17:09:30Z")
Is there some reason to think she officially de-classified any of it? Her defense all along was that it wasn’t classified at the time. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-not-recommending-charges-against-clinton/759125/218 "2016-07-06T17:15:17Z")
Don’t know. Kinda why I was asking the question. Because I don’t know. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Ace](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/6bbea6/32.png) [@Johnny\_Ace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Ace)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-not-recommending-charges-against-clinton/759125/219 "2016-07-06T18:28:52Z")
Two sure things: Republicans will continue worrying this like a dog with a bone for as long as they think they can command news cycles (and probably longer), and it will have no major effect on the Presidential election. I also don’t think it’s going to have much effect on down-ticket races, but that’s less certain. ---
**Author:** ![Disgruntled\_Penguin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a8b319/32.png) [@Disgruntled\_Penguin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Disgruntled_Penguin)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-not-recommending-charges-against-clinton/759125/220 "2016-07-06T18:48:12Z")
> [@Grumman](#): > > “But officer, look at all the people I _didn’t_ run over!” A point I acknowledged and you edited out. This is poor form. If you just want to spout off and not engage in honest debate I’d appreciate you using someone elses posts to do it. If you’re truly talking to me how about starting with acknowledging what I actually did say? It isn’t that hard to do. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-not-recommending-charges-against-clinton/759125.md?page=10) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-not-recommending-charges-against-clinton/759125.md?page=12)