Total Posts:21|Showing Posts:1-21
Jump to topic:

Hillary to be indicted?

1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2016 8:28:33 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
http://www.nydailynews.com...

So...what now?

"And they also say that if the attorney general does not indict, they're going public. So one way or another, either she's gonna be indicted, and that process begins, or we try her in the public eye with her campaign. One way or another, she's gonna have to face these charges."

...That's not the best sounding situation for her. But, time will tell if DeLay is bullshitting. Hopefully for the Dems, he is. That doesn't mean I want her to get the nomination anyway - this is just bad attention.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
kevin24018
Posts: 1,880
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2016 2:08:01 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/27/2016 8:28:33 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
http://www.nydailynews.com...

So...what now?

"And they also say that if the attorney general does not indict, they're going public. So one way or another, either she's gonna be indicted, and that process begins, or we try her in the public eye with her campaign. One way or another, she's gonna have to face these charges."

...That's not the best sounding situation for her. But, time will tell if DeLay is bullshitting. Hopefully for the Dems, he is. That doesn't mean I want her to get the nomination anyway - this is just bad attention.

Ironic that Bernie said in the first debate people where sick of hearing about the dam emails. Bet he wishes he could take that back.
My guess is this would bring up Benghazi again as well.
I'm sure this won't be a fast process, but let's assume she gets elected president, then gets convicted and then what? our president goes to prison? I'm sure Iran and China are watching all of this, wonder what they make of it. It is a tangled web that was weaved.
Is this why Bloomberg is considering an independent run? Will be interesting to see how it all plays out.
imabench
Posts: 21,220
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2016 3:17:59 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
A Texas politician saying Hillary will be indicted? Im already 98% sure he's full of sh**

"Despite the Texas Republican's assertions, the FBI itself cannot present an indictment on its own"

make it 100 actually
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2016 3:47:14 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/27/2016 3:17:59 PM, imabench wrote:
A Texas politician saying Hillary will be indicted? Im already 98% sure he's full of sh**

"Despite the Texas Republican's assertions, the FBI itself cannot present an indictment on its own"

make it 100 actually

Yea, I got to agree. Bluster at best. How many times did Elmer Fudd think he has that rabbit till you stop believing he would ever get it?
kevin24018
Posts: 1,880
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/28/2016 1:56:47 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/28/2016 3:41:28 AM, GrandOldParty wrote:
If she is going to be indicted, I hope it's after she wins the nomination. That would be sweet.

makes you wonder why Bloomberg is considering a run. And then good ole Joe voicing his criticisms. very strange days we live in.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/28/2016 3:55:54 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/28/2016 1:56:47 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
At 1/28/2016 3:41:28 AM, GrandOldParty wrote:
If she is going to be indicted, I hope it's after she wins the nomination. That would be sweet.

makes you wonder why Bloomberg is considering a run. And then good ole Joe voicing his criticisms. very strange days we live in.

It makes me wonder why anyone is taking Tom DeLay at his word.
kevin24018
Posts: 1,880
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/28/2016 4:30:52 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/28/2016 3:55:54 PM, TBR wrote:
At 1/28/2016 1:56:47 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
At 1/28/2016 3:41:28 AM, GrandOldParty wrote:
If she is going to be indicted, I hope it's after she wins the nomination. That would be sweet.

makes you wonder why Bloomberg is considering a run. And then good ole Joe voicing his criticisms. very strange days we live in.

It makes me wonder why anyone is taking Tom DeLay at his word.

they aren't, it's about priming the public since the fbi can only recommend, so if that recommendation is made the ground work has already been set to pressure Lynch to move forward. Why these processes aren't done through impartial parties makes no sense but that's a whole other thing.
but there does seem to be some worry on the Democratic side.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/28/2016 4:44:34 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/28/2016 4:30:52 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
At 1/28/2016 3:55:54 PM, TBR wrote:
At 1/28/2016 1:56:47 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
At 1/28/2016 3:41:28 AM, GrandOldParty wrote:
If she is going to be indicted, I hope it's after she wins the nomination. That would be sweet.

makes you wonder why Bloomberg is considering a run. And then good ole Joe voicing his criticisms. very strange days we live in.

It makes me wonder why anyone is taking Tom DeLay at his word.

they aren't, it's about priming the public since the fbi can only recommend, so if that recommendation is made the ground work has already been set to pressure Lynch to move forward. Why these processes aren't done through impartial parties makes no sense but that's a whole other thing.
but there does seem to be some worry on the Democratic side.

You asked above about the emails, and Benghazi. I will say again, not one democrat cares one bit about the emails or Benghazi. What we care about is - is trying yet again to "defend" a candidate I care little about against worthless scandal.
v3nesl
Posts: 4,494
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/28/2016 5:12:55 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/28/2016 3:41:28 AM, GrandOldParty wrote:
If she is going to be indicted, I hope it's after she wins the nomination. That would be sweet.

