|
Post by Merge on Jul 5, 2016 15:19:49 GMT
against Hillary Clinton in email server case. No article yet, but I just watched the press conference live.
The FBI spokesperson made a point of talking about how objective and professional the investigation had been, and how outside opinions and politics had had no influence on the investigation.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by freecharlie on Jul 5, 2016 15:21:59 GMT
I don't believe it will mollify the haters, but after multiple reports and this, I am ready to let it be in the past.
If she wins, we will hear about it for years.
|
|
ginacivey
Pearl Clutcher
refupea #2 in southeast missouri
Posts: 4,685
Jun 25, 2014 19:18:36 GMT
|
Post by ginacivey on Jul 5, 2016 15:23:09 GMT
i doubt the investigation was fair and impartial
not when it was headed up by someone with her job on the line
no way, no how
but most people never really expected her to be called onto the carpet
politicians will continue doing what politicians do
gina
|
|
moodyblue
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,177
Location: Western Illinois
Site Supporter
Jun 26, 2014 21:07:23 GMT
|
Post by moodyblue on Jul 5, 2016 15:23:40 GMT
I thought his explanation was very clear and comprehensive. I was not honestly sure what the recommendation would be until he stated it. I don't think this will end the issue for some people, by any means, but I think many people will understand the decision.
|
|
PLurker
Prolific Pea
Posts: 9,743
Location: Behind the Cheddar Curtain
Jun 28, 2014 3:48:49 GMT
|
Post by PLurker on Jul 5, 2016 15:26:35 GMT
I think this will satisfy the middle-grounders. But not the haters or lovers. Nothing anyone could say would satisfy either extremes.
ETA the findings did not surprise me at all.
|
|
|
Post by marmargirl on Jul 5, 2016 15:30:17 GMT
I just watched it, too. I was satisfied with the explanation that the FBI director gave and appreciated that it was explained in a way I was able to understand.
I am no expert in politics, and I know there will be debates as to this decision, but I feel based on what he said, the right decision was made.
And I am not a die-hard Hillary fan, but I also don't despise her.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 13, 2024 7:17:26 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2016 15:32:47 GMT
I did not expect a different outcome.
Hillary can destroy emails and her daily schedules, impede investigations by failing to turn over required documents and lie to the American people repeatedly with impunity. Par for the course.
|
|
|
Post by elaine on Jul 5, 2016 15:34:39 GMT
I thought his explanation was very clear and comprehensive. I was not honestly sure what the recommendation would be until he stated it. I don't think this will end the issue for some people, by any means, but I think many people will understand the decision.
|
|
|
Post by annabella on Jul 5, 2016 15:39:23 GMT
While I find it strange that she would use a personal email, her explanation of why made sense and she wasn't the first high ranking govt official to do so. I think it deplorable that she had to make public all her personal emails to her daughter, etc. I have no real opinion of her either way, but I do think at this point that she has taken so many attacks on her, I have to wonder if it's just because she's a woman? I bet when she wrote her book she didn't realize at that time she would have so much more material for the next book. lol
|
|
kate
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,517
Location: The city that doesn't sleep
Site Supporter
Jun 26, 2014 3:30:05 GMT
|
Post by kate on Jul 5, 2016 15:41:06 GMT
I thought it was interesting that he said there was a whole culture of carelessness in the State Dept. about email security. Although it doesn't excuse HRC's actions, it does put them in a more understandable context.
I agree that her fans are going to cheer and her haters are going to sneer - you can pick things out of the FBI's report to support either side.
|
|
|
Post by freecharlie on Jul 5, 2016 15:42:35 GMT
While I find it strange that she would use a personal email, her explanation of why made sense and she wasn't the first high ranking govt official to do so. I think it deplorable that she had to make public all her personal emails to her daughter, etc. I have no real opinion of her either way, but I do think at this point that she has taken so many attacks on her, I have to wonder if it's just because she's a woman? I bet when she wrote her book she didn't realize at that time she would have so much more material for the next book. lol I think part of it is the woman, but there are a myriad of other reasons as well. Her husband was president and had an affair and she stayed with him Her husband was president and lots of people thought he did a good job She is a Democrat and there are some rabid anti-Democrat people out there. She's made some stupid decisions and must pay
|
|
MizIndependent
Drama Llama
Quit your bullpoop.
