FBI has 5 days to produce documents or Director will face Contempt of Congress...

T. A. Gardner said:
Your article simply tries to excuse what Hillary did...

Together, the documents, technically known as Form 302s, depict less a sinister and carefully calculated effort to avoid transparency than a busy and uninterested executive who shows little comfort with even the basics of technology, working with a small, harried inner circle of aides inside a bureaucracy where the IT and classification systems haven’t caught up with how business is conducted in the digital age. Reading the FBI’s interviews, Clinton’s team hardly seems organized enough to mount any sort of sinister cover-up.

That amounts to She knowingly moved the server to her home, even though it is a gross violation of law, but the intent wasn't malicious, but rather because she was really busy and didn't understand the technology... That's an excuse for criminal behavior and nothing more.

Here is the same thing again:

Hillary Clinton comes across in the FBI interviews as a disengaged tech user who sees the communication tools as little more than a means to an end. She has, according to multiple aides, never even learned how to use a desktop computer.

Even that article clearly states, even if inadvertently, that Hillary knowingly was doing this shit

Except that what Clinton turned to others for help with wasn’t an Amazon purchase or reading CNN.com: She needed help managing a massive trove of communications about the inner workings of the nation’s diplomacy and national security. Over the course of five years, those emails lived first in her Chappaqua, New York, basement, then later in a data center in New Jersey, then they were FedExed across the country and possibly copied onto a thumb drive before being printed out, sorted and handed back to the State Department in 12 bankers’ boxes.

More dissembling that really is an admission of her guilt:

Clinton didn’t like the idea of carrying around two devices—one for official government work and one for personal or political correspondence, which is discouraged on government accounts. So she opted instead to carry only a single device, a personal BlackBerry, linked to a newly registered email account on a private domain, clintonemail.com, that was run off a recycled server from her unsuccessful presidential bid the year before.

The whole article tries to apologize and dissemble for the Hildabeast. She's fucking guilty as fuck of violating a whole raft of laws on government documents.
Click to expand...

Hillary was not prosecuted by the Trump Justice Dept. Thats the end of the story, handjob.
 
floridafan said:
Hillary was not prosecuted by the Trump Justice Dept. Thats the end of the story, handjob.
Click to expand...

No, not the end. Trump and his DOJ were obviously smart enough not to go after the person he just defeated in an election. That would have been seen as vindictive and politically motivated. On the other hand, now we have the moron Joke and his DOJ that look poised to do exactly that to a person that has a good possibility of being his opponent in the next election.

I'd say the Left, Joke, and his Minions of Ignorance are fucking retarded if they think that's a good idea. Sometimes you toss the small fish back to keep things in balance in the pond rather than viciously fishing it to death.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
No, not the end. Trump and his DOJ were obviously smart enough not to go after the person he just defeated in an election. That would have been seen as vindictive and politically motivated. On the other hand, now we have the moron Joke and his DOJ that look poised to do exactly that to a person that has a good possibility of being his opponent in the next election.

I'd say the Left, Joke, and his Minions of Ignorance are fucking retarded if they think that's a good idea. Sometimes you toss the small fish back to keep things in balance in the pond rather than viciously fishing it to death.
Click to expand...

Wow, Terry. You can always be counted upon to defend Trump at every turn. :thup:
 
T. A. Gardner said:
No, I only stated Of the three, only Trump has a viable excuse / reason in that he was president and could declassify the documents essentially on a whim. That is something neither Hillary or Biden can use as a defense. For them, there is no excuse, particularly in Hillary's case. She went far beyond the other two in using what amounted to a secret private personal server that was illegal in its entirety to receive classified information on. Even her intent was clearly felonious and criminal. At least in Trump's and Biden's case, the documents were just mishandled with no overt intent (at least none at this point) to misuse them intentionally.
Click to expand...

Sure but the problem you have is that you are lying.

Trump had no credible defense. NONE.


Lying under Oath in a sworn affidavit and Obstruction of Justice are not waved even if you grant Trump declassified them (which he did not).


They are still government documents Trump has no right to possess and when he has his lawyers swear out a statement they gave them all back, while actively hiding them, that is the crime Trump did, that no one else did. Thus why Trump gets charged and no one else does.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
given the timeline of events and information that came out, you'd have to be an absolute partisan moron to believe she wasn't guilty...it's why she wasn't elected.

you can always tell the partisan trash out there by the way they adamantly deny any wrongdoing when it's the politician they favor, but can condemn with the flimsiest of evidence when it's a politician they hate.

sounds like you.
Click to expand...

Soounds like every trumper in the country.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Your article simply tries to excuse what Hillary did...

