Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Obama doesn't like Bill who he feels treated him like a child/lesser
and Michelle doesn't like Hillary's attitude.
I wouldn't be surprised if Obama throws the Clintons under the bus.
He might feel Bernie to be a better "Obama 2.0" for his legacy.
This would mean cooperation of the Justice Dept with FBI and a
formal indictment resulting in a Sanders nomination.
Today, Obama wouldn't say who he voted for. He said I'm not
telling you "yet"... this means he cares.. he DID make a choice.
We will know soon who that is merely by whether or not Hillary
is charged with crimes by the United States Justice Department.
Oh, I agree with you on that. We've already seen that once the right gets its teeth into something against a Clinton they will drag it out for years. All the years Ken Starr "investigated" Bill Clinton, to the tune of $75 million taxpayer dollars, and then the nine (and counting) Benghazi investigations, with millions more of our dollars squandered.
There is little doubt the right will attempt to drag this one out for years as well, squandering yet millions more of our dollars on their personal vendetta against the Clintons.
Yes, on this alone we agree.
Think what good they could have done with all our money instead of endless 'investigations'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowball7
Obama doesn't like Bill who he feels treated him like a child/lesser
and Michelle doesn't like Hillary's attitude.
I wouldn't be surprised if Obama throws the Clintons under the bus.
He might feel Bernie to be a better "Obama 2.0" for his legacy.
This would mean cooperation of the Justice Dept with FBI and a
formal indictment resulting in a Sanders nomination.
Today, Obama wouldn't say who he voted for. He said I'm not
telling you "yet"... this means he cares.. he DID make a choice.
We will know soon who that is merely by whether or not Hillary
is charged with crimes by the United States Justice Department.
My prediction: There is no indictment, and not for any nefarious reason or due to any backroom deals, but because, as many people in positions to know have said, there is nothing criminal there. It's a "scandal" only in the right wing fantasy land. Just like Benghazi and the myriad of other faux "scandals" the right has attempted to cook up against the Clintons for the last quarter of a century.
Clinton wins the nomination and goes on to win the election, and is president for the next four, and possibly eight, years.
Yes..just like the "Lawmaker" who leaked and suggested 147 FBI Agents investigating when in truth it's about 12.. LAWMAKER~~~ Like so many leaks that get blown out of proportion to INFLATE their bullet points AGAINST any Clinton. Fed Source: About 12 FBI Agents Working on Clinton Email Inquiry - NBC News
But this has been going on for decades..and pepper..those who hate anything Liberal swallow it whole..They don't call it "RED MEAT" for no reason!! Those who don't better believe it's real fact..Those that know the truth..deny it and blame it on the source...Makes me just SMH!!
As such..147~~ which is about 97% of an over statement..BUT for some reason the "47" jumps out at me Anybody here remember that 47% comment by Romney?
I thought this part of the article you posted was very telling.
In an unusual legal defense strategy, four top Clinton advisers from her time as secretary of state have hired the same lawyer to represent them should they be interviewed by FBI investigators. Poltico reports a former assistant U.S. attorney is representing the Clinton aides, who plan to tell the same story to investigators if they're asked, in order to present a united front from the Clinton camp.
You guys better get your story straight.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyndarn
Yes..just like the "Lawmaker" who leaked and suggested 147 FBI Agents investigating when in truth it's about 12.. LAWMAKER~~~ Like so many leaks that get blown out of proportion to INFLATE their bullet points AGAINST any Clinton. Fed Source: About 12 FBI Agents Working on Clinton Email Inquiry - NBC News
But this has been going on for decades..and pepper..those who hate anything Liberal swallow it whole..They don't call it "RED MEAT" for no reason!! Those who don't better believe it's real fact..Those that know the truth..deny it and blame it on the source...Makes me just SMH!!
As such..147~~ which is about 97% of an over statement..BUT for some reason the "47" jumps out at me Anybody here remember that 47% comment by Romney?