Posts: 5,836
Jun 25, 2014 19:43:16 GMT
|
Post by MizIndependent on Jul 5, 2016 15:49:07 GMT
So basically... 110 emails had classified info 8 chains top secret info 36 secret info 8 confidential (lowest) +2000 "up-classified" to confidential after the fact Recommendation to the Justice Department: file no charges in the Hillary Clinton email server case. Comey further stated: Summary Comey: So, plenty of evidence she actually did violate the law, just "no clear evidence Clinton intended to violate the law". Guess that's all it takes to get a free pass in politics...as long as you didn't intend to, you don't have to be held accountable but if anyone else does it, they will be. If she's this careless with classified emails, I don't know what the hell to expect if she becomes president...but hey, anyone but Trump, right?
|
|
|
Post by BeckyTech on Jul 5, 2016 15:50:11 GMT
FBI used words like "careless" and "negligent." I think we can add "monumentally stupid" to set up their own server. Bad judgment personified.
|
|
pyccku
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,817
Jun 27, 2014 23:12:07 GMT
|
Post by pyccku on Jul 5, 2016 15:50:20 GMT
While I find it strange that she would use a personal email, her explanation of why made sense and she wasn't the first high ranking govt official to do so. I think it deplorable that she had to make public all her personal emails to her daughter, etc. I have no real opinion of her either way, but I do think at this point that she has taken so many attacks on her, I have to wonder if it's just because she's a woman? I bet when she wrote her book she didn't realize at that time she would have so much more material for the next book. lol Yes, I think that does have something to do with it. I read an interesting article yesterday on Hillary's approval ratings. She has high approval when she's doing a job, but once she asks/campaigns for a job with more power, all of a sudden her approval ratings go down. It's not just a presidential candidate thing, it is something fairly common in many different situations. A man who looks for a promotion or tries to move into a position of more responsibility is seen as ambitious, and a go-getter who knows how to go after what he wants. A woman who does the exact same thing is bitchy, conniving, manipulative, and needs to know her place. I know there are some people out there who truly have a beef with Hillary - but there are also some who have bought into the whole meme of "crooked Hillary" even if there is plenty of evidence to show that she's no more - and in fact LESS - crooked than many other politicians. In a male politician, that's just expected - you can't get ahead in politics without being a little crooked, etc. But for Hillary, it's proof that she's sheer evil and too ambitious for her own good. America loves women like Hillary Clinton–as long as they’re not asking for a promotion
|
|
sweetpeasmom
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,592
Jun 27, 2014 14:04:01 GMT
|
Post by sweetpeasmom on Jul 5, 2016 15:50:31 GMT
I guess I'll be in the minority here. They found that they were careless in the way they handled sensitive information. Said she should have known better. It was most likely that sensitive information was hacked but of course those hackers are slick enough that there wouldn't be evidence of that (duh). However, we aren't going to do anything about this.
So someone who wants to be the most powerful leader in this country, proves she can't be trusted to handle the upmost top secret information correctly and yet people will still give her a pass.
I just don't get it.
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Jul 5, 2016 15:51:34 GMT
I have a lot of respect for Comey, given his history going back to the Bush administration. I don't believe for a second that he would give politics any consideration. His past actions show that, I believe.
|
|
MizIndependent
Drama Llama
Quit your bullpoop.
Posts: 5,836
Jun 25, 2014 19:43:16 GMT
|
Post by MizIndependent on Jul 5, 2016 15:53:08 GMT
|
|
sweetpeasmom
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,592
Jun 27, 2014 14:04:01 GMT
|
Post by sweetpeasmom on Jul 5, 2016 15:54:18 GMT
Summary Comey: So, plenty of evidence she actually did violate the law, just "no clear evidence Clinton intended to violate the law". Guess that's all it takes to get a free pass in politics...as long as you didn't intend to, you don't have to be held accountable. Only for her. If you or I were to violate a law by accident, we'd still be charged. Save
|
|
MizIndependent
Drama Llama
Quit your bullpoop.
Posts: 5,836
Jun 25, 2014 19:43:16 GMT
|
Post by MizIndependent on Jul 5, 2016 15:57:55 GMT
Summary Comey: So, plenty of evidence she actually did violate the law, just "no clear evidence Clinton intended to violate the law". Guess that's all it takes to get a free pass in politics...as long as you didn't intend to, you don't have to be held accountable. Only for her. If you or I were to violate a law by accident, we'd still be charged. SaveExactly. In fact, I amended my comment above to include the rest of Comey's statement (emphasis mine): So...because she's Hillary, she won't be charged. She is now officially declared "above the law".
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jul 5, 2016 16:00:41 GMT
Only for her. If you or I were to violate a law by accident, we'd still be charged. SaveExactly. In fact, I amended my comment above to include the rest of Comey's statement (emphasis mine): So...because she's Hillary, she won't be charged. She is now officially declared "above the law". Are "security or administrative sanctions" the same thing as having charges brought? I didn't hear him say anything about another similar person being charged.
|
|
|
Post by katieanna on Jul 5, 2016 16:03:34 GMT
FTR, I think she should be held accountable - just as any of the rest of us would be held accountable if we had done the same thing under the same circumstances. The fact that she isn't being held accountable - well, we're not really surprised, are we?
|
|
MizIndependent
Drama Llama
Quit your bullpoop.
