Despite article author Tyler Durden's assertion, I think I'll stick to the career prosecutor's opinion.

 

The point was not Tyler Durden's opinion. The point was that someone else WAS indicted for mishandling classified information without intent. At least one "reasonable prosecutor" tried and won such a case.


 

Of course that other person wasn't one of the ruling class.


 

My impression is that you'd back Hillary even if she committed murder, as long as the FBI let her get away with it. Heaven knows it's pretty obvious she's committed treason; selling US foreign policy to foreign dignitaries for personal gain.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

There are no honest government officials unless one agrees with everything they do.

 

There are no completely honest people, period. The problem is that government officials have power that ordinary citizens don't, and that government power is always continually increasing. At that level, dishonesty can ruin lives.


 

But Hillary has taken government corruption and dishonesty to a level not seen since Huey Long.


 

When life goes to hell in a handbasket, all one can do is laugh. Check out #moretrustedthanhillary

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

Sure she does...  but do you think that a Democrat Attorney General appointed by a Democrat President is going to over-ride the FBI's recommendation and charge a Democrat presidential nominee?

 

This is purely speculation on my part.  She already stated that she would go with what the FBI recommends according to this article in the New York Times...  after her "surprise" visit with Bill Clinton at a Phoenix airport.  Is it possible that Bill Clinton informed her that the FBI Director had been bought and would recommend no indictment?  Does anyone else find it odd that according to the article published July 1st the FBI was expected to report it's findings "in the coming weeks", then the following day (Saturday during a holiday weekend) Hillary is interviewed and on Tuesday the FBI makes a "surprising announcement"?

 

This whole thing stinks big time.

 

Exactly.  It's a dog-and-pony show for the unthinking masses.  Lynch and Comey's behavior was unprecedented, like erecting a billboard saying THE FIX IS IN.  And anyone with a brain knows Hillary's defense is ridiculous on its face.  Really, she was the nation's highest ranked diplomat but never sent or received any classified emails in the entire 4 years?  Sure.

---

Man, if some hacker out there has that data and has been sitting on it now would be a good time to get premium dollars from the Trump. He/She could provide the info that would allow Trump to buy the office of POTUS. Wish I knew how to hack.

---

Looking to troll? Don't bother, we supply our own.

 

 

Man, if some hacker out there has that data and has been sitting on it now would be a good time to get premium dollars from the Trump. He/She could provide the info that would allow Trump to buy the office of POTUS. Wish I knew how to hack.

The data is out there.  Putin has already indicated that Russia has these emails, and that they will be released.  It won't require any investment from the Trump campaign.  They'll appear at the most inopportune moment for Clinton, probably around the convention.

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Exactly.  It's a dog-and-pony show for the unthinking masses.  Lynch and Comey's behavior was unprecedented, like erecting a billboard saying THE FIX IS IN.  And anyone with a brain knows Hillary's defense is ridiculous on its face.  Really, she was the nation's highest ranked diplomat but never sent or received any classified emails in the entire 4 years?  Sure.

 

That's the primary point for sure.  This wasn't intended to dissuade anyone who is actually paying attention.  Those people have already made up their minds about what a corrupt pile of garbage Clinton is. 

 

The thing about this situation is that, while in the past the Clinton crime operation was at least a little less blatant in their disregard for the law, this time around they're practically flaunting it.  Hillary lies, and she's exposed.  She lies again, and she's exposed again.  The lies keep piling up, and every time they do, she keeps on rolling along like it really doesn't matter what she says.  Why?  Because the ignorant masses need to be spoon fed their drivel.  They're not paying attention to what's actually happening, only what they're told by Hillary and her lapdogs in the media. 

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Comey basically just said Hillary apparently just had no idea what she was doing.  Yes, and that's who we want for President. Somebody who doesn't even now how to handle classified information.

---

Comey basically just said Hillary apparently just had no idea what she was doing.  Yes, and that's who we want for President. Somebody who doesn't even now how to handle classified information.

 

C'mon now, it's a great victory for Democrats to celebrate that their chosen champion's gross incompetence wasn't quite criminal.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

The entire private server operation was to avoid FOID requests.  And Hillary claims she did it "for convenience, so I wouldn't have to carry 2 devices".  That's another lie - she bragged to a Silicon Valley audience that she carries THREE devices - an iPhone, iPad, and Blackberry.  BTW, it would have taken Hillary less than 1 minute to add a 2nd email account to her State Dept Blackberry.  She could have easily used the Blackberry for all her communications, public and private. 

---

The data is out there.  Putin has already indicated that Russia has these emails, and that they will be released.  It won't require any investment from the Trump campaign.  They'll appear at the most inopportune moment for Clinton, probably around the convention.

If it does. Is she done or not? Sadly, I'm not sure anymore these days if folks care she is a criminal or not. Win at all costs.

---

Looking to troll? Don't bother, we supply our own.

 

 

I dont think she can win at this point. 

---

C'mon now, it's a great victory for Democrats to celebrate that their chosen champion's gross incompetence wasn't quite criminal.

 

My candidate is a complete dumb [BLEEP] but I'm backing her anyway.

 

Seems legit.