If she was anybody else, she'd already be in jail. The people in the press, including Fox, they are so bizarre in the way they handle this, as if there is some question about whether she was criminally reckless and negligent (or worse) in setting up a homemade email server to handle national secrets. I can think of only one reason for setting up your own mail server: You want to be able to delete emails whenever you need to.

It's like the Benghazi Youtube thing - I just have to laugh out loud at some of these highly intelligent talking heads on TV saying, basically "No, she didn't lie about the dog eating the student's homework, the student told her that". The idea of letting militant Islam write the narrative, that's the outrage in the Youtube fiasco. Over and over with this administration it's "Are they that stupid, or is it something more sinister?"
This space for rent.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/28/2016 5:29:25 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/28/2016 5:12:55 PM, v3nesl wrote:
"Are they that stupid, or is it something more sinister?"

Neither conclusion is appealing.
kevin24018
Posts: 1,880
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/28/2016 9:25:01 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
is the writer wrong?

from the comments section because I like to poke hornets nests with a stick
Prediction:

Mrs. Weiner will step forward and take complete responsibility for placing all that classified material on Hillary's bathroom server. Hillary? She knew nothing about it at all.
2017 - Weiner/Huma is convicted
2018 - Hillary pardons her

At least this is the plan in Hillary's 70 year old mind. If that fails, the defense is...

"Head injury!"
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/28/2016 9:34:07 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/28/2016 9:25:01 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
is the writer wrong?

from the comments section because I like to poke hornets nests with a stick
Prediction:

Mrs. Weiner will step forward and take complete responsibility for placing all that classified material on Hillary's bathroom server. Hillary? She knew nothing about it at all.
2017 - Weiner/Huma is convicted
2018 - Hillary pardons her

At least this is the plan in Hillary's 70 year old mind. If that fails, the defense is...

"Head injury!"

I have no interest in battling it out, but there still is no intent. The case is about piss-poor judgment, that's about it.
v3nesl
Posts: 4,494
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/28/2016 9:52:53 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/28/2016 9:34:07 PM, TBR wrote:
At 1/28/2016 9:25:01 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
is the writer wrong?

from the comments section because I like to poke hornets nests with a stick
Prediction:

Mrs. Weiner will step forward and take complete responsibility for placing all that classified material on Hillary's bathroom server. Hillary? She knew nothing about it at all.
2017 - Weiner/Huma is convicted
2018 - Hillary pardons her

At least this is the plan in Hillary's 70 year old mind. If that fails, the defense is...

"Head injury!"

I have no interest in battling it out, but there still is no intent. The case is about piss-poor judgment, that's about it.

No, I don't think so, because arranging your own server is extra work. So this isn't picking the wrong scarf for the weather, this is going to a lot of extra effort for some reason. I don't think I've ever heard any of her defenders try to explain why she wouldn't have her employer's IT experts set up her email. Especially when there are such unique security considerations for her job.
This space for rent.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/28/2016 10:00:31 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/28/2016 9:52:53 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 1/28/2016 9:34:07 PM, TBR wrote:
At 1/28/2016 9:25:01 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
is the writer wrong?

from the comments section because I like to poke hornets nests with a stick
Prediction:

Mrs. Weiner will step forward and take complete responsibility for placing all that classified material on Hillary's bathroom server. Hillary? She knew nothing about it at all.
2017 - Weiner/Huma is convicted
2018 - Hillary pardons her

At least this is the plan in Hillary's 70 year old mind. If that fails, the defense is...

"Head injury!"

I have no interest in battling it out, but there still is no intent. The case is about piss-poor judgment, that's about it.

No, I don't think so, because arranging your own server is extra work. So this isn't picking the wrong scarf for the weather, this is going to a lot of extra effort for some reason. I don't think I've ever heard any of her defenders try to explain why she wouldn't have her employer's IT experts set up her email. Especially when there are such unique security considerations for her job.

She had the server before she was secretary.
v3nesl
Posts: 4,494
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2016 11:55:35 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/28/2016 10:00:31 PM, TBR wrote:
At 1/28/2016 9:52:53 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 1/28/2016 9:34:07 PM, TBR wrote:
At 1/28/2016 9:25:01 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
is the writer wrong?

from the comments section because I like to poke hornets nests with a stick
Prediction:

Mrs. Weiner will step forward and take complete responsibility for placing all that classified material on Hillary's bathroom server. Hillary? She knew nothing about it at all.
2017 - Weiner/Huma is convicted
2018 - Hillary pardons her

At least this is the plan in Hillary's 70 year old mind. If that fails, the defense is...