Posts: 5,836
Jun 25, 2014 19:43:16 GMT
|
Post by MizIndependent on Jul 5, 2016 16:04:02 GMT
|
|
|
Post by annabella on Jul 5, 2016 16:04:09 GMT
It's not just a presidential candidate thing, it is something fairly common in many different situations. A man who looks for a promotion or tries to move into a position of more responsibility is seen as ambitious, and a go-getter who knows how to go after what he wants. A woman who does the exact same thing is bitchy, conniving, manipulative, and needs to know her place. This is so true! So she did not knowingly break the law. What's the difference? Putting it on her private server is more secure than Powell logging into yahoo mail. The fact that Rice and Albright didn't use much email says the position is really changing, and now clear guidelines will be put in place for the future.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 13, 2024 7:17:26 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2016 16:05:36 GMT
I love how Comey pretty much said and of course, I'm paraphrasing "opinions on this are like assholes, everyone has one"...mic drop.
She'll still take a hit in the polls but it's far enough out from November that she'll make up that ground, especially when she debates The Donald....I cannot wait.
I knew that they would never be able to find what they needed to charge her and that was WILLFUL INTENT.
|
|
moodyblue
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,177
Location: Western Illinois
Site Supporter
Jun 26, 2014 21:07:23 GMT
|
Post by moodyblue on Jul 5, 2016 16:05:57 GMT
Only for her. If you or I were to violate a law by accident, we'd still be charged. SaveExactly. In fact, I amended my comment above to include the rest of Comey's statement (emphasis mine): So...because she's Hillary, she won't be charged. She is now officially declared "above the law". "Consequences" does not always equate to legal charges. If you read the next sentence he mentions security or administrative sanctions. Sounds like those would be the consequences, not necessarily legal charges.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jul 5, 2016 16:07:42 GMT
I understand that, but he didn't say anything about charges brought in those other circumstances. He said "security or administrative sanctions."
|
|
CeeScraps
Pearl Clutcher
~~occupied entertaining my brain~~
Posts: 3,827
Jun 26, 2014 12:56:40 GMT
|
Post by CeeScraps on Jul 5, 2016 16:08:57 GMT
I'm not sure this has been mentioned, but in tech years her emails were ages ago. Tech was not what it is today. Security regarding tech was not what it is today. Heck, 10 years from now it won't be the same.
I was impressed by Comey's explanation. He explained everything they looked at. It was amazing they seemed to go through everything with a fine tooth comb. Even to the point of tracking down the emails that they couldn't get to.
Totally a side note....gosh Comey's tall!!
|
|
moodyblue
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,177
Location: Western Illinois
Site Supporter
Jun 26, 2014 21:07:23 GMT
|
Post by moodyblue on Jul 5, 2016 16:11:22 GMT
I'm not sure this has been mentioned, but in tech years her emails were ages ago. Tech was not what it is today. Security regarding tech was not what it is today. Heck, 10 years from now it won't be the same. I was impressed by Comey's explanation. He explained everything they looked at. It was amazing they seemed to go through everything with a fine tooth comb. Even to the point of tracking down the emails that they couldn't get to. Totally a side note....gosh Comey's tall!! I agree. I thought it seemed to be a very comprehensive investigation. Very painstaking and tedious work too.
|
|
MizIndependent
Drama Llama
Quit your bullpoop.
Posts: 5,836
Jun 25, 2014 19:43:16 GMT
|
Post by MizIndependent on Jul 5, 2016 16:12:09 GMT
I'm not sure this has been mentioned, but in tech years her emails were ages ago. Tech was not what it is today. Security regarding tech was not what it is today. Heck, 10 years from now it won't be the same. Sorry, but that is not accurate. As far back as 2004 (when I started working in IT), there were PLENTY of security measures to be taken and the government had plenty of measures in place to protect classified information. She has zero excuse. Zero. But who cares right? And if anyone else did what she did... "To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now." fbi.gov: Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System ETA: Please note how he separates Hillary from "those individuals" (as being those who engage in similar activities) by saying "those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions," not that Hillary would be, just "those individuals". So, for all intents and purposes, she's getting a completely free pass.
|
|
flute4peace
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,757
Jul 3, 2014 14:38:35 GMT
|
Post by flute4peace on Jul 5, 2016 16:15:39 GMT
Is anyone else curious about whether the outcome would be different were she not running for President, or running against a different Republican candidate?
I hate to think it would affect the investigation, but it's got to be niggling in the back of someone's mind somewhere.
|
|