Together, the documents, technically known as Form 302s, depict less a sinister and carefully calculated effort to avoid transparency than a busy and uninterested executive who shows little comfort with even the basics of technology, working with a small, harried inner circle of aides inside a bureaucracy where the IT and classification systems haven’t caught up with how business is conducted in the digital age. Reading the FBI’s interviews, Clinton’s team hardly seems organized enough to mount any sort of sinister cover-up.

That amounts to She knowingly moved the server to her home, even though it is a gross violation of law, but the intent wasn't malicious, but rather because she was really busy and didn't understand the technology... That's an excuse for criminal behavior and nothing more.

Here is the same thing again:

Hillary Clinton comes across in the FBI interviews as a disengaged tech user who sees the communication tools as little more than a means to an end. She has, according to multiple aides, never even learned how to use a desktop computer.

Even that article clearly states, even if inadvertently, that Hillary knowingly was doing this shit

Except that what Clinton turned to others for help with wasn’t an Amazon purchase or reading CNN.com: She needed help managing a massive trove of communications about the inner workings of the nation’s diplomacy and national security. Over the course of five years, those emails lived first in her Chappaqua, New York, basement, then later in a data center in New Jersey, then they were FedExed across the country and possibly copied onto a thumb drive before being printed out, sorted and handed back to the State Department in 12 bankers’ boxes.

More dissembling that really is an admission of her guilt:

Clinton didn’t like the idea of carrying around two devices—one for official government work and one for personal or political correspondence, which is discouraged on government accounts. So she opted instead to carry only a single device, a personal BlackBerry, linked to a newly registered email account on a private domain, clintonemail.com, that was run off a recycled server from her unsuccessful presidential bid the year before.

The whole article tries to apologize and dissemble for the Hildabeast. She's fucking guilty as fuck of violating a whole raft of laws on government documents.
Click to expand...

Nope. It was an explanation of a new system for government being handed to a person unfamiliar and uncomfortable with technology. You rightys cobble together some nefarious scenarios, where none exist. The reds investigated her a dozen times and could nothing. You should have testified. That would have given the committees a laugh.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Actually, Trump has a far better excuse than either Joke or the Hildabeast. He was president at the time, and presidents can declassify anything they choose to. Yes, there is a process for that officially, but at least Trump could make a reasonable argument that he declassified the documents. In the case of Joke and the Hildabeast, they had no such authority and were, and are, clearly in violation of law and rules covering the handling of classified documents. "I didn't know" isn't an excuse to not be charged. Possession, regardless of intent, is sufficient evidence to charge someone with mishandling classified documents.

I'm being fair about this, you on the other hand, are letting your terminal case of TDS get in the way.
Click to expand...

Like he declassified those M-a-L docs just by thinking it. :rolleyes:
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Absolutely wrong! Possession is sufficient for criminal charges to be brought. Real life example I saw while in the Navy. A junior Petty Officer took a Reactor Plant Manual (RPM) home to study so he could get qualified sooner. His intentions were completely honorable and good. He showed the manual to no one else. He got caught bringing it back onto the ship. He was court martialed for mishandling classified documents.

INTENT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. POSSESSION IS SUFFICIENT FOR CRIMINAL CHARGES.
Click to expand...

His intentions may have been "honorable and good" but his brain was stuck on stupid for flouting the regulations.
 
Nordberg said:
Nope. It was an explanation of a new system for government being handed to a person unfamiliar and uncomfortable with technology. You rightys cobble together some nefarious scenarios, where none exist. The reds investigated her a dozen times and could nothing. You should have testified. That would have given the committees a laugh.
Click to expand...

Ya but T.A. had been making the argument that it is not fair as republicans and their voters are hopelessly stupid and Dems and their voters are super smart.

He argues even when the Dem's do such obvious crimes, like the ones he claims no one can deny, it is wrong to expect that republiclown POTUS, with his AG and FBI director and republican controlled SC, simply cannot indict and convict the much smarter Dems.

He argues Dems though can indict and convict boatloads of republiclowns even when it is all republiclowns in power.

Its a checkmate situation. One side, Dems is clearly more corrupt but just too smart to ever be caught. The other side, republiclowns, are innocent but too inept and stupid to not convicted.
 
Doc Dutch said:
I think it has to do with the low IQ thing. A commonality of all JPP Trumpers is elderly Euro-American males who are very unhappy with their lives.
Click to expand...

Just like their fearful leader. I've never seen a moment of innocent joy and happiness from trump. He's just a miserable SOB 24/7/365.
 
Nordberg said:
Nope. It was an explanation of a new system for government being handed to a person unfamiliar and uncomfortable with technology. You rightys cobble together some nefarious scenarios, where none exist. The reds investigated her a dozen times and could nothing. You should have testified. That would have given the committees a laugh.
Click to expand...

Wrong. In that situation, you figure it out and adapt to it. You don't ignore it, then demand everyone around you simply ignore the law and the rules and do as you fucking please.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top