I'll quote a good post on the 147 FBI agents investigating Hillary.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rescue3
You guys have zero idea what you're talking about. But using the right words will help explain what is really happening.
If there are 12 agents assigned full time to a file, that's a task force. By definition, that's a major case. "Criminal probe" is a media term and is not one that is recognized in federal criminal justice system. Any newspaper silly enough to use it - and then apologize for it - well shame on them.
Hillary Clinton is the subject of a federal criminal investigation. She will become a target of a grand jury investigation if and when the matter is brought to a grand jury (if it hasn't already).
The FBI does not conduct 'security reviews' or whatever other term Hillary chooses to use to minimize what's really going on. The FBI is administratively and bureaucratically wired to do one thing: conduct criminal investigations. (Well, there are one or two other things, but they aren't relevant here.) I can guarantee you that there is an open file number, with her name as the title, and it is a criminal investigation being conducted by the national security division.
The office running the case is called the office of origin or controlling office. They send out leads. Agents in other offices catch those leads, write 302s (a form recording investigative results) and send them back to the office of origin for inclusion in the case file. If it is a very sensitive case, the agents conducting the leads are required to sign NDAs just like the controlling case agents. What the Director almost certainly briefed some member of congress was that 147 agents had signed NDAs on the case, meaning the original case agents plus all the ones that ran leads or were otherwise tangentially involved.
Congressmen are too important to keep their own notes. They tell their staff. There are over 5,000 congressional staffers. Leaks invariably come from staffers, not the member themselves. And democratic staffers leak at the same rate - or greater - as republican staffers. (BTW - a good number of democratic staffers are Bernie supporters.) Some of the crooked-est people I met in DC were congressional staffers.
The republicans are not driving this train; they are little more than interested observers. I'm certain they would love for Hillary to take a perp walk, just as I'm sure most democrats would like to see Hillary exonerated. I strongly doubt either will occur.
As to an indictment, the criminal justice system uses that tool far less often than people think. I brought lots of cases to grand juries that resulted in guilty pleas, not indictments. The Petreaus case was handled that way. There never was an indictment there - just a negotiated settlement.
Finally, 92% (give or take 1% variance from year to year) of criminal cases brought in the federal criminal system are resolved with a negotiated settlement (read: plea bargain). As I just wrote, many of those occur before the grand jury even receives a bill of indictment. In other words, the grand jury never gets the chance to indict.
Having undoubtedly ticked off both sides of this political divide, I now return you to your argument...
My prediction: There is no indictment, and not for any nefarious reason or due to any backroom deals, but because, as many people in positions to know have said, there is nothing criminal there. It's a "scandal" only in the right wing fantasy land. Just like Benghazi and the myriad of other faux "scandals" the right has attempted to cook up against the Clintons for the last quarter of a century.
Clinton wins the nomination and goes on to win the election, and is president for the next four, and possibly eight, years.
Quote:
18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information (f): 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
Her failure to identify a single instance of classified information on her server out of over 2000 examples permitted the repeated removal of classified information from it's proper place of custody.
It is standard practice for the State Department to suspend review activity when that activity is related to an ongoing criminal investigation. The FBI asked the State dept to halt their review for this reason. Even Reuters says so. (your linked article fails to mention that key component).
Hillary has been quoted as saying "none of the emails were marked classified went sent", which is absolutely true. They are marked:
Top Secret
Secret
Confidential
Public Trust
Unclassified
Pure and simple, her statement is a deliberate form of language parsing with a goal to establish a false narrative and mislead the general public.
How 'bout dem apples'?
Last edited by AKA Bubbleup; 04-05-2016 at 09:09 AM..
Reason: ed
Petraeus deliberately gave classified information to someone who shouldn't have had it. GAVE IT TO THEM. DELIBERATELY. Clinton never did that.
So yer sayin' that she did it accidentally?
That her judgement was so poor that she
couldn't even tell the difference between
"beyond top secret" and her yoga plans?
A ringing endorsement to be sure.
BTW, negligence fits the criteria for indictment.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Anybody here remember that 47% comment by Romney? 
