Hillary May Be Charged Within 60 Days

Page 16 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,686
136
Has it not been 60 days yet?

Depends on what days you're talking about. In normal earth days, it's been 85. In working days, M-F, it's only been 60 counting holidays. In Venus days, we're just getting into it because a day on Venus lasts 5832 hours.

In the minds of True Believers, indictment is always less than 60 days away.
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
http://nypost.com/2016/03/31/fbi-finishes-email-examination-ready-to-interview-hillary/

FBI finishes email examination; ready to interview Hillary

The FBI has completed its examination of Hillary Clinton’s emails and will soon be interviewing Clinton herself and deciding whether to file criminal charges, a report said.

The FBI has been joined by Justice Department prosecutors and will also interview key State Department figures, including former Clinton aide Philippe Reines and ex-Clinton chief of staff Cheryl Mills, according to Al Jazeera America.

After the interviews are conducted, officials expect FBI Director James Comey to make his recommendation to Attorney General Loretta Lynch about potential criminal charges, the network said.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,686
136

"a report said"

WTF is that supposed to mean?

When what you want to believe & what propagandists want you to believe are the same thing you make their job easy. The fact that you want to believe it means they've already accomplished their task, tweaked your headset at an attitudinal level. They just need to come back & twiddle the dials a little on a fairly regular basis to verify the i/o relationship.

Which is not to say that the FBI won't interview Hillary or her aides but rather that they have not indicated their intentions.
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
"a report said"

WTF is that supposed to mean?

When what you want to believe & what propagandists want you to believe are the same thing you make their job easy. The fact that you want to believe it means they've already accomplished their task, tweaked your headset at an attitudinal level. They just need to come back & twiddle the dials a little on a fairly regular basis to verify the i/o relationship.

Which is not to say that the FBI won't interview Hillary or her aides but rather that they have not indicated their intentions.
All this "propaganda" related to journalists using inside (and unidentified) sources seems to be very difficult for you to accept...you have my deepest sympathies.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,686
136
All this "propaganda" related to journalists using inside (and unidentified) sources seems to be very difficult for you to accept...you have my deepest sympathies.

Funny you should put it that way. That's what DiGenova did 86 days ago when he predicted indictment within 60 days. That's what a variety of right wing sources have been claiming to do for some while even as there's really been nothing more than innuendo served up.

When the FBI offers up something official I'll be more than inclined to believe it. In the meanwhile, it's a mistake to allow much credibility to the hacks & flacks of sensationalistic media.
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
Funny you should put it that way. That's what DiGenova did 86 days ago when he predicted indictment within 60 days. That's what a variety of right wing sources have been claiming to do for some while even as there's really been nothing more than innuendo served up.

When the FBI offers up something official I'll be more than inclined to believe it. In the meanwhile, it's a mistake to allow much credibility to the hacks & flacks of sensationalistic media.
There have been numerous legitimate news sources lately saying the investigation is nearing its end and that interviews with Clinton's staff are imminent. You obviously don't believe them...but it won't be long before we know who's actually more credible....you or these various news sources you characterize as the "hacks & flacks of sensationalistic media". I look forward to watching you eat crow.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
33,621
17,196
136
There have been numerous legitimate news sources lately saying the investigation is nearing its end and that interviews with Clinton's staff are imminent. You obviously don't believe them...but it won't be long before we know who's actually more credible....you or these various news sources you characterize as the "hacks & flacks of sensationalistic media". I look forward to watching you eat crow.

And we will look forward to hearing more excuses and conspiracies and yet another "scandal" you will so desperately want to believe to be true, from you.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,686
136
There have been numerous legitimate news sources lately saying the investigation is nearing its end and that interviews with Clinton's staff are imminent. You obviously don't believe them...but it won't be long before we know who's actually more credible....you or these various news sources you characterize as the "hacks & flacks of sensationalistic media". I look forward to watching you eat crow.

Please. I never said interviews won't happen. Don't pretend that I have. I said there's a lot of **obvious** bullshit you seem to want to believe rather desperately.

I figure you'll keep circling the boat as long as they're chumming the water.
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
Please. I never said interviews won't happen. Don't pretend that I have. I said there's a lot of **obvious** bullshit you seem to want to believe rather desperately.

I figure you'll keep circling the boat as long as they're chumming the water.
Yes or no...do believe that these news stories are likely valid?
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,686
136
Yes or no...do believe that these news stories are likely valid?

Which stories? The one in the OP? That prediction clearly didn't come true.

The rest? Hell- the FBI may have already interviewed Hillary's staff for all we know or they may never. I'll believe what they say & not anything somebody claims they will say.

I'd be a chump if I did.
 

Zorkorist

Diamond Member
Apr 17, 2007
6,861
3
76
Look at Benghazi... where she threw Americans to the wolves, for her political gain.

-John
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
33,621
17,196
136
I don't know what makes you dumber, the fact that it takes you three posts to express yourself or the fact that it takes you two minutes between posts to come up with a new one scentence thought.
 

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
30,065
31,023
136
I don't know what makes you dumber, the fact that it takes you three posts to express yourself or the fact that it takes you two minutes between posts to come up with a new one scentence thought.

The time between posts becomes longer as he drinks more. Bing drinking is hell on the brain.
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
147 agents!

