FBI recommends no charges to be filed against Clinton


#1

foxnews.com/politics/2016/07/05/fbi-recommends-no-charges-to-be-filed-against-clinton.html?intcmp=hpbt1

FBI Director James Comey announced Tuesday he will not recommend the Department of Justice seek criminal charges against Hillary Clinton for her personal email use while secretary of state.

The decision helps remove what was arguably the biggest threat to her presidential campaign going forward – a criminal referral that could have led to an indictment – just weeks before her party’s national convention in Philadelphia where she is set to seal her nomination as the Democrat standard bearer.

Looks like Hillary is home free :frowning:


#2

There was the meeting between Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch, then the leak that it was reported that there would be no charges for Hillary Clinton, then Comey comes out and says all this stuff about how she did send classified emails (Per Chris Cillizza “Remember Clinton said ZERO emails she sent or received were classified at the time.”), and Comey said 8 of these emails of were Top Secret (isn’t Top secret the highest or one of the highest classifications there is?) and minutes after Comey says there will be no charges…


#3

Least surprising announcement ever.


#4

Sounds like they did a thorough investigation. At least now we know why it took so long.


#5

The Machine keeps on going.

How can anyone vote for her and still sleep at night? :mad: :confused:


#6

(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

“gross negligence”

Gross negligence is a legal concept which means serious carelessness. Negligence is the opposite of diligence, or being careful.

FBI “extremely careless”

law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793

While perhaps a close victory for Hillary its indicative of an individual obviously much too careless to be President and not just here but on various accounts.


#7

From James Comey statement:

“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.”

m.fbi.gov/#https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/statement-by-fbi-director-james-b.-comey-on-the-investigation-of-secretary-hillary-clintons-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system


#8

It took a while to twist everyone’s arms.

This corruption is precisely why good, honest, quality individuals do not want to run for president.


#9

The lack of criminal charges is not going to end the criticism. She is going to be criticised by people saying she has been too careless with classified information to hold the office of the presidency, on the fact that she said no classified emails had been sent but classified emails have been sent, and Comey said it was possible that “hostile actors” could have hacked emails, although he said they had no direct information of hacking. The door isn’t closed that hackers could release classified emails that they hacked, and if emails were hacked, is there information in those emails that could possibly put US security at risk? I think I may have read someone question about security on Twitter.


#10

So she’s exempt from the law.


#11

But of course! It runs in the family.


#12

Only a very small number of the e-mails containing classified information bore markings indicating the presence of classified information

So they were marked and a bunch of people, including Clinton, happily sent them back and forth across an unclass server. Of course Clinton has previously said that NONE of the emails she sent were classified, and yet some were properly marked as such. :mad:

Yeah, that at best would cause me to lose my clearance forever, at worst I’d be in jail or on probation like Petraeus.

"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.

:mad:


#13

According to the report, the FBI is not recommending to the Department of Justice sanctions against Clinton because of lack of intentional misconduct. It seems to me, however, that the finding of gross negligence on her part with regard to a few Top Secret documents no less and other confidential matters, as well as a security culture of carelessness throughout the State Department, is enough for the FBI to recommend at least some form of punishment or penalty. While they claim their investigation was independent of any outside influences, I cannot help but think that the fact Hillary Clinton is the presumptive candidate for the POTUS must have had some influence on the FBI’s unorthodox decision. Yet it is precisely BECAUSE she is a candidate for the highest office of the land, that the apparently lenient course of action of the FBI should NOT have been engaged in.


#14

“Gross negligance” is actually mentioned in one of the laws.

Also, seeing a marked classified document on an unclass server and just sending it on or even ignoring it is intentional misconduct. Everybody with a clearance knows what you’re supposed to do in that situation.

So, yeah, there should be some form of punishment, but that’s just for little people these days.


#15

You can say that again. Power and money talk. Hillary has the power (together with Bill) while Trump has the money. The rest of us, we can go…


#16

Yes indeed…praise God if this is what saves us and the world from Donald Trump!


#17

:yawn: I sincerely hope no one is suprised at this, especially after the meeting on the tarmac with Bill…for heaven’s sake. The whole investigation was probably set up just to get her cleared before the election.


#18

Extreme carelessness and corruption never saved anyone from anything, in fact it has served to do just the opposite.


#19

You honestly think Hilary is better than Trump?

Praise God for Hilary??


#20

That is to say, if her last name wasn’t Clinton, and she wasn’t the democratic nominee (we all know she was chosen before the primaries), he would be recommending charges.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.