"Head injury!"

I have no interest in battling it out, but there still is no intent. The case is about piss-poor judgment, that's about it.

No, I don't think so, because arranging your own server is extra work. So this isn't picking the wrong scarf for the weather, this is going to a lot of extra effort for some reason. I don't think I've ever heard any of her defenders try to explain why she wouldn't have her employer's IT experts set up her email. Especially when there are such unique security considerations for her job.

She had the server before she was secretary.

That's relevant, I guess. I didn't know that. But it doesn't really answer why a secretary of state would do govt business on a homemade server. Again, I can't think of any reason to do this unless you want to be able to delete emails if necessary. You do this if you don't want your emails in the public record. But when you're secretary of state, your emails belong to the country.

It seems to me a deliberate attempt to be above the law. It's being a queen instead of a civil servant. It's precisely the sort of thing that must be rooted out if democracy is to prosper. Like Bill's harems, it's the sort of thing that wouldn't be tolerated in any corporation, so why should it be tolerated in someone handling the nation's most sensitive issues?
This space for rent.
kevin24018
Posts: 1,880
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2016 2:01:16 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/29/2016 11:55:35 AM, v3nesl wrote:
At 1/28/2016 10:00:31 PM, TBR wrote:
At 1/28/2016 9:52:53 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 1/28/2016 9:34:07 PM, TBR wrote:
At 1/28/2016 9:25:01 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
is the writer wrong?

from the comments section because I like to poke hornets nests with a stick
Prediction:

Mrs. Weiner will step forward and take complete responsibility for placing all that classified material on Hillary's bathroom server. Hillary? She knew nothing about it at all.
2017 - Weiner/Huma is convicted
2018 - Hillary pardons her

At least this is the plan in Hillary's 70 year old mind. If that fails, the defense is...

"Head injury!"

I have no interest in battling it out, but there still is no intent. The case is about piss-poor judgment, that's about it.

No, I don't think so, because arranging your own server is extra work. So this isn't picking the wrong scarf for the weather, this is going to a lot of extra effort for some reason. I don't think I've ever heard any of her defenders try to explain why she wouldn't have her employer's IT experts set up her email. Especially when there are such unique security considerations for her job.

She had the server before she was secretary.

That's relevant, I guess. I didn't know that. But it doesn't really answer why a secretary of state would do govt business on a homemade server. Again, I can't think of any reason to do this unless you want to be able to delete emails if necessary. You do this if you don't want your emails in the public record. But when you're secretary of state, your emails belong to the country.

It seems to me a deliberate attempt to be above the law. It's being a queen instead of a civil servant. It's precisely the sort of thing that must be rooted out if democracy is to prosper. Like Bill's harems, it's the sort of thing that wouldn't be tolerated in any corporation, so why should it be tolerated in someone handling the nation's most sensitive issues?

from what I have read, in these circumstances "intent" doesn't matter.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2016 2:30:51 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
I have worked in enterprise it. It is incredibly common fot people (executives) to want to use another email address they are know by. Not allowed by policy, but not unusual. In tho case she was not told no, it was a precedent before etc.

I'll say again, piss poor judgment. That's what it was
v3nesl
Posts: 4,494
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2016 2:37:39 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/29/2016 2:01:16 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
...

from what I have read, in these circumstances "intent" doesn't matter.

Legally, no. Shoot, I live in the DC suburbs, I know lots of people with clearances, including people who work for the CIA. Seriously, the average Joe would be in jail for doing a stunt like this. Definitely out of a job and have their clearance stripped.

Unless I'm totally misunderstanding, this is a clear case of royalty being above the law. It happens all the time, of course, it's just sad that so few people want to call her on it.
This space for rent.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2016 2:53:50 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/29/2016 2:37:39 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 1/29/2016 2:01:16 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
...

from what I have read, in these circumstances "intent" doesn't matter.

Legally, no. Shoot, I live in the DC suburbs, I know lots of people with clearances, including people who work for the CIA. Seriously, the average Joe would be in jail for doing a stunt like this. Definitely out of a job and have their clearance stripped.

Unless I'm totally misunderstanding, this is a clear case of royalty being above the law. It happens all the time, of course, it's just sad that so few people want to call her on it.

Again, so not defending what was a colossal bit of stupidity, but no. You would be stripped of your clearance, not indited.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2016 2:59:55 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
All the laws that I have read through relating to this apply to the agency. That is, it is illegal for THEM to not keep proper archives, delete emails etc. There just is no law covering this, again, from what I have seen. The best I have seen in law - Section 1924 of Title 18

"has to do with deletion and retention of classified documents. "Knowingly" removing or housing classified information at an "unauthorized location" is subject to a fine or a year in prison."

So, back up to Keven, yea Intent has a big part to play in this.