Well, fewer than 50.

Uhh, 12 we think...

It's all bullshit.
Says ONE anonymous source...chose whatever number you want to believe as if it really matters in the scheme of things. The number probably varied widely over the course of the investigation, especially when huge slugs of emails came in needing review. That aside, there have been numerous legitimate news sources lately saying the investigation is nearing its end and that interviews with Clinton's staff are imminent. Since there are so many sources saying this, I chose to believe it. It's your prerogative to believe otherwise....there's really no reason to argue about it imo.
 
Last edited:

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,686
136
Says ONE anonymous source...chose whatever number you want to believe as if it really matters in the scheme of things. The number probably varied widely over the course of the investigation, especially when huge slugs of emails came in needing review. That aside, there have been numerous legitimate news sources lately saying the investigation is nearing its end and that interviews with Clinton's staff are imminent. Since there are so many sources saying this, I chose to believe it. It's your prerogative to believe otherwise....there's really no reason to argue about it imo.

Which all comes back around to what you want to believe vs what you have reason to believe. You're not alone in that, obviously, given that there's a whole industry devoted to keeping you in a state of irrationality that varies by the individual.

like all the other "scandals" from 2008 forward, it's the kind of thing propagandists have to regularly puff up & freshen up to maintain the attitudes of their chosen audience.

That's the part you fail to pick up on, your own attitude. You want it to be true, whatever it is, so it's child's play for them to lead you to believe that it is. They just use new bits of misinformation so you'll forget all the bullshit spread previously. Obviously, that works.

It's reasonable to think that the FBI should finish up soon. It's pretty much imperative that they do so before the DNC in late July. I'm sure they'll be thorough because they don't want any chickenshit after the fact back stabbing to come their way.

Indictments seem unlikely. Part of the great power invested in the office of the SoS is the great discretion necessary to do the job effectively. In that, mistakes will be made & should be expected. It's no reason to get a rope unless you already want to hang them.
 

mrjminer

Platinum Member
Dec 2, 2005
2,739
16
76
Which all comes back around to what you want to believe vs what you have reason to believe. You're not alone in that, obviously, given that there's a whole industry devoted to keeping you in a state of irrationality that varies by the individual.

like all the other "scandals" from 2008 forward, it's the kind of thing propagandists have to regularly puff up & freshen up to maintain the attitudes of their chosen audience.

That's the part you fail to pick up on, your own attitude. You want it to be true, whatever it is, so it's child's play for them to lead you to believe that it is. They just use new bits of misinformation so you'll forget all the bullshit spread previously. Obviously, that works.

It's reasonable to think that the FBI should finish up soon. It's pretty much imperative that they do so before the DNC in late July. I'm sure they'll be thorough because they don't want any chickenshit after the fact back stabbing to come their way.

Indictments seem unlikely. Part of the great power invested in the office of the SoS is the great discretion necessary to do the job effectively. In that, mistakes will be made & should be expected. It's no reason to get a rope unless you already want to hang them.

Indictments should have already been made. There is no question she violated the Espionage Act at this point. They have all the proof they need. Any normal citizen / politician would probably already be convicted and serving their sentence by now since the case is open and shut. Frankly, it is a disgrace that it's gone on this long.
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
Which all comes back around to what you want to believe vs what you have reason to believe. You're not alone in that, obviously, given that there's a whole industry devoted to keeping you in a state of irrationality that varies by the individual.
Although I believe that the mere fact that she's being investigated by the FBI for so long is quite ominous, I've never presumed guilt.

That's the part you fail to pick up on, your own attitude. You want it to be true, whatever it is, so it's child's play for them to lead you to believe that it is. They just use new bits of misinformation so you'll forget all the bullshit spread previously. Obviously, that works.
This is the part that you fail to pick up on, you presume to know what I believe when you obviously don't.

It's reasonable to think that the FBI should finish up soon. It's pretty much imperative that they do so before the DNC in late July. I'm sure they'll be thorough because they don't want any chickenshit after the fact back stabbing to come their way.
Since you've now discredited the credibility of the entire news media industry regarding this particular issue, on what credible and factual basis do you conclude that the FBI should finish up soon? Is the FBI somehow constrained by a deadline of late July? If so, please provide a link with compelling evidence backing up this claim or admit that you're just making shit up as you go along. Now let's step back and put this all in perspective. You attack me for saying what I believe to be reasonable which is substantiated by numerous sourced news reports, yet you then turn right around and espouse your opinion as reasonable when it is based on mere conjecture and zero evidence. This is the part you fail to pick up on, your hypocrisy.

Indictments seem unlikely. Part of the great power invested in the office of the SoS is the great discretion necessary to do the job effectively. In that, mistakes will be made & should be expected. It's no reason to get a rope unless you already want to hang them.
I personally don't know whether indictments are likely or not. However, for you to make such a statement, I would expect to see something that substantiates your opinion based on credible evidence...yet you provide none. Again, the irony here is that you give me crap about believing multi-sourced news reports and then immediately turn around and pull unsubstantiated shit out of the air...based on nothing more than what you want to believe vs what you have reason to believe....which is the very thing you accuse me of.

The projection and hypocrisy is strong with you.
 
Last edited: