[POLL] U.S. Presidential Election 2016

[el_gonz87]

The last statement you made is basically a total antonym of the first three

False.

 

[Lacius]

that quote is not mutually exclusive to the idea that intent was the biggest reason why she didn't violate any of the statutes.

No, this is. One cannot claim ignorance or lack of intent as a defense for breaking a law. If I run a red light because I didn't see it, that doesn't matter; I'm still getting a ticket. She wasn't charged with breaking the law because there is no evidence that she broke the law, period.

"We have no evidence sufficient to justify the conclusion that she violated any of the statutes related to classified information."

She was secretary of defense.

No, she was Secretary of State.

The statutes that apply to her are different than other people. Comey said as much.

No, Comey did not say that.

 

[HaloEliteLegend]

I personally would like to read the GOP's emails and see how scared they were when Trump was destroying Cruz and Bush, and how hard they tried to stop him. I guess it would be kinda like the DNC emails, swap Bernie with Trump and them being unsuccessful. Thank god the GOP didn't have super delegates, all parties need to agree to get rid/never have them.

Haha, now those would be fun to read! Also, superdelegates are the dumbest things tbh.

True, but would you liked to be back-stabbed by the most evil (possible) president!? I know I don't want her in Office!

I don't want either of 'em. They're both so untrustworthy, so dishonest, so terrible. If I had to pick, ehhhhh probably Hillary, but I'd be scared as shit regardless.

 

[osaka35]

One cannot claim ignorance or lack of intent as a defense for breaking a law.

But...what. That's exactly what those who think she should be prosecuted say lol. Wait, so are you agreeing with the sentiment, but in order to not be against clinton, you just want to ignore any stupidity on her part? That if evidence of negligent was presented to your satisfaction, you feel she should be prosecuted?

"In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here."

"We have no evidence sufficient to justify the conclusion that she violated any of the statutes related to classified information."

They have different statutes depending on who it is...they have special statute for personnel, and a different one for higher ups, and no statute for publishers. You should look into the statutes that a secretary of state has.

No, she was Secretary of State.

Sorry, that was my bad typing too fast.

No, Comey did not say that.

"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."

Well, I thought he obviously saying they're not going to prosecute her like a normal person. Not like a private citizen. So either she follows different rules due to her being secretary of state, or because of some shady reason (which would be the republican standpoint). I take that she didn't break any laws because there are special, far more lenient laws, that require intent in order to prosecute. But hey, whichever you want.

 

[Lacius]

But...what. That's exactly what those who think she should be prosecuted say lol. Wait, so are you agreeing with the sentiment, but in order to not be against clinton, you just want to ignore any stupidity on her part? That if evidence of negligent was presented to your satisfaction, you feel she should be prosecuted?

"In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here."


They have different statutes depending on who it is...they have special statute for personnel, and a different one for higher ups, and no statute for publishers. You should look into the statutes that a secretary of state has.



Sorry, that was my bad typing too fast.




"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."

Well, I thought he obviously saying they're not going to prosecute her like a normal person. Not like a private citizen. So either she follows different rules due to her being secretary of state, or because of some shady reason (which would be the republican standpoint). I take that she didn't break any laws because there are special, far more lenient laws, that require intent in order to prosecute. But hey, whichever you want.

She didn't break any laws.

 

[osaka35]

She didn't break any laws.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I'll take it.

 

[Viri]

Spoiler

Are you ready for the true winner?

 

[HaloEliteLegend]

Spoiler

Are you ready for the true winner?

he's gonna start a political revolution

 

[pokemonster]

you can see clinton monster supporter.

 

[vonfnas]

Gotta love all the trolls placing their vote on Trump xD

 

[el_gonz87]

Gotta love all the trolls placing their vote on Trump xD

I'm just glad this thread is not hosted on her server or she would be up 11 points and a 6yr old Russian hacker would know all the secrets of gbatemp!!

 

[HaloEliteLegend]

you can see clinton monster supporter.

Some people just need a nice long stay at Arkham Asylum.

 

[Glyptofane]

you can see clinton monster supporter.

Her supporters are petty thieves, vandals, and violent thugs. At best they are simply delusional.

 

[vonfnas]

 

[Engert]

 

[HaloEliteLegend]

Her supporters are petty thieves, vandals, and violent thugs. At best they are simply delusional.

There's 318 million people in the US. If Clinton is somewhere in the 40-50% range in polls, then why aren't there 127-159 million people going to jail right now? Right, because you made a silly generalization. Most people voting for anyone - Trump, Hillary, or otherwise - are actually (*gasp*) decent people!

 

[Viri]

you can see clinton monster supporter.

How tolerant.

 

[RevPokemon]

I'm just glad this thread is not hosted on her server or she would be up 11 points and a 6yr old Russian hacker would know all the secrets of gbatemp!!

Smea does already know all about this website.


I kid.

 

[Viri]

I'm just glad this thread is not hosted on her server or she would be up 11 points and a 6yr old Russian hacker would know all the secrets of gbatemp!!

https://twitter.com/ScottAdamsSays/status/792231193978687488

 

[TotalInsanity4]

False.