 

The zombies only know how to vote D.  It's truly a cult-like religion.  Reality has no factor.  There is only the D.  We are the D.  Resistance is futile.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

Are you kidding?  They just threw the U.S. Justice Dept and FBI under the bus to clear Hillary.  They cheated Bernie in almost every primary.  Rigging the general election won't concern them at all.  Easy as flipping a switch, now that we have electronic voting.  

---

If I unintentionally run a red light and a cop sees me do it...do I still get a citation?

---

Have you seen my baseball?

If I unintentionally run a red light and a cop sees me do it...do I still get a citation?

 

Depends, if you're black you might get dead.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Comey basically just said Hillary apparently just had no idea what she was doing.  Yes, and that's who we want for President. Somebody who doesn't even now how to handle classified information.

 

And this is the point Republicans should seize on:  She's mentally unfit for office of the Presidency, just like Donald.

 

So pick the less bad candidate, who you believe is named "Donald Trump", and spend the next 4 months convincing the American public why a careless Hillary is a worse idea.

 

But knock it off with the conspiracy theories about Comey, because you're going to look like you're hoarding tin foil.

---

Something about this whole thing just kind of "smells funny" to me, so I did a bit of quick research on my own.  It actually leads to more questions for me, and makes me miss investigative journalism the way that it used to be done and published.  Perhaps that should have been my career.

 

First let's take a look at the timeline of recent events.

 

June 27 (Monday) - Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch "happen to be" at the same airport and have an "impromptu" meeting with no press.  This raises flags directly because of the ongoing investigation of Hillary Clinton's email situation.

 

July 1st (Friday) - An article published in the New York Times says that Loretta Lynch will "accept" what the FBI and her staff recommends regarding the case.  Specifically she said that she would "defer to the recommendations of her staff and the F.B.I.".  This raises a couple of questions regarding "her staff" and the FBI which I'll address below.

 

July 2nd (Saturday) - The FBI interviews Hillary Clinton regarding the investigation.  One thing of note here is that it's a holiday weekend so many people are taking a long weekend off to enjoy the holiday.  Typically the main press, people working for government agencies (FBI), etc. aren't really paying attention.  More attention is typically paid to enjoying a long weekend off to spend with their families, especially the day of the holiday itself.  That leaves Sunday and Monday (the day of the holiday).

 

July 3rd (Sunday) - Stories come out that Barack Obama is going to campaign with Hillary Clinton starting Tuesday (the day after the holiday).  Up to this point, Obama has stayed clear of the election.  Why the sudden change?

 

July 5th (Tuesday) - The FBI tells the media that they are going to hold a press conference, no questions after.  This was unscheduled and a surprise.  It happens at 11:00 AM EST when the announcement that is the subject of this thread is made.

 

My question(s) is, how can the FBI make such a quick determination over a holiday weekend when an interview with subject of the investigation happens on a WEEKEND, specifically a HOLIDAY WEEKEND when most would be off and not working?

 

So I looked into the FBI Director's (James Comey) background.  A couple of things kind of stand out in my mind.

 

First, he wasn't appointed as Director of the FBI under President Bush, he was a Deputy Attorney General.  During his time there, there was certainly some friction involved.  He was actually appointed to his current position by President Obama.

 

This is pretty much looking like a partisan job to me.  Some posters use the "he was a Bush appointee" argument, but that's really not the case.  Look at his background and it's pretty evident that he is pretty much one of the "Democrat Elites" in Washington DC.

 

I did my bit of research this evening, I would suggest others do the same.

 

Florida Rep John Mica owes you a debt of gratitude, because he totally lifted your post today during the Congressional hearing.

 

Kudos.

---

Florida Rep John Mica owes you a debt of gratitude, because he totally lifted your post today during the Congressional hearing.

 

Kudos.

His toupee doubles as a scanner/recording device.

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

His toupee doubles as a scanner/recording device.

He *did* create the TSA...

---

The point was not Tyler Durden's opinion. The point was that someone else WAS indicted for mishandling classified information without intent. At least one "reasonable prosecutor" tried and won such a case.


 

Of course that other person wasn't one of the ruling class.


 

My impression is that you'd back Hillary even if she committed murder, as long as the FBI let her get away with it. Heaven knows it's pretty obvious she's committed treason; selling US foreign policy to foreign dignitaries for personal gain.

 

I'm no fan of Hillary, but I really don't believe she or her husband murdered anyone.  You do, but that's your conclusion based on the evidence you've reviewed.

 

I'll agree to disagree.  If she were found guilty of such after due process, I would not vote for her.

 

The title of this topic is "FBI confirms the rule of law is dead", and if you go over my posts, you'll see that my arguments are against that statement, for the reasons I've laid out.  It actually has nothing to do with either Clinton or their history, which is what you and several other posters keep bringing in.  I realize it's hard not to do that, as I believe we are a pool of very well-informed posters that have formed opinions of people that have been in politics as long as the Clintons have.

 

The FBI director has acted in a very non-partisan fashion, and as I watch him right now on CNN, I think he's doing a fine job of defending his decision.

 

I also think there's some statutes that will get re-written as a result of this hearing.  Rule of law is very much alive in the